Distance Education

ISSN: 0158-7919 (Print) 1475-0198 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cdie20

How do students define their roles and

responsibilities in online learning group projects?

Karen C. Williams , Kari Morgan & Bruce A. Cameron

To cite this article: Karen C. Williams , Kari Morgan & Bruce A. Cameron (2011) How do
students define their roles and responsibilities in online learning group projects?, Distance
Education, 32:1, 49-62, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2011.565498

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2011.565498

Published online: 03 May 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 424

View related articles

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cdie20

Download by: [University of New England] Date: 09 June 2016, At: 02:23
 Distance Education
Vol. 32, No. 1, May 2011, 49–62

How do students define their roles and responsibilities in online

learning group projects?
Karen C. Williams*, Kari Morgan and Bruce A. Cameron

Department of Family and Consumer Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA
(Received 27 August 2010; final version received 12 January 2011)
Taylor and Francis
CDIE_A_565498.sgm

Distance
10.1080/01587919.2011.565498
0158-7919
Open
2011
10Article
32
Karen
cachevki@uwyo.edu
000002011
and
C.Williams
Education
Distance
(print)/1475-0198
Learning Association
(online) of Australia, Inc.
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

The goal of this study was to explore the processes of group role formation in
online class settings. Qualitative analysis was used to code chat logs and
discussion threads in six undergraduate Family and Consumer Sciences online
courses that required online group projects. Four themes related to the process of
group role formation emerged: testing the waters, apologies as being nice, tag –
you’re it, and struggling to find one’s role. Students created roles of leader,
wannabe, spoiler, agreeable enabler, coat-tails, and supportive worker as the group
process evolved over the course of the semester. Results lend support for a balance
between allowing students to create and experience roles on their own and faculty
assignment of roles. Questions are raised related to faculty approaches toward
directing and scaffolding the group process.
Keywords: group processes; group roles; distance education; higher education;
qualitative research

Introduction
The ability to work collaboratively in groups has long been recognized as an impor-
tant skill in the workplace. Research has continued to emphasize the need for effec-
tive group dynamics and collaborative strategies in projects and approaches to
problem-solving (Baskin, Barker, & Woods, 2005; Fisher, Thompson, & Silverberg,
2004–2005; Hood, 1997; Wheelen, Murphy, Tsumura, & Kline, 1998).
Successful group processes include the ability to problem-solve, work effectively
with others, communicate orally and in writing, and manage resources including
time and responsibility to project outcomes (Meyers & Jones, 1993). Academic
settings are an important venue for disseminating information about group processes
and providing students with opportunities to practice and gain skills in effective
group work.
Benne and Sheats (1948) identified three categories of group roles as: task (those
that relate to getting the work done), personal/social (those that contribute to the posi-
tive functioning of the group), and dysfunctional or individualistic (those that disrupt
group processes or weaken its cohesion). Within these three categories, Benne and
Sheats further identified 26 different roles that can be assumed by individuals or multi-
ple individuals within a group. Since Benne and Sheats did not study applications for
their theory, others have redefined, expanded, and examined how group roles look in

*Corresponding author. Email: cachevki@uwyo.edu

ISSN 0158-7919 print/ISSN 1475-0198 online

© 2011 Open and Distance Learning Association of Australia, Inc.
DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2011.565498
http://www.informaworld.com
 50 K.C. Williams et al.

practice (Belbin, 1996–2001; Strijbos, Martens, Jochems, & Broers, 2004; Tuckman
& Jensen, 1977).
Due to the importance of collaborative work in today’s society, university faculty
members may wish to include information on effective group processing (including
group roles) as well as opportunities for students to practice group processes in
academic coursework in campus and online educational settings. For some faculty
teaching in online settings, it may be tempting to avoid assigning group projects;
however, group projects have been identified as important, effective strategies in the
delivery of online classes (Palloff & Pratt, 1999; Williams, 2002). Although many
studies have shown the importance of group work for building learning communities
and improving experiences for students (Dawson, 2006; Fisher et al., 2004–2005;
Gunwardena, Lowe, & Anderson, 1997; Liu, Magijuka, Bonk, & Lee, 2007; Ouzts,
2006; Rovai, 2002; Rovai & Barnum, 2003; Shin & Chan, 2004), few researchers
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

have examined group roles as they develop in online learning environments. A better
understanding of group role formation will allow faculty members to better support
online students to develop effective tools for learning about and conducting group
work. The goal of this study was to explore the process of group role formation in
online educational settings.

