# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many students, particularly if they are new to college, do not like group assignments and projects. They might say they "work better by themselves" and may be wary of irresponsible members of their group dragging down their grade. Or, they may feel group projects take too much time and slow down the progression of the class.

Despite these reservations, research has demonstrated that students working in small groups learn more and demonstrate better knowledge retention than students taught in other instructional formats. Working in groups provides students with a sense of shared purpose that can increase their morale and motivation. Group work can be incorporated into almost any course, regardless of size, discipline, or level.
Have clear goals and purpose

Information on the importance of developing skills in group work and how this benefits the students in the topics presented in the course.

Examples of how this type of group work will be used in the discipline outside of the classroom.

How the assignment or project benefits from multiple perspectives or dividing the work among more than one person.

Choose the right assignment

Would the workload of the project or activity require more than one person to finish it properly?

Is this something where multiple perspectives create a greater whole?

Does this draw on knowledge and skills that are spread out among the students?

Will the group process used in the activity or project give students a tangible benefit to learning in and engagement with the course?

Help students learn the skills of working in groups

Give a short pre-survey to your class about their previous work in groups to gauge areas where they might need help: ask about what they liked best and least about group work, dynamics of groups they have worked in, time management, communication skills or other areas important in the assignment you are designing.

Allow time in class for students in groups to get to know each other. This can be as simple as brief introductions for an in-class active learning activity to a short interim or draft assignment as a prelude to a longer project that spans several weeks in a course.

Based on the activity you are designing and the skills that would be involved in working as a group, assemble some links to web resources that students can draw on for more information, such as sites that explain how to delegate and share responsibilities, conflict resolution, or planning a project and time management.

Have a plan for clarifying questions or possible problems that may emerge with an assignment or project. Are there ways you can ask questions or get draft material to spot areas where students are having difficulty understanding the assignment or having difficulty with group dynamics that might impact the work later?

Designing the assignment or project

Break the assignment down into steps or stages to help students become familiar with the process of planning the project as a group.

Suggest roles for participants in each group to encourage building expertise and expertise and to illustrate ways to divide responsibility for the work.

Use interim drafts for longer projects to help students manage their time and goals and spot early problems with group projects.

Limit their resources (such as giving them material to work with or certain subsets of information) to encourage more close cooperation.

Encourage diversity in groups to spread experience and skill levels and to get students to work with colleagues in the course who they may not know.

Promote individual responsibility

Build "slack days" into the course. Allow a pre-arranged number of days when individuals have to "step away" from group work to focus on other classes or campus events. Individual students claim "slack days" in advance, informing both the members of their group and the instructor. Encourage students to work out how the group members will deal with conflicting dates if more than one student in a group wants to claim the same dates.

Combine a group grade with an individual grade for independent write-ups, journal entries, and reflections.

Have students assess their fellow group members.

If you are having students assume roles in group class activities and projects, have them change roles in different parts of the class or project so that one student isn't always "stuck" doing one task for the group.

Gather feedback

For in-class activities, have students jot down thoughts at the end of class on a sheet of paper or large notecard for a short formative assessment.

At the end of a larger project, or at key points when you have them submit drafts, ask the students for an "assignment wrapper"-a short reflection on the assignment or short answers to a series of questions.

Further Reading & Resources:

Group Work Strategies for Any Course from Faculty Focus

Group Work: How to Use Groups Effectively from The Journal of Effective Teaching

Online Students Don't Have to Work Solo from Inside Higher Ed

Students Riding on Coattails during Group Work? Five Simple Ideas to Try from Faculty Focus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many students, particularly if they are new to col

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cite this guide: Brame, C.J. & Biel, R. (2015). Setting up and facilitating group work:
Using cooperative learning groups effectively. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [todaysdate] from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively/.

Many instructors from disciplines across the university use group work to enhance their students' learning. Whether the goal is to increase student understanding of content, to build particular transferable skills, or some combination of the two, instructors often turn to small group work to capitalize on the benefits of peer-to-peer instruction. This type of group work is formally termed cooperative learning, and is defined as the instructional use of small groups to promote students working together to maximize their own and each other's learning (Johnson, et al., 2008).

Cooperative learning is characterized by positive interdependence, where students perceive that better performance by individuals produces better performance by the entire group (Johnson, et al., 2014). It can be formal or informal, but often involves specific instructor intervention to maximize student interaction and learning. It is infinitely adaptable, working in small and large classes and across disciplines, and can be one of the most effective teaching approaches available to college instructors.

What can it look like?

Informal cooperative learning groups
In informal cooperative learning, small, temporary, ad-hoc groups of two to four students work together for brief periods in a class, typically up to one class period, to answer questions or respond to prompts posed by the instructor.

Additional examples of ways to structure informal group work
Think-pair-share
The instructor asks a discussion question. Students are instructed to think or write about an answer to the question before turning to a peer to discuss their responses. Groups then share their responses with the class.
Peer Instruction
This modification of the think-pair-share involves personal responses devices (e.g. clickers). The question posted is typically a conceptually based multiple-choice question. Students think about their answer and vote on a response before turning to a neighbor to discuss. Students can change their answers after discussion, and "sharing" is accomplished by the instructor revealing the graph of student response and using this as a stimulus for large class discussion. This approach is particularly well-adapted for large classes.
Jigsaw
In this approach, groups of students work in a team of four to become experts on one segment of new material, while other "expert teams" in the class work on other segments of new material. The class then rearranges, forming new groups that have one member from each expert team. The members of the new team then take turns teaching each other the material on which they are experts.
Formal cooperative learning groups
In formal cooperative learning students work together for one or more class periods to complete a joint task or assignment (Johnson et al., 2014). There are several features that can help these groups work well:

The instructor defines the learning objectives for the activity and assigns students to groups.

The groups are typically heterogeneous, with particular attention to the skills that are needed for success in the task.

Within the groups, students may be assigned specific roles, with the instructor communicating the criteria for success and the types of social skills that will be needed.

Importantly, the instructor continues to play an active role during the groups' work, monitoring the work and evaluating group and individual performance.

Instructors also encourage groups to reflect on their interactions to identify potential improvements for future group work.

This video shows an example of formal cooperative learning groups in David Matthes' class at the University of Minnesota:

There are many more specific types of group work that fall under the general descriptions given here, including team-based learning, problem-based learning, and process-oriented guided inquiry learning.

What's the theoretical underpinning?

