The ability to work in groups is vital for today's workforce, yet the existence of the
necessary skills among students is questionable. Although group activities are now
common, specific classroom instruction in effective group participation skills is not.
Moreover, students recognize the need for such instruction. Content analysis of
students' self-descriptions identified ten categories of deficiencies: conflict avoidant,
public speaking anxiety, leadership, shy, oral skills, lack motivation, brainstorm
ing, impatient,-intolerant, dislike groups. These weaknesses were addressed by a
vuriety of pedagogical exercises including individual presentations, type or tem
perament identification, an enhanced understanding of argument and brainstorm
ing, and ways to encourage substuntive, but not procedural or affective, conflict.
Student-perceived improvements were found in all categories, with the largest
improvement in public speaking anxiety.
Ainsworth, S.J. (2000). Teamwork 2000: Multifunctional teams help companies cut through bureaucracy and unleash creativity to improve their bottom line . Chemical & Engineering News, 77, 54-59.
2.
Alexander, M., Davis, R., & Underwood, R. (2000, April). Advantages and disadvantages of using teams in the classroom. Paper presented at the Association for Business Communication Midwest Regional Conference, lndianapolis.
3.
Benne, K.D., & Sheats, P. (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social Issues,4, 41-49.
4.
Burnett, R.E. (1991). Substantive conflict in a cooperative context: A way to improve the collaborative planning of workplace documents. Technical Communication, 38, 532-539.
5.
Chen, G. (1994). Social desirability as a predictor of argumentativeness and communication apprehension. The Journal of Psychology , 128, 433-438.
6.
Eisenberg, E., & Goodall, H.L., Jr. (1997). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. New York: St. Martin's.
7.
Engleberg, I.N., & Wynn, D.R. (1997). Working in groups: Communication principles and strategies. Boston: Houghton Mifflin .
8.
Eysenck, H.J. (1995). Creativity as a product of intelligence and personality. In D.H. Saklofske, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). International handbook of personality and intelligence (pp. 231-247). New York: Plenum .
9.
Guffey, M.E. (2000). Business communication: Process and product (3rd ed.). New York: South-Western .
10.
Hildebrand, J.E. (1996, November). "I get so nervous in front of a group!" Paper presented at the 61st annual meeting of the Association for Business Communication, Chicago.
11.
Infante, D.A., & Rancer, A.S. (1996). Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness: A review of recent theory and research. Communication Yearbook , 19, 319-351.
12.
Jameson, D.A. (1993). Using a simulation to teach intercultural communication in business communication courses. The Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication, 56(1), 3-9.
13.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning . Review of Educational Research, 49, 51-70.
14.
Keirsey, D. (1998). Please understand me II: Temperament, character,and intelligence. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company.
15.
Kuralt, K.M. (1996, April). Preparing team members to recognize and control conflict in collaborative writing groups. Paper presented at the Association for Business Communication Midwest/East/Canada Regional Conference, Toronto, Canada.
16.
Locker, K.O. (1992). What makes a collaborative writing team successful? A case study of lawyers and social workers in a state agency. In J. Forman, (Ed.), New visions of collaborative writing (pp. 37-62). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
17.
Locker, K.O. (2000). Business and administrative communication (5th ed.). New York: Irwin-McGraw Hill.
18.
McPherson, B. (1999). Correlating students' personality types with their rating of topics covered in business communication classrooms. Business Communication Quarterly, 62(3), 46-53.
19.
Motley, M. (1997). Overcoming your fear of public speaking: A proven method. Boston: Houghton Mifflin .
Nicotera, A.M. (1996). An assessment of the argumentativeness scale for social desirability bias. Communication Reports, 9(1), 23-35.
22.
O'Keefe, D.J. (1977). Two concepts of argument. The Journal of the American Forensic Association, 13(3), 121-128.
23.
Perrigo, E.M. (1994, November). Business and professional communication: Where are we now? Are we teaching skills that are necessary in business today ? Paper presented to the 80th Speech Communication Association Conference, New Orleans, LA.
24.
Phillips, G.M. (1990). Theoretical basis for instruction in small group performance. In G. M. Phillips (Ed.). Teaching how to work in groups (pp. 265 -291). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
25.
Reinsch, N.L., & Shelby, A.N. (1997). What communication abilities do practitioners need? Evidence from MBA students. Business Communication Quarterly , 60(4), 7-29.
26.
Schullery, N. (1999). Argumentative men: Expectations of success. Journal of Business Communication, 36, 362-381.
27.
Schultz, B.G. (1996). Communicating in the small group: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
28.
Wardrope, W.J., & Bayless, M. (1999). Content of the business communication course: An analysis of coverage. Business Communication Quarterly , 62(4), 33-40.
29.
Wheeless, L.R. (1975). An investigation of receiver apprehension and social context dimensions of communication apprehension. The Speech Teacher, 24, 261-268.
30.
Wilson, B., & Schullery, N. (2000). Rotating responsibility reaps rewards. Business Communication Quarterly, 63(2), 68-72.
31.
Winter, J.K., & Neal, J.C. (1995). Group writing: Student perceptions of the dynamics and efficiency of groups. Business Communication Quarterly , 58(2), 21-24.
