A Comparison of Group Processes, Performance, and Satisfaction in Face‐to‐Face Versus Computer‐Mediated Engineering Student Design Teams

Abstract

Industry often requires engineers to work in teams. Therefore, many university engineering courses require students to work in groups to complete a design project. Due to the increasingly global nature of engineering, opportunities for students to navigate the issues of distance, time, culture, language, and multiple perspectives associated with virtual teams are becoming particularly desirable. To understand students' experience with virtual teams in a graduate course on principles of lean manufacturing, a group of researchers at a midwestern university compared the project performance, selected group processes, and satisfaction of students randomly assigned to face‐to‐face and computer‐mediated communication design teams. Students in both the face‐to‐face and computer‐mediated communication design teams performed equally well on the final project, and reported similar patterns in group processes with a few exceptions. Students in face‐to‐face design teams were more satisfied with the group experience than those in the computer‐mediated communication design teams; however, all reported an overall positive experience.

The Effect of Individual and Group Characteristics on Remote Collaboration

“…Despite its potential benefits, studies of CSCL have reported unpredictable group behaviors, including: misunderstandings due to lack of nonverbal cues, increased negative behavior such as flaming, reduced group consensus, less satisfaction with process and outcomes, and low efficiency [4]. Some research studies [5] support the idea that students prefer faceto-face over computer-mediated meetings.…”

Developing Critical Collaboration Skills in Engineering Students: Results from an Empirical Study

“…Prior research suggests that learning can be best facilitated by scaffolded instruction that supports collaboration and interaction in authentic environments using state of the art tools and processes. 8 Scaffolds are defined as instructional and expert support in the guise of feedback, directions or guided instructional materials and tools embedded in instructional activities. Scaffolding has been identified as a powerful approach to support learning in complex collaborative environments.…”

“…However, most existing engineering programs don't fully incorporate the learning opportunities for students to master technology-supported teamwork as a core element of the curriculum. 8,9 Also, we have found that in general, there is little understanding of the role of technology on supporting collaborative learning outcomes.…”

A Qualitative Inquiry into the Role of Web-based Collaboration Tools and Instructional Scaffolds in the Facilitation of Team Processes

“…It has been suggested that most existing engineering programs don't fully incorporate the opportunity for students to master technology-supported teamwork as a core element of the curriculum. 4,5 In addition, courses that use team projects give little consideration to the cognitive and behavioral processes such as team building, clarifying goals and expectations, planning, communication, consensus building and conflict resolution; which hold the key to successful collaboration. 5,6 A recent review of research on engineering student teams suggests that our understanding of how best to cultivate collaboration amongst remote teams of students is largely underdeveloped 7 .…”