The use of cooperative learning groups in instruction is based on the principle of constructivism, with particular attention to the contribution that social interaction can make. In essence, constructivism rests on the idea that individuals learn through building their own knowledge, connecting new ideas and experiences to existing knowledge and experiences to form new or enhanced understanding (Bransford, et al., 1999). The consideration of the role that groups can play in this process is based in social interdependence theory, which grew out of Kurt Koffka's and Kurt Lewin's identification of groups as dynamic entities that could exhibit varied interdependence among members, with group members motivated to achieve common goals. Morton Deutsch conceptualized varied types of interdependence, with positive correlation among group members' goal achievements promoting cooperation.

Lev Vygotsky extended this work by examining the relationship between cognitive processes and social activities, developing the sociocultural theory of development. The sociocultural theory of development suggests that learning takes place when students solve problems beyond their current developmental level with the support of their instructor or their peers. Thus both the idea of a zone of proximal development, supported by positive group interdependence, is the basis of cooperative learning (Davidson and Major, 2014; Johnson, et al., 2014).

Cooperative learning follows this idea as groups work together to learn or solve a problem, with each individual responsible for understanding all aspects. The small groups are essential to this process because students are able to both be heard and to hear their peers, while in a traditional classroom setting students may spend more time listening to what the instructor says.

Cooperative learning uses both goal interdependence and resource interdependence to ensure interaction and communication among group members. Changing the role of the instructor from lecturing to facilitating the groups helps foster this social environment for students to learn through interaction.

Is there evidence that it works?

David Johnson, Roger Johnson, and Karl Smith performed a meta-analysis of 168 studies comparing cooperative learning to competitive learning and individualistic learning in college students (Johnson et al., 2006). They found that cooperative learning produced greater academic achievement than both competitive learning and individualistic learning across the studies, exhibiting a mean weighted effect size of 0.54 when comparing cooperation and competition and 0.51 when comparing cooperation and individualistic learning. In essence, these results indicate that cooperative learning increases student academic performance by approximately one-half of a standard deviation when compared to non-cooperative learning models, an effect that is considered moderate. Importantly, the academic achievement measures were defined in each study, and ranged from lower-level cognitive tasks (e.g., knowledge acquisition and retention) to higher level cognitive activity (e.g., creative problem solving), and from verbal tasks to mathematical tasks to procedural tasks. The meta-analysis also showed substantial effects on other metrics, including self-esteem and positive attitudes about learning. George Kuh and colleagues also conclude that cooperative group learning promotes student engagement and academic performance (Kuh et al., 2007).

Springer, Stanne, and Donovan (1999) confirmed these results in their meta-analysis of 39 studies in university STEM classrooms. They found that students who participated in various types of small-group learning, ranging from extended formal interactions to brief informal interactions, had greater academic achievement, exhibited more favorable attitudes towards learning, and had increased persistence through STEM courses than students who did not participate in STEM small-group learning.

The box below summarizes three individual studies examining the effects of cooperative learning groups.

What are approaches that can help make group work effective?
Preparation Articulate your goals for the group work, including both the academic objectives you want the students to achieve and the social skills you want them to develop. Determine the group conformation that will help meet your goals.
In informal group learning, groups often form ad hoc from near neighbors in a class.

In formal group learning, it is helpful for the instructor to form groups that are heterogeneous with regard to particular skills or abilities relevant to group tasks. For example, groups may be heterogeneous with regard to academic skill in the discipline or with regard to other skills related to the group task (e.g., design capabilities, programming skills, writing skills, organizational skills) (Johnson et al, 2006).

Groups from 2-6 are generally recommended, with groups that consist of three members exhibiting the best performance in some problem-solving tasks (Johnson et al., 2006; Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992).

To avoid common problems in group work, such as dominance by a single student or conflict avoidance, it can be useful to assign roles to group members (e.g., manager, skeptic, educator, conciliator) and to rotate them on a regular basis (Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992). Assigning these roles is not necessary in well-functioning groups, but can be useful for students who are unfamiliar with or unskilled at group work.
Choose an assessment method that will promote positive group interdependence as well as individual accountability.
In team-based learning, two approaches promote positive interdependence and individual accountability. First, students take an individual readiness assessment test, and then immediately take the same test again as a group. Their grade is a composite of the two scores. Second, students complete a group project together, and receive a group score on the project. They also, however, distribute points among their group partners, allowing student assessment of members' contributions to contribute to the final score.

Heller and Hollabaugh (1992) describe an approach in which they incorporated group problem-solving into a class. Students regularly solved problems in small groups, turning in a single solution. In addition, tests were structured such that 25% of the points derived from a group problem, where only those individuals who attended the group problem-solving sessions could participate in the group test problem. This approach can help prevent the "free rider" problem that can plague group work.

The University of New South Wales describes a variety of ways to assess group work, ranging from shared group grades, to grades that are averages of individual grades, to strictly individual grades, to a combination of these. They also suggest ways to assess not only the product of the group work but also the process. Again, having a portion of a grade that derives from individual contribution helps combat the free rider problem.
Helping groups get started Explain the group's task, including your goals for their academic achievement and social interaction. Explain how the task involves both positive interdependence and individual accountability, and how you will be assessing each.
Assign group roles or give groups prompts to help them articulate effective ways for interaction. The University of New South Wales provides a valuable set of tools to help groups establish good practices when first meeting. The site also provides some exercises for building group dynamics; these may be particularly valuable for groups that will be working on larger projects.

Regularly observe group interactions and progress, either by circulating during group work, collecting in-process documents, or both. When you observe problems, intervene to help students move forward on the task and work together effectively. The University of New South Wales provides handouts that instructors can use to promote effective group interactions, such as a handout to help students listen reflectively or give constructive feedback, or to help groups identify particular problems that they may be encountering.

Assessing and reflecting

In addition to providing feedback on group and individual performance (link to preparation section above), it is also useful to provide a structure for groups to reflect on what worked well in their group and what could be improved. Graham Gibbs (1994) suggests using the checklists shown below.

The University of New South Wales provides other reflective activities that may help students identify effective group practices and avoid ineffective practices in future cooperative learning experiences.

References

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Cabrera, A. F., Crissman, J. L., Bernal, E. M., Nora, A., Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (2002). Collaborative learning: Its impact on college students' development and diversity. Journal of College Student Development, 43(1), 20-34.

Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Boundary crossing: Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and problem-based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25 (3&4), 7-55.

Dees, R. L. (1991). The role of cooperative leaning in increasing problem-solving ability in a college remedial course. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 409-21.

Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1).

Heller, P., and Hollabaugh, M. (1992) Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics 60, 637-644.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2006). Active learning: Cooperation in the university classroom (3 rd edition). Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Holubec, E.J. (2008). Cooperation in the classroom (8 th edition). Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journl on Excellence in College Teaching 25, 85-118.