Study context
This study was completed at a Western mid-sized research university in the USA. Six
online courses taught during the spring and summer sessions in a department of
Family and Consumer Sciences were used: one lower division course and five upper
division courses taught by five faculty members. The lower division course was a
required course for all Family and Consumer Sciences majors and as such included
freshmen through to seniors. It is common for upper classmen to enroll in this course
as they are community college transfer students or have changed majors. There were
no lower division students in upper division classes.
All courses used an eCollege platform. Spring semester courses were delivered in
16 weeks; summer session classes were 12 weeks in duration. Length of the online
projects and requirements varied by instructor; however, all projects were a significant
portion of the final grade. Groups were assigned by the faculty member, and typically
included three or four students. Students negotiated roles as they went through the
online group process. The faculty member provided students topics from which to
select their project, and posted the grading rubric.
Student groups had access to group-specific chat rooms, threaded discussion areas,
and document-sharing capabilities through the course platform. In addition, students
were allowed to communicate through any other means they chose including email,
phone, and face-to-face meetings for those who were in the same locations. The
instructor did not monitor communications outside of the course platform.

Participants
The participants consisted of 126 students enrolled in six online courses in a depart-
ment of Family and Consumer Sciences: 118 females and 8 males. Courses included
both traditional and nontraditional aged students, ranging in age from 19 to 62. They
were predominantly Caucasian, but also included a small number of students who
classified themselves as Asian, African American, or other.
 Distance Education 51

Methodology
The goal of this study was to explore the process of group role formation in online
class settings by analyzing artifacts gathered in online classes using group projects.
Artifact analysis was accomplished through the coding of printed chat logs and discus-
sion threads, nearly 600 pages in all. The initial codes applied to this study originated
from an earlier analysis of student comments to open-ended questions included on a
survey related to social task development (Cameron, Morgan, Williams, &
Kostelecky, 2009). They included the following: anti-group, cheerleading, good grade
motivation, supportive/collaborative, personal sharing of information, taking the lead,
prefers face-to-face classes/resistant to online, non-personal, frustration, follow
through, let go/trust others, show me/prove yourself, lack of trust, work ethic/task
orientation, lack of work or effort, rule orientation, selfless/other oriented, respect,
egocentrism, initiative, manners/acting nice/polite. Initially, all three researchers inde-
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

pendently coded the threads and chat logs at the sentence and paragraph level by using
the initial codes; they then shared their notes, providing a peer check process. The
team then discussed the emerging data to co-construct the collapsed final codes and
themes (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, Koole, & Kappelman, 2006). Use of multiple
investigators for data coding and more than one source of data (threaded discussions
and chat logs) provided triangulation and validation of the findings (Lincoln & Guba,
1985).

Results
The goal of this study was to explore the process of group role formation in online
class settings. Four themes related to the process of group role formation emerged
from the data: testing the waters, apologies as being nice, tag – you’re it, and strug-
gling to find one’s role. In addition, results reveal that student roles – leader, wannabe,
spoiler, agreeable enabler, coat-tails, and supportive worker – evolved in the absence
of assigned roles. These themes and roles are defined in further detail below, with
direct quotes from students to illustrate the themes. All names used in the quotes are
pseudonyms. S1, S2, and so on are used to show that multiple students are having a
dialog with each other regarding their online group project rather than to identify
particular students in multiple examples. Where such notations are not used, only one
student’s quote is used as an example. Page numbers in parentheses after each exam-
ple represent the location within the printed data.

Group role formation themes

Testing the waters
Testing the waters was a method students use to check in with each other and to test
their ideas prior to making commitments related to roles and processes. This phenom-
enon was observed in introductory and advanced courses, and was a strategy used by
all students, regardless of age, as illustrated in the following conversation and quotes.

Quote 1:

S1: Hello Group. Anyone have any idea what we would like to write the paper on? I
just wanted to check in to see your thoughts. Chat with you later.
 52 K.C. Williams et al.

S2: I haven’t read through the book to better help me decide – I have no clue what I
would be interested in enough to write that much about. Maybe the wellness
category? What’s everyone’s opinion? (p. 168)

Quote 2:

Sounds good. Do we want to break down who should look for what information so
that we don’t all go the same way? For instance, one or two of us could focus on the
diet and diabetes, then someone could focus on childhood obesity and diabetes, and
then another could look for information relating to the family care aspect. Just an idea.
(p. 82)

Apologies as being nice

Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

Apologies as being nice was a strategy that students employed to avoid creating
conflict, or to preempt negative feedback or anger. Students using this strategy
issued apologies in tandem with an excuse for not completing a task or for avoiding
responsibility. Apologies were not issued directly for not completing the work or for
avoiding responsibility; rather, it was implied that because they had apologized for
their lack of attentiveness, they should automatically be forgiven. This seems to be
similar to the help seeker role identified by Benne and Sheats (1948), where the
individual tries to gain the sympathy of the group. The following quotes illustrate
this theme.

