Common process and behaviour issues at each stage

Stage 1: Finding common ground
Stage 2: Roles and goals: developing modes of shared influence
Stage 3: Getting the job done: pursuing academic goals
Stage 4: Reflecting and learning from the experience: self-renewal

Stage 1: Finding common ground

In the first stage, the main process issues are those of:

•   talking at cross purposes
•   someone needing to take the lead
•   finding out something of each others' expectations and motivations
•   finding ways to begin negotiating the task.

Behaviour is often characterised by:

•   withholding true feelings
•   keeping the ideas simple
•   saying acceptable things, over politeness
•   avoiding controversy
•   avoiding disclosure

At this stage, agreement on the team's purpose and objectives will often be assumed, but may actually differ because of members' unspoken interpretations. Some members may exert pressure to 'get on with the job' rather than to spend time clarifying group goals from each members' perspective and expectations.

Highly task orientated groups may also try to move quickly through the first stage, but may then encounter difficulties as sub groups or individuals pursue different or conflicting objectives. The late introduction of new members requires that the group return to this first stage in order to integrate the new member.

We also spent a lot of this and the next session talking about aspects of our experiences other than the topic. This seemed quite essential in terms of getting to know each other and in finding ways to clarify our communication to each other. Contrasts between us as individuals became very apparent.¹

I think you need to find something in the group that you LIKE to do, that you're happy with. You need to discuss this in terms of your skills, what you're best at, what you want to do.

Our first session was spent mostly in social interaction. In reflection I appreciate the real value of this ‘getting to know you’ time because as our group evolved there were times when I felt frustrated, worried, concerned and annoyed but it was easy for me to resolve these feelings with the group, my feelings of group membership were strengthened.

For both groups to become effective learning groups it was important to realise that we each came to the group with different goals, ideals, expectations and schemas. Therefore the early stages of forming these groups required a vast amount of listening and negotiating.

It's hard to get started because there's so many interests and bits of information coming in, it's hard to get focused to begin with. Time, need time to get it organised, the first two or three weeks are very slow, just discussing and sharing ideas.

____________________

¹These and other quotations are selected from the responses of Murdoch students to our survey on the delivery of collaborative learning.

Stage 2: Roles and goals: developing modes of shared influence

In the second stage the main process issues are those of:

•   conflict because of different perspectives and orientations
•   learning to accommodate a variety of views and approaches
•   accommodating differences in work and learning styles
•   finding strategies to solve problems and to improve meetings
•   division of the work
•   learning to listen to one another
•   being able to acknowledge suggestions or controversy without taking it personally
•   reflecting on and evaluating personal behaviour and contribution
•   achieving a group goal

Behaviour is often characterised by:

•   strongly expressed views
•   poor listening
•   challenging people instead of ideas
•   defensive reactions to questions or criticism
•   leadership and control issues
•   withdrawal
•   lack of collaboration
•   problems may be perceived as caused by incompatible personalities

This is the most difficult stage for groups to negotiate as it means forging a team identity from the diversity of its membership. Cliques may develop, and members may react differently to the conflicts raised. Groups will often attempt to deal with these conflicts through domination, compromise or majority rule, but with limited overall success. Rather, conflicts need to be brought out into the open and treated in a problem solving manner which includes all group members. If re-framed in a positive light, conflicts can lead groups to greater interpersonal understanding and higher productivity.

If you assume that many of these conflicts arise from conflicts of perspectives and values, then a ‘critical thinking’ approach will remind you that you can and should use these differences as a source of strength and potential, not as insurmountable problems. This applies equally in Stage 3, following.

Having some important understandings in common was encouraging and gave us a sense of strength and unity. But it was not important to be identical, rather the reverse, we had different needs, areas of expertise and experience and these different foci broadened the scope of what we could produce

I found myself in a conflict situation, there were two strong personalities and we clashed, at the time I actually thought it was a personality clash but you know thinking back on it, and I did a lot of thinking about it, I think it was more we were clashing about the concept more than anything, the problem was that we were talking past each other not listening to one another.

You have to be careful not to be too constrained about your own ideas. You need to listen to other people, respect their ideas, learn not to make it into personal issues.

We worked at different rates, this took quite a while for me to come to terms with.

In all groups I was involved in, listening was the most valuable skill. Without it talk was useless. I felt that in some groups the task hindered the listening; we were too intent on completing the project to remember to listen well!

