Adaptive, generative, and transformative learning in project teams

Valerie I. Sessa · Manuel London · Christopher Pingor · Beyza Gullu

42 citations0/0 files storedTeam Performance Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Team Dynamics and Performance Problem and Project Based Learning Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this study is to analyze a framework of team learning that includes three learning processes (adaptive, generative, and transformative), factors that stimulate these processes, and consequences of them. The variables provided a field study of the model. Design/methodology/approach In the field study, 69 project teams of 3 to 11 students and their instructors responded to surveys. Findings Positive learning stimuli were related to adaptive and generative learning processes, while negative stimuli were related to transformative learning processes. Learning processes were related to individual student learning outcomes. In addition, adaptive and generative learning processes were positively related to team and instructor ratings of outcome quality, while transformative learning was negatively related to team ratings of outcome quality. Research limitations/implications The results were subject to the following limitations: cross‐sectional design, mostly self‐report measures, and the lack of control endemic to field research. As such, this study is viewed as an initial test of the team‐learning model in a field setting. Additional research, including longitudinal designs and experimental designs, are called for. Practical implications This study adds to the growing literature on group learning. Educators and managers need to be aware that there are different kinds of learning processes in which groups can engage and that these are stimulated to occur differently and have a different impact on outcomes. Originality/value Team learning is rarely assessed directly as a construct in its own right and there is a lack of empirical support delineating causes and consequences of team learning. This field study is a first step in this direction.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

References

1991The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization 1999Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams 1991Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures 1988Organizational Learning 2004Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis 1997What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite 2007Answers to 20 Questions About Interrater Reliability and Interrater Agreement 2006Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.