group dynamics and learning in an ion behaviour virtual learning community[1]

8/4/2019 Group Dynamics and Learning in an ion Behaviour Virtual Learning Community[1]

1/34

Group dynamics and learning in an Organisation Behaviour virtuallearning community: the case of six virtual peer-learning teams.Author:C.M.Dubey-Assistantprofessor,IPSR,Unnao

Dr.Manish Singh-AIET,Allahabad

Keywords: Higher Education, teaching and learning, virtual learning, Bachelorof Commerce

Abstract

Introduction

Group maturity and learning

The nature of group learning

Communication as sign of maturity

Teacher as anxiety container

Background to the study

Research approach

Case study data and initial analysis

Cross case thematic analysis

Conclusion

References

Abstract

This paper explores the impact of non-defensive group dynamics, as a

precondition for experiential group learning, in the group space of an onlineOrganisation Behaviour class as virtual learning organisation in RMITsstrategic flagship Bachelor of Commerce. It comprises detailed analysis ofarchives of the interactions,


2/34

via threaded discussion and virtual chat, of six self-directed virtual peer learningteams acting as case studies. Findings suggest that anxiety, particularly aboutthe reflective part of Kolbs experiential cycle, can lead to defensive behavioursand shallow or single loop learning. This is despite the part the teacher, asdesigner and online facilitator, can play in anxiety containment. Those groups

mature enough however, to remain more motivated than anxious aboutreflection on process issues, can learn deeply. Here the teacher and the skills invirtual group organisation and communication, provided by students withmanagement experience, can assist groups to develop as effective teams.

IntroductionComputer mediated communication has provided a new type of group space forsocial interaction between and within groups. The quality of this interaction is ofgeneral interest to educationalists, but especially for those for whom theconversation is between groups learning collaboratively. For socialconstructivists it is in this new virtual group space that cognitive developmentcan occur as a result of group interactions leading to increasingly sophisticated

conceptual understandings. Individual learning is thus supported by the natureof the social behaviours and processes operating in group space: it is these thathave been the subject of recent pedagogical evaluations (Stacey & Rice, 2002,McLoughlin, 2002, Treleaven, 2002, Andrews & Schwarz, 2002).Staceys research (1998), demonstrating the link between cognitive and socio-affective communication, is based upon the founding work of Harasim, for whomgroup interaction is a critical variable in learning and cognitive development(1990 p.43 in Stacey, 1998, p.77): in particular the socio-emotional variables ofgroup interaction, including motivation, satisfaction and anxiety reduction thatare important in effective learning (Stacey, 1998, p. 77). Tyson (1989)differentiates between group dynamics and processes: group dynamics consistof the energy shifts fuelled by the underlying forces of motivation and anxiety,( p.47) whereas group processes are made up of a groups comings and goingsand the sequence of its activities and interactions.The focus of this paper, following Creeses (2001) study of group dynamics inthe potential space (Winnicott, 1973) of a TAFE class, is on the impact of groupdynamics, that is the interplay between motivation and anxiety, in an onlineOrganisation Behaviour course. The course is based on Tysons (1999)experiential classroom as learning organisation model (CALO), where studentmanagers in self-directed virtual peer learning teams (VPLTs) learn throughreflection on practice (Schon, 1983). The group interactions themselves are thesubject of study and responsiveness to them is an indicator of group learningand development (Agryis & Schon, 1978). In the context of this study group

dynamics are thus seen more than a critical variable or as having an effect thatcannot be ignored (Stacey, 1998, p.40). Rather non-defensive group dynamicsare seen as a precondition for the group being able to learn.