Jones, D. J., & Brickner, D. (1996). Implementation of cooperative learning in a large-enrollment basic mechanics course. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings.

Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., and Hayek, J.C. (2007). Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations (ASHE Higher Education Report, No. 32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Love, A. G., Dietrich, A., Fitzgerald, J., & Gordon, D. (2014). Integrating collaborative learning inside and outside the classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4), 177-196.

Smith, M. E., Hinckley, C. C., & Volk, G. L. (1991). Cooperative learning in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education 68(5), 413-415.

Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 96(1), 21-51.

Uribe, D., Klein, J. D., & Sullivan, H. (2003). The effect of computer-mediated collaborative learning on solving ill-defined problems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 5-19.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

This teaching guide is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Group work: Using cooperative learning groups effectively

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Cynthia J. Brame and Rachel Biel Print Version Cite this guide: Brame, C.J. & Biel, R. (2015). Setting up and facilitating group work: Using cooperative learning groups effectively. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [todaysdate] from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively/. Many instructors from disciplines across the university use group work to enhance their students' learning.

# data[].attributes.headline
Theories or methodologies Regarding Working Together

# data[].attributes.subject
Theories or methodologies Regarding Working Together

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teamwork plays an important part in successful business operations. Definitions of teamwork include a group of people working together for a common goal with each member contributing to the project or program. Social scientists and group-theory researchers study teams to develop theories to define effective practices.

Business-administration programs teach team techniques, and employers ask management-job applicants questions about team-building techniques and practices. An understanding of teamwork theory helps impress job interviewers and also improves work management.

Productive teams help build businesses and create effective companies. Maslow's team building theory suggests that teams are motivated by opportunities for growth and actualization, as explained by Halo Psychology. Highly motivated teams tend to be more creative and productive. Firms focused on high production levels study teams and interpersonal interactions at the business with an eye on making changes to improve productivity.

Apple founder and former Pixar head Steve Jobs, for example, incorporated teamwork as an important part of his corporate operations. Jobs thought the key to high-performing teams involved frequent employee interaction, as described by Inc. He used teamwork theories in the construction of his corporate headquarters to increase worker interaction. Despite the fact that Jobs pioneered communication through electronic media, he also promoted personal interaction to fuel successful teams and workplaces.

The first scholarly study of teamwork took place in the 1950s under the direction of psychologists examining how humans relate to themselves and others. This group looked at how work influences team interactions and the actions team members take to tap the talents and skills of other members in solving a task or problem at work.

Additional studies explored the changes in teams over time and how teams integrate technology in completing tasks. The earliest formal studies of teamwork took place after World War II and focused on discovering the reasons for the failure of military teams.

Using a label to describe a theory allows easy recognition and a foundation to discuss the basic concepts. Major theories evaluating team-member role development include Interaction Process Analysis, a theory proposed by sociologist Freed Bales in 1950. Bale's theory evaluates individual members using a formal inventory system.

David Buchanan and Andrzej Huczynski published a major theory in the 1980s focusing on the elements of power and status in team management theory. Other important theories such as Meredith Belbin's theory of team roles also presented in the 1980s, propose ways to examine assigned team-member roles and compare these with the roles developed as a result of the individual team member's personality. More recently, John Adair's leadership theory emerged offerring a framework for team leaders that integrates tasks, managing the team and managing individual contributions, Mind Tools reports.

The major elements examined by teamwork studies include the team environment, member actions, communication used by the team, traits and roles of team members and the team work assignment. Scholarly studies also explore the attitudes and beliefs of the team members. In-depth team study also looks at the use of employer reward systems, both real and perceived by the worker.

Modern scholarly studies compare new teamwork theories with earlier theories, and also create mathematical equations to represent the behavior of individual team members and the group as a whole. The math equations attempt to predict team behavior under various employment conditions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teamwork theory was developed by organizational psychologists and social scientists. Applying teamwork theory in the workplace can maximize team performance and overall productivity. Important theorists to know include Maslow, Bales, Belbin, Adair and others.

# data[].attributes.headline
Theories or methodologies Regarding Working Together 

# data[].attributes.subject
Theories or methodologies Regarding Working Together 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
4. TEAMWORK AND COMMUNICATION

Suzan Last

An important aspect of effective teamwork entails understanding group dynamics in terms of both team situation and individual temperament. This section reviews a variety models often applied in workplaces that can help a team perform optimally and manage crises effectively.

"Tuckman's Stages of Group Development," proposed by psychologist Bruce Tuckman in 1965, is one of the most famous theories of team development. It describes four stages that teams may progress through: forming, storming, norming, and performing (a 5th stage was added later: adjourning). According to McCahan et al., the stages move from organizing to producing, and although the stages appear linear, in fact teams may move backwards to previous stages, depending on events that may influence the team and the communications strategies that they use. Some teams can also stall in a stage and never fully realize their potential. Figure 4.2.1 outlines these stages. Please refer to the McCahan et al. text for a more complete discussion.

Figure 4.2.1 The Stages of the Tuckman Model.

Note that at each stage, communication is a critical component of successfully moving to the next stage. The forming stage, when everyone is getting to know each other and are trying to make a good impression, is a good time to create a set of shared expectations, guidelines, or a Team Charter. A team forming activity is also a good idea to help build trust and get to know the various strengths and weaknesses of the team members. This is an orientation stage, on both an interpersonal and professional level, where preliminary boundaries and expectations are established.

The storming stage is the one most often characterized by group conflict. It is often where the preliminary expectations and boundaries are challenged as individuals learn more about each other's motivations. This coincides with the "brainstorming" stage of the design process, in which each member contributes ideas that could potentially become the focus of the project. It is also the stage where team mates learn about each others' strengths and weaknesses, and try to determine what their roles will be in the project. Learning to harness the constructive potential of conflict and compromise in this stage is important to progressing to the next stage.

During the norming stage, if conflicts have been resolved and team mates have proved flexible, all is going well, each team member knows their role and works on their part of the project. Sometimes, people work independently in this stage, but check in with team mates frequently to make sure work flow is efficient and effective. Group cohesion ensures that everyone is responsible to the task and to each other; Gantt Charts can be very helpful in keeping everyone on track during this stage. Problems might arise at this stage if teammates do not fully understand their role, the team expectations, or the overall goal; revisiting the forming or storming stage may be required.