Quote 1:

I am so sorry that I haven’t been around to help out. May someone fill me in as to where
we are going and how I can help? I have read what you have written and I am terribly
sorry about not responding sooner. You said you emailed me, but I don’t check my
university account. The email account that I check is ______. (p. 251)

Quote 2:

I just got a last minute great opportunity to go to Mexico for a week – and only pay
airfare! So … I will be out of town from the 15th to the 23rd. If there is anything I can
do for the group project before then let me know. I will take a larger load on the final
steps of the project if not. Thanks for your understanding. (p. 14)

Tag – you’re it
Tag – you’re it described a process groups used to assign leaders by default. The first
one who posts an idea is seen as the leader by the group, whether he/she had intended
to take that role or not. The following quotes illustrate one group’s initial planning
thread, showing that the first one who posted became the leader.

S1: Hello everyone. I just wanted to let all of you know that my mom works with some
social workers and when I get a free minute, I am going to go ask them some
questions about the resources available in ___ (since this is where I am this
summer) for our project. Let me know if any of you want me to ask her anything
in particular! (p. 40)
S2: Hi! Sounds like your mom’s friend will be very useful. I will think of some good
questions.
 Distance Education 53

S3: Hello. I will also try to think of some good questions … I’ll let you know when I
come up with them!
S4: I know some people in the town where I live that can probably help us find the
right direction for this project. I am going to start working hard on this project next
week. Sorry I have not responded until now but I am here and will check back next
week and hopefully have some info so that we can get started.
S1: Oh don’t worry about not responding yet. It seems to me that Dr. ___ really wants
us to use a lot from the readings he has given us in class and I am not totally for
sure what we can use from what we have so far??? So, if you come up with
anything let us know!
S1: Hello everyone! I just thought we might all need to start figuring out how we want
to go about doing this group project. Do you all want to come up with our own
thing and then put it together? Or, do you all think we should split things up in
some way? Let me know what you all want to do and I am going to start working
on ideas of what I think the family (we were assigned to in our project) needs. I
hope everyone is enjoying their summers! (pp. 41–42)
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

Struggling to find one’s role

The theme of struggling to find one’s role described processes used to discover, under-
stand, and clarify individual roles within a group without clearly stating or defining
specific roles. This was frequently observed when no clear leader had emerged from
the group, or when the group had not discussed roles or group project expectations
upfront in their discussion threads. The following quote and conversation illustrate this
theme.

Quote 1:

I just read some more comments and am a bit confused. Have we chatted and divided the
work up yet? If not, I am free most evenings with enough notice. I get done with work
at 5:30 then head out of town where I have no Internet access so earlier is better for me,
but I can wait around town if need be. Thanks. (p. 16)

Quote 2:

S1: I was not saying that is the outline to be turned in, but just some of my ideas
about how we should approach each requirement for our outline. Just trying to
help is all … is this still confusing? Also, for your outline E., what is your
question that you are answering with your thesis statement? … Who is going to
pull together our entire outline? Does anyone have any sources they are willing to
cite and add to it?
S2: The intro I wrote is for the whole paper. L is going to copy and paste everything
into word and turn it in tonight. I’m still confused on your outline. Did you already
turn something into the dropbox just from yourself, or is your post what she should
add?? (pp. 478–479)

Evolution of individual roles within the group

Results of our analysis indicate that individual student roles evolved during the
process of completing the group project. Students rarely discussed specific roles, or
took time to assign roles. Rather, roles were created as the group process unfolded.
These roles were leader, wannabe, spoiler, agreeable enabler, coat-tails, and
supportive worker. They are defined and illustrated with quotes in the following
sections.
 54 K.C. Williams et al.