3/34

The psychodynamic and systems understanding of, and teaching about grouplearning is now outlined.Group maturity and learningThe concept of emotional ability for groups to learn is derived from Kleins(1959) notion of an individuals psychological maturity. For Bion (1961) workgroups are those mature enough to be able to learn standing in contrast togroups operating defensively in response to anxiety (Menzies, 1970). Bionhighlights three modes of defensive or group basic assumption to be lookedafter by a leader, to flee or fight others, or to be rescued by a pairing. These arenamed Basic Dependency, Fight/Flight and Pairing. Turquet (1974) adds afourth, Basic Assumption Oneness.The nature of group learningA mature or learning (Senge,1991) group can respond creatively to itsenvironment, technologically supported or otherwise. Shallow and deep (Biggs,1999) approaches to learning are comparable with Argyis and Schons (1974,1978) notion of single and double loop learning. Single loop learning is when agroup operates within existing norms without examining them in depth. Group

dynamics here include quasi resolution of conflict, intragroup rivalry, conformity,avoidance of uncertainty, parochial interests and miscommunication (Tyson,1989 p.158). Conversely, double loop learning occurs when the normsthemselves are scrutinised and reworked. Members invite each other toconfront their views and to alter them in order to produce a position that isbased on the most valid information possible, to which people involved canbecome internally committed (Tyson, 1989, p.158). For the Tavistock School ofgroup relations, it is processing of the here and now so that assumptions maybe uncovered, and hypotheses, made about the sometimes unconscious drivesbeneath.Kolbs (1984) individual experiential learning cycle, based on Lewins work with

group dynamics in the 1940s, is the conceptual framework used to understandhow groups can learn deeply. The VPLT provides the concrete experience forreflective observation: in this, it is the giving and receiving of feedback aboutthe here and now group process issues such as exercise of leadership, conflictresolution, problem solving interpersonal relations and online communication towhich group members are most likely to respond defensively. If virtual groupscan contain their anxiety about reflection on experience, abstractconceptualisation, followed by active experimentation is then possible.Cognitive ability, rather than emotional maturity, seems helpful forconceptualisation, as does management skill for the final action or improvementphase.Communication as sign of maturity

Linguistic analyses such as that by Treleaven (2003) of bulletin board postingsdemonstrate that the quality of the communication in group space is seen ascritical in understanding the nature of collaborative learning processes.McLouglin (2002) and Andrews & Schwarz (2002) both note a process/ learningoutcome connection,


4/34

recording qualitative and quantitative differences in the bulletin board postingsby high and low performing teams.Interpersonal communication is also seen as central to interpreting groupdynamics from a psychodynamic perspective. Schlachet (1986) describes groupor potential space also as a psychic envelope in which defensivemiscommunication or a healthy form of understanding can be demonstrated.Creese (1997) sees mutual trust and respect, shared values and goals, genuinefeedback and communication as a sign of a teams learning capability.Teacher as anxiety containerThe importance of the role of online moderator (Salmon, 2000) and designer(McLouglin, 2002) and of teacher presence (Stacey & Rice, 2002) is noted interms of the social and cognitive behaviours of online groups. Creese (2001)describes the online teacher as m/other who maintains the boundary ofpotential space and attempts to contain anxiety through the multifaceted rolesof designer, administrator, facilitator and modeller of learning behaviours.Within the CALO model, whether face-to-face or virtual, self managed groupshowever interact in the presence of the teacher with only intermittent direct

interventions. The power of a groups dynamics, made up of individual groupmembers personalities, levels of emotional maturity, abilities, skills andresource are not always containable.

Background to the study

The broad aim of the study is to improve student learning in OrganisationBehaviour in the context of RMIT Universitys (2000) policy of flexible renewaland its strategic flagship, the Bachelor of Commerce (BComm). The introductionof the experiential CALO model is integral to the redesign of the course foronline delivery.

The BComm is a program at faculty level, with Organisation Behaviour a firstyear core unit provided by the School of Management. The BComm is designedfor overseas markets and commenced in Vietnam in 2002, with a trialemanating from RMITs Bundoora campus, in Semester 2, 2001. The studentbody for the ongoing BComm, Bundoora, from which the case studies are taken,is largely drawn from metropolitan Melbourne, with some students from regionalVictoria.Although the Vietnam course was always to be mixed mode with face-to-facefacilitators, Bundoora has evolved into a fully online course. Consequentlygroup formation has moved from self-selection at face-to-face orientations, torandom online selection by the teacher. The selection of case studies is on thebasis of groups that communicated only electronically.

The course comprises online lectures set up in the Blackboard interface toRMITs Distributed Learning System. The other resources relate to the two majorlearning activities, an individual learning contract and the VPLT.


