Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning Through Group Work in the College Classroom: Evaluating the Evidence from an Instructional Goal Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research

Part of the book series: Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research ((HATR,volume 31))

Abstract

Early conceptions of group work seemed easy to understand and intuitively appealing to faculty as well as relatively simple to implement. As use in the classroom and research on the process continued, ideas about learning from group work became more and more complex. In this chapter, we describe the research on instructional innovations related to group work, not from the perspective of their underlying theory, but organized by the goals that instructors are trying to reach. In particular, we structure this chapter around some fairly universal instructional goals for the postsecondary classroom: knowledge acquisition, knowledge application, knowledge creation, and disciplinary discourse acquisition.

Having reviewed the current research explicating nine group instructional interventions, from jigsaw technique to computer-mediated discussion, we conclude with suggestions for future developments in theory, research, and instruction. In particular, we see a need for continued work on the particulars of how groups manage their work, accompanied by a broader systems-based theoretical perspective, and improvements in practice based more purposefully on instructional goals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aitchison, C. (2009). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 905–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, J. (2006a). Arguing to learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443–459). Cambridge, UK: The Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, J. (2006b). Collaboration in computer conferencing. In A. O’Donnell, C. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 197–232). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snaoo, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M., Hansen, T., Joiner, R., & Traum, D. (1999). The role of grounding in collaborative learning tasks. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computation approaches (pp. 31–63). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., et al. (1998). Learning with understanding: Lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 271–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrows, H. (1996). Problem–based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beers, P., Boshuizen, H., Kirschner, P., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 634–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, R., & Hanze, M. (2015). Impact of expert teaching quality on novice academic performance in the jigsaw cooperative learning method. International Journal of Science Education, 37(2), 294–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bossert, S. T. (1988). Cooperative activities in the classroom. Review of Research in Education, 15(1), 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chace, J. F. (2014). Collaborative projects increase student learning outcome performance in nonmajors environmental science course. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(6), 58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. (2013). Collaborative knowledge building: Towards a knowledge creation perspective. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 437–461). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C., & Clark, D. (2013). Learning through collaborative argumentation. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 314–332). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chng, E., Yew, E. H. J., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Effects of tutor–related behaviors on the process of problem–based training. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 491–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, N. J., Gorman, J. C., Myers, C., & Duran, J. (2012). Theoretical underpinning of interactive team cognition. In E. Salas, S. M. FIore, & M. P. Letsky (Eds.), Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 187–208). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiPardo, A., & Freedman, S. W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretic foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58(2), 119–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolmans, D., & Schmidt, H. (2006). What do we know about cognitive and motivational effects of small group tutorials in a problem–based learning? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11(4), 321–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolmans, D., & Wilkerson, L. (2011). Reflection on studies of the learning process in problem-based learning. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 437–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolmans, D., de Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. H., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2005). Problem–based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education, 39, 732–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., Prangsma, M., & Jaspers, J. (2003). Computer support for collaborative and argumentative writing. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwhistle, & J. van Merrienboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 159–178). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faigley, L. (1992). Fragments of rationality: Postmodernity and the subject of composition. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R., & Prince, M. (2007). The many faces of inductive teaching and learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Zottmann, J., & Weinberger, A. (2013). Collaboration scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 403–436). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2001). Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(8), 714–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gere, A. R. (1987). Writing groups: History, theory and implications. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gere, A. R., & Abbott, R. (1985). Talking about writing: The language of writing groups. Research in the Teaching of English, 19, 362–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 437–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidet, P., Kubitz, K., & McCormack, W. (2014). Analysis of the team–based learning literature: TBL comes of age. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-4), 303–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hairston, M. (1982). The winds of change: Thomas Kuhn and the revolution in the teaching of writing. College Composition and Communication, 33(1), 76–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen, K., Paavola, S., Kangas, K., & Seitama-Hakkarainen, P. (2013). Sociocultural perspectives on collaborative learning: Toward collaborative knowledge creation. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The International handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 57–73). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self- and peer-assessment: The students’ views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. (1992). Collaboration is not collaboration is not collaboration: Writing center tutorials vs. peer-response groups. College Composition and Communication, 43(3), 369–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrington, A. J. (1981). Writing to learn: Writing across the disciplines. College English, 43(4), 379–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. (2006). Design principles for scaffolding technology-based inquiry. In A. O’Donnell, C. