Teaching conflict management: active and traditional learning approaches in a group communication course

Teaching conflict management: active and traditional learning approaches in a group communication course

Welborn, Rhonda D.

Date: 2007-05

Type: Thesisma

Table of Contents: 1. Review of related literature -- 1.1. Statement of the problem -- 1.2. Group work and conflict -- 1.3. Conflict -- 1.4. Self-efficacy -- 1.5. Methods of instruction -- 1.5.1. Active learning -- 1.5.2. Lecture -- 1.6. Hypotheses -- 2. Research methods -- 2.1. Research design -- 2.2. Sample -- 2.3. Procedures -- 2.4. Instructional methods -- 2.5. Dependent measures -- 2.5.1. Conflict communication self-efficacy -- 2.5.2. Management of conflict -- 2.5.3. Frequency of conflict -- 3. Results -- 3.1. Participant response -- 3.2. Analyses of dependent measures -- 3.3. Hypotheses -- 3.4. Research questions -- 4. Discussion -- 4.1. Findings and conclusions -- 4.2. Limitations and suggestions for future research -- References -- Appendices.

Abstract:

The vital role of effective groups within modern organizations requires attention to the dynamics of group communication, specifically conflict management. The first context in which most individuals learn group communication skills is in the university classroom. Sims (2006) asserts that the established literature examining approaches to teaching has convinced most scholars that the student's classroom experience must advance beyond the traditional lecture format, to more interactive student involvement. This study investigated the hypothesis that active learning would result in higher perceptions of self-efficacy in students' group conflict management than would traditional lecture instruction. This study also explores issues associated with differences in instructional methods, as well as change in self-efficacy across time periods. University students in a group communication course who received either active learning or lecture based instruction in group conflict management voluntarily completed a conflict communication self-efficacy measure, and two conflict management measures. The analyses indicated that self-efficacy did increase significantly across time periods, however, no evidence was found of a difference between instructional methods. Measurement issues, the importance of a manipulation check, implications of the findings, and suggestions for future research are discussed.