5/34

Communication occurs at the organisation level via the course communicationdevices (threaded discussion, virtual chat, file exchange and email) with eachVPLT having their own set of devices in Group Pages.


6/34

Research approach

A practical form of action research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988) enables cyclesof planning, acting and reviewing, the first three of which are covered in this

paper. The focus on group dynamics resulted from an illuminative evaluation(Creese, 2001) of cycle 1, that identified a gap between the recognitioncognitively and the maturity emotionally to reflect on group process. Thefollowing revisions were made in an attempt to address group anxiety aboutreflection: -Cycle 2:

refining of weekly group activities to suit fully online mode removal of individual learning journal/integration of weekly group review

and individual and group reflection questions introduction of a weekly process consultancy report introduction of formative feedback on group folios

Cycle 3: connections between phases of Kolb and parts of VPLT and assessment

criteria made more explicit in online instructions and feedback

These revisions were made in response to the continuous collection ofqualitative data in collaboration with students or the critical reference group(Wadsworth, 2000). Reflection on this data, nominated below as little r and big Rresearch cycles led to theory grounded in the authors practice as teacher.

Data collection methods

Data was collected as part of the following cycles:

small r: interacting with students via course and group communication devices formative and summative feedback on VPLT folios

big R: follow up interviews with VPLTs and individuals retention of VPLT folios for detailed analysis of electronic archives

Data analysis

The initial analysis of case data was based upon repeated reading to identify

dynamics suggestive of single or double loop learning. Subsequent cross caseanalysis was based on emerging themes.


7/34

Case study data and initial analysisOf the six studies, because of space, three, one from each cycle, are covered indetail: the remaining three, one from cycle 1 and two from cycle 3 aresummarised here and included in the later discussion.The following code has been adopted to distinguish the various types of datasource.

Virtual chat: date, time and message indented Threaded discussion: date and message indented Follow up interviews: quotations in inverted commas

Messages are reproduced as they were typed, including spelling mistakes.Cycle 1: Blue GroupThe Blue Group were predominantly made up of mothers in their thirties whoworked in a variety of businesses and wanted to upgrade their qualifications.George from regional Victoria was a late addition to the group.The dramatic dynamics experienced by this group were foreshadowed in thefirst chat, to which the teacher was invited. Stellas dogmatic attitude pervades

discussion about the team task insistingJuly 16 09:31:08 no, our task is to produce a profile of team members.

The teachers subsequent reminder that the task involves the study of teamoperation is ignored. Milly, the Chair suggests at the beginning of the nextmeeting that team members

Jul 23 09:22:08 evaluate each team member and how they areperceived within the team, look at the threaded discussion board andrespond as you see it.

Stella immediately deflects the group from this. She first suggests adjourningthe meeting because of the virtual medium. When the Chair repeats thesuggestion Stella challenges whether feedback on others is required

Jul 23 09:40:13 I didnt think that we are supposed to assess othermembers of the team only ourselfs (sic).

Nothing eventuates on the discussion board. By the next meeting Stella movesquickly to counter Millys every word with the result that Milly says

Aug 9 08:52:38 Slow down Im the chairman.Stella beings to draw on the virtual group white board then types into the chat

Aug 9 08:56:19 yes its good fun when you are bored, you can doodle.


8/34

When eventually we need a new chairman appears on the whiteboard Millyexplodes.


9/34


10/34

Aug 9 09:06:16 one of the norms of the team was that the chairmanwould control it and ask questions,BUT YOU DONT GIVE ME A CHANCE.

Milly leaves before the end of the meeting. Stella denies that her challenge is acoup as other group members describe it later on in the meeting. Thechallenge results in the group taking up Stellas suggestion of rotating roles. Thegroup also colludes with Stellas refusal to address issues of reflection on selfagreeing as follows in the next meeting

Aug 16

08:24:02 no personal comments08:24:07 no judgements08:24:16 no negative apologies.