Roles just came naturally from people's qualities. We did this really well. We all knew what we were good at, and did these parts, like I'm good at writing and editing so I did this but we all decided at the beginning what to do. We still shared each role but one person was responsible for the final judgement, this worked really well, It was a good way to put it together, we all had input and were all together while I wrote and edited but because it was my job I had the final say. But we discussed everything. We had respect for each other's roles that they'd chosen.

Stage 3: Getting the job done: pursuing academic goals

At the third stage, the main process issues are those of:

•   working together to achieve the task
•   evaluating the quality of the group interaction
•   evaluating progress towards the group goal
•   being able to debate ideas and critique contributions without personalisation and defensiveness
•   more flexible leadership
•   valuing differences
•   accessing individual’s particular strengths and resources
•   dealing with the issue of equity of contribution.

Behaviour is often characterised by:

•   active listening
•   exchange of ideas
•   shared leadership
•   systematic ways of working
•   willingness to review preconceived ideas
•   receptiveness to the ideas of others
•   conflicts treated in a problem-solving rather than a win-lose manner
•   self disclosure and trust
•   flexibility of contribution
•   high creativity
•   openness and trust
•   strong relationships
•   easy acceptance of differences of view

At this stage members begin to see some of the quantitative and qualitative benefits of working as a group, members become more tolerant of diverse ideas and approaches, creativity becomes valued, individual strengths are utilised and individual weaknesses compensated for by the group. Team resources are pooled, diversity is seen as positive rather than threatening, feelings of achievement are high and are recognised as greater than each could achieve alone.

Yes the write-up was hard but what was more difficult than that, because of the focus and research, was setting the boundaries of what to cover and what not to, staying focussed on two or three central concerns, where to draw the line around it. Talking with others is the only way round this.

In terms of skills it was good to give an ongoing report, to make this intelligible and worthwhile, and to find out how much you know through the constant explanation to others.

By week six I realised I was still reading, doing preparation and research the same as I would as an independent learner, but with the expectation that the collaborative process would be beneficial in a clarification, sorting and critical sense. My work was more of an offering to the group than an end product, which it would be if I was working alone.

I was not prepared for this feeling of accomplishment...It's amazing. I can't stop feeling proud of myself and of the group. After we had finished I wanted to shout "We did it!".

Stage 4: Reflecting and learning from the experience: self-renewal

At the fourth stage, the main process issues are those of:

To be efficient and useful, reflection should be used both formatively and summatively, that is both during the group work (to help 'form') and at the end of the group's life (to sum-up, or look back). Reflection is an ongoing means of understanding personal and group effectiveness. Questions of what did and didn't 'work' in the group context can only be answered and understood through reflective praxis. From this, ideas for improvement can be initiated, tried, and evaluated.

Reflective praxis can be unstructured, ie discussing ideas over a coffee or while travelling home, or more structured by using criteria for effective group work (see the group building exercises and the assessment model), and/or by using the reflection and evaluation forms to be found in an Appendix.

Well I was used to doing individual work, I preferred this in the past. But you learn a lot about yourself and about working with others. You learn in greater depth, you can bounce your ideas around and get ideas you wouldn't have thought of.

How other people work and make their conclusions, it's good to see the differences in this, I can use their ideas, approaches, methods in other units. How they gather information and all that sort of thing.

None of us wanted a group project, we were all more comfortable doing individual work. But once we got started we weren't too worried. At the start we didn't want it but by the end when we saw how the three of us worked it was good, we were pleased. Our different strengths really helped. Looking back on working together we realised it brought out the best in all of us, we negated each other's weaknesses. But we wouldn't have believed that in week three.

This group work is pulling me up. It's more interesting, I really enjoy it, I'm very stimulated to work harder and contribute more.

You have to look at yourself I think and you have to think 'what are my faults?' and it really is quite distressing in that you begin to think 'maybe I'm intolerant, maybe I don't listen to others, maybe I think I know everything' but even though I'm saying that it's painful I would like to add that there's no gain without pain and that it's definitely worthwhile.

What did I gain from the experience: More self confidence than I can begin to describe; Four new friends; Not to avoid problems - if we hadn't admitted at times that things were not going according to plan we wouldn't have learned as much about the content and our own values.