Interrelation between regulatory and socioemotional processes within collaborative groups characterized by facilitative and directive other-regulation

Group other-regulators largely set the socioemotional climate in the group.Other-regulatory moves are coordinated with how they foster group interactions.Directive other-regulator had highly critical and exclusionary interactions.Facilitative other-regulator was proactive in promoting mutual respect and inclusion.Analysis of evolving use of these processes showed differences in other-regulation. Research emphasizes cognitive processes as they occur in social contexts. In light of this focus, it is critical that we also consider the social interactions and interpersonal dynamics that contribute to group activity (Barron, 2003). Previous findings differentiate a guiding form of other-regulation conceptualized in the extant literature (i.e., facilitative other-regulation), from a directive form during which a group member manages and controls the regulatory processes for the group (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2014; Volet & Mansfield, 2006). The current study aims to investigate whether the interrelations between regulatory processes and their socioemotional interactions, and how they unfold over the course of group activity, differ for groups characterized by facilitative or directive other-regulation. Two small groups of middle school students who varied in their form of other-regulation were observed during three collaborative tasks within an inquiry-based science curricular context. Results indicated that directive other-regulators used primarily negative socioemotional interactions in line with their control-oriented regulatory aims and initiated highly critical exchanges marked by socially comparative remarks, as well as provoked disrespectful reactions from group members. In contrast, facilitative other-regulators proactively fostered positive socioemotional interactions by being inclusive of everyone's ideas and advocating for the respect of alternative perspectives. Taken together, the other-regulator played a predominant role in setting the socioemotional tone and used socioemotional interactions as a means to fulfill regulatory aims.

[1]  M. Vauras,et al.  SHARED-REGULATION AND MOTIVATION OF COLLABORATING PEERS: A CASE ANALYSIS , 2003 .

[2]  Brigid Barron.  Achieving Coordination in Collaborative Problem-Solving Groups , 2000 .

[3]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Social and Cognitive Factors Driving Teamwork in Collaborative Learning Environments , 2006 .

[4]  M. Vauras,et al.  Self- and Social Regulation in Learning Contexts: An Integrative Perspective , 2009 .

[5]  Toni Kempler Rogat,et al.  Socially Shared Regulation in Collaborative Groups: An Analysis of the Interplay Between Quality of Social Regulation and Group Processes , 2011 .

[6]  Toni Kempler Rogat,et al.  Affect and engagement during small group instruction , 2011 .

[7]  Céline Darnon,et al.  Dealing with a disagreeing partner: Relational and epistemic conflict elaboration , 2007 .

[8]  N. Webb,et al.  The Development of Students' Helping Behavior and Learning in Peer-Directed Small Groups , 2003 .

[9]  H. Schweingruber,et al.  TAKING SCIENCE TO SCHOOL: LEARNING AND TEACHING SCIENCE IN GRADES K-8 , 2007 .

[10]  Hanna Järvenoja,et al.  Socio-emotional conflict in collaborative learning—A process-oriented case study in a higher education context , 2014 .

[11]  S. Volet,et al.  Group work does not necessarily equal collaborative learning: evidence from observations and self-reports , 2010 .

[12]  Karin S. Frey,et al.  Predicting changes in children's self-perceptions of academic competence: a naturalistic examination of evaluative discourse among classmates. , 2002, Developmental psychology.

[13]  G. Salomon,et al.  When teams do not function the way they ought to , 1989 .

[14]  Jennifer M. Langer-Osuna,et al.  Toward a Model of Influence in Persuasive Discussions: Negotiating Quality, Authority, Privilege, and Access Within a Student-Led Argument , 2014 .

[15]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[16]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  The Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving , 1995 .

[17]  Sanna Järvelä,et al.  Socially Constructed Self-Regulated Learning and Motivation Regulation in Collaborative Learning Groups , 2011, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[18]  S. Schneider,et al.  Experiencing Diversity, Conflict, and Emotions in Teams , 2003 .

[19]  Hanna Järvenoja,et al.  Emotion control in collaborative learning situations: do students regulate emotions evoked by social challenges? , 2009, The British journal of educational psychology.

[20]  M. Vauras,et al.  Socially shared metacognition of dyads of pupils in collaborative mathematical problem-solving processes , 2011 .

[21]  Brigid Barron.  When Smart Groups Fail , 2003 .

[22]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  Knowledge Building: Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology , 2006 .

[23]  M. Vauras,et al.  Social Interaction - What Can It Tell Us about Metacognition and Coregulation in Learning? , 2005 .

[24]  Michel Ferrari,et al.  Epistemology and Science Education: Understanding the Evolution Vs , 2010 .

[25]  Toni Kempler Rogat,et al.  Other-regulation in collaborative groups: implications for regulation quality , 2014 .

[26]  A. Hadwin,et al.  Self-Regulation, Coregulation, and Socially Shared Regulation: Exploring Perspectives of Social in Self-Regulated Learning Theory , 2011 .

[27]  Billie Eilam,et al.  Students’ planning in the process of self-regulated learning , 2003 .

[28]  Nicole B. Kersting,et al.  Help seeking in cooperative learning groups , 2013 .

[29]  Annemarie S. Palincsar,et al.  Group processes in the classroom. , 1996 .

[30]  Lisa Linnenbrink-Garcia,et al.  Academic Emotions and Student Engagement , 2012 .

[31]  K. Kumpulainen,et al.  The situated dynamics of peer group interaction: an introduction to an analytic framework , 1999 .

[32]  Clark A. Chinn,et al.  Differences in epistemic practices among scientists, young earth creationists, intelligent design creationists, and the scientist-creationists of Darwin's era , 2011 .

[33]  S. Volet,et al.  High-Level Co-Regulation in Collaborative Learning: How Does It Emerge and How Is It Sustained?. , 2009 .

[34]  S. Volet,et al.  Group work at university: significance of personal goals in the regulation strategies of students with positive and negative appraisals , 2006 .

[35]  Ravit Golan Duncan,et al.  A microgenetic classroom study of learning to reason scientifically through modeling and argumentation , 2008, ICLS.

[36]  E. Mannix,et al.  The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance. , 2001 .

[37]  Ravit Golan Duncan,et al.  Promoting Middle School Students’ Understandings of Molecular Genetics , 2011 .