11/34

The teacher is asked to the next meeting and attempts to get the group toreflect on what has happened. Stella initially uses the medium as an excuse for

Aug 23 08:31:10 stifling dynamics

and later admits


12/34

Aug 23 09:04:23 It has made me very wary of people who will makepersonal comments about me in a public forum especially when I thinkthey are not correct. I do not feel safe, I feel vulnerable and I dont enjoythat.

The teacher discusses this with her the next day on the phone for over twohours.However the teacher interventions of Aug 23 do not affect the dynamics of thegroup established on


13/34

Aug 16. The last seven meetings from Aug 30 to Sep 27 are made up entirely ofunrelated chatter. The group has regressed as George described in his post on

15 Sep (to) being too nice on the discussion board (where) everyone

agrees.George had previously attempted to follow up the suggestions made by theteacher on Aug 23 urging the group the next day to

Aug 24 step back a bit sometimes, before taking the next step forward.But as George complains on the discussion board on 8 Sep no one responds. Thediscussion board rather is used to give feedback on the profiles, which Stacey


14/34

insists comprise only of positive things about members, and are later included inthe folio.


15/34

Soft Pack Consultancy (SFC)


16/34


17/34


18/34

The dynamics here are characterised by Adrians apparent use of reflectivelanguage to devalue Daniel in the groups eyes. When Daniel leaves the course,SPCs meetings are reduced to idle chat, the imaginary virtual company whichAdrian suggests never eventuates, and an incomplete handwritten folio, minusreflection, results.

Cycle 2: Yay teamThis was a group initially of five members. Interactions between Clarissa, Cliff

and Richard seem significant in this groups development. It was because ofRichard that the group was able to understand the nature of their task. In thefirst meeting Richard says

Mar 3 07:30:43 My impression from reading some of the group discussionstuff is that the group exercises make up the content and then we aresupposed to reflect on what is happening in the group and how we feelabout it.

Richard is also to advise the team about the relationship to Kolbs learning.However at the second meeting to which the teacher had been invited to attendhe says

Mar 10 07:25:04 it seems an easy concept but our own self confidenceor lack of can hinder this process.

Later on when the teacher has left the meeting, Richard confides that he doesnot feel comfortable

Mar 10 08:43:04 sharing my innermost thoughts(a minute later described as innermost demons) with others.Richard is not present for the next meeting and the group does not discuss hisdeparture. However Clarissa pushes the need for reflection on the discussionboard.


19/34

May 21 I know I have been harping on about CONFLICT of late but findLizs point that our team seems to avoid conflict quite interesting.

Clarissa follows this with a sophisticated analysis of the reasons for theiravoidance, namely lack of trust and the limitations of online communication,and adds a final question

May 21 Can you think for any other possible reasons?Two members respond on the discussion board, one saying they trust the group,one blaming the virtual medium.Clarissa brings up the issue again at the next meeting on May 30. When no oneresponds, she suggests a solution with which the group feels comfortable; it isthat


20/34

each member should post to the discussion board a reflection about one of theprocess issues flagged in the formative feedback given on the folio. This was toinclude, on Clarissas insistence, not only the what but also the analytical whyshe had demonstrated. Her suggestion was endorsed by Cliff, the Chairperson,but at the last meeting, and a group discussion could not ensue.Cliff, a mature aged student with extensive management experience, initiallyfocuses on the doing part of the VPLT. As Chair, he deflects from reflectivediscussion by bringing up procedural matters but seems comfortable chairinggroup discussion of peripheral matters such as Macroeconomics (one of theother BComm courses), their individual learning contracts and their experienceof other teams. Following feedback on the folio draft, Cliff can appreciate thebenefit of reflecting on the VPLT as management practice. Eventually he is ableto chair a twelve minute group reflection. This is an extract:

May 18 07:53:25 I would say that it has been frustrating not only tomyself but even my non attendance could have annoyed members.May 18 07:55:30 Remember this is based on our individual perceptionsand feelings.May 18 07:56:54 Yes Clarissa may interpret things differently from mewhich is good as we can then see how other perceive the team and itschallenges.


21/34

The final folio demonstrates strong reflection in writing, some analysis andevidence of some improvements in practice.

Cycle 3: Group I

This group of three shared an initial negative experience of the course. Stephenhad started a month late, and Trudy and Charles were from groups that hadnever formed. Group I also had in common the motivation for learning, a desirefor exceptional results, a preparedness to take risks and think creatively.