Few first-time teams reach the performing stage, as this happens when teams have worked together well on several projects, have established a synergy, and have developed systems that that make projects go smoothly and efficiently. Less time is needed to form, storm and learn to norm; performing teams can move quickly and interdependently to tackling the task at hand. Adjourning and going their separate ways can often be somewhat emotional for these teams. Figure 4.2.2 depicts the trajectory of each team member during each stage.

DISC theory, developed in 1928 by Dr. William Moulton Marston (who also, as it happens, created the Wonder Woman comic series!), has evolved into a useful model for conflict management as it predicts behaviours based on four key personality traits he originally described as Dominance, Inducement, Submission, and Compliance. The names of these four traits have been variously revised by others over the decades, so you might find different terms used in different contexts. The four general traits are now often described as (1) Dominance, (2) Influence/Inspiring (3) Steadiness/Supportive, and (4) Compliance/Conscientiousness (see Figure 4.2.3).

Industries often use DISC assessments in professional contexts. Having some insight into your teammates' personality traits can help when trying to resolve conflicts. General characteristics of each trait are as follows:

Dominance

Characteristics: direct, decisive, ego-driven, problem-solver, and risk-taker; likes new challenges and freedom from routine; driven to overcome obstacles

Strengths: great organizer and time manager; challenges the status quo; innovative

Weaknesses: can be argumentative, disrespectful of authority, and overly ambitious (taking on too much); can be blunt, stubborn, and aggressive

Inspiring/Influential

Characteristics: enthusiastic, persuasive, optimistic, trusting, impulsive, charismatic, and emotional

Strengths: creative problem solver; great cheer-leader, negotiator, and peace-maker; a real "people person"

Weaknesses: more concerned with popularity than tangible results; lacks attention to detail

Steady/Supportive

Characteristics: reliable, predictable, friendly, good listener, team player, empathetic, easy-going, and altruistic.

Strengths: dependable, loyal; respects authority; has patience and empathy; good at conflict resolution; willing to compromise.

Weaknesses: resistant to change; sensitive to criticism; difficulty prioritizing

Cautious/Conscientious/Compliant

Characteristics: has high standards; values precision and accuracy; analytical and systematic; even-tempered, realistic, and logical; methodical; respect for authority

Strengths: great information gatherer/researcher; able to define situations precisely and accurately; offers realistic perspective

Weaknesses: can get bogged down in details; needs clear boundaries, procedures, and methods; difficulty accepting criticism; may avoid conflict or just "give in." May be overly timid.

Richard Beckhard's GRPI model, originally developed in 1972, has been widely adapted in sports contexts as the GRIP model (see Figure 4.2.4), outlining four interrelated components of highly effective teamwork:

Goals: everyone must fully understand and be committed to the goals of the team, and of the organization. Everyone's goals must be aligned in order to establish trust, make progress, and achieve desired outcome.

Roles: all team members must know what part they play, what is expected, and how they are held accountable and responsible.

Interpersonal: quality communication and collaboration require and foster trust among team members; sensitivity and flexibility needed to deal with conflict and make progress.

Processes: defined system for how decisions are made, how the team solves problems and addresses conflict; defines work flow and procedures to be followed in completing the project.

Thomas and Kilmann's model for handling team conflict outlines five main approaches to managing team conflict ( Competing, Accommodating, Compromising, Avoiding, and Collaborating), placed in a matrix of two scales: Assertiveness-the degree to which one tries to meet one's own needs; and Cooperativeness-degree to which one tries to satisfy the needs of other team members (See illustration).

Each approach can have both positive and negative impacts:

1. Competing: highly assertive, but uncooperative behaviour, characterized by the urge to "win at all costs," dominate, and engage in power struggles. This can result in animosity, but can also spur teammates to compete constructively, which can lead to interesting innovations if well managed.

2. Accommodating: highly cooperative, but unassertive behaviour. This may seem like a good way to avoid conflict, but it can also lead to self-silencing of good ideas in order to appease others, which may lead to feelings of resentment.

3. Compromising: this approach is the most moderate in both scales, and while it might seem constructive, it can lead to dissatisfaction and mediocre progress or results. Sometimes compromise is necessary, but often, the best solution comes from a single inspirational source.

4. Avoiding: being unassertive and uncooperative is generally the least effective way to deal conflict, as this simply avoids the problem and neglects the need for a solution. However, when a feasible solution to a problem seems impossible, sometimes ignoring it and focusing on what is good can be the best way to just get through it.

5. Collaborating: being highly assertive and cooperative is the best way to find solutions that benefit the whole team and build respect.

In his 2005 book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Lencioni outlines five common problems teams experience that impact their effectiveness:

1. Lack of trust: if team members do not trust each other, they are unlikely to take risks or ask for help. A lack of trust means a low level of comfort that makes it difficult to communicate and perform effectively as a team

2. Fear of conflict: avoiding conflict can lead to an artificial "peace" at the expense of progress and innovation. Conflict is a normal part of team work and can be very productive if managed effectively.

3. Lack of commitment: team members do not commit to doing the work, do not follow through on decisions or tasks, do not meet deadlines, and let their teammates down, ultimately affecting the success of the whole project.

4. Avoidance of accountability.

5. Inattention to results: when team members focus on their own personal goals instead of project goals, they lose sight of the expected results that actually measure the success of the project. Not focusing on the results during the process means that no one is planning how to improve those results.

Lencioni advises tackling each dysfunction, displayed in the pyramid in Figure 4.2.5, from the bottom up. Establishing trust is a crucial first step to being able to manage conflict, achieve commitment, create accountability and focus on results.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
4.2 Five Models for Understanding Team Dynamics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
4. TEAMWORK AND COMMUNICATION Suzan Last An important aspect of effective teamwork entails understanding group dynamics in terms of both team situation and individual temperament. This section reviews a variety models often applied in workplaces that can help a team perform optimally and manage crises effectively.

# data[].attributes.headline
Theories or methodologies Regarding Working Together 

# data[].attributes.subject
Theories or methodologies Regarding Working Together 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teamwork Theory

Tuckman's Stages of Group Development
Probably the most famous teamwork theory is Bruce Tuckman's "team stages model".
First developed in 1965, Tuckman's model is widely known as a basis for effective team building. Yet how many people really know how to use it? Below we explain Tuckman's model before offering some fresh insights on how to take it further.

Tuckman's model is significant because it recognizes the fact that groups do not start off fully-formed and functioning. He suggests that teams grow through clearly defined stages, from their creation as groups of individuals, to cohesive, task-focused teams.

