2. What Kind of Groups and Individuals SUCCEED in Collaborative Projects? John A. Johnson Penn State DuBois j5j@psu.edu

3. Nature of the Project Students in a large (~180) introductory psychology class were assigned to groups of 7-8 students. Each group was to write an annotated list of web sites that helped answer 8 general questions about psychology. Each student wrote his or her own answers to the questions.

4. Goals of Project To restore thoughtful exploration of ideas To increase internet literacy To assess how well students learn this way –for the class, overall –for different types of students

5. Observational Aside Witness the long string of trends and fads in teaching Yesterday, Total Quality Management Today, technology and collaboration Each hailed as THE ANSWER THE answers deny learning styles Bottom line: Does technique work?

6. For Missing Details Full report available at: http: // cac.psu.edu / ~j5j / persona / courses / courses.html#Empower96

7. Setup Logistics Assess computer attitudes and literacy on first day of class Enter scores in spreadsheet; sort to distribute talent in groups Result: ~180 students in 25 groups of 7-8 students Signs labeled A-Y hung around auditorium perimeter

8. Assignments & Activities 50% each class allotted to group meetings and training for 3 weeks Meeting 1: Informal, introductions Meeting 2: 8 research questions; ½ supportive, ½ supportive skills Meeting 3: Detailed description of expectations

9. Expected Product One annotated list of web sites for entire group Each member writes own answers to eight questions Annotated list & answers emailed Each student rates contribution of each group member

10. Criteria of Individual Success Score on ungraded multiple- choice test Score on research project Contribution rating from group Specific + and - behaviors Post-test of attitudes/literacy

11. Criteria for Group Success Equality of rated contributions # of valid web addresses # of questions adequately answered % of students who contributed Open-ended comments

12. Multiple Choice Test Scores Difference between scores on 19 questions not lectured on and 21 questions lectured on not statistically different Overall performance (52%) lower than previous year (69%) Scores correlated →r =.24 (p<.01) with project score →r =.45 (p<.01) with contribution score

13. Reports (N=166) 33 excellent (deep comprehension) 58 good (MC-test level) 54 okay (rote; mistakes & copying) 6 problems (marginal functioning) 15 failed to turn in anything Scores correlated r =.23 (p<.01) with rated group contribution)

14. Correlates of Individual Project Scores Low Neuroticism –(depression, self-consciousness) High Extraversion –(assertiveness) High Openness to Experience –(openness to aesthetics & ideas) High Conscientiousness –(competence, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline)

15. Distribution of Group Contribution Scores

16. Correlates of Contribution to Group High Extraversion –(assertiveness and activity) High Openness to Experience –(openness to feelings) High Conscientiousness –(dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline)

17. Correlates of Positive and Negative Behaviors High Conscientiousness –competence –order –dutifulness –achievement striving –self-discipline –deliberation

18. Follow-up Attitude Questions

19. Correlates of Attitudes Who likes web searching? –Unpredictable from personality scores Who likes group work? Students with high scores on: –emotional stability –gregariousness & excitement-seeking and low scores on –openness to aesthetics –openness to feelings

20. Indices of Group Success

21. Correlates of Group Success % of Students Contributing related to –higher scores on multiple choice test –higher levels of impulsivity, activity, immodesty –receiving the supportive rather than directive skill handout Number of sites/answers related to –higher levels of openness to aesthetics

22. Future Directions I’ve eliminated group projects as a uniform requirement Future projects will involve individual tailoring –Projects will be an optional alternative –Groups can choose their members –Students can choose research topics that interest them –Personality self-assessment may help estimate suitability for projects