22/34

Charles droll chairmanship is supported by Trudys uncanny know-how withanalysis and practical leadership. Trudy was new to tertiary study but hadworked for many years as a financial analyst. She said that she was able to seethe similarities between analysis of financial data and the application of theoryto the behaviour of VPLT members. Trudy took leadership by providing apractical four step way, outlined in a posting to the group discussion board onSep 20, for the group to efficiently tackle the assessment requirements in thereduced time available. Charles was happy (Sep 22) for her to take charge ofthe agenda like this and Stephen thought

Sep 23 your 4 step process (posting exercises, reviewing othermembers postings, meeting and answering review questions, planningfor next week and discussing folio) is terrific, very clear and easy tofollow.


23/34

As well as providing structure for their communication, Trudy in her lengthypostings, from one of which an extract follows, is timely and persistent atkeeping the group to her schedule, maintaining communication, following upwith others suggestions, summarising the teams progress and modelling a wayof demonstrating their learning.


24/34


25/34

Sep 24 Considering we all seem to have the same goals in mind for thisteam, similar understanding of what it is were doing this is creatingteam cohesiveness. The text describes this as the degree of attractionpeople feel toward the team and their motivation to remain members p.284 this will result in our needs being fulfilled by the team ie our need to

learn, progress studies, achieve good marks and then we will want toremain members of I team. I have reviewed the text (ch 9 pp278-286)and I can see our team clearly moving thru the theoretical; stages ofteam formation.

Following Trudys lead all three are soon taking it in turns on the discussionboard to work through the course requirements, process at length the teamoperation and apply all steps of Kolb. Charles and Stephens previous studies inlaw and science seemed to provide the cognitive ability to analyse at a highlevel.

Group members are also able to give one another positive and negativefeedback on the discussion board.

Sep 22 Charles responding to Trudy and Stephen: Stephen. I think thisposting shows that you have an excellent idea about how to start working


26/34

in a team. As we are finding out though, time-management is a keyrequirement to successful output and that seems to be something youneed to work on.

Stephen is able to accept the criticism and act upon his espoused goal of self-improvement.

Sep 23 Stephen responds to Trudy and Charles: I can relate to your styleTrudy of wanting to do everything your own way. I tend to be likethat.however it can lead to procrastination in order to wait and producethe perfect result, which in turn can frustrate others especially in theteam environment as we have experienced in the past week. So one ofmy personal goals is to learnhow to contribute on time and consistentlywithout the need to rush at the last minute, thereby enabling the othersto review my work and offer their response.

Interestingly the group uses the virtual chat simply for the mechanics ofrealising Trudys plan of action. Any attempts to discuss process issues in realtime are quashed by Charles dry lets move on.


27/34

The final product is outstanding, demonstrating deep learning in all phases ofthe Kolb cycle.

Group LIn Group L, Bill and Joseph agree to reflect on their group processes, but Chrisinsists that a more structured way to complete the folio is to simply answer thereview


28/34

questions. Bill and Chris lock horns in an online debate. Chris eventually wins,with the result that weekly individual reflections are included in the folio; butthere is no discussion of these in meetings. After the debate the group agreethat they have become productive and are now performing.


29/34

Group J

This group shared previous negative experiences of tertiary study. Alan takes alead in the group expression of hatred for the course and resistance to the taskof reflection. By mid semester nothing has been produced for formativefeedback. Some individual attempts at least to give an indication of workingare unsuccessful, and some members leave. At the last minute Alan single-handedly produces a folio that is purely descriptive.Cross case thematic analysis

The cross case analysis is based on the following themes: leadership, as a signal of defensive behaviour or of assistance in group

development communication, as pointer to group maturity reflection, as indicator of levels of learning

impact of teacher as anxiety container

Leadership

To the shared motivation to learn, Trudys leadership in Group I added, astructure and mode of communication, as well as the modelling of how todemonstrate learning. It was not however a dependent relationship; rather itestablished the working context in which group members could contributeequally and develop as a team.

