Share, Rotate, Split: The Effects of Group Work Role Distributions on Student Outcomes
Jacob Feinleib, Matthew Dew, and N.G. Holmes

TL;DR
This study evaluates how different role distribution strategies in physics lab groups affect student attitudes and outcomes, revealing that sharing roles generally benefits student attitudes while splitting roles may have negative effects.
Contribution
It expands prior research by analyzing a broader range of role distributions across multiple student outcomes using data from two institutions.
Findings
Sharing roles positively influence student attitudes.
Splitting roles tend to negatively affect attitudes.
Rotating roles have intermediate effects.
Abstract
Education literature recommends many different strategies for structuring student group work in labs. Many of these strategies, however, have not been sufficiently evaluated for their effects on student outcomes. One prior study suggested that sharing roles, rather than splitting roles, in lab groups can boost students' physics interest and self-efficacy. Here, we expand upon this literature by evaluating the effects of a broader range of role distributions across several student outcomes from a large sample at two different institutions. We developed a survey item to probe the ways students distribute their roles in lab groups. The item asks for the percent of time in lab they spent working together on lab roles (sharing), working alone on roles but rotating each session (rotating), and working alone in the same role throughout the semester (splitting). We employed hierarchical linear…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsScience Education and Pedagogy · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Various Chemistry Research Topics
