The architecture of teamwork: examining relationships between teaching, assessment, student learning and satisfaction with creative design outcomes

References

• Adams, S., Simon, L., & Ruiz, B. (2002, June 16–19). A pilot study of the performance of student teams in engineering education. Paper presented at the proceedings of the American society for engineering education annual conference and exposition, Montreal.
   Google Scholar
• Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Silver, W. S. (1999). Lessons from the best and worst student team experiences: How a teacher can make the difference. Journal of Management Education, 23(5), 467–488. doi:10.1177/105256299902300503
   Google Scholar
• Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Stewart-Belle, S. (1998). Exploring predictors of student team project performance. Journal of Marketing Education, 20(1), 63–71. doi:10.1177/027347539802000108
   Google Scholar
• Barber, P. (2004). Developing and assessing group design work: A case study. Paper presented at the international engineering and product design education conference, DELFT, the Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Peer assessment in university teaching: Evaluating seven course designs [Article]. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1), 19–36. doi:10.1080/02602930500262346
   Google Scholar
• Biggs, J. (1986). Assessing student approaches to learning. In J. Jones and M. Hornsburgh (Eds.), Research and development in higher education: Volume 8: Papers presented at the eleventh annual conference of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand, 24th-27th August 1985 (pp. 241–246). Sydney: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, C. M., & Ammons, J. L. (2003). Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency, and specificity of criteria in peer assessments. The Journal of Education for Business, 78(5), 268–272. doi: 10.1080/08832320309598613
   Google Scholar
• Brown, R. W. (1995, November 1–4). Autorating: Getting individual marks from team marks and enhancing teamwork. 25th Annual frontiers in education conference, American society for engineering education and institute of electrical and electronic engineers, Atlanta, Georgia.
   Google Scholar
• Burdett, J. (2003). Making groups work: University students’ perceptions. International Education Journal, 4(3), 177–191.
   Google Scholar
• Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, C. A. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823–850. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb01571.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakraborti, C., Boonyasai, R. T., Wright, S. M., & Kern, D. E. (2008). A systematic review of teamwork training interventions in medical student and resident education. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(6), 846–853. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0600-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, K. J., & Auken, S. V. (2001). Creating positive group project experiences: An examination of the role of the instructor on students’ perceptions of group projects. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(2), 117–127. doi: 10.1177/0273475301232005
   Google Scholar
• Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M., Toy, D., & Wright, L. (2006). Can't we pick our own groups? The influence of group selection method on group dynamics and outcomes. Journal of Management Education, 30, 557–569. doi: 10.1177/1052562905284872
   Google Scholar
• Christiaans, H. H. (2002). Creativity as a design criterion. Communication Research Journal, 14(1), 41–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, P. G. (2006). What would a theory of interprofessional education look like? Some suggestions for developing a theoretical framework for teamwork training 1. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 20(6), 577–589. doi: 10.1080/13561820600916717
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35. doi: 10.3102/00346543064001001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, S. G. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239–290. doi: 10.1177/014920639702300303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., & Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. Long Beach: California State University Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Cosse, T. J., Ashworth, D. N., & Weisenberger, T. M. (1999). The effects of team size in a marketing simulation. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7, 98–106.
   Google Scholar
• Cuff, D. (1991). Architecture: The story of practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 37(4), 346–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeter-Schmelz, D. R., Kennedy, K. N., & Ramsey, R. P. (2002). Enriching our understanding of student team effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Education, 24, 114–124. doi: 10.1177/0273475302242004
   Google Scholar
• Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331–350. doi: 10.1080/03075079912331379935
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feichtner, S. B., & Davis, E. A. (1984). Why some groups fail: A survey of students’ experiences with learning groups. The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9(4), 58–73.
   Google Scholar
• Fiechtner, S. B., & Davis, E. A. (1992). Why some groups fail: A survey of students’ experiences with learning groups. In A. S. Goodsell, M. R. Maher, & V. Tinto (Eds.), Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. (pp. 86–100). New York: pnNational Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, & Assessment, Syracuse University.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, M., & McKenzie, J. (2002). SPARK, a confidential web-based template for self and peer assessment of student teamwork: Benefits of evaluating across different subjects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 551–569. doi: 10.1111/1467-8535.00291
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gokhale, A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22–30.
   Google Scholar
• Goldfinch, J., & Raeside, R. (1990). Development of a peer assessment technique for obtaining individual marks on a group project. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 15(3), 210–231. doi: 10.1080/0260293900150304
   Google Scholar
• Goltz, S. M., Hietapelto, A. B., Reinsch, R. W., & Tyrell, S. K. (2008). Teaching teamwork and problem solving concurrently. Journal of Management Education, 32(5), 541–562. doi: 10.1177/1052562907310739
   Google Scholar
• Gosenpud, J. J., & Washbush, J. B. (1991). Predicting simulation performance: Differences between individuals and groups. In W. J. Wheatley & J. Gosenpud (Eds.), Developments in business simulation & experiential exercises (pp. 44–48). Stillwater, OK: Association for Business Simulation and Experiential Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315–342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 47–99). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R., & Walton, R. E. (1986). Leading groups in organizations. In P. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 72–119). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Hamlyn-Harris, B. J., Hurst, B. J., Baggo, K. V., & Bayley, A. J. (2006). Predictors of team work satisfaction. Journal of Information Technology Education, 5, 299–315.
