Taking a Trait Approach to Understanding College Students' Perceptions of Group Work

This study examined whether college students' perceptions of the positive and negative attributes of group work are associated with their tolerance for ambiguity, tolerance for disagreement, conversational sensitivity, and cognitive flexibility. Participants were 192 undergraduate students who completed a series of quantitative measures referencing their feelings toward group work and their communicative and personality traits. Results indicated that (a) students' perceptions of the positive attributes of group work were correlated positively with tolerance for ambiguity, tolerance for disagreement, conversational sensitivity, and cognitive flexibility and (b) students' perceptions of the negative attributes of group were correlated positively with conversational sensitivity. Future research should continue to explore the impact of students' traits on their perceptions of classroom group work.  Despite the pedagogical value associated with small group work in the college classroom (Allen & Plax, 2002), one downside to group work is the range of perceptions students have about group work (Myers & Goodboy, 2005). These perceptions, however, may be differentiated by the personality and communication predispositions students have toward working on tasks in general, which then may affect how students approach group work, a specific group task, or group members. The purpose of this study is to examine whether college students' perceptions of the positive and negative attributes of group work are associated with their tolerance for ambiguity, tolerance for disagreement, conversational sensitivity, and cognitive flexibility. Review of Literature For many college students, small group work is an inevitable component of their coursework. Used extensively across academic disciplines (Adams & Slater, 2002; McKinney & Graham-Buxton, 1993; Payne & Monk-Turner, 2006; Vik, 2001; Warnemunde, 1986), small group work is believed, at least from the perspective of course instructors, to provide multiple benefits to students. These benefits include developing an extensive understanding and retention of small group concepts (Young & Henquinet, 2000) and course content (Wardrope & Bayless, 1999), becoming more proficient in social and interpersonal communication skills (Kendall, 1999; Winter & Neal, 1995), and becoming adequately prepared for future vocational and career endeavors (Monk-Turner & Payne, 2005; Page & Donelon, 2003). Although many students feel they accomplish more by working in a group than by working alone (Payne & Monk-Turner, 2006; Payne, Monk-Turner, Smith, & Sumter, 2006; Winter & Neal, 1995), not all college students recognize the benefits associated with small group work nor do all college students appreciate group work (Keyton, 1994; Schullery & Gibson, 2001). Keyton, Harmon, and Frey (1996) posited that the impressions students hold about group work fall into two categories: the identification of positive attributes of group work and the identification of negative attributes of group work. Some positive attributes are being able to contribute to the group task, learning something from group members, sharing the workload with their group members, and perceiving the group experience as helpful for their future careers; some negative attributes are problems with task assignment and coordination, group member conflict, and group members who are uncooperative, who fail to participate or contribute to the group task, or who do not attend group meetings (Colbeck, Campbell, & Bjorklund, 2000; Duin, 1990; Dyrud, 2001; Livingstone & Lynch, 2000; Payne & Monk-Turner, 2006; Winter & Neal, 1995). Students' impressions also are influenced by issues such as time constraints, a focus on grades, and competing demands such as jobs, friends, and romantic relationships (Freeman, 1996; Monk-Turner & Payne, 2005). …

Field of study: Education