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 148–170). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C., & DeSimone, C. (2013). Problem-based learning: An instructional model of collaborative learning. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 370–385). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C., Chinn, C., Chan, C., & O’Donnell, A. (Eds.). (2013). The international handbook of collaborative learning. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, W. (2011). Theory to reality: A few issues in implementing problem-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 529–552. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9198-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvela, S., & Hadwin, A. (2013). New frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvela, S., & Jarvenoja, H. (2011). Socially constructed self-regulated learning and motivation regulation in collaborative learning groups. Teachers College Record, 113(2), 350–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49(1), 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2009a). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2009b). Energizing learning: The instructional power of conflict. Educational Researcher, 38(1), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (2000). Constructive controversy: The educative power of intellectual conflict. Change, 32(1), 28–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., Murayama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta--analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89(1), 47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, M. E., Schallert, D. L., Park, Y., Lee, S., Chiang, Y. V., Cheng, A. J., et al. (2013). Expressing uncertainty in computer-mediated discourse: Language as a marker of intellectual work. Discourse Processes, 49(8), 660–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelson, A., & Distlehorst, L. (2000). Groups in problem-based learning (PBL): Essential elements in theory and practice. In D. Evensen & C. Hmelo (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 167–184). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., Kim, M., & Svinicki, M. (2012). Situating students’ motivation in cooperative learning contexts: Proposing different levels of goal orientation. Journal of Experimental Education, 80(4), 352–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory Into Practice, 41(1), 33–39. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4101_6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Chicago: Follett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., Glenn, P., & Conlee, M. (2000). When is the problem – based tutorial not tutorial? Analyzing the tutors role in the emergence of a learning issue. In D. Evenson & C. Hmelo (Eds.), Problem – based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 53–73). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. (2006). Project-based learning. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317–333). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, J. R., & Christensen, C. (1993). Groups as problem-solving units: Toward a new meaning of social cognition. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32(1), 5–30. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1993.tb00983.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Schallert, D. L., Song, K., Park, Y., Chiang, Y. V., Vogler, J. S., et al. (2011). Resistance phenomena in collaborative online discussions. Yearbook of the Literacy Research Association, 60, 370–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, J., Resnick, L., & Higgins, E. T. (1993). Social foundations of cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 582–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mamede, S., Schmidt, H. G., & Norman, G. (2006). Innovations in problem-based learning: What can we learn from recent studies? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11, 403–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marra, R., Jonassen, D., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works: Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-4), 221–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaelsen, L., & Black, R. H. (1999). Problems with learning groups: An ounce of prevention. Journal of Legal Studies Education, 17(2), 91–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaelsen, L., Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Team–Based learning practices and principles in comparison with cooperative learning and the problem–based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-4), 57–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, J., Malvin, J., Schaeffer, G., & Schaps, E. (1985). Evaluation of jigsaw, a cooperative learning technique. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 104–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noll, E., & Fox, D. L. (2003). Supporting beginning writers of research: Mentoring graduate students’ entry into academic discourse communities. National Yearbook Conference Yearbook, 52, 332–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., Weinberger, A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2013). Scripting for construction of a transactive memory system in multidisciplinary CSCL environments. Learning and Instruction, 25, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2013). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction through a transactive discussion script in CSCL. Computers & Education, 61, 59–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. (2006). The role of peers and group learning. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 781–802). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A., & Hmelo-Silver, C. (2013). What is collaborative learning? An overview. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 1–16). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J. H., Schallert, D. L., Sanders, A. K. Z., Williams, K. M., Seo, E., Yu, L., et al. (2015). Does it matter if the teacher is there? A teacher’s contribution to emerging patterns of interactions in online classroom discussions. Computers & Education, 82, 315–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, V., & Atkinson, D. (1999). Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resta, P., & Laferriere, T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roseth, C., Saltarelli, A., & Glass, C. (2011). Effects of face-to-face and computer-mediated constructive constroversy on social interdependence, motivation, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 804–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotgans, J., O’Grady, G., & Alwis, W. (2011). Introduction: Studies on the learning process in the one-day, one-problem approach to problem-based learning. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 443–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., Spada, H., & Hauser, S. (2009). Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observing a model. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 69–92. doi:10.1007/s11412-008-9054-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santicola, C. (2011). Enhancing student learning and critical thinking through academic controversy in post secondary macroeconomics. Doctor of Philosophy Empirical Research, The Robert Morris University, Moon, PA (UMI Number: 3528369).