Tuckman's Teamwork Theory

Tuckman describes working with a team of social psychologists, on behalf of the U.S. navy. The team studied small group behaviour, from several perspectives. In doing so, Tuckman reviewed 50 articles on group development and noticed that there were two features common to these small groups: the interpersonal or group structure, and the task activity. From this he identified that groups evolved into teams via four common stages.

Firstly an orientation, testing phase which often led to a period characterized by a degree of conflict. This then generally resolved itself, leading to a more socially cohesive phase. Finally, groups settled to a functional phase, during which they focused on role-relatedness. To summarize these four phases, Tuckman coined the oft-quoted terms: "forming", "storming", "norming" and "performing".

Tuckman's teamwork theory is best illustrated on a graph which shows the link between group relationships (the horizontal axis) and task focus (the vertical axis). The optimal or "performing" position is reached when relationships have developed within the group and it has started delivering with a clear focus on the task.

However, Tuckman's ideas clearly indicate that it takes time to reach the "performing" stage, and it's normal for these teams to go through ups and downs as they develop relationships. Particularly in the early period, which is perhaps why Tuckman called it the "storming" phase!

The 4 Phases of Tuckman's Teamwork Theory

Forming:

The initial stage of team development during which individuals have not yet gelled together. Everybody is busy finding their place in the team, sizing each other up, and asking themselves why they are here! Find out more in our articles: Team Building Techniques and Teamwork Tips. The first offers advice on starting a new team while the second will help you take over an existing team (perhaps a far more common situation).

Storming:

People begin to see themselves as part of a team. However at this stage they may challenge each other, and the team leader, about such things as what the team is doing, and how things should be done. As the stage title suggests, conflict and confrontation typify this stage, as differences surface. This may result in some loss of performance or focus on the task, as the diagram illustrates.

Norming:

This is the phase where team members start to come together, developing processes, establishing ground rules, clarifying who does what, and how things will be done. This phase is characterized by a growing sense of "togetherness". Find out more about both the Storming and Norming phases in our article: Team Building Concepts.

Performing:

This is the final stage where increased focus on both the task, and on team relationships, combine to provide synergy. Performance is delivered through people working effectively together. We have written two articles to further develop this stage. Team Building in the Workplace will help you build a performing team. Characteristics of Effective Teamwork will help you and your team sustain that performance.

Thinking about Tuckman's Model

The value of Tuckman's model is that it helps us understand that teams evolve. It also helps us to consider how they may encounter different problems at different stages of their development.

One limitation of the model may be that it makes team building appear too linear and sequential. Although it's a useful analytical tool, we must remember that some teams may "loop" around in their development.

For example, not all teams evolve smoothly through Tuckman's stages but may yo-yo between norming and storming until they either begin to function, or are disbanded! Regardless of limitations, all well-conceived models can be useful in helping us to understand and better manage our circumstances.

Adjourning

Tuckman's famous phases are part of a teamwork theory based on stages of team development. His theory may have gained popularity partly due to the catchy labels for each of his stages. Indeed, in 1977 Tuckman proposed an update to his model, introducing a fifth stage: adjourning. This was meant to reflect the period after a team disbands, having achieved its objectives or perhaps being broken-up for other reasons. The issues for managers here can include:

Capturing the knowledge/expertise of the team for future use or reference.

Dealing with any sense of loss amongst team members, where successful or well-established teams are being broken up.

Understanding the causes and ramifications of team dysfunction, where the team is being disbanded because it has not worked.

Beyond Tuckman's Theory

Tuckman's theory provides a useful and simple way to think about how we humans interact in team situations. Firstly by illustrating that it's normal for teams go through stages as they develop. Secondly, by highlighting the need to manage different aspects of team behaviour at each stage of that development. The beauty and usefulness of Tuckman's model is perhaps in its simplicity. Follow this for more information on this theory or click here to read Tuckman's original article.

Team development theories such, as Tuckman's group development stages, recognise that teams develop through different stages, from forming through to performing. Whilst these theories give a useful understanding of different team requirements at different times, there are a number of questions that aren't particularly well answered by the models. For example:

How should you lead at the different stages of a team's development?

How do you identify when you are progressing through a stage?

How does the team develop in the organisational setting?

How is it affected by other outside influences?

The theory of group stages alone doesn't answer these questions. To do so, and thus to build a more robust teamwork concept, ideas about team leadership and outside factors need to be introduced. We've done just this in our STAR team performance model. You can see how this model applies to group stages in: Stages of Team Development.

This is the first of ten articles in our teamwork series. But for some practical tips on using teamwork theory, look at our great-value guides (below), or at our Team Building Exercises for all team stages.

Team Building Exercises and Team Stages

Our e-guide: Team Building Exercises has been specifically designed to help you understand and use a team stages model. It contains a tool for each stage to help you build a high-performing team - as quickly as possible. The exercises in the guide are grouped according to our own team stages model. Remember, each team is unique and needs to be led through several developmental stages. These include:

If you're creating a new team or taking over an existing team

Exercise 1: Being a TEAM together
Exercise 2: True or false
Exercise 3: Who does what in a team?
Exercise 4: Getting the mix right
Exercise 5: Doing something for the first time
Exercise 6: Two years from now

If you're developing an existing team

Exercise 7: A clearer vision
Exercise 8: Mad, sad or glad
Exercise 9: Seeing the bigger picture
Exercise 10: Positive feedback
Exercise 11: Conflicting views

If you're team is already performing and achieving results

Exercise 12: Did you notice?
Exercise 13: Limiting beliefs

If you're trying to sustain good team performance

Exercise 14: Scarce resources
Exercise 15: Keeping going

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teamwork Theory | Tuckman's Stages of Group Development - The Happy Manager

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Probably the most famous teamwork theory is Bruce Tuckman's 'team stages model'. Tuckman's model is widely used for effective team building.

# data[].attributes.headline
Videos that convey sharing responsibility and/or reciprocity 

# data[].attributes.subject
Videos that convey sharing responsibility and/or reciprocity 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Center for Positive Organizations - Michigan Ross

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reciprocity: Asking for What you Need and Helping Others (Wayne Baker)

# data[].attributes.headline
Videos that convey sharing responsibility and/ or reciprocity

# data[].attributes.subject
Videos that convey sharing responsibility and/ or reciprocity

# data[].attributes.headline
Videos that convey responsibility and/or reciprocity 

# data[].attributes.subject
Videos that convey responsibility and/or reciprocity 

# data[].attributes.headline
How to improve accountability within work 

# data[].attributes.subject
How to improve accountability within work 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Managing a team is hard. Building a high performance team? That's even harder. But one key skill that high performance teams all have in common is that they hold themselves accountable, both as individuals and as a team.