Leader
The role of leader was defined as one who facilitates and keeps the group on task. The
following quotes illustrate the role of leader:

Quote 1:

Hey guys, because we have to turn in our thesis/introductory paragraph on Monday we

should really get our thesis decided on and our paragraph going. Maybe our thesis statement
could go along these lines: ‘Children involved in sports and good eating habits will later
demonstrate a healthier lifestyle …’ Any other ideas, or rewording of these ideas? (p. 316)

Quote 2:

To ease the process of this group paper, I think we should do the Group Work sugges-
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

tions: Define the essential tasks. What tasks need to be done to bring the project to a
successful completion? Identify these and make the list together, and do it before you
start deciding who does what. It’s important to have a roadmap that you all agree with
before beginning. Put these in writing so everyone has the same information at the same
time. Identify each participant’s role. Who is going to be responsible for what? Use each
others’ strengths to your advantage as any successful team does. Ask yourselves: Do we
need a team leader who’ll keep things and individuals on tasks? Do we need a recorder?
A researcher or more than one? Someone good at graphics? Think broadly and be sure
the roles fit the essential tasks you have identified, and that each person is making an
equal, important contribution. Add these to the written essential tasks and be sure all
group members know them. Set a realistic timeline that allows the project to be done in
time (and with time to fix, redo, or create documents that the group reviews). Create the
timeline so that everyone knows then their task must be completed, when the group is
going to meet, when the feedback needs to be given, and when the finished project needs
to be submitted. Put it in writing. What do you all think about this? (p. 241)

Wannabe
The role of wannabe describes the role taken on by an individual who tries to control
the group without taking responsibility – in other words, they wannabe a leader in
appearance without doing the actual work required. The quotes below illustrate
interactions typical of a wannabe.

Quote 1:

It sounds like everyone has their topic, but correct me if I’m wrong … I am a little
confused on some of the topics so I put down what I thought everyone is going to work
on so just let me know for sure! (p. 318)

Quote 2:

I think that sounds good! I found a stat that said 25 million children in the US are over-
weight. Do you think we could/should add that in somewhere? That is a stunning number
and might help with the intro. (p. 307)

Quote 3:

Hey, ____. I think we’re thinking along the same lines! I was writing down some ideas
too when I read your post, so I tried to incorporate your thesis. Mine is more of a whole
introduction. It is a rough draft so let me know what you think should be changed. I’m
 Distance Education 55

not that great at coming up with thesis statements so I just wrote a paragraph. We should
try to revise it a bit so the thesis stands out more. Also I came up with the quality of life
thing when I was typing since that is one of FCS’s major missions. Here is what I came
up with, let me know any suggestions … (p. 307)

Spoiler
The spoiler role describes a very infrequent participant who comes in and out and expects
that others work around what they want to do, without regard for previous work already
being done or roles already in progress. The following quotes illustrate this role.

Quote 1:

[This first posting occurred on 2 June, when others had begun on 22 May and a leader was
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

already established and sections and issues assigned.] I guess I am not sure if the proactive
parents part of our paper is covered or not, so if it isn’t then I can definitely cover that
section. If someone is already doing that, I would like to give information and statistics
about why nutrition and exercise is important for kids.… I think we should all post our part
of the introduction on the TD [threaded discussion] and then one person needs to volunteer
to put the paragraph together. I have no problem doing it if need be. (p. 318)

Quote 2:

Hi everyone. Since my focus is Child development, I will do the section on interaction

of the child with family and community members. Should we all start posting our
portions here when we get them done, then we can put it all together? Let me know what
you think. I’ll get my part done as soon as possible. [Another student had already chosen
this area with agreement from the others.] (pp. 279–280)

Quote 3:

Ok, so I have read over the paper and added a few comments. I’m sorry if any of my
comments offend anyone, but I’m a communications major so I pick through papers.
There are a couple of things I wanted to point out: 1. In the family description that Dr.
__ gave us, it’s said as Downs Syndrome and our paper has Down Syndrome throughout
it, so I changed them all to Downs; 2. When citing in text, there needs to be commas
separating the author and the page numbers and also it needs to be consistent whether or
not you use p. or not to abbreviate page or just put the number, that was also inconsistent
throughout. I will attach the part that I have added and my comments, but you guys do
not have to change anything if you don’t agree with it, I was just pointing it out. Also, I
need a little help with my part because I’m not too sure on how in-depth I am supposed
to go. So just let me know what you guys think, I am pretty much done with it but I just
wanted to make sure before I submitted it. Thanks, and I hope I didn’t make anyone mad
with my suggestions. (p. 36)

Agreeable enabler
An agreeable enabler is one who goes along with all suggestions even when tasks shift
and continues to do the work for others, letting others get away with work avoidance.
The following quotes illustrate the role of the agreeable enabler.

Quote 1:

S1: So are we waiting for C? T [leader] is not coming, right?

S2: Ah, here C is now.
 56 K.C. Williams et al.