    Google Scholar 

  • Savin-Baden, M. (2014). Using problem – based learning: New constellations for the 21st century. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-4), 197–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge–building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–115). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D.L., Chiang, Y.V., Park, Y., Jordan, M.E., et al. (2009). Being polite while fulfilling different discourse functions in online classroom discussions. Computer & Education, 53(3), 713–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D. L., & Martin, D. B. (2003). A psychological analysis of what teachers and students do in the language arts classroom. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 31–45). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D. L., Reed, J. H., & the D-Team. (2003–2004). Intellectual, motivational, textual, and cultural considerations in teaching and learning with computer-mediated discussion. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36, 103–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H. G., & Moust, J. H. (2000). Factors affecting small-group tutorial learning. In D. Evensen & C. Hmelo (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 19–48). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitama-Hakkarainen, P., Viilo, M., & Hakarainen, K. (2010). Learning by collaborative designing: Technology-enhanced knowledge practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(2), 109–136. doi:10.1007/210798-008-9066-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semin, G. R., Garrido, M. V., & Palma, T. (2012). Socially situated cognition: Recasting social cognition as an emergent phenomenon. In S. Fiske & C. N. Macrae (Eds.), SAGE handbook of social cognition (pp. 138–164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharon, R. B., & Erickson, K. A. (2010). A constructive controversy approach to “Case Studies”. Teaching Sociology, 38(2), 119–131. doi:10.2307/25677741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 94(3), 429–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 43–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smagorinsky, P. (1995). Constructing meaning in the disciplines: Reconceptualizing writing across the curriculum as composing across the curriculum. American Journal of Education, 103(2), 160–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1981). Can conflict be constructive? Controversy versus concurrence seeking in learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(5), 651–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2010). Guiding group cognition in CSCL. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 255–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–425). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefanou, C., Stolk, J., Prince, M., Chen, J., & Lord, S. (2013). Self – regulation and autonomy in problem – and project – based learning environments. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(2), 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svinicki, M. (2007). Moving beyond “It worked”: The ongoing evolution of research on problem-based learning in medical education. Educational Psychology Review, 19(1), 49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweet, M., & Michaelsen, L. (2007). How group dynamics research can inform the theory and practice of postsecondary small group learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweet, M., & Pelton-Sweet, L. (2008). The social of foundation of team-based learning: Students accountable to students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 116, 29–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjosvold, D. (2008). Constructive controversy for management education: Developing committed, open-minded researchers. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 73–85. doi:10.2307/40214499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollmer, A., & Seyr, S. (2013). Constructive controversy research in the business organizational context. International Journal of Conflict Management, 24(4), 399–420. doi:10.1108/IJCMA-07-2011-0055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. (1982). Student interaction and learning in small groups. Review of Educational Research, 52(3), 421–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–873). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. C., Alwis, W., & Rotgans, J. (2011). Are tutor behaviors in problem – based learning stable? A generalizability study of social congruence, expertise and cognitive congruence. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 505–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, One University Station D5800, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Marilla D. Svinicki (Professor Emeritus) & Diane L. Schallert (Professor)

Authors
  1. Marilla D. Svinicki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diane L. Schallert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marilla D. Svinicki .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, The University of Iowa, IOWA CITY, Iowa, USA

    Michael B. Paulsen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Svinicki, M.D., Schallert, D.L. (2016). Learning Through Group Work in the College Classroom: Evaluating the Evidence from an Instructional Goal Perspective. In: Paulsen, M. (eds) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26829-3_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26829-3_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26828-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26829-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation