Practicum Week : 9

Date: 10th September 2021

Journal Topic : The issue of social-loafing and free-rider effect

1. Isu Yang Difokuskan :

The issue that I want to highlight this week is about social-loafing and free-rider effect.
According to Business Dictionary (n.d.), it has been stated that social-loafing means: “It
is a tendency of certain members of a group to get by with less effort than what they
would have put when working alone. Its two common manifestations are free-rider effect,
where some members do not put in their share of work under the assumption that others'
efforts will cover their shortfall and thus cause sucker effect, where the other (fully
performing) member lower their efforts in response to the free-riders' attitude.”

Certain occurrences that I had encountered whilst observing them executing group
discussion in the classroom are, I observed there were certain pupils who did not
contribute or only did little contribution to the discussion and did something else instead
for instance, like chatting with other friends in the Google Meet chatbox. I also witnessed
how they just wait for the other students' response and type out a similar answer as the
others.

As a teacher, I do not want this kind of incident to occur in the classroom as it paves
ways for pupils to come out with excuses of not doing their part. Other than that, it could
affect the dynamics of the pupils as a whole and sparks resentment between one
another. When certain individuals are seen as weak contributors to the group purpose, it
tends to split the group and fosters a lack of cohesion (Gilles, 2017). When the
distinction between the active and passive students are too obvious, the motivated pupils
will start to deliberately reduce their workload as not want to feel as they are being
exploited by the less motivated ones. As stated by Gilles, (2017): “While there is a
disparity of effort between members of a group, individuals start to gauge their own effort
based on what others are doing instead of maintaining a standard of excellence towards
achieving the goal. This lowers the level of satisfaction for the task in all members of the
group.”

Collaborative learning is highly stressed in 21st century classroom as it brings numerous

pros but no doubt the cons are also there. According to Davis, (1999): “Studies have
shown that group work offers great possibilities for deeper learning compared to some
more traditional teaching formats but it can also lead to some new problems such as
free-riding.” In order for me to make the best out of the collaborative learning and get the
pupils to engage actively in the lesson, I opt to analyze the factors that contribute to this
matter and ways to combat this problem. Students’ participation are necessary to ensure
the success of the lesson.

2. Analisis Isu Yang Difokuskan (Punca dan Kesan Isu) :

One of the factors that encourage social-loafing is the group size. According to Simms &
Nichols (2014), a research done by Maximilien Ringelmann showed that when a group of
people collectively pulled on a rope, the output was less than when group members
individually pulled on a rope. Those participants who pulled alone exerted a mean force
of 85.3 kg per person. When participants pulled in 7- and 14-person groups, the mean
force exerted per person was 65.0 kg and 61.4 kg, respectively.
The same scenario happened in online class. When there is a group discussion ongoing,
certain pupils may feel that the work of their the other students will be enough to
successfully accomplish the task at hand, thus individual effort decreases as the result.
The responsibility of the pupils become less obvious and as a consequence, the
solidarity in the group decreases. The contribution level decreases exponentially as the
number of group members increases (Jaques, 2006).

The second factor that promotes social-loafing and free riding is low level of motivation
faced by the pupils. An absence of motivation prompts poor group participation. Another
reason for low motivation is when pupils think the task or the group’s purpose is not
worth their time and energy. Not only that, when pupils who hate group works and had
decided from the start that they do not want to participate are assigned to work in
groups, they will often look for ways to assume the least amount of responsibility and
contribute as little as possible (Gilles, 2017).

Another factor is the domination of the active students. When there are certain pupils
who monopolize the task in a group; not letting others have a say that will overpower the
contribution of the others. As a result, they may feel discouraged and eventually
withdraw, feeling no need to participate because the dominant student is so brilliant
(Weaver, 2005).

3. Kajian Lampau (Literature Reiview) Terhadap Isu (Pengalaman atau Kajian

Lepas) :

Pupils’ engagement should be optimized in teaching and learning session aligned with
the 21st century learning. Teacher should play their role in making this happen and
produce well-rounded students, who are not only good at academics but also
manner/conscience; gives full commitment when working with other people. Students,
with the proper help, can be guided toward greater autonomy and take on a greater
responsibility for their own education if instructors provide them with useful, engaging,
and relevant tasks to accomplish with their peers (Davis, 1999).

Therefore, I will always improve myself and figure out what I can do to ensure pupils get
maximum input from my teaching.

4. Cadangan dan Idea Penyelesaian Masalah :

In future, there are a few ways that I could use to tackle this problem. I realized this is not
a trivial matter as it could affect the effectiveness of knowledge transmission throughout
the lesson. Therefore, below are my suggestions:

- Keep the team small. Social loafing can also be minimized by limiting the group size,
which makes it harder for social loafers to hide behind other group members. It is for
easier for me to monitor individual input in smaller groups as opposed to bigger groups.
The highest number of members in a group is four as higher number than that creates
opportunity for pupils to free ride.

- Make sure groups are cohesive. Group cohesiveness is important; when cohesiveness
in a group increases, participation increases. Groups formed by the pupils instead of
random assignment by the teacher are assumed to be more cohesive, more productive,
and experience a lower incidence of social loafing (Karns, 2006)

- Add peer evaluations during the group projects. By doing this, every pupil is aware that
they are being observed and judged by their group members. Thus, it can act as a signal
for the free-riders that there will be consequences for nonparticipation.
 - Make the task more meaningful. Pupils tend to slack off when they don’t feel that the
task matters. When they recognize the importance of their efforts, they tend to work
harder and smarter.

5. Tempoh Masa Penyelesaian : 1 Week

6. Tindakan Susulan :

I will try to conduct the suggestions to see the extent on how it will positively impact my
teaching. I realize that some students seem to slack off because they are uninterested
towards learning English language. Therefore, as a teacher, I will carry the responsibility
to make my students participate as much as possible to ensure optimal learning.

Rujukan :

Business Dictionary. (n.d). Social-loafing. Retrieved from

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/social-loafing.html

Davis, B. G. (1999). Cooperative learning: students working in small groups in speaking

of teaching: Standford University Newsletter on Teaching. 10 (2), 1-4

Gilles, G. (2017). Social Loafing: Definition, Examples & Theory. Retrieved from
http://study.com/academy/lesson/social-loafing-definition-examples-theory.html

Jacques, D. (2006). Learning in groups: A handbook for face-to-face and online

environments. Abingdon: Routledge.

Karns, GL. (2006). Learning style differences in the perceived effectiveness of learning
activities. Journal of Marketing Education. 28 (1), 56-63.

Simms, A. & Nichols, T. (2014). Social Loafing. Journal of Management Policy and
Practice, 15(1), 58-67. Retrieved from
http://www.nabusinesspress.com/JMPP/NicholsT_Web15_1_.pdf

Weaver, R. R., Qi, J. (2005). Classroom organization and participation: College students’
perceptions. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(5), 570-601.