Liana Razmerita, Armelle Brun


Group work has been adopted as an important tool to support collaborative work in order to enhance learning processes. There is a wealth of literature related to group performance and the impact of group composition on group and individual performance. However, very few studies address the issue on how to automatically form groups. This article proposes a methodology that could be used by professors to form groups automatically taking into account different criteria as well as the students’ profile. This methodology is based on a pilot study that analyzes group composition of self-formed student groups. The pilot study findings suggest that students tend to form homogeneous group in terms of level of the knowledge. Furthermore, students report that working on common topics of interests was a decisive factor in forming the groups.


  1. Abrami, P. C., Poulsen, C., and Chambers, B. (2004). Teacher motivation to implement an educational innovation: Factors differentiating users and non-users of cooperative learning. Educational Psychology, pages 201-216.
  2. Alfonseca, E., Carro, R., Martn, E., Ortigosa, A., and Paredes, P. (2006). The impact of learning styles on student grouping for collaborative learning: A case study. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction Journal, pages 377-401.
  3. Bekele, R. (2005). Computer-Assisted Learner Group Formation Based on Personality Traits. PhD thesis, Hamburg University.
  4. Bradley, J. H. and Herbert, F. J. (1997). The effect of personality type on team performance. Journal of Management Development, pages 337-353.
  5. Chan, T., Chen, C. M., Wu, Y. L., Jong, B. S., Hsia, Y. T., and Lin, T. W. (2010). Applying the genetic encoded conceptual graph to grouping learning. Expert Systems with Applications, 37:4103-4118.
  6. Dansereau, D. and Johnson, D. (1994). Learning, Remembering, Believing: Enhancing Human Performance, chapter Cooperative learning, pages 83-111. Druckman, D. and Bjork, R.A.
  7. Florea, A. M. (1999). An agent-based collaborative learning system: Advanced research in computers and communications in education. In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Computers in Education.
  8. Graf, S. and Bekele, R. (2006). Forming heterogeneous groups for intelligent collaborative learning systems with ant colony optimization. In Intelligent Tutoring System Conference.
  9. Ho, T. F., Shyu, S. J., Wang, F. H., and Li, C. T. (2009). Composing high-heterogeneous and high-interaction groups in collaborative learning with particle swarm optimization. In World Congress on Computer Science and Information Engineer-ing.
  10. Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. (1994). Perspectives on Small group Learning: Theory and practice, chapter What is cooperative Learning? Rubicon Publishing Inc.
  11. Kirchner, K., Razmerita, L., and Sudzina, F. (2008). Web 2.0: The Business Model, chapter New Forms of Interaction and Knowledge Sharing on Web 2.0. Springer Science and Business Media.
  12. Krejins, K., Kirschner, P. A., and Jochems, W. (2002). The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environ-ments. Educational Technology and Society, pages 26-37.
  13. Martin, E. and Paredes, P. (2004). Using learning styles for dynamic group formation in adaptive collaborative hypermedia systems. In Proceeding of the conference AHCWS.
  14. Mondahl, M., Rasmussen, J., and Razmerita, L. (2009). Web 2.0 applications, collaboration and cognitive processes in case-based foreign language learning. In 2nd World Summit On The Knowledge Society.
  15. Nijstad, B. and Carsten, K. (2002). Creativity and group innovation. Applied Psychology, 51(3).
  16. Paulus, P. B. and Nijstad, B. A. (2003). Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration. Oxford University Press.
  17. Razmerita, L. and Kirchner, K. (2009). Personal knowledge management: The role of web 2.0 tools for managing knowledge at individual and organisational levels. Online Information Review, 33(6):1021-1039.
  18. Rich, M. (1997). A learning community on the internet: An exercise with masters students. In Proc. of Americas Conf. on Information Systems.
  19. Sharan, S. (1999). Handbook of cooperative learning methods. Westport.
  20. Siemens, G. (2010). Connectivism: A learning theory for digital age. Articles/connectivism.htm retrieved the 16th of May.
  21. Slavin, R. E. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase achievement? Psychological Bulletin.
  22. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Developmental and motivational perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, pages 1161-1167.
  23. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and Practice. Allyn & Bacon.
  24. Souren, P., Seetharaman, P., Samarah, I., and Mykytyn, P. (2003). Impact of heterogeneity and collaborative conflict management style on the performance of synchronous global virtual teams. Information and Management, pages 303-321.
  25. Wang, D. Y., Lin, S. J., and Sun, C. T. (2007). Diana: A computer-supported heterogeneous grouping system for teachers to conduct successful small learning groups. Computers in Human Behavior.
  26. Webb, N. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. Intern. Journal of Educational Research, pages 21-39.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Razmerita L. and Brun A. (2011). COLLABORATIVE LEARNING IN HETEROGENEOUS CLASSES - Towards a Group Formation Methodology . In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-8425-50-8, pages 189-194. DOI: 10.5220/0003338901890194

in Bibtex Style

author={Liana Razmerita and Armelle Brun},
title={COLLABORATIVE LEARNING IN HETEROGENEOUS CLASSES - Towards a Group Formation Methodology},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,
SN - 978-989-8425-50-8
AU - Razmerita L.
AU - Brun A.
PY - 2011
SP - 189
EP - 194
DO - 10.5220/0003338901890194