S3: Hey guys. I am here, but I have a family emergency. I have to go. Sorry. Email me
with any suggestions and I will email back tonight.
S2: Since there are two people missing, I could just write a quick email with the
suggestions K and I found after we wrote up the paper and we could just postpone
this to next Sunday. What do you guys want to do? (p. 163)

Quote 2:

S1: If we don’t give ____ something else to do it may not be fair. She won’t have a
chance to ever do anything since her section was the wrong one, she hasn’t chat-
ted, and I’d take over her assignment.
S2: What do you think? It’s still important to get it done.
S1: Maybe after that rough draft we can see how much needs to be done and offer her
a chance to do some of it to catch up.
S3: I missed all that … she’s not coming?
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

S1: There was an email from her about an hour ago you could read … basically she
did the wrong topic so we have 2 ‘social’ sections. And she’s missing the chat to
study for a test.
S3: That’s not right. I’m at work and still managing to chat.
S4: I feel very strongly that this should be a total group effort, and the problems ____
has run into are unfortunate, but maybe we should see what we can do to help her
get back on track. (p. 127)

Coat-tails
The role of coat-tails describes an individual who tries to appear to be an active
participant, but in reality, does little to no work. The following quotes illustrate
this role.

Quote 1:

Hey! This is what I have so far. I didn’t get to the outline part of it, because I wasn’t sure
if they wanted us to do a numerical outline of just a summary! … I think it looks perfect!
Great job ladies!! I’ll put it in the drop box if you want, since we seem to be going in
turn! Hahaha!! (p. 455)

Quote 2:

[The student below is commenting on another student who has posted minimally. When
things were posted, the postings were late and weren’t incorporated into the project, but
the student expected to get credit, showing a coat-tails role.]

I think this all looks good. I just want to point out that once again the only person that
has not contributed by the deadline is _____. I think that this is a serious problem. I
would also like to point out that although she has posted a few times she hasn’t really
added anything at all to the process. Let me know if you ladies don’t feel the same way.
(p. 262)

Supportive worker
The supportive worker role defines an individual who understands assignment criteria
and the group dynamics, follows through, and takes initiative to ensure the group’s
success. The following quotes illustrate this role:
 Distance Education 57

Quote 1:

Here are some areas in the library that I searched ERIC, Education Abstracts, and
teacher reference center. How can I help to set up the outline? I like the topic or thesis
that (name of group leader) came up with. Did you see my additional ideas that I
emailed? (p. 557)

I guess just let me know if you think these areas of the research are what we are looking
for! I will help in whatever way I can and can write up more of the factual points of the
research to be included in the fact sheet as you mentioned! I’ll check back soon to make
sure I am on the same page as everyone! (p. 87)

Quote 2:

Hi, ____. I don’t mind doing the paper portion. I’ll just take the most important points
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

and outline as the power point will go. I am pretty knowledgeable about power point but
I am not sure how to put them all together! Hopefully someone else here has more
ability! (p. 88)

Discussion
The goal of this study was to explore the process of group role formation in online
class settings. Results reveal that roles in online groups emerge in a process of give
and take, sometimes almost by accident. Students make tentative comments to test
roles within groups and struggle to find roles without providing clear labels or defini-
tions of roles; and roles that are assigned (namely, the leader role) tend to be assigned
by default. Many students are reluctant leaders, taking on the role when no one else
will. One student expressed this particularly well when she said:
I would rather not be leader, because I am very comfortable in that role and would actu-
ally like to learn how to be more of a ‘team player’ and take the lead from other people,
I nominate you, __, as the group leader for the reason that you are not comfortable with
that role. You can use this as a great opportunity to learn a lot about yourself! If you need
advice, you can always ask me – I’d be more than happy to help you! (p. 242)
Yet she reluctantly assumed the role of leader anyway, since everyone saw her as
being the one to organize, stay on task, and get things done.
Our research also shows that students use apologies to couch or reframe interac-
tions as they work to develop roles, often as excuses but sometimes to maintain what
they see as positive working relationships. This supports other studies indicating that
women tend to want to avoid confrontation or critique of others if they think it will
jeopardize relationships (Cooney, Quoss, & Williams, 1999; Magolda, 1992; Quoss,
Williams, & Cooney, 2000; Wood, 2005). Wolf (2008) saw the application of
women’s socialization around sensitivity and caring as:
Women are socialized around process tasks of taking turns, listening, connecting, reach-
ing consensus, among others … Women may also devote cognitive time to thinking
about hurt feelings, what people meant by comments, whether or not they are liked by
peers, and whether others are being included. (p. 155)
Students, particularly female students, need to be helped to understand the benefits
of constructive feedback, ways to give feedback in a way that will be accepted and
understood, and the importance of feedback as part of group processes and leadership
development.
 58 K.C. Williams et al.

