ANALYSING THE CADENCE OF GROUP CONFLICTS ACROSS GENDER DURING ONLINE LEARNING

It has been two years since the world has been forced to cope with doing things online. Even in normal face-to-face group discussions, participants face difficulties and conflicts, and now online learning has not made it any easier. This study explores the ups and downs in group discussion. 72 participants responded to a survey to find out how they perceive the conflicts in group formation. The findings in this study revealed that there were significant differences the norming stage and also performing & adjourning stage. In addition to that, the total mean score showed interesting differences across gender. Not all group formations with different genders go through conflicts. Not all team members with the same gender are conflict-free. Sometimes discussions/some activities are more difficult to carry out because of conflicts across genders are not properly addressed. Then again, not all group conflicts are negative. Conflicts are good in several ways. The conversations improve the communication and negotiation skills of the team members. In addition to that, defending for one’s point helps to sharpen critical thinking skills. The findings in this study cannot be generalized for all situations in group work. This study can be a springboard for more group formation and group conflicts research. i Correspondence: email patanim@gmail.com, noorh763@uitm.edu.my Noor Hanim Rahmat, Norhartini Aripin, Zarina Razlan, Mazlen Arepin, Eliyas S. Mohandas, Mok Soon Sim ANALYSING THE CADENCE OF GROUP CONFLICTS ACROSS GENDER DURING ONLINE LEARNING European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies Volume 6 │ Issue 2 │ 2021 56


Background of Study
Collaborative learning has longed gained its popularity in the classroom. Leaners gain more than just the content of the lesson during group interactions. The communication lets the learners practice their language skills (Rahmat, 2016) especially when it involves interacting with learners of different cultures or even gender. The study by Aripin & Rahmat (2021) reports that genders language differently when it comes to conveying information during interaction.
It is undeniable that the pandemic wave has changed the way learners acquire knowledge. Nevertheless, collaborative learning is used in online classes. According to Rahmat (2020), millennials learn differently from their older peers. They have poor communications skills because of technology. Sure enough, having to attend online classes is one level ahead for many learners who used to look at online interactions as non-academic. As such, the study by Sukimin, et al. (2021) and Janssen & Wubbles (2016) suggested that future researchers look into group interactions among learners during online learning. It would be interesting to see how learners are coping with online group interactions. Similarly, Goni et al. (2020) raised the issue whether online learning encourages team conflict and if it did, how do the learners manage the conflict? This study is done to explore the conflicts that takes place during online group interactions, Specifically, this study is done to answer the following question; 1) How is Forming displayed during online group work across gender? 2) How is Storming displayed during online group work across gender? 3) How is Norming displayed during online group work across gender? 4) How are Performing & adjourning displayed during online group work across gender?

Introduction
This section presents information on group interaction, group conflicts, past studies, as well as, the conceptual framework of the study.

Group Interactions
There are numerous evidences to proof that group interactions are beneficial. Vygotsky (1978) defended that group interactions sharpen the use of language to promote thinking, as well as develop reasoning. Teachers need to provide the opportunity to students for a managed discussion about their learning. These discussions must have a purpose so that meaningful exchange between students can promote deeper understanding. Vygotsky (1978) reports that group interactions help to improve learners' zone of proximal development (ZPD). This sone is the difference between what the learner can do on his/her own and what he/she can achieve with the guidance and encouragement from a skilled team member. As such, teachers need to ensure that the team these three important components. Firstly, the presence of someone with knowledge and skills beyond that of the learner (a more knowledgeable other). Next, social interactions with a skilful tutor that allow the learner to observe and practice their skills. Finally, scaffolding, or supportive activities provided by the educator, or more competent peer, to support the student as he or she is led through the ZPD.

Conflicts in Group Interactions
When interactions take place, there are bound to be conflicts. The issues of group conflict in any organisation can also be mirrored in team interactions in the classroom. According to Shonk(2020), there are three types of conflicts ( Figure 1); (a) task conflict, (b) relationship conflict and (c) value conflict. The first of the three types is task conflict. This usually involves concrete issues related to learners work assignments. This can include disagreements about how to divide the task among team members. The second type of conflict is relationship conflict. This may stem from differences in personality, or even style of working. The last type is value conflict. This can arise form differences in identities and values of the team members. This can include differences in ethics, norms or other deeply held values. What happens in group conflicts? Tuckman and Jensen's (1977) presented a model of group formation that explains the processes that take place during group conflicts. Group formation comprises of (a) forming, (b) storming, (c) norming, (d) performing and Group Conflicts Task Conflict

