Students in higher education courses need to practice vital groupwork skills that are increasingly relevant in today's collaborative workplace, which often occurs through small group coursework.
Statement of the Problem:
The process of forming small groups with students who are committed to the topic and goals is frequently problematic.
Literature Review:
We review the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of common group formation strategies, such as self-assembly and professor assignment.
Teaching Implications:
We discuss the use of a unique method of forming small groups in a university setting through a fun, interactive activity based on the classic “speed-dating” exercise.
Conclusion:
We recommend that educators consider the use of a speed-interviewing group formation strategy to allow groups to form based on similar topic interests and work styles.
AggarwalP.O’BrienC. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475308322283
AronsonE.YatesS. (1983). Cooperation in the classroom: The impact of the jigsaw method on inter-ethnic relations, classroom performance and self-esteem. In H. Blumberg & P. Hare (Eds.), Small groups. John Wiley & Sons.
4.
BaconD. R.StewartK. A.AndersonE. S. (2001). Methods of assigning players to teams: A review and novel approach. Simulation & Gaming, 32(1), 6–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687810103200102
5.
BaileyS.BarberL. K.FergusonA. J. (2015). Promoting perceived benefits of group projects: The role of instructor contributions and intragroup processes. Teaching of Psychology, 42(2), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315573147
6.
BlowersP. (2003). Using student skill self-assessment to get balanced groups for group projects. College Teaching, 51(3), 106–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567550309596422
7.
BruffeeK. (1984). Collaboration and the ‘conversation of mankind’. College English, 46(7), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.2307/376924
8.
ByrneD. (1971). The attraction paradigm. Academic Press.
9.
ChapmanK. J.MeuterM.ToyD.WrightL. (2006). Can’t we pick our own groups? The influence of group selection method on group dynamics and outcomes. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), 557–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562905284872
10.
CurseuP. L.KenisP. N.RaabJ.BrandesU. (2010). Composing effective teams through team-dating. Organization Studies, 31(7), 873–894. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610373195
11.
EllemersN.RinkF. (2005). Identity in work groups: The beneficial and detrimental consequences of multiple identities and group norms for collaboration and group performance. In S. R. Thye & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Social Identification in Groups (Advances in Group Processes (Vol. 22, pp. 1–41). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6145(05)22001-5
12.
HansenR. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for Business, 82(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19
13.
HansenR. S.HansenK. (2007). The student experience in speed teaming: A new approach to team formation. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 4(7), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.19030/TLC.V4I7.1567
14.
HübscherR. (2010). Assigning students to groups using general and context-specific criteria. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 3(3), 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2010.17
15.
JacksonJ. C.LemayE. P.Jr.BilkeyD.HalberstadtJ. (2017). Beyond “birds of a feather”: A social inference approach to attachment-dependent grouping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 216–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.004
16.
JansL.LeachC. W.GarciaR. L.PostmesT. (2015). The development of group influence on in-group identification: A multilevel approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18(2), 190–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430214540757
17.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR. T.HolubecE. J. (1994). The new circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom and school. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
18.
JoyceC. K.JenningsK. E.HeyJ.GrossmanJ. C.KalilT. (2010). Getting down to business: Using speed storming to initiate creative cross-disciplinary collaboration. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2009.00538.x
19.
LindholmJ. A.SzelenyiK.HurtadoS.KornW. S. (2005). The American college teacher: National norms for the 2004-2005 HERI Faculty Survey. Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.
MahenthiranS.RouseP. J. (2000). The impact of group selection on student performance and satisfaction. International Journal of Educational Management, 14(6), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540010348043
22.
MaidmentJ.CrispB. R. (2007). Not just for romance: Applications of ‘speed dating’ in social work education. Groupwork, 17(2), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1921/196212
23.
MichinovN.MichinovE.Toczek-CapelleM. C. (2004). Social identity, group processes, and performance in synchronous computer-mediated communication. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.8.1.27
24.
MilesJ. A.KleinH. J. (1998). The fairness of assigning group members to tasks. Group & Organization Management, 23(1), 71–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601198231005
25.
MurphyB. (2005). Need to get your students talking? Try speed dating!. The Teaching Professor, 19(7), 1–4.
26.
MuurlinkO.MatasC. P. (2011). From romance to rocket science: Speed dating in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(6), 751–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.539597
27.
PhillipsK.NorthcraftG. B.NealeM. A. (2006). Surface-level diversity and decision-making in groups: When does deep-level similarity help?Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 9(4), 467–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206067557
SeethamrajuR.BormanM. (2009). Influence of group formation choices on academic performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930801895679
30.
SharanS.SharanY. (1976). Small group teaching. Educational Technology.
31.
SlavinR. E. (1991). Synthesis of research of cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71–82.
32.
StrongJ. T.AndersonR. E. (1990). Free-riding in group projects: Control mechanisms and preliminary data. Journal of Marketing Education, 12(2), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/027347539001200208
33.
SublettL.JohnstonA.SeahornC.WaltherC.MorenoG. (2022). Materials and Instructions for the “Speed-Dating” Activity for Forming Small Groups (Version 2). figshare. https://doi.orgs/10.6084/m9.figshare.20402349.v2
34.
SwaimJ.HenleyA. (2017). The use of influence tactics and outcome valence on goal commitment for assigned student team projects. Journal of Management Education, 41(1), 118–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916662497
35.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Blackwell.
36.
WaxA.DeChurchL. A.ContractorN. S. (2017). Self-organizing into winning teams: Understanding the mechanisms that drive successful collaborations. Small Group Research, 48(6), 665–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496417724209
