Share, rotate, split: The effects of group work role distributions on student outcomes

0Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

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 in a large sample at two different institutions. We developed a survey item to probe the ways in which students distribute their roles in lab groups. The item asks for the percent of time in lab that students 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 modeling to measure the effects of these role distributions on student critical thinking, self-efficacy, perceived agency, sense of belonging, and recognition based on survey items specific to physics lab contexts. We found that role distributions did not differentially impact student critical thinking. We also found that sharing roles tended to have a positive impact on student attitudes; splitting had a negative effect on attitudes; and rotating fell in between. Statistical significance varied across these attitudinal outcomes. Our findings invite further research and controlled studies to better understand the apparent benefits of sharing, rotating, and splitting roles in introductory physics labs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Feinleib, J., Dew, M., & Holmes, N. G. (2026). Share, rotate, split: The effects of group work role distributions on student outcomes. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1103/1n3c-v2fj

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free