That's why all great managers should know how to build a culture of accountability in the workplace.

Here are eight team accountability exercises to start right now:

1. Set clear expectations, and document them

The first step in team accountability is making sure your team knows exactly what's expected of them individually and collectively. A great way to do this is to use a RACI matrix for big projects. If anyone were to approach a member of your team outside of the department, they should be able to clearly say:

What their team is trying to achieve (and how this ties to the overall company objectives)

What their responsibilities are in the team

What their individual KPIs are

Who is accountable for what

If your team doesn't know their expectations, be sure to change that. Use team management software to document and manage projects to keep everyone in the loop. You should also use time in your one-on-ones to go over individual and team goals again and again until they become second nature to your employees.

2. Make everyone responsible for team meeting agendas

Nothing is worse than being the only one talking in a meeting that you set up. If that sounds like how your team meetings run, take a step back and give your whole team power to control the agenda. This means sharing it beforehand and making everyone responsible for taking meeting notes. When others contribute to the agenda and are prepared for the meeting, you'll be able to listen and coach more rather than maintaining the conversation.

3. Assign tasks to individuals

It sounds counterintuitive to talk about increasing team accountability, and then encourage assigning tasks to individuals...right? Not really. You might think that assigning action items and tasks to teams will help them work more collaboratively, but the reality is that without a single person assigned to complete a piece of work or next step, it will fall through the cracks. With one person assigned, the rest of the team knows who to hold accountable, which is especially important if your team is highly dependent on each other to complete work before they can start their own.

4. Follow-up

In emails, in meetings, in chats...always, always follow-up. As a manager, aside from setting the expectations for your teams, this is the second most important thing you can do to impact team accountability. Expectations and goals that are set without follow-up or reiteration will fall through.

5. Adopt an "embrace mistakes" mantra

Encourage your team to own their mistakes and failures, learn from them and move on. Eliminate all games, "he said she said" attitudes or shirking responsibilities within the team. If something didn't get done, ask who was responsible (another reason why assigning tasks to individuals is hugely important), why didn't it happen and what can we do differently next time around to make sure it does get done.

6. ...but make sure there are consequences

If something doesn't get done, and nothing happens, was it really ever that important to do in the first place? Establish a team dynamic where everyone is clear on what happens when goals and targets are not meant. It's not a scare tactic, but it should be something the team is aware of. Think of it like this: if someone asks a member of your team "What happens if you don't do X?" then the answer shouldn't be "nothing."

7. Reward wins

Recognition in the workplace is still one of the biggest employee engagement factors. Build team accountability by rewarding and recognizing wins within the team and as a team. Studies consistently show that recognition is key to employee drive, motivation and retention.

8. Practice what you preach

"Lead by example"..."Practice what you preach"...there are a dozen cliché quotes with the same sentiment, but what it boils down to is this: be the model for what you want your teams to do. This means owning up to your own mistakes, taking responsibility for your actions and being clear with your team on your accountabilities.

Creating a culture of accountability takes time and effort, but it's well worth it in the long run. Try implementing these eight team accountability exercises into your day-to-day, and watch performance skyrocket 🚀.

Create a culture of accountability with Hypercontext

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 ways to improve accountability in your team

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All great managers should know how to build a culture of accountability in the workplace. Here are eight team accountability exercises to start right now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As a manager, it's a tricky balance to promote accountability for business outcomes while demonstrating kindness to individuals on your team. How do you find the sweet spot between being compassionate and holding people responsible? The secret is to over-index on clear expectations and then provide frequent, low-impact coaching and feedback to give your team members assistance without ever transferring ownership of responsibility. This article covers some techniques to instill in your team the sense that they can be simultaneously vulnerable with you and responsible for hitting their goals.

Your team has a lot to accomplish, so you can't afford to have anyone on board who consistently lets their colleagues down. You need individuals who understand their responsibilities and feel obligated to deliver - a team full of people who feel accountable. But building an accountable team is easier said than done.

Accelerate your career with Harvard ManageMentor®. HBR Learning's online leadership training helps you hone your skills with courses like Leading People. Earn badges to share on LinkedIn and your resume. Access more than 40 courses trusted by Fortune 500 companies.

What you need to know about being in charge.

Learn More & See All Courses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hold Your Team Accountable with Compassion, Not Fear

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a manager, it's a tricky balance to promote accountability for business outcomes while demonstrating kindness to individuals on your team. How do you find the sweet spot between being compassionate and holding people responsible? The secret is to over-index on clear expectations and then provide frequent, low-impact coaching and feedback to give your team members assistance without ever transferring ownership of responsibility.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From a leadership perspective, there's a real thirst for increasing leadership accountability. Executives have recently asked me various questions that linger over the concept of building team accountability to help them achieve their strategic plans while creating high-performing teams:

"How do I build accountability in teams? "

"How do I increase accountability in leadership and employees?"

" What else can I do to get people to do what we need them to do?"

"How can I hold a team member to be held accountable and still be seen as a good leader?"

"How do I balance leadership accountability and personal accountability when building a team of engaged employees?"

"Creating a culture of accountability is hard, how do I provide constructive feedback without being the bad guy?"

Building team accountability requires understanding a few dynamics because it's more complicated than we might recognize. It goes beyond the responsibility for the outcomes, which is obviously important. Still, effective leaders know that they need a culture of accountability in their teams that provide the input needed to achieve the expected team performance. Holding people accountable is one of the most important things that a successful leader does for organizational alignment, but it is also one of the hardest. It is one thing to outline your strategic objectives during team planning, but you need to create the culture to implement it.

First of all, teams - by definition - are made up of individuals. We can't forget that. An understanding is needed that society tends to truly value individual contribution while also (and separately) valuing team contribution. This interesting contradiction causes much confusion about which should be valued the most. The secret alchemy, then, is to simply sort out the confusion to start building accountability in the workplace. Without accountability in a team, it is much more difficult - and stressful - to achieve your quarterly plan. Each team member needs to be responsible for - and take ownership of - their actions, so the team can achieve results as laid out in the plan.

Team Accountability

We can do this if we recognize where the individual plays a more vital role and where teamwork plays a more vital role. For instance, when there's sudden chaos or an emergency of some sort, you want one or more individuals to step up and take the lead. On the other hand, teams are better when you need smart thinking to solve a problem or transform a process. Successful strategy execution must allow each of your team members the flexibility they need to make decisions and be held accountable for the results. Accountable leaders at all levels are responsible for holding people accountable and regularly reviewing goal progress with their teams to win the talent war.

