You are here:

The Nature of Groups: Implications for Learning Design Article

, Agilefox, United States ; , Lehigh University, United States

Journal of Interactive Learning Research Volume 17, Number 1, ISSN 1093-023X Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Abstract

Considering recent claims that groups are important to teaching and learning, the authors examine the differences between groups and collections of people to see how one might create learning groups when designing learning and instruction. Based on literature in the fields of group dynamics and education, characteristics of groups are listed and explored. Strategies for creating learning groups are synthesized. Implications for practice are discussed.

Citation

Ohl, T. & Cates, W. (2006). The Nature of Groups: Implications for Learning Design. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(1), 71-89. Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved October 20, 2018 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Allport, F. H. (1924). Social psychology. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
  2. Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997).The jigsaw classroom: Building cooperation in the classroom. New York: Longman.
  3. Bales, R.F. (1965). The equilibrium problem in small groups. In A. P. Hare, E. F. Borgatta, & R. F. Bales (Eds.), Small groups: Studies in social interaction (pp. 444-476). New York: Knopf. Baloche, L. A. (1998). The cooperative classroom: Empowering learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  4. Baron, R. A., & Byrne, D. (2003). Social psychology. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
  5. Ben-Ari, M. (2001). Constructivism in computer science education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20(1), 45-73.
  6. Bhattacharya, M., & Chatterjee, R. (2000). Collaborative innovation as a process for cognitive development. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(3), 295-312.
  7. Black, J. B., & McClintock, R. O. (1996). An interpretation construction approach to constructivist design. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 25-31). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
  8. Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1997) Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, leadership. San Francico: Jossey-Bass.
  9. Brown, R. (1999) Group processes: Dynamics within and between groups. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Bruning, R., Schraw, G., & Ronning, H. (1999). Cognitive psychology and instruction. Columbus, OH.: Merrill, Prentice Hall.
  10. Campbell, D. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 3, 14-25.
  11. Caropreso, E., & Chen, S. (2003, October). Personality as a grouping strategy for online collaborative learning. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education Communications and Technology, Anaheim, CA.
  12. Cattell, R. B. (1953). New concepts for measuring leadership, in terms of group synality. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (pp. 14-27). Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
  13. Crook, C. (1998). Children as computer users: The case of collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 30, 237-247.
  14. Deutsch, M. (1949a). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 129-152. Deutsch, M. (1949b). An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group processes. Human Relations, 2, 199-231.
  15. Ehley, L. (2003). What is a browser? Retrieved October 10, 2003, from http://www.depts.alvern O.edu/cil/mod1/webtutorial/browser.html
  16. Ellis, D. G., & Fisher, B. A. (1993). Small group decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill. Festinger, L. (1953). Group attraction and membership. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (pp. 92-101). Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson. Forsyth, D. (1999). Group dynamics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Ohl and Cates
  17. Gillies, R. M. (2003). The behaviors, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 137-147.
  18. Hare, A. P. (2003). Roles, relationships, and groups in organizations: Some conclusions and recommendations. Small Group Research, 34(2), 123-154.
  19. Jackson, J. M., & Williams, K. D. (1985). Social loafing on difficult tasks: Working collaboratively can improve performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 446-454.
  20. Janis, I. L. (1983) Groupthink. In H. H. Blumberg, A. P. Hare, V. Kent, & M. Davies (Eds.), Small groups and social interaction: Vol. 2 (pp. 39-46). New York: Wiley & Sons.
  21. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1990). Social skills for successful group work. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 29-33.
  22. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1996). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1017-1044). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
  23. Johnson, S. D., Suriya, C., Yoon, S. W., Berrett, J. V., & La Fleur, J. (2002). Team development and group processes of virtual learning teams. Computers & Education, 39, 379-393. Jonassen, D. H. (1990). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist view of instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(9), 32-34.
  24. Kagan, S. (1990). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 12-15.
  25. Kagan, J., Havemann, E., & Segal, J. (1984). Psychology: An introduction. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
  26. Kiesler, S., & Kraut, R. (1999). Internet use and ties that bind. American Psychologist, 54, 783-784. Le Bon, G. (1896). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. New York: Macmillan. Retrieved September 9, 2005 from http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=BonCrow. Sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=all
  27. Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics. New York: Harper. Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Uhles, A. N., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., & Sherman, S. J.(2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 78, 223-246. Mero, L.
  28. Nelson, D. A. (1990) The design of everyday things. New York: Currency.
  29. Neo, M., & Neo, K. (2002). Building a constructivist learning environment using a multimedia design project – a Malaysian experience. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 11, 141-153.
  30. Parritt, H. J. (2003). What is the Internet? Retrieved September 9, 2005, from http://www.kentla W.edu/cyberlaw/resources/whatis.html
  31. Peri, A., Barbarito, M., Barattoni, M., & Abraham, A. (2000). The dynamics and the interpersonal and intrapersonal relations within an isolated group in extreme environments. Small Group Research, 31, 251-274.
  32. Piaget, J. (1928). Judgment and reasoning in the child. New York, Harcourt.
  33. Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Grossman. Pierce, D. R. (1962). The dual function of the task group. Journal of Educational Sociology, 36, 159-162.
  34. Shaban, S., & Head, C. (2003). E-learning classroom environment: Description, objectives, considerations and example implementation. International Journal on E-Learning 2(3), 29-35. Slavin, R. E. (1990). Research on cooperative learning: Consensus and controversy. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 52-54.
  35. Slavin, R. E. (1991a). Group grades make groupwork work: Response to Kohn. Educational Leadership, February, 89-91.
  36. Slavin, R. E. (1991b). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71-82.
  37. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
  38. Steiner, I. D. (1976). Task performing groups. In J. W. Thibaut, J. T. Spence, & R. C. Carson (Eds.), Contemporary topics in social psychology (pp. 393-422). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
  39. Thibaut, J. (1953). An experimental study of the cohesiveness of underprivileged groups. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (pp. 102-120). Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
  40. Thomas, W. (1928). The child in America. New York: Knopf.
  41. Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. American Journal of Psychology, 9, 507-533.
  42. Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequences in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399.
  43. Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages in small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies, 2, 419-427. Tudge, J.
  44. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  45. Wageman, R. (1999). Task design, outcome interdependence, and individual differences: Their joint affect on effort in task-performing teams. Group Dynamics: Research, Theory, and Practice, 3, 132-137.
  46. Wentzell, K. R. (1991). Classroom competence may require more than intellectual ability: Reply to Jussim (1991). Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 156-158.
  47. Wheelan, S. A., Davidson, B., & Tilin, F. (2003). Group development across time: Reality or illusion? Small Group Research, 34, 223-245.
  48. Wright, M. E. (1943). The influence of frustration upon the social relations of young children. Character and Personality, 12, 111-122.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.