   Google Scholar
• Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self- and peer-assessment: the students’ views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53–70. doi: 10.1080/07294360123776
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, R. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for Business, 82(1), 11–19. doi: 10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19
   Google Scholar
• Hyatt, D. E., & Ruddy, T. H. (1997). An examination of the relationship between work team characteristics and effectiveness: A replication and extension. Personnel Psychology, 50, 553–585. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00703.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V. (1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 371–384.
   Google Scholar
• Jalajas, D. S., & Sutton, R. I. (1984–1985). Feuds in student groups, coping with whiners, martyrs, saboteurs, bullies, and deadbeats. Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9(4), 217–227.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom (2nd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, L., & Miles, L. (2004). Assessing contributions to group assignments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 751–768. doi: 10.1080/0260293042000227272
   Google Scholar
• Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50(5), 936–941.
   Google Scholar
• McGourty, J., Dominick, P., & Reilly, R. R. (1998, November). Incorporating student peer review and feedback into the assessment process. Paper presented at the 28th annual Frontiers in education conference, Tempe, AZ.
   Google Scholar
• McKendall, M. (2000). Teaching groups to become teams. Journal of Education for Business, 75(5), 277–282. doi: 10.1080/08832320009599028
   Google Scholar
• Mello, J. A. (1993). Improving individual member accountability in small work group settings. Journal of Management Education, 17(2), 253–259. doi: 10.1177/105256299301700210
   Google Scholar
• Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (2002). Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups. Sterling, VA: Praeger Pub Text.
   Google Scholar
• Mulder, R. A., & Pearce, J. M. (2007, December 2–5). PRAZE: Innovating teaching through online peer review. Paper presented at the 24th annual conference of the Australasian society for computers in learning in tertiary education, Singapore.
   Google Scholar
• National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. (2012). EDU education guidelines. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from NCARB http://www.ncarb.org/en/Studying-Architecture/~/media/Files/PDF/Guidelines/EDU_Guidelines.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9–34.
   Google Scholar
• Pfaff, E., & Huddleston, P. (2003). Does it matter if I hate teamwork? What impacts student attitudes toward teamwork. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(1), 37–45. doi: 10.1177/0273475302250571
   Google Scholar
• Raban, R., & Litchfield. (2006, December). Supporting peer assessment of individual contributions in groupwork. Paper presented at the 23rd annual conference of the Australasian society for computers in learning in tertiary education, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• R.A.I.A. (2002). RAIA education policy endorsed by RAIA national council November 2000 and amended by RAIA national council November 2002. Accessed on January 6, 2005, from http://www.architecture.com.au/i-cms_file?page=2542/EDUCATION_POLICY_rev_format_2005.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Royal Institute of British Architects. (2010). Criteria for validation. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from http://www.architecture.com/files/ribaprofessionalservices/education/validation/ribavalidationcriteriafromseptember2011parts1,23.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Salas, E., Rozell, D., Mullen, B., & Driskell, J. E. (1999). The effect of team building on performance, an integration. Small Group Research, 30, 309–329.
   Google Scholar
• Shih, S.-G., Hu, T.-P., & Chen, C.-N. (2006). A game theory-based approach to the analysis of cooperative learning in design studios. Design Studies, 27(6), 711–722. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2006.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Dochy, F., & Moerkerke, G. (1999). Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer- and co-assessment. Learning Environments Research, 1(3), 293–319. doi: 10.1023/A:1009932704458
   Google Scholar
• Strong, J. T., & Anderson, R. E. (1990). Free-riding in group projects: Control mechanisms and preliminary data. Journal of Marketing Education, 12, 61–67. doi: 10.1177/027347539001200208
   Google Scholar
• Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K. E., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45(2), 120–133. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Computer-assisted research design and analysis (Vol. 748). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon Boston.
   Google Scholar
• Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276. doi: 10.3102/00346543068003249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker, R. (2008). The impact of assessment modes on collaborative group design projects. In S. Frankland (Ed.), Enhancing teaching and learning through assessment: Embedded strategies and their impacts (Vol. 2, pp. 72–85). Hong Kong: The Assessment Resource Centre, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, R. (2012, June 18–21). Collaboration down under: Investigating team learning in Australia in architecture and related design contexts. Paper presented at the Canada international conference on education (2012: Ontario, Canada) Ontario, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, R., & Rollo, J. (2006). Teaching and learning in collaborative group design projects. Journal of Architectural Engineering & Design Management, 2( Teaching and Learning in the Built Environment), 19–30.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, A. (2001). British psychology students’ perceptions of group-work and peer assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 28–36. doi: 10.2304/plat.2001.1.1.28
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, R. (2005). Groupwork and assessment: The handbook for economics lecturers. Kingston upon Thames: Kingston University.
   Google Scholar