That said, though, the individuals placed on a team matter. In an HBR article, Gratton and Erickson noted that the "greater the proportion of experts a team had, the more likely it was to disintegrate into nonproductive conflict or stalemate." These kinds of teams are not teams. They are groups of individuals coming together under the façade of working as a team. They're still a group of individuals.

Yet, most individuals in team formation want to do what they're supposed to do. Their intent is good. The missing link is that what the team is supposed to do gets lost in translation. It's assumed that they just know what to do, which is why our leadership development program is so popular as it provides actionable advice to develop accountable leaders and teams. Accountability training for leaders provides a positive return on investment as it builds accountability and trust throughout the organization.

Hopefully, your company isn't full of one crisis after another. If it is, then celebrating the individual might be your default solution. But for most companies, the continual journey is around improvements, innovation, and problem-solving. With that said, we can see the relevance of accountability in a team environment. Lack of accountability spreads quickly through the organization, limits productivity, kills morale, and destroys trust.

The missing link is that this 'team' of individuals needs to know what they, as a collective whole, are accountable for accomplishing. Personal accountability doesn't always translate to accountability in a team. As a leader, it's your job to provide them with a definition of what it is you're holding them accountable for doing and increase your communication to increase accountability. Consider implementing skip-level meetings to bridge the gaps between levels of management, start with our best skip-level meeting questions.

To do this, consider using The Five C's Framework for Building Team Accountability:

1. Common Purpose: Set the stage for any team initiative by talking about the 'why.' Why are they here? Why are they working on this project or this special task force? Connect what you need the team to do with why you need them to spend valuable time doing it. What's the point? Why does it matter? We always tend to tell a team of people what to do; many leaders are good at that. As a result, the 'why' gets completely ignored. The sign of a high-performing team is the ability to rally around a common purpose.

2. Clear Expectations: What is it that you ultimately need the team to do? These are the accountability questions leaders to set clear expectations for the team. You need to tell the team repeatedly so that all team members are clear on what is expected of them. It often takes several repetitions before the entire team can communicate them effectively.

Clarify: Are you looking for one specific viable solution to a company-wide problem, or are you asking the team to jointly agree on three potential solutions to present? Do you expect them to define a roadmap for the one (or three) solutions or not? Do you need them to present a list of pros and cons with their solution(s)? How do you want to be kept informed along the way? An email every Friday afternoon? A white paper three times a week (Side note: Please don't do this last one), or what? Whether it's an intact workplace team or a task force, use the Job Scorecard as a tool to help prompt your thinking as to what you need the team to be responsible for doing. Clear expectations are the cornerstone of accountability.

Accountable Leadership: If it's a special task force (vs. an intact workplace team), who's the person who's driving the train? In other words, who's ultimately accountable for making sure that what the team needs to do gets done? It doesn't mean this person is the only one doing the work; it simply means s/he is on top of it. The same would hold true for a new initiative for an intact team. You, the leader, shouldn't think you have all the power to check how things are going. Instead, who on the team can take the leadership role to ensure the transition gets moving and keeps moving? Who's accountable for driving the train? Do you accept responsibility when it is required?

In your mind, what does success look like when you achieve a goal? Setting up a metric for what success looks like clarifies the degree to which people are supposed to do something. Otherwise, you can get a checkmark that says, "We did it." But was it done relative to the expectations you had in your head? Define (clearly) what success looks like. (Side note: Avoid having a due date as a success metric. Any of us can produce a ton of mediocre work by a deadline.)

3. Communicate & Align: As time passes, as part of their leadership development, it's a leader's job to keep a team focused and aligned so that everyone's involved and moving in the same direction. How are they going to do what you need them to do? What resources might they consider using? Keep everyone focused. Over and over, communicate with them, ask questions, remind them why what they're doing is essential, etc. Your job as a leader is to keep them rowing in the same direction, especially when rolling out annual and quarterly plans. Communication and alignment are what provide life to any team because it's what fosters longer-term sustainability.

4. Collaborate and Coaching: Set the stage for collaboration all along the way so that adjustments can be made in real time. You can monitor progress and coach your people. Don't tell them what to do. Coach. Listen to them (80%) and talk with them (20%) to increase your team's performance. Nurture them to talk with each other. Be a resource for them. What roadblocks must be removed, and how can you help remove them? If what you've tasked your people to do is essential, then it deserves your support. Collaboration is at the heart of a great weekly team meeting, where the accountability rubber meets the road. Did everyone do what they said they were going to do? How are you coaching employees to take ownership of their commitments? An effective leader must first keep your commitment to building trust with the team, or they're doomed to failure.

5. Consequences: Most people see consequences, and they immediately think of a negative connotation. We overlook that consequences can also be positive, and every organization should use positive feedback. Make results and consequences visible. Talk to your team strategically vs. tactically, usually done through questions vs. statements. Secondly, for some reason, leaders are the first to let people know when something's not right or if it's gone awry. But when things go well, it's as if success is glossed over. The consequence of that, though, is that you help create a remedial culture. People are only noticed and given attention at weekly team meetings when things go differently than expected. So work to provide equal (or more) weight to what's gone right. Celebrate!

Need some help getting started? Rhythm Systems has programs that can help you execute your strategy with less drama!

Team Accountability Vs. Personal Accountability (Video)

Leadership Accountability: How Good Leaders Hold Their Team Accountable

Which of the Five C's do you find the hardest to do?

Which is the most important, and why?

You can take our team accountability assessment to see where you stand and how to improve.

Need help getting your team aligned to achieve your growth goals? Rhythm systems software was ranked the #1 easiest software to use, highest ROI, fastest implementation, and highest adoption rate on G2.

Additional information on accountability in leadership:

The Power of Systems and People: Accountable Leaders and Teams leadership development program to improve team performance and avoid being part of the great resignation.

You can take Our Team Accountability Assessment to see how your team stacks up.
Why You Need a Peak Performance Plan for Your A-Players Leadership Accountability Definition in Management
Level 5 Leadership - How to be a Level 5 Leader with examples
Team Accountability Begins with Personal Accountability How top CEOs Close the Strategy Execution Gap Follow-Up: The Key To Leadership Development Building Team Accountability: Job Scorecards 10 Signs of an Accountable Culture [Infographic]Growing Team Accountability in Your Organization 5 Steps to Having an Accountability Discussion [Video]
You can learn more about accountable leaders and teams.