The six roles that were identified in our study fit the traditional (Benne & Sheats,
1948) categories of task (leader, supportive worker), personal/social (agreeable
enabler), or individualistic (coat-tails, spoiler, wannabe). The fact that three of the
roles that emerged can be classified as individualistic in nature is indicative of the
challenges many students appear to face in completing online group projects. One
explanation for this phenomenon can be found in the literature on differences in learn-
ing styles, expectations, and values among different generations (Carlson, 2005;
Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005; Skiba & Barton, 2006; Windham, 2005). Oblinger and
Oblinger identified a classification system differentiating Matures (1900–46),
Boomers (1946–64), Generation X (1965–82), and the Net Generation/Millennials
(1982–91). Students in this study spanned all but the Matures generation. Of particular
note is a tendency for Generation X students to feel a sense of privilege and entitle-
ment coupled with a strong sense of competence, while Net Generation students tend
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

to like anonymity and are assertive and confident (Tapscott, 1998). Both have a
tendency toward individualism, while Boomers are more likely to be team and process
oriented. In an online setting with learners from a variety of generations, the process
of forming groups may be even more complex. This may cause increased frustration
and confusion over roles and responsibilities, as well as potential difficulties with
understanding communication styles and contexts.
It is also important to note that many of the roles we identified cannot be seen as
positively contributing to the success of the group, similar to those identified by Benne
and Sheats (1948). Many schema for categorizing group roles focus on the positive
aspects of those roles rather than on the potential problems that can develop when indi-
viduals create roles for themselves or when roles develop that are not beneficial or are
maladaptive. Table 1 (modified and expanded from Belbin, 2001) illustrates these key
differences, comparing our findings with those of roles that have been identified in the
business and group training literature. Negative roles are indicated in bold.
The roles that emerged as the group process developed in our study mirror the
roles that have been suggested by others (Belbin, 1981; Benne & Sheats, 1948; Fran-
cis & Young, 1992; Margerison & McCann, 1985; Mumma, 1984; Wells, 1988). Yet
they allow for more subtle nuances regarding the valence (positive or negative) of
these roles to be highlighted. To fully implement and reap the benefits of working in
groups, instructors must be attentive to the positive and negative aspects of group
work, and design educational strategies to most effectively enhance learning.

Implications for practice and future research

Our results lend support for a balance between an approach that allows undergraduate
students to create and experience roles on their own and one in which faculty assign
roles and direct the group process in online settings. As faculty members work on indi-
vidual courses or as part of departmental curriculum teams, it is important to discuss
the following issues related to the formation of group processes and the development
of roles in online group projects:

● Can we assume that students will transfer group skills from the face-to-face
environment to the online environment? Where are they getting skill develop-
ment related to group processes: departmental courses, required general educa-
tion courses, courses identified by individual instructors? As Meyers and Jones
(1993) pointed out, “We cannot assume that students have all the necessary
 Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

Table 1. Team role comparisons.

Benne and Sheats Cameron,
(1948) Mumma Margerison and Francis and Young Williams, and
(partial list) Belbin (1981) (1984) McCann (1985) Wells (1988) (1992) Morgan (2010)
Initiator-Contributor Plant Creator Creator Innovators Idea Developer Concept Developer
Information Seeker Resource Innovator Explorer Promoters External Promoter
Investigator Contact
Coordinator Chairman Leader Chairperson Politician Cooperator Leader
Coordinator Leader
Gatekeeper/Expediter Shaper Manager Thruster- Facilitator Radical
Orienter Organizers
Energizer
Elaborator Evaluator- Monitor Evaluator Assessor Quality Critic
Critic Evaluator Developers Controller
Standard- Team Worker Moderator Upholder Team Builder Harmonizer Agreeable
Setter Maintainers Enabler
Harmonizer
Procedural Technician Company Organizer Controller Doer Supportive
Worker Inspectors Worker
Implementer
Completer Finisher Concluder Completer Checker
Finisher Producers Finisher
Group Observer Specialist Recorder/
Secretary
Recorder Reporter-Advisers Socializer
Follower Coat-tails
Recognition Wannabe
Seeker
Distance Education

Aggressor Spoiler
Blocker
59
 60 K.C. Williams et al.