Relationship Conflict
Value Conflict adjourning. Firstly, the (a) forming stage of a group involves clarifying common interests and roles to be played. This is the stage where the team's purpose is clarified, roles and boundaries are decided and interpersonal relationships begin. Next, come the (b) storming stage and may involve the problem-solving processes. This is usually where conflict emerges. If the conflict is unresolved, it can inhibit the team's progress. The third stage is the (c) norming stage usually involves the clarification of the task and establishing the agenda. This stage involves belonging, growth and control. The last stage is the (d) performing stage involves the allocation, implementation, and evaluation of the task. Finally, the adjourning stage can include the celebration of task completion.

Past Studies
Collaborative learning has been widely used as classroom activities to encourage interactions. The study by Curşeu, Chappin & Jansen (2018) found that collaborative learning is often used in higher education to help students develop their teamwork skills and acquire curricular knowledge. Their study tested a mediation model in which the quality of group discussions mediates the impact of gender diversity and group motivation on collaborative learning effectiveness. Findings show that the proportion of women in groups, and the group level need for cognition and core self-evaluations (within group average) positively predict discussion quality that in turn predicts group (academic) performance. They also found that the effect for gender diversity on group performance is only partly mediated by discussion quality. They listed four common obstacles to collaboration; students' lack of collaborative skills, free-riding, competence status, and friendship. This study may be useful for educators, designers, and researchers to foster the quality of student collaboration. The pandemic has added a value to the collaborative learning by making it feasible online. The study by Faja (2013) explored students' perceptions of online collaborative learning involving both process and product oriented activities. The online collaborative activities were used in the context of a Management Information Systems course. Findings showed that perceived structure of the collaborating activity and peer interaction that takes place during the activity are positively related to perceived learning. Peer interaction and perceived learning were also related to satisfaction with the course. Another study by Goni, Cortazar, Alvares, Donoso, and Miranda (2020) explored the impact of the transition to online learning. The purpose of the study was to understand if face-to-face and online team dynamics differed concerning the prevalence of personal goals, team challenges, and individual/social strategies. Findings showed that both modalities report mostly the same prevalence of goals, challenges, and strategies. However, online students tend to manifest a significantly lower prevalence of specific challenges and strategies, suggesting that online teamwork may have involved less group deliberation. These results provide evidence for the "equivalency theory" between online and face-to-face learning in a context where all systemic levels transitioned to a digital modality. These findings raise the question of whether online teaching encourages the emergence of team conflict and deliberation needed for creative thinking.
However, when several individuals are put together to complete tasks, sometimes conflicts arise. This paper by Ella, Roberta, Andrea, & Manuela (2007) reports the results of a study aimed to establish whether the amount and types of conflicts vary in all male, all female and mixed gender groups working in asynchronous collaborative learning online settings. Sixty psychology majors were divided into three groups. The lessons were conducted online by the same teacher. The study show that the levels of participation in the three groups varied in relation to gender composition. All female group did have more conflicts then male and mixed groups, but primarily they did not have interpersonal. The female groups ́ conflicts seem to be related to goal-oriented process of work.

Conceptual Framework
The framework for this study (Figure 2) is adapted from Tuckman and Jensen's (1077) model of group formation. However, this study looks at group formation in online learning. The formation begins with the forming of the group. This is the stage where the team members orientate themselves to the objective of the task. This initial stage is where the team members get to know one another. As the discussion escalates, conflicts may arise. This is known as the storming stage. The third stage is the stage where the team members try to normalise the situation by getting consensus from the group. The last stage, the closure, can come in two stages. Firstly, the group now is ready to either present the group work online or submit the group task. The last stage is the stage of adjourn where the team members celebrate the completed task.

Research Design
This quantitative study is done to explore the group formation process during online learning. 72 respondents were purposely chosen to participate in this study. There were 15 male and 57 female students. The students went through a semester of online learning and during the semesters, they were asked to form group discussions to complete tasks given by the teacher. All classes and group discussions were done online. The students responded to the survey at the end of the semester to indicate their perception of group formation via online. The instrument (table 1) used is a survey with 5 sections. Section A is about the demographic profile. Section B is about forming (5 items), section C is about storming (5 items), section D is about norming (5 items) and section E is about performing & adjourning (5 items).  Table 2 shows the reliability statistics for the instrument. The analysis revealed a Cronbach alpha value of .919 thus revealing a good internal reliability. Data is collected online via goggle form. The data is analysed using SPSS version 26 and presented in the form of percentage for the demographic profile and mean score for the variables. Findings for the demographic profile is presented in the form of pie charts and findings for the variables are presented in the form of bar charts.