For the Yay team leadership was various. Richards understood the task anddeparted when uncomfortable with it, Clarissas insisted on both reflection andanalysis, and Cliffs had organisational expertise.

Leadership in the other groups however was related more to basic assumptionfunctioning. The Blue Groups dynamics are characterised by the groups basicassumption dependency on Stellas informal but powerful leadership, promptedby her high levels of insecurity. Once Millys formal position as Chair had been

undermined, the group could operate as one unconsciously colluding to avoidany group reflection. When SPC became dependent upon Adrian, energy wasspent in loyalty to Adrian over Daniel. In Group L Charles online challenge to Billwas ultimately successful in demonstrating the groups oneness. Group J aftertaking the lead from Alan to fight the course most members then fled from it.


30/34


31/34

Maturity of communication can be seen to relate to non-defensive groupbehaviour or the ability to focus on the task of deep or double loop learning.Group Is language on the threaded discussion board appeared genuine withfeedback both positive and negative given and acted upon. Howevercommunication in their virtual chats was more matter of fact dealing withlogistics. The Yay team generally maintained a level of open communicationabout most matters.The communication of those defensive groups can be seen generally todeteriorate. The Blue Groups last month of meetings were reduced to idlechitchat. SPC lost even the mocking style of communication that characterisedtheir early meetings. The language of Group L changed under Charlesleadership to that of mechanics. Group Ls language of hatred for the courseturned to love of sport before stopping completely.Reflection as indicator of levels of learningThe response by the VPLTs to the task of reflection seems here to determine theability to engage with the subsequent Kolb phases.Group I appears to have learnt deeply, operating in all phases of Kolb at a high

level, and exhibiting throughout dynamics suggestive of double loop learning.But reflection was carried out asynchronously. The Yay teams individualreflections on, and analysis of, process issues, in response to Clarissassuggestion, were written too late for group discussion and action. Nonethelessthe group increasingly demonstrated dynamics characteristic of double looplearning.The Blue Group invested much of its energy in defending against any groupfeedback. Consequently they confined themselves to the experience rather thanreflecting on it and operated within the existing norms of single loop learning.After Adrian had encouraged SPC members

Aug 30 08:37:17 not as a criticism of David but better to confront our

weaknesses as a team to rectify them, there was no hint of any such reflection.The individual attempts by Joseph and Bill to reflect and analyse were includedin Group Ls folio. But as there was no group discussion about these, the groupremained at the level of single loop learning. Individual comments about GroupJs slackness and loss of focus were not responded to in meetings.Impact of teacher as anxiety containerIn cycle one the teacher was very involved with the Blue Group. After an initialintervention about team operation was ignored, the teacher later attempted toget the group to process the leadership coup. It seems that, while the teacherwas present in the chat, members were eventually able to give feedback; butwith her departure the previous dynamics reappeared. The teacher had little to

do with SPC.


32/34

In cycle two Richards understanding of the team task resulted from his readingof the course discussion board. It seems that Clarissa acted following theteachers formative feedback on the Yay team folio.In cycle three Team I is of interest because members deep understanding of thetask was idiosyncratic, with Richards related to formative feedback on learningcontract and the other two to design matters: Trudys to repeated reading of thecourse instructions, and Charles to the completion of a team exercises. Theteacher had no involvement in Team Is discussion board or chat room.In Group L the teacher had given Bill extensive formative feedback on hislearning contract. Attendance by the teacher at one of their meetings seemed ofsignificance to Joseph and Bill but not Chris. The teacher had responded toGroup Js request to form a company, and had suggested that the group reflecton their processes within this.ConclusionIt seems, that in this experiential online Organisation Behaviour course,defensive group dynamics can operate as a more potent factor on grouplearning, than that of the teacher as designer or facilitator. The cyclical

deepening in learning, demonstrated by the ability of some VPLT cases to beginto reflect and improve their practice, might seem to result from improvementsin educational design and online facilitation. However, the third cycle comprised,not only Group Is deep or double loop learning, but also Groups L and J, withthe worst learning outcomes. It seems that, if group members remain overallmore anxious than motivated about the task of learning, the course design andinterventions of online moderator, seem to have little impact on these defensivedynamics. However, if the dynamics of the group are such that it can operate asa work group, motivated to learn, the input of teacher can assist such non-defensive groups, in particular to reflect on their operation as a means ofimproving it. Deep learning in some groups has also been seen to have been