group-interaction skills from the outset” (p. 77). It takes time and mentoring for
students to develop skills, learn to rely on one another, monitor their progress,
and reflect upon what went well or badly so that future group experiences can
improve.
● What is the role of the instructor? Who should be responsible for teaching group
processes, and in what courses? Many curricula within departments and programs
sequence courses to meet learning goals, but group processes may not be examined
as part of a curriculum mapping exercise, or it may be assumed that such topics
and skills are covered in the general education courses required of all majors.
● How should group process and role development be introduced? Should instruc-
tors let students work through role development on their own or should they teach
group roles and processes? Should they assign roles, particularly in initial classes?
● Should a team-based learning approach be used in online classes as advocated
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

by Palsole and Awalt (2008) where students are assigned roles and work in their
teams for all projects, thereby learning course content and group approaches to
problem-solving? Such an approach could involve the changing of roles over
time, either by instructor assignment or naturally as the groups progress.
● As students work through the process of group formation, should they go with
the strengths that are being demonstrated or give group members experiences in
areas where they lack skill? And again, what is the role of the faculty member?
● When negative roles emerge during the online group process, how can the
faculty member intercede or mediate?
To more fully explore group roles and processes in online courses, additional
research needs to be undertaken to investigate the nuances of positive and negative
group roles and the role of the instructor in supporting the development of group roles
and processes. This line of research could be enhanced by gaining additional insight
into the perceptions of faculty members of the importance of group roles and
processes in online group projects.
In addition, further studies need to be undertaken to examine more fully the differ-
ences in male and female perceptions of roles. In particular, in courses that are
predominately female, the role of gender imbalance should be examined. From the
data in this study, it is possible that males may have felt intimidated or marginalized,
leading to a lesser feeling of connectedness or commitment to their group project
(Rovai & Baker, 2005).
The results of this study suggest a need for balance between an approach that
allows students to create and experience roles on their own and an approach in which
faculty assign roles and direct the group process. Furthermore, the developmental
needs of students in terms of being exposed to and learning group roles should be
considered. Students should be exposed to concepts of group roles and effective group
processes in freshman- or sophomore-level classes, and these concepts built on as
students progress through their coursework. Students may enter the online setting with
a range of backgrounds and exposure to group work in volunteer or professional
settings; however, providing guidelines and information on successful group work
will ensure that all students have the tools needed to benefit from group work.

Acknowledgement
Partial funding for the research was provided by a grant from the University of Wyoming
Outreach School.
 Distance Education 61

Notes on contributors
Karen C. Williams is a professor of child development at the University of Wyoming. Her
research interests include pre-service preparation of early childhood educators, distance educa-
tion, and multiculturalism and diversity issues.

Kari Morgan is an assistant professor of family and consumer sciences at the University of
Wyoming. Her research interests focus on the issues and challenges faced by rural families, and
the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Bruce A. Cameron is an associate professor of family and consumer sciences at the University
of Wyoming. His research interests include the evaluation of the effectiveness of domestic
laundry detergents, the yellowing propensity of US wool, and teaching in an online setting.

References
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

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. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00435.x
Belbin, M. (1981). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. Burlington, MA: Butter-
worth Heinemann.
Belbin, M. (1996–2001). Team role descriptions. Retrieved from http://www.belbin.com/
content/page/2944/BELBIN%20Team%20Role%20Summary%20Descriptions.pdf
Belbin, M. (2001). Different team-role models. Retrieved from http://www.belbinfrance.com/
cms/cmsfiles/Later%20versions%20of%20Belbin%20Team%20Roles.pdf
Benne, K., & Sheats, P. (1948, Spring). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social
Issues, 4(2), 41–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1948.tb01783.x
Cameron, B.A., Morgan, K., Williams, K.C., & Kostelecky, K.L. (2009). Group projects:
Student perceptions of the relationship between social tasks and a sense of community in
online group work. The American Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 20–33. doi:
10.1080/08923640802664466
Cameron, C., Williams, K.C., & Morgan, K. (2010). Emergence of roles in online group
projects: Student definitions? Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on
Education, Honolulu, HI.
Carlson, S. (2005, October 7). The net generation goes to college. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 52(7), A34. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/
Cooney, M.H., Quoss, B., & Williams, K.C. (1999, Fall). Intellectual foundations for teaching
ethical decision-making to college students. Teaching & Learning: The Journal of Natu-
ral Inquiry, 14(1), 5–15.
Dawson, S. (2006, July). A study of the relationship between student communication interac-
tion and sense of community. Internet & Higher Education, 9(3), 153–162. doi: 10.1016/
j.iheduc.2006.06.007
Fisher, M., Thompson, G.S., & Silverberg, D.A. (2004–2005). Effective group dynamics in e-
learning: Case study. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(3), 205–222. doi:
10.2190/YTJ7-PLQB-VNDV-71UU
Francis, D., & Young, D. (1992). The team review survey. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Garrison, D.R., Cleveland-Innes, M., Koole, M., & Kappelman, J. (2006). Revisiting method-
ological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability. Internet & Higher
Education, 9(1), 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.001
Gunwardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the
development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of
knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research,
17(4), 397–491. doi: 102190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAG
Hood, G. (1997, August). Teaming with ideas. People Management, 3(17), 36–38.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Liu, X., Magijuka, R.J., Bonk, C.J., & Lee, S. (2007, Spring). Does sense of community
matter? Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(1), 9–24. Retrieved from http://
www.infoagepub.com/Quarterly-Review-of-Distance-Education.html
 62 K.C. Williams et al.

