The effect of team learning behaviours and team mental models on teacher team performance
- 20 Downloads
Teams become a key resource for organisations to meet different challenges. Thus a high team performance is essential in work context. The aim of this study was to get a deeper understanding of meaningful team learning and team mental models in educational contexts, by analysing the effect of team learning behaviours (TLBs) on the development of task-related team mental model (Task-TMM) and team performance. A three-wave longitudinal survey was conducted among interdisciplinary vocational teacher teams (N = 66 teams with 276 team members). TLBs and team performance were measured by validated scales. Task-TMM was measured by an open question about the work tasks of the teams to achieve its goals. The answers were evaluated by content analysis and categorised according to their semantic similarity. Path modelling of the data shows that TLBs have a positive effect on developing Task-TMM and on team performance in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and innovativeness. Task-TMM has a positive effect on effectiveness but not on efficiency or innovativeness. The results provide insights into how teachers’ team performance can be fostered, such as by fostering TLBs creating a learning environment where team members depend on each other to accomplish their work tasks. Especially the longitudinal design and the type of analysis of Task-TMM provides new and deep insights into the relationship between TLBs, Task-TMM and team performance. Through the qualitative approach investigating Task-TMM the study also provides insight into the work tasks of teams in detail.
KeywordsTeam learning behaviour Team mental models Team performance Teacher teams Longitudinal study Vocational education
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation), Grant MU 2833/4-1, awarded to Regina H. Mulder.
The authors declare that this study is in compliance with ethical standards.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors (Andreas Widmann and Regina H. Mulder) declare that they have no conflict of interest. All the authors have seen and agree with the contents of the manuscript.
- Akkerman, S. F., Van den Bossche, P., Admiraal, W., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Simons, P. R.-J., et al. (2007). Reconsidering group cognition: From conceptual confusion to a boundary area between cognitive and socio-cultural perspectives? Educational Research Review,2, 39–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.02.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In N. J. Castellan (Ed.), Individual and group decision making: Current issues (pp. 221–246). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Carley, K. M. (1997). Extracting team mental models through textual analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior,18, 533–558. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199711)18:1+%3c533:AID-JOB906%3e3.0.CO;2-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Coke, P. K. (2005). Practicing what we preach: An argument for cooperative learning opportunities for elementary and secondary educators. Education,126, 392–398.Google Scholar
- Dudenredaktion (Hrsg.) (2010). Duden Bedeutungswörterbuch – Wortschatz und Wortbildung. Berlin: Bibliographisches Institut.Google Scholar
- Fürstenau, B., Trojahner, I., & Oldenbürger, H.-A. (2009). Übereinstimmungen und Unterschiede von semantischen Netzwerken als Repräsentationen komplexen Wissens. In D. Münk, T. Deißinger, & R. Tenberg (Eds.), Forschungserträge aus der Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik (pp. 117–129). Opladen: Barbara Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jörg, T. (2004). Complexity theory and the reinvention of reality education. In B. Davis, R. Luce-Kapler, & R. Upitis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 complexity science and educational research conference (pp. 121–146). Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, Institute for Complexity and Education.Google Scholar
- Kozlowski, W. J. K., & Bell, B. S. (2008). Team learning, development, and adaptation. In V. I. Sessa & M. London (Eds.), Work group learning: Understanding, assessing and improving how groups learn in organizations (pp. 15–44). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
- Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273–283. 10.1037t/0021-9010.85.2.273.Google Scholar
- Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Havard University Press.Google Scholar
- Neumann, W. (2017). Team learning at Work - Activities, products, and antecedents of team learning in organizational complex decision-making teams. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from https://epub.uni-regensburg.de/36361/.
- Reuveni, Y., & Vashdi, D. R. (2015). Innovation in multidisciplinary teams: The moderating role of transformational leadership in the relationship between professional heterogeneity and shared mental models. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,24, 678–692. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.1001377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rupprecht, M. (2014). Innovatives Verhalten bei Diversität in Unternehmensberatungsteams. Hamburg: Dr. Kovac.Google Scholar
- Stahl, G. (2000). A model of collaborative knowledge-building. In B. Fishman & S. O’Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), fourth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 70–77). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology,52, 591–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2013). Team entitativity and teacher teams in schools: Towards a typology. Frontline Learning Research, 2, 86–98. 10.14786/flr.v1i2.23.Google Scholar