Advantages & Disadvantages of Collaboration - Thesis Proposal Example

Advantages & Disadvantages of Collaboration 14 February Table of Contents (Outline) Topics Page No. I. Introduction 2 II. Thesis Statement 2 III. Abstract 3 IV. Literature Review 3 V. Discussion 3-5 A. Solitary Learners in Collaborative Environments B. Shifts in Pedagogy C. How to Improve Teamwork in Virtual Teams D. Impact of Different Learning Styles E. How to Properly Assess Member Contributions to the Team F. Making Global Virtual Teams More Effective G. How to Improve Collaboration within Teams H. Team-based Activities that Promote Learning VI. Conclusions A. In the Academe (need to further refine team collaboration setups) B. In the Workplace (some workers do not like working in teams) VII. Implications (blind adaptation of collaboration in almost all settings) VIII. Recommendations (areas of research gaps and need for further studies) IX. Bibliography Introduction Today, a lot of changes are going on due to changes in lifestyles, working environment and inside the academic institutions. Most of the changes have been brought about due to the technological advances such as those in digital telecommunications technology. Primary as an example is the Internet technology which now allows virtual teams to be formed. It means a local virtual team (classmates doing their homework at home) or may pertain to truly global virtual teams in which project-based teams are composed of some members from very far and diverse locations that may even involve several different time zones with no overlap. Due to distance and time differences, there are special challenges involved in setting up and managing virtual teams compared to traditional or conventional teams. However, there are also similarities with regards to how to manage these virtual teams in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and output performance. Of special concern is how to make people collaborate when most team members do not know each other personally and may never even have meet. This paper attempts to look at some of the relevant issues facing members of virtual teams if they are assigned to a collaborative project in academia. Some findings will ultimately be also hopefully useful in actual professional work settings since people are the same everywhere. Thesis Statement Although collaborative learning environments seem to be the rage these days, it is not proven that it enhances the learning objectives in all instances. There are times when teams are not that effective when other factors come into play that affect the teams internal dynamic equation. Admittedly, there are some advantages in working as a team but we also know that there are difficulties too, encountered whenever a team is formed to perform a task, attain an objective or even finish a classwork. This means that working in collaborative environments may not always the best solution in some instances. There are some doubts about its efficacy. Abstract Team environments are the fad these days because many experts claim it is a good way to accomplish tasks. In this regard, this paper looks at how collaborative environments are actually experienced by students in an academic setting and determine current literature on this subject. Specifically, it examines in a new light how students are affected especially those who prefer to do things on their own due to their personality types or some of the factors that predispose them to work better when alone rather than in team environments. This paper is a critical examination of the available literature and maybe find some gaps in research studies. Most studies focused on the benefits of teamwork but not on some mismatch between team member and their collaborative environment which may even hamper effective performance. Literature Review Education has changed in many ways and pedagogy is now concentrated in imparting knowledge as part of a social learning experience unlike before. This means students are now engaged in more collaborative activities related to academic work. This was the big paradigm shift that occurred in conjunction with the development of new technologies like the Internet that has been used to deliver distance learning more efficiently. Many educational experts are of the opinion or belief that learning is best achieved during social negotiation settings such as what happens when students are grouped together into teams (Ke & Carr-Chellman, 2006). A good part of current literature on the topic of collaborative learning have been found either to be outdated, focused more on the wrong subject and generally lacking in overall depth of the important aspects of collaborative learning environments. An example of this bias is solitary learners are usually not interviewed or considered in most research studies on their learning experiences. This is a critical aspect of the new learning paradigms because more and more teams are being organized for doing most of the academic works being assigned today. Discussion A. Solitary Learners Of all the more recent technologies to be introduced into society, it is the Internet that has the most impact on social, political, economic and educational aspects. In education, the shift now is towards collaborative learning environments engendered by two phenomena: the rise of Internet access and usage that enables people in distant places to be brought together and the theoretical shift in pedagogy that learning is best experienced in social settings rather than individually. This later situation (independent individual learning) has not yet been fully explored by sociologists and educators alike (ibid. 250) in which collaboration has negative effects on the learning process because of individual differences in personal preferences. Most solitary learners want privacy for reflection and do not want to become interdependent that results when placed in a team environment. Within this context, it is important to consider this when giving out assignments intended for group work. B. Paradigm Shift in Pedagogy Similar to the shift in pedagogic outlook with regards to delivering distance education through correspondence courses, a dramatic shift also took place with education delivered in more conventional settings like the university classrooms. This was the case