Magolda, M.B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-related patterns in

students’ intellectual development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Margerison, C.J., & McCann, D.J. (1985). Team management profiles: Their use in managerial
development. Journal of Management Development, 4(2), 34–37. doi: 10.1108/eb051580
Meyers, C., & Jones, T.B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college class-
room. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mumma, F. (1984). Team-work & team roles inventory. King of Prussia, PA: HRDQ.
Oblinger, D.G., & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds.). (2005). Educating the next generation. Washington,
DC: Educause.
Ouzts, K. (2006). Sense of community in online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 7(3), 285–296. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/Quarterly-Review-
of-Distance-Education.html
Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective
strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Palsole, S., & Awalt, C. (2008, Winter). Team-based learning in asynchronous online settings.
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 116, 87–95. doi: 10.1002/tl.336
Downloaded by [University of New England] at 02:23 09 June 2016

Quoss, B., Williams, K.C., & Cooney, M. (2000, July). Promoting students’ intellectual devel-
opment: A qualitative study of teaching practices. Family Science Review, 13(1–2), 31–43.
Retrieved from http://www.familyscienceassociation.org/FSR132000.php
Rovai, A. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research
in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1), 1–16. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.
php/irrodl
Rovai, A., & Baker, J.D. (2005). Gender differences in online learning: Sense of community,
perceived learning, and interpersonal interactions. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 6(1), 31–44. Retrieved from http://www.infoagepub.com/Quarterly-Review-
of-Distance-Education.html
Rovai, A.P., & Barnum, K.T. (2003, Spring). On-line course effectiveness: An analysis of
student interactions and perceptions of learning. Journal of Distance Education, 18(1),
57–73. Retrieved from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde
Shin, N., & Chan, J.K.Y. (2004). Direct and indirect effects of online learning on distance
education. British Journal of Education Technology, 35(3), 275–288. doi: 10.1111/j.0007-
1013.2004.00389.x
Skiba, D.J., & Barton, A.J. (2006). Adapting your teaching to accommodate the net genera-
tion of learners. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 11(2), 15. doi: 10.3912/OJIN.
Vol11No02Man04
Strijbos, J., Martens, R., Jochems, W.M.G., & Broers, N.J. (2004, April). The effect of func-
tional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to
investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research,
35(2), 195–229. doi: 10.1177/1046496403260843
Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tuckman, B.W., & Jensen, M.A.C. (1977, December). Stages of small-group development revis-
ited. Group & Organizational Studies, 2, 419–427. doi: 10.1177/105960117700200404
Wells, B. (1988). Working with our publics: In-service education for cooperative extension,
module 5 – Working with groups and organizations. Raleigh: North Carolina State
University, Department of Adult & Community College Education.
Wheelen, S.A., Murphy, D., Tsumura, E., & Kline, S.F. (1998, June). Member perceptions of
internal group dynamics and productivity. Small Group Research, 29(3), 371–393. doi:
10.1177/1046496498293005
Williams, K.C. (2002). Using group projects to enhance online learning. Journal of Teaching
in Marriage and Family, 2(1), 115–121.
Windham, C. (2005). The student’s perspective. In D.G. Oblinger & J.L. Oblinger (Eds.),
Educating the next generation. Washington, DC: Educause. Retrieved from http://
www.educause.edu/TheStudent%27sPerspective.6061
Wolf, S. (2008). Peer groups: Expanding our study of small group communication. Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Wood, J.T. (2005). Gendered lives: Communication, gender, and culture (6th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Thomson Wadsworth Learning.