Improving the Performance of Online Learning Teams: A Discourse Analysis

This paper compares the processes of Face-To-Face (FTF) teams and Online Learning Teams (OLTs) and proposes methods to improve the performance of OLTs. An empirical study reviewed the performance of fifteen FTF teams and OLTs and their communication patterns were coded by the TEMPO system developed by Futoran et al. (1989) in order to develop a discourse analysis for each team. The results confirmed that FTF teams outperformed OLTs and identified four approaches to improve the performance of OLTs: (1) Posting well-organized information; (2) Increasing “process gain” activities and decreasing “process loss” activities; (3) Instructions and facilitation to promote the discussion of process and content equally and facilitate better communication patterns; (4) Minimizing members’ absences. These are reviewed and practical solutions proposed.

[1]  Bernard C. Y. Tan,et al.  A dialogue technique to enhance electronic communication in virtual teams , 2000 .

[2]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , 2000 .

[3]  J. Fleiss.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1974 .

[4]  Abbey L. Casper-Curtis.  VIRTUAL TEAM DEVELOPMENT IN A COLLEGE COURSE SETTING , 2002 .

[5]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  Computer-mediated and face-to-face groups: who makes riskier decisions? , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[6]  Merrill Warkentin,et al.  Virtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-based Conference System* , 1997 .

[7]  Linda M. Harasim,et al.  Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment , 1990 .

[8]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. , 2002 .

[9]  C. Fulford,et al.  Perceptions of Interaction: The critical predictor in distance education , 1993 .

[10]  Daniel V. Eastmond.  Alone but Together: Adult Distance Study through Computer Conferencing , 1995 .

[11]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  The Virtual Classroom: Learning Without Limits Via Computer Networks , 1994 .

[12]  Farhad Moeeni,et al.  Comparing Web-Based Content Delivery and Instructor-Led Learning in a Telecommunications Course , 2005, J. Inf. Syst. Educ..

[13]  Frances Slack,et al.  Collaboration and Teamwork: Immersion and Presence in an Online Learning Environment , 2005, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[14]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  A comparative content analysis of face-to-face vs. ALN-mediated teamwork , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[15]  Blake Ives,et al.  Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research , 2004, DATB.

[16]  P. M. Alexander,et al.  Towards reconstructing meaning when text is communicated electronically , 2003 .

[17]  Ramesh Sharda,et al.  Decision support system effectiveness: a review and an empirical test , 1988 .

[18]  Rudy Hirschheim,et al.  A paradigmatic and methodological examination of information systems research from 1991 to 2001 , 2004, Inf. Syst. J..

[19]  Janice R. Kelly,et al.  TEMPO: A Time-based System for Analysis of Group Interaction Process , 1989 .

[20]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Do mediated contexts differ in information richness? A comparison of collocated and dispersed meetings , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[21]  Mingming Jiang,et al.  A Study of Factors Influencing Students’ Perceived Learning in a Web-Based Course Environment , 2000 .

[22]  F. Anderson,et al.  The impact of netcentricity on virtual teams: the new performance challenge , 2002 .

[23]  Merrill Warkentin,et al.  Training to improve virtual team communication , 1999, Inf. Syst. J..

[24]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Situated learning in cross-functional virtual teams , 2000 .

[25]  Diane M. Christophel.  The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning , 1990 .

[26]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Message Equivocality, Media Selection, and Manager Performance: Implications for Information Systems , 1987, MIS Q..

[27]  Karen Swan,et al.  Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses , 2001 .

[28]  D. Garrison,et al.  Assessing Social Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing , 1999 .

[29]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[30]  William H. DeLone,et al.  Global boundaries, task processes and IS project success: a field study , 2006, Inf. Technol. People.

[31]  Jolene Galegher,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication for Intellectual Teamwork: An Experiment in Group Writing , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[32]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Durability of online teamworking: patterns of trust , 2006, Inf. Technol. People.

[33]  E. Salas,et al.  Virtual Teams: Effects of Technological Mediation on Team Performance , 2003 .

[34]  Patricia Kearney,et al.  Clarifying the relationship between teacher nonverbal immediacy and student cognitive learning: Affective learning as the central causal mediator , 1996 .

[35]  C. Gersick.  Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development , 1988 .

[36]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[37]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Technology, Group Process, and Group Outcomes: Testing the Connections in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Groups , 1997, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[38]  Brian R. Dineen.  Teamxchange: A Team Project Experience Involving Virtual Teams and Fluid Team Membership , 2005 .

[39]  Min Liu,et al.  The Effects of Electronic Collaboration in Distributed Project Management , 2006 .