Findings
This section presents the findings of this study. The first part reports the findings in terms of percentage for gender distribution. The next parts discuss answers to the research questions presented above. The research questions are answered in two parts; (a) the first part, the researcher presents the ANOVA test to see if there are any significant differences of variables across gender. According to Greenland, et al. (2016), a p-value less than 0.05 (typically ≤ 0.05) is statistically significant. Next, (b) the researcher compares the mean scores of items in the variables across gender. Figure 3: Percentage for Gender Distribution Figure 3 above shows the percentage for gender distribution. 21% are male and 79% are female respondents.

Findings for Forming across Gender
This section answers Research question 1: How is Forming displayed during online group work across gender?
In order to answer the question, the first stage is report if there are and significant difference in forming across gender. With reference to Table 3, there are no significant difference (p > 0.05) for all items in forming across gender.  Next, Figure 4 presents the mean score for forming across gender. Both male and female learners agreed that group work makes it easier to divide work (mean for male = 3.5; mean for female = 3.7). Interestingly, both genders were neutral about the ease of getting to know their friend online (mean for male and female = 3).

Findings for Storming across Gender
This section answers Research question 2: How is Storming displayed during online group work across gender?

TEO1It is easy to get to know my classmates in online classes
TEO2It is easy to talk about the assignments with my friends online TEO3It is easy to plan the assignments with my friends online TEO4It is easy to divide work for the assignments online TEO5It is easy to check progress of group assignments online

Male Female
Firstly, all items in storming show no significant difference (p > 0.05) across gender.  Figure 5 presents the mean score form storming across gender. The highest mean (mean for male = 3.7; mean for female = 3.6) is for "conflicts allow the group to choose the nest idea". Next, both male (mean = 3.5) and female (mean = 3.5) respondents agreed that "conflicts allow the group to evaluate ideas.

Findings for Norming across Gender
This section answers Research question 3: How is Norming displayed during online group work across gender? With reference to Table 5, 4 out of 5 items were found to be significant different (p< 0.05). There is a significant different between gender for "group conflicts are easily ended with consensus. Next, there is also a significant difference between genders for "Group conflicts end when team members compromise". There are significant differences for "Group conflicts end when team members are able agree on a selected ideas together", and also "Group conflicts end when team members can agree to disagree".    Figure 6 shows the mean score for norming across gender. The highest means (male = 3.5; female = 4) are for "Group conflicts end when team members are able agree on a selected ideas together "next is for (male = 3.3; female = 3.9) are for "Group conflicts end when team members compromise" and "Group conflicts end when team members agree on alternatives to their solutions/ideas" (mean for male = 3.4 ; female = 3.9).

Findings for Performing and Adjourning across Gender
This section answers Research question 4: How are Performing & adjourning displayed during online group work across gender? Table 6 shows the ANOVA table for performing & adjourning. There are significant differences (p < 0.05) across gender for "Team members take responsibility to make improvements" and "Team members work together to make many changes before the final work".   Figure 7 shows the mean score for performing & adjourning. The highest mean scores are at "Team members take responsibility to make improvements" (male = 3.4; female = 4.1) and "Team members work together to make many changes before the final work" (male = 3.5; female = 4.1)

Summary of Findings and Discussion
The findings in this study revealed that there were significant differences for 4 items in the Norming stage. There were also significant differences for 2 items in the performing & adjourning stage.
In addition to that the total mean score (figure 8) showed interesting differences. It was found that the mean scores for all variables were higher for female than for the male respondents. Ella, Roberta, Andrea, & Manuela (2007) also found in their study that female learners do show to have more conflicts than their male counterparts. TECL16Team members take responsibility to make improvements before the closure TECL17It is easy to arrive at the closure of the group discussion

Pedagogical Implications and Suggestion for Future Research
Not all group formations with different genders go through conflicts. Not all team members with the same gender are conflict-free. sometimes discussions/some activities are more difficult to carry out because of conflicts across genders that is not properly addressed Then again, not all group conflicts are negative. According to Vygotsky (1978), conflicts are good in several ways. The conversations improve the communication and negotiation skills of the team members. In addition to that, defending for one's point helps to sharpen critical thinking skills. The findings in this study cannot be generalized for all situations in group work. This study can be a springboard for more group formation and group conflicts research.