Photo Credit: iStock by Getty Images

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leadership Accountability: Build Accountability Leadership in your Team

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Building team accountability through leadership development requires that we understand a few dynamics because it's more complicated than we might recognize. Accountability in a team starts with personal accountability and accountable leadership.

# data[].attributes.headline
Steps for support for all class members in an assignment 

# data[].attributes.subject
Steps for support for all class members in an assignment 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Setting the Stage for Success in Group Work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Once the group roles have been established, work towards building a community for cooperation and collaboration. Devote a segment during class for groups to interact, define group norms, and explore potential challenges. Cooperative activities require students to engage in learning together. Typical structures for cooperative activities are:

# data[].attributes.headline
steps for support for all class members in an assignment 

# data[].attributes.subject
steps for support for all class members in an assignment 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Make your students' group work more effective by giving each member a specific role to fill.

Advisory

English & Language Arts

History

Social Studies

The resources I'm getting from my colleagues through Facing History have been just invaluable.

- Claudia Bautista, Santa Monica, Calif

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Make your students' group work more effective by giving each member a specific role to fill.

# data[].attributes.headline
Steps  for support for all class members in an assignment 

# data[].attributes.subject
Steps  for support for all class members in an assignment 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Center for Teaching & Learning : UMass Amherst

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Successful group work is characterized by trust, psychological safety, clarity of expectations, and good communication; being in the same location while working is not essential to group effectiveness (Duhigg, 2016; Kelly, 2008; Salmons, 2019). Below we offer strategies and examples that work for short-term collaborative group work (e.g., discussions in an online, hybrid/flexible, or in-person class) and long-term collaborative assignments (e.g., group projects), ending with additional considerations for long-term collaborative work.

STRATEGIES & EXAMPLES

Provide Opportunities to Develop Connection and Trust

Engage students with community building activities. Groups work best when students feel connected and trust each other. Brief icebreaker activities are fun and allow students to get to know each other before delving into group work. If using a video conferencing platform such as Zoom or Echo360, ask students to type a word or emoji about how they are doing into the chat, or during in-person classes students can share this orally or via an audience response system. Let students practice group work in Moodle or Blackboard with some low-stakes group assignments.

Create group norms. In the first few weeks of class, create participation norms that all students agree upon as a class or within their small groups. Discuss with students how certain social identities (e.g., women in STEM, transgender students) can be unintentionally marginalized during group work as a justification for creating norms around respectful and inclusive communication (Oakley, Felder, Brent, & Elhajj, 2004). Vary the groupings of students so that students can meet other students and hear different perspectives, particularly in the first weeks of class. Refer back to the agreed-upon norms when conflict arises.

Proactively check in with groups. It's important to pay attention to both process and the accomplished task. As you drop into groups during class time or consult with groups in office hours, note who does and does not speak; consider asking questions about process such as who is generating ideas and how they know everyone is on board with these ideas. Check in individually with quieter students. Remember, how you address group functioning models how they should interact with each other (Kelly, 2008).

(Over)communicate and Reinforce Expectations

Communicate the purpose. Communicate in writing and orally the skills students will develop by the end of their group work experience and why this is a valuable task or project to do in groups (as opposed to individually). You might ask students to connect skills they will learn to their personal goals and describe how they will know if they've developed these skills apart from your feedback.

Describe the tasks. In writing, describe the tasks in detail, including steps in the process with due dates/deadlines, resources needed, technology for communication, and expectations for group work. This means giving students clear topics, questions, deliverables, or goals for group work. Consider assigning rotating task roles such as discussion director, connector, summarizer, recorder, and reporter (Kennedy & Nilson, 2008). Create a space online for students to submit questions which are publicly answered for all to see; this can become an FAQ forum. At the end of group work, have groups submit something that demonstrates their engagement with the task for a small amount of points, such as group decisions, remaining questions, or discussion notes.

Clarify the criteria. Communicate specific details about how student work generated in groups will be assessed (i.e., rubrics, exemplars, grading scheme). Use positive, "do this" language rather than negative, "don't do this" language when possible. Show examples that typify important or challenging aspects of the work with narrations (i.e., on video or in a commented document) of what makes the work exemplar.

Additional Tips for Long-term Collaborative Projects

Be sure students have a communication plan. This can be specified as part of their group norms and processes at the beginning of the project. In addition, be clear how and when groups should communicate with you, where and in what format they should submit materials, and what to do if they encounter a problem.

Break apart the project into phases or milestones with clear deliverables at each stage. Clearly specify how and where students should turn in work (i.e., online or in person), and use this format consistently for all deliverables.

Have students periodically check in about their group process and report back on their process. At the beginning of the project, ask students to identify how they want to work together, what their expectations are for each other, and what collaborative tools the group wants to use. Have them post their group norms in an online forum. Include a requirement for a "team effectiveness discussion" or evaluation (self or peer) after students have some time to work together (e.g., 2nd milestone; See Oakley et al. 2004 for a "Crisis Clinic" guide). Allow them to adjust norms and set goals for the next phase of group work.

Clearly connect homework, lectures, or other learning activities to the group project. For example, after learning new concepts, students might be asked to turn in a brief "Application memo" which connects course content to their group project. An online session might end with an "Integrate it" discussion among group members to integrate new learning into their project. Homework might be called "Project Prep." Name activities by their purpose so that students see the relevance and utility of each activity more easily.

Foster cross-group peer review. Students will appreciate hearing what other groups are doing and can get ideas for their own projects. For example, have students share their milestones or group work with another group and have them record questions and feedback in a collaborative document. Review that document to provide feedback to the entire class, saving you from giving feedback to each group. Peer review can also be done as a workshop or group assignment activity in the LMS.

Please contact the CTL with any questions or for more details about the examples shared at ctl@umass.edu. For support with collaborative technology, email instruct@umass.edu.

For questions on your LMS, Google, and other educational technology contact IDEAS at instruct@umass.edu

REFERENCES

Duhigg, C. (2016, February 25). What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team. The New York Times.

Kelly, R. (2008, August 11). Creating trust in online education, Faculty Focus.

Kennedy, F. A., and Nilson, L. B. (2008). Successful strategies for teams. Team Member Handbook. Office of Teaching Effectiveness and Innovation, Clemson University.

Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), pp. 9-34.

Salmons, J. (2019). Learning to collaborate, collaborating to learn: Engaging students in the classroom and online. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Image by Armin Rimoldi for Pexels.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Center for Teaching & Learning : UMass Amherst

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Successful group work is characterized by trust, psychological safety, clarity of expectations, and good communication; being in the same location while working is not essential to group effectiveness (Duhigg, 2016; Kelly, 2008; Salmons, 2019).