‘Teaching Group Communication Without Functional Groups: Course Audit and Redesign’
Module Overview
The following case study is an analysis and redesign of an asynchronous ‘Small Group Communication’ course with the goal of improving group interaction and skill development.
Context
This project examines a first-year undergraduate ‘Small Group Communication’ course delivered in a fully asynchronous online format. The course is designed to develop skills in collaboration, leadership, conflict resolution, and group decision-making. These outcomes require interaction, shared experience, and ongoing feedback. In many online implementations, the course structure relies on…
- recorded lectures
- readings
- discussion boards
- loosely defined group assignments
The result is a learning environment where students complete tasks but do not consistently develop communication skills that transfer beyond the course.
Problem Statement
Online ‘Small Group Communication’ courses often fail to develop the skills they are designed to teach because the structure of the course removes the conditions required for effective group interaction. Communication within groups depends on responsiveness, feedback, and the ability to adapt in relation to others.
In asynchronous environments, students are frequently asked to analyze communication rather than participate in it.
- Interaction is fragmented
- feedback is delayed or absent
- and group processes are left undefined.
Students may complete assignments successfully while demonstrating little growth in their ability to collaborate, lead, or manage conflict.
Diagnosis
The course design reveals several consistent failures that limit learning.
- Absence of structured group formation and norms. Students are placed into groups without clear expectations, roles, or communication protocols.
- Lack of group-work skill development. Students are expected to collaborate without being taught how to collaborate.
- Fragmented and ineffective interaction. Communication occurs through disconnected tools without sustained interaction.
- Inequitable participation. Group structures do not ensure individual accountability.
- Misaligned assessment. Assessment focuses on individual work rather than group communication performance.
Before: Typical Course Structure
- Objectives: Broad and non-measurable
- Content: Lecture videos and readings
- Interaction: Discussion boards
- Group Work: Unstructured or loosely defined
- Assessment: Quizzes and short reflections
Design Principle
Group communication must be learned through structured, iterative participation within functional group systems. Effective group learning requires…
- intentional design of interaction
- roles
- feedback and
- accountability
Redesign
The redesigned model restructures the course to align interaction, learning, and assessment.
A) Group System Design
Group-based learning is structured as a sustained system rather than a series of isolated tasks. Students are assigned to groups of three to four members for the duration of the module.
Roles rotate across cycles:
- Facilitator: Guides discussion and ensures participation
- Analyst: Applies course concepts
- Connector: Extends group thinking
- Evaluator: Provides feedback on group interaction
B) Performance Based Learning Cycle
- Concept engagement: Students engage with targeted content
- Scenario-based analysis: Students analyze a realistic scenario
- Group simulation: Groups complete a structured task
- Group deliverable: Shared output
- Reflection and evaluation: Students reflect and receive feedback
C) Assessment Strategy
- Individual contribution (30–40%): Role fulfillment and participation
- Group deliverable (30–40%): Communication and collaboration quality
- Reflection (20–30%): Analysis of group interaction
After: Redesigned Model
- Objectives: Clear and performance-based
- Content: Targeted and task-aligned
- Interaction: Structured group system
- Learning: Iterative and performance-based
- Assessment: Individual, group, and reflective
Why This Works
This redesign aligns learning activities with the skills the course is intended to develop. Students engage in communication as an active process rather than studying it as content. Structured interaction supports development over time.
Reflection
This redesign shifts the course from content delivery to performance-based learning. Students engage in communication & self-reflection, thus improving their skill-sets over time.
