Review by: Brahm, Taiga (2007-04-10)

Teams are increasingly recognized as important sources of knowledge construction. Thus, more emphasis is put on the implementation of teamwork in organizations and on the usage of collaborative learning in education. However, team learning does not always prove to be more effective than other forms of learning. The article by van den Bossche et al. puts its focus on social as well as cognitive determinants of group learning. It aims at developing a theoretical framework for collaborative learning including "both an understanding of how sociocognitive processes give rise to cognitive development and an understanding of the social, interpersonal dimension of teamwork." (p 491). Based on a review of literature, the authors develop the following six hypotheses:

• H1: "Increasing (co-)construction and constructive conflict in the interaction of the team will positively influence the development of mutually shared cognition." This hypothesis is based on the assumption that interaction and communication processes will lead to the co-construction of knowledge, emphasis is put on the negotiation processes as well as on the constructive solution of conflicts.
• Shared cognition can be used to explain the effectiveness of teams. It leads to an environment for efficient group decision making. Additionally, it supports the coordination of different team member actions (since all team members solve the same problem). Finally, more alternatives are taken into account leading to more creativity in the problem-solving process. This argumentation leads to H2: "More developed mutually shared cognition in a team will result in higher team effectiveness."
• The following hypotheses focus on the social determinants of group learning. First, psychological safety is addressed which in fact is not a new concept but has hardly been researched in this context so far. H3: "Psychological safety is positively associated with team learning behavior."
• H4 focuses on cohesion, differentiating between a) task cohesion and b) social cohesion: H4a: "Task cohesion is positiveley related to team learning behavior." and H4b: "Social cohesion is not related to team learning behavior."
• The highly researched concept of interdependence is divided into task and outcome interdependence with task interdependence leading to more support, information sharing and communication. Outcome interdependence supports open-mindedness as well as more intensive search for solutions and compromises. Thus, H5 concludes that "task and outcome interdependence will be positively related with learning behavior".
• Lastly, "group potency is positively related to team learning behavior" (H6) with group potency being defined as the collective belief of the group's effectiveness.

The different hypotheses were integrated into a model of team learning beliefs and behaviors which was tested with data from 75 teams. The questionnaire was composed of scales from validated questionnaires. Data was aggregated on the team-level and different methods of analysis were used (multiple regression and path analysis). The study resulted in the confirmation of H1 and H2, thus leading to the conclusion that mutually shared cognition is a major learning outcome. Additionally, four of the five identified team beliefs, i. e. interdependence, task cohesion, psychological safety, and group potency, could be confirmed. As expected in H4b, social cohesion was not related to team learning behavior. The article used findings from organizational psychology and transfered them to collaborative learning in education. With highly promising results and a profound research methodology, this study could provide a pathway for further interdisciplinary research.