ABSTRACT

This article expands upon research into task planning