Team formation tools assume instructors should configure the criteria for creating teams, precluding students from participating in a process that affects their learning experience. We propose LIFT, a novel learner-centered workflow where students propose, vote for, and weigh team formation criteria, and the collective results serve as inputs to the team formation algorithm. We conducted an experiment (N=289) comparing LIFT to the usual instructor-led process, and interviewed participants to evaluate their perceptions of LIFT and its outcomes. We found learners were capable of proposing novel criteria not part of existing algorithmic tools, like organizational style. Generally, learners avoided criteria frequently selected by instructors, including gender and GPA, and instead preferred those that promoted efficient collaboration. Second, LIFT led to team outcomes comparable to those achieved by the instructor-led approach, despite the differences in the configurations, and teams valued having control of the team formation process. We provide instructors and tool designers with a workflow and evidence supporting giving learners control of the algorithmic process used for grouping them into teams.
CATME is a tool that implements a criteria-based team formation approach. The tool facilitates forming teams based on criteria like demographics, skills, and work styles. This information is collected from the students via an online survey. The effectiveness of this genre of tool depends on the practicality of the instructors configuration of the criteria, the veracity of students responses to the survey, and the soundness of the algorithm. In this thesis, we investigate potential issues affecting these factors. Our study was conducted by performing new analysis of data collected from a prior study comparing the performance of teams formed using CATME or randomly in a user interface design course. The performance of teams was not statistically different between the two conditions. In examining the students responses to the team formation survey, we found issues related to Self-Assessment such as inconsistencies between students ratings of their skills and reporting of their strongest skills, and potential cases of misreports. Likewise, we found some cases where the tool produced unexpected results when calculating the homogeneity of the skills of a team. Implications for instructors and tool designers to mitigate these problems are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.