[image: Image result for university of education logo]
Name: Muntaha Rizwan
Subject: Teaching of Mathematics
Roll #: Bsf1701574
Topic: The social psychology of online collaborative learning
Submitted To: Sir Shehzada Qaisar
· Collaborative learning
Collaborative learning is a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together. Unlike individual learning, people occupied in collaborative learning capitalize on one another’s resources and ability (asking one another for information, assess one another’s ideas, observe one another’s work, etc.). Collaborative learning raise top surface learning.
· Benefits of collaborative learning:
· Develops higher level thinking abilities.
· Develops information or ideas.
· Develop social interaction skills.
· Cooperative learning is a successful teaching aim in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to better their grip in a subject.
· Social psychological principles:
· Social Loafing
· Increase student’s commitment
· Encourage extensive communication
· Increase team cohesion
· Encourage distributed leadership
One of the more common problem students have about collaborative work is the unfair workload among team members uneven distribution of workload is found in many settings. For example, “slacking” on the part of group members can be found even in such minimal vigorous tasks as clapping in a lab setting and is commonly referred to as social loafing. Social loafing is a matter of extensive less energy on a task than if one were working alone on that same task. One of the primary reason of this situation is scattering of responsibility. Group members believe that someone else from the group or team will apply more energy, or do more work, and make up for their lack of effort. This is one reason that group work can be unsuccessful. Not only does the social loafer not learn the information because they are not concerned in the project, but they force team members to again assignment tasks, as well as handle the resentment involved with the unfairness of this practical.
Make individual team member participating known. One documented tactic involves or arrange the efforts of each team member, such that the participating of each one is understood and known. While making participating known might starting, seem as though we are prescribe cooperative rather than collaborative learning, it does not need have to be cooperative. That is, it might seem as though we are forward that teams divide up tasks and then combine the products, rather than collaborate together on the whole task, but such an approach is not what we are forward. Collaborative participation can also be special For example, individual team members can add their entire team paper using different colored fonts for each person. This “colored editing “approach allows all team members to check over the final product.
Increase student’s commitment:
Another producing action, shown to minimize social loafing in online learning communities is to increase team members’ commitment to the successful finalizing of the task. We depend on the teams themselves to effective this tactic. Often, students want their teachers to fix problems they encounter working as a team. For example, students often consult their professors, complaining that a team member is not participating enough. However, in order for teams to progress and become characterized and functional, team members must solve their own problems. Therefore, if a team member is thought to be social loafing, the other team members must situated this issue with that student.
Encourage extensive communication:
In CORAL, because our teams consist of many students at two sites, we often find that team members from one site sees team members from the other side as social loafers. Thus, team members other side must communicate in great fact to each other, simply what aspect of the project they are working on. This can be done by appoint messages on the teams’ Web-based discussion boards, mentioning it during chat room conferences, or during video conference conversation. Often, students suppose that everyone on the team knows what they are working on, because they have been discussing it at their own site, and make faulty theory, thinking all team members know what each person is finalizing. They supposed that the other site also knows what they are doing, but because the other side does not see them working, the other side develops a simple cognitive distortion, supposing the quality (i.e., that their other side team members are not participating to the finalizing of the assignment). Everything supposed, the more communication team members have with one another, the less likely they will experience confusion as to who is carrying out what task.
Increase team cohesion:
An additional proven action to reduce social loafing is to strengthen group quality. A cohesive team cares about their team members and the successful finalization of their tasks. In order to encourage quality at the beginning of the semester, we encourage teams to determine a team identity, consisting of a team name, logo, and motto. Similarly required his groups of boys to develop team names and flags in his classic study on intergroup dispute. While this may have a minimal effect on team quality, this task does serve an additional reason to get team members from distant sites to begin talking to each other.
Encourage distributed leadership:
Often, online teams believe that they must appoint one person as a leader, and this can become a desired role, because it is conscious in a positive light. Starting, team members think that they have to have one person lead, and do not realize that all team members have to take on leadership responsibility. However, distributive leadership is superior in online collaborative settings. In distributed leadership, all team members share the leadership role, thereby reducing social loafing. Any team member can take it upon him/herself to take action that will help complete tasks successfully and help the team’s development. Distributed leadership suggests that many more people are involved in the leadership activity than might practice be supposed. Thus, team leadership participation that move out should not be limited to a small number of people with ettiqute senior roles. Distributed leadership, then, interest on team skills, rather than individual skills. Student teams must be support to adopt this collaborative leadership style, for it reduces behavior toward social loafing.
Increase intergroup contact. One proven method for minimize social grouping is to increase intergroup contact, referred to as the contact theory. It is essential that all team members communicate largely, in order to reduce other side conflict and standardize. Extensive communication allow team members to see similarities with others, encourage both synchronous and asynchronous communication with other side team members, hence reducing similarity partially. In CORAL, for example, we encourage teams to meet in chat rooms once or twice a week, in addition to meeting via video conference during class time, and utilizing discussion boards for asynchronous communication. It should be noted, however, that in order for increased intergroup contact to have the intended effect, the overall interactions must be neutral to positive. If the majority of other side interactions are unpleasant and negative, the unkindness between groups will remain or increase.
· Introduce superordinate goals:
A second method for reducing social categorization is the introduction of superordinate goals. The introduction of a task that can only be met through the efforts of all team members can significantly reduce the hostility between in-groups and out-groups, and increase team cohesion. By working together, team members begin to know each other as unique individuals, thereby eliminating some of the bias and hostility that is often found in multiple-site learning communities.
· Cognitive distortion:
We’ve mentioned that students often dislike group work because the learner had earlier negative group experiences where they felt responsible for completing all—or most—of the assignment adequately, and without the aid of group members. In some cases, team members believe that others will complete the assignment, and as a result, students fail to contribute. Therefore, other team members have to assume responsibility, and do complete the assignment alone. In other cases, students behave this way due to a lack of confidence in fellow classmates’ ability to complete assignments to their level. They believe that their relevance abilities are superior to those of their member of a team, and that their member of team’ quality of work will negative trouble their grade. In this case, other team members are prepared to participate to the finalization of the assignment, but are not allowed to do so.
· Start with simple collaborative tasks.
· Encourage intended discussion of team relate.
· Encourage teams to develop rules.