2018
DOI: 10.1109/te.2018.2816010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gendered Risks of Team-Based Learning: A Model of Inequitable Task Allocation in Project-Based Learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
54
1
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
54
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Diversity in engineering teams is important beyond the intrinsic value of equity, as diverse teams are better problem solvers [4]. Individuals must have specific knowledge about the benefits of team diversity and how to leverage diverse contributions, however, as in the absence of this knowledge tasks may be inequitably allocated to team members based on biased assumptions about their ability to contribute [5], [6]. Helping students recognize the importance and value of diversity in engineering teams, therefore, may help to create teams that leverage the benefits of their diversity, design more effectively for diverse populations, and create more inclusive learning environments.…”
Section: Activities In First-year Engineering Coursesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Diversity in engineering teams is important beyond the intrinsic value of equity, as diverse teams are better problem solvers [4]. Individuals must have specific knowledge about the benefits of team diversity and how to leverage diverse contributions, however, as in the absence of this knowledge tasks may be inequitably allocated to team members based on biased assumptions about their ability to contribute [5], [6]. Helping students recognize the importance and value of diversity in engineering teams, therefore, may help to create teams that leverage the benefits of their diversity, design more effectively for diverse populations, and create more inclusive learning environments.…”
Section: Activities In First-year Engineering Coursesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding the first concern, it is commonly observed that students, especially "high-achieving" students, report that team-based learning may affect them negatively academically [21]. Conversely, other students are able to earn higher scores by simply contributing less to the project than their peers [22][23][24][25]. Also, it has been reported that these workload inequalities can develop into social interactions which further exacerbate inequalities and lead to higher levels of dissatisfaction on the team [18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Implicit bias on student teams is often theorized to influence the prioritization of ideas expressed by white male students over those expressed by their female counterparts or teammates of color [1]. In addition, a gender-correlated division of work often occurs on student-teams, with men doing the more technical tasks of the project, leaving women to often fill the remaining organizational and managerial positions on the team [2], [3], [4]. Reasoning for this type of behavior is often linked to differences in student learning goals for a course, whether that be mastery orientation (motivation to understand the material), performance orientation (motivation to earn grades or favor) or performance-avoidance orientation (motivation to avoid appearing less competent than fellow peers) [3].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, a gender-correlated division of work often occurs on student-teams, with men doing the more technical tasks of the project, leaving women to often fill the remaining organizational and managerial positions on the team [2], [3], [4]. Reasoning for this type of behavior is often linked to differences in student learning goals for a course, whether that be mastery orientation (motivation to understand the material), performance orientation (motivation to earn grades or favor) or performance-avoidance orientation (motivation to avoid appearing less competent than fellow peers) [3]. Previous literature suggests that gender-based variations in self-efficacy also play a role in task allocation on teams [2].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%