An Examination of Socially Destructive Behaviors in Group Work

Abstract

With the increasing prevalence of group work in marketing courses there is a need to consider the impact of students' social dynamics on both learning and satisfaction outcomes. This article explores one such dynamic at both intra-and intergroup levels. Using data generated from multiple sources, it was identified that students who are actively contributing to group processes have difficulty distinguishing between students, and indeed groups, that are socially loafing and those that are genuinely struggling with the material. As a consequence, the struggling students are subject to incidences of socially destructive behaviors, critically harming their ability to develop. This has the potential to harm not only the individual struggling student and their group but also burden the other members of the class with a class member that will never be able to meaningfully contribute. Using social interdependence theory, a framework is proposed to explain how this confusion among contributing students arises. Recommendations are made regarding how to design curriculum so as to minimize the incidence of this phenomenon as well as intervention strategies to mitigate its effect should it present.

Collaborative learning practices: teacher and student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration

“…This may lead to the second obstacle, free-riding, which has been extensively discussed in CL literature (e.g. Freeman & Greenacre, 2010;Popov et al, 2012). The third obstacle, competence status, confirms the finding by Bunderson and Reagans (2011) showing that competence status suppresses collective learning in such a way that low-status students are inhibited in participating actively and are often underestimated, whereas high-status peers have more chances to contribute and tend to ignore the efforts of low-status members.…”

“…When examining the effectiveness of CL, researchers have noted challenges that students experience such as unequal individual participation in group tasks (e.g. Freeman & Greenacre, 2010;Janssen, Erkens, Kanselaar, & Jaspers, 2007), and students' lack of communicative and collaborative skills (e.g. Li & Campbell, 2008;Pauli, Mohiyeddini, Bray, Michie, & Street, 2008).…”

“…Previous studies focused either on one obstacle instead of multiple (e.g. Freeman & Greenacre, 2010;Ross, 2008), or investigated obstacles only from the perception of either the teachers (e.g. Abrami, Poulsen, & Chambers, 2004) or the students (e.g.…”

Collaborative Learning Practices by Gender: A Case of a Community School in Nepal

“…This may lead to low performance in collaborative learning, which has been extensively discussed in collaborative learning literature (e.g. Freeman & Greenacre, 2010;Popov et al, 2012). The finding by Bunderson and Reagans (2011) shows that competence status suppresses collective learning in such a way that low-status students are inhibited in participating actively and are often underestimated, whereas high-status peers have more chances to contribute and tend to ignore the efforts of low-status members.…”

Bridging the Gap

“…Apart from aiding student learning, reflective journals had the further benefit of enabling the instructors to go beyond the usual survey-based student evaluation processes and review One-on-one consultations as necessary the insights the journals gave in determining future directions for the subject (Freeman & Greenacre, 2011).…”