assisted by members with management experience and important skills instructuring online group interaction and enabling improvements of practice.Cognitive ability and experience in relating theoretical ideas to practice havealso been beneficial, as has the echoing of the teachers modelling of learningbehaviours. But, it has been seen that by themselves, such skills and the role ofthe teacher, can appear powerless in the face of defensive group dynamics,which bind members together apparently uncontrollably. It seems that non-defensive group dynamics are a precondition for a groups ability to learndeeply.ReferencesAgryis, C. & Schon, D. A. (1974). Theory in Practice: Increasing ProfessionalEffectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Agryis, C. & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational Learning a Theory of ActionPerspective. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.


33/34

Andrews, T. & Schwarz, G. (2002). Preparing students for the virtualorganization:

an evaluation of learning with virtual learning technologies. EducationalTechnology

& Society, 5(3).[Online] http://www.ifets.massy.ac.nz/periodical/vol_3_2002/andrews.htmlBion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in Groups. London: Tavistock.Creese, E. (1997). The tension between artistic purpose and management

functionsin the Performing Arts, Aesthetex, 7(1), Winter, 57-59.Creese, E. (2001). From dependency towards self-direction via virtual chat: the

caseof one TAFE class in G. Kennedy, M. Keppel, C. McNaught and T. Petrovic (Eds),Meeting at the Crossroads: Short Paper Proceedings of the 18th Annual

Conferenceof the Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp29-

32)

Melbourne: Biomedical Multimedia Unit, The University of Melbourne.Creese, E. (2001). An Illuminative Evaluation of the First Cycle of OrganisationBehaviour within the Bachelor of Commerce, unpublished paper.Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (Eds) (1988). The Action Research Planner. Geelong,Victoria: Deakin University.Klein, M. (1959). Our adult world and its roots in infancy, Human Relations, 12:291-301.Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Menzies, I. (1970). The Functioning of Social Systems as a Defence AgainstAnxiety, Tavistock: London.McLouglin, C. (2002). Computer supported teamwork: An integrative approach

toevaluating cooperative learning in an online environment. Australian Journal ofTechnology, 18 (2), 227-254.[Online] http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet18/mclouglin.htmlRMIT University, (2000). RMIT University Strategic Plan, 1998-2002, Melbourne.Salmon, G. (2000)). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online.London: Kogan Page..Schlachet, P. J. (1988). The Concept of Group Space. International Journal ofGroup Psychotherapy, 36 (1), 130-141.Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. USA: Basic Books.Senge, P. (1991). The Fifth Discipline. London: Century Business.


34/34

Stacey, E. (1998). Study of the Enhancement of Learning through GroupInteraction

by Computer Mediated Communication, unpublished Doctor of Philosophy ThesisStacey, E. & Rice, M. (2002). Evaluating an online environment. Australian

Journalof Education Technology, 18(3), 323-340.[Online] http://www.ascilite.au/ajet/ajet18/stacey.htmlTreleaven, L. (2003). Evaluating a communicative model for web mediatedcollaborative learning and design. Australian Journal of Education Technology,19(1), 100-117 [Online] http://www.ascilite.au/ajet/ajet19/mclouglin.htmlTurquet, P. M. (1974). The Individual & the Group, in S. Gibbard, Hartman, J. J. &Mann, R. D. (Eds). Analysis of Groups. California: Jossey- Bass.Tyson, T. (1989). Working with Groups. South Melbourne: MacMillan.Tyson, T. (1999). CALO the Class as a Learning Organisation: the CALO modelrevisited and revitalised. Human Resource Management/Organisation Behaviour,Working Paper Series, School of Business, Swinburne University of Technology,Melbourne.

Wadsworth, Y. (1991). Everyday Evaluation on the Run. Action Research IssueAssociation: Melbs.Winnicott, D.W. (1971). Playing and Reality. London: Penguin

group dynamics and learning in an ion behaviour virtual learning community[1]

Documents