of accounting in which it was thought desirable to employ project-based learning activities to promote learning using a team approach. Educators gradually adopted this approach in view of sociologists own opinions that learning is essentially a social activity and best experienced in social settings. It was quite a drastic repudiation of the old conventional approaches of talk-and-chalk methods where a student merely listens to the professors lectures. A prevalent view today is a learning process is vastly enhanced when there is student participation. However, some of the experts have expressed doubts due to the thinness of empirical research data (Lightner et al., 2007) C. Improving Teamwork in Virtual Teams We can reasonably expect that team-based learning experiences will become the norm in the future especially with the Internet as an enabling tool to bring people together faster and easier. Although the methodology of imparting knowledge has changed via this paradigm shift in educators and practitioners, the measures used for evaluating student performance have not been changed to suit the new realities. With this mind, it is high time to emphasize those core interpersonal attributes that contribute significantly to improved team performance outcomes. For virtual teams to be effective (both in academic and workplace settings), two things must be present: emergent team leadership and the need for members to develop trust and rapport among themselves (Gibson & Cohen, 2003). Improving the spirit of teamwork to enhance the collaboration among virtual team members is important because online learning collaboration lacks immediate feedback mechanisms and there is greater difficulty in establishing meaning in an absence of other non-verbal clues in communication such body language and voice tone. D. Impact of Different Learning Styles Putting together students with sometimes different temperaments and learning choices is a common pitfall when using a team-based approach to pedagogy. This was already said by authors Ke & Charr-Chellman (2006) that some students prefer to interact only to the limits of academic requirements but not go beyond to include social interactions (probably shy types). Many solitary learners feel out of sync with online collaborative learning. One can add to the common obstacles faced by virtual teams the new element of learning styles. This has impact on how the team will eventually gel and coalesce around a common educational goal because learning styles can either make or break a groups productivity (Alfonseca et al., 2006). It is the view of some educators whether two or more heads are necessarily better than just one person doing the work as in the so-called “productivity paradox” (Balijepally et al., 2009). E. Assessing Team Member Contributions In order to assess properly each members contribution to the team, there must at first be an open environment brought about by knowledge sharing and a shared understanding of what it takes for the team to succeed in its task (Duarte & Snyder, 2006). These two elements are vital because much of the teamwork is often ambiguous and sometimes lacking in specific guidelines. Team members must work individually despite the absence of clear directions for the good of the team. It is also shown by research that members who assess themselves often rate themselves higher in terms of actual contribution than what other members are willing to concede. At any rate, it is shown empirically there is a direct correlation between contribution by members (as indicated by using some index) and their overall academic assignment scores (Johnston & Miles, 2004). When working within a team, it is vital to manage one important resource: time. Executive coach Marshall Goldsmith advises using four simple steps to avoid time-wasters (Goldsmith, 2007) such as resolving internal conflicts arising from assertion of authority by team members, differences in opinion or failure to compromise (Fredrick, 2008). Reference List Alfonseca, E., Carro, R. M., Martin, E., Ortigosa, A. & Paredes, P. (2006). The Impact of Learning Styles on Student Grouping for Collaborative Learning: A case study. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 16 (3-4), 377-401. Balijepally, V. G., Mahapatra, R. K., Nerur, S. & Price, K. H. (2009). Are Two Heads Better than One for Software Development? The Productivity Paradox of Pair Programming. MIS Quarterly, 33 (1), 91-118. Baskin, C., Barker, M. & Woods, P. (2005). When Group Work Leaves the Classroom, Does Group Skills Development Also Go Out the Window? British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (1), 19-31. Duarte, D. L. & Snyder, N. T. (2006). Mastering Virtual Teams: Strategies, Tools and Techniques that Succeed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Fredrick, T. A. (2008). Facilitating Better Teamwork: Analyzing the Challenges and Strategies of Classroom-based Collaboration. Business Communication Quarterly, 71 (4), 439-455. Gibson, C. B. & Cohen, S. G. (2003). Virtual Teams that Work: Creating Conditions for Virtual Team Effectiveness. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Goldsmith, M. (2007). How Can I Improve Collaboration within My Team? Watertown, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. Johnston, L. & Miles, L. (2004). Assessing Contributions to Group Assignments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29 (6), 751-768. Ke, F. & Charr-Chellman A. (2006). Solitary Learner in Online Collaborative Learning: A Disappointing Experience? The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7 (3), 249-265. Lightner, S., Bober, M. J. & Willi, C. (2007). Team-based Activities to Promote Engaged Learning. College Teaching, 55 (1), 1-27. Salmoni, A. J. & Gonzalez, M. L. (2008). Online Collaborative Learning: Quantifying How People Learn Together Online. Medical Teacher, 30 (7), 710-716. Short notes: I used two books as additional references because all your sources were peer-reviewed journals (although that is also very good). In yellow highlights Authors highlighted in green indicated their works were already used in text citations. Only two remaining works were not yet used thus far (in red highlight). Your team can already do the rest of the paper. Green highlights on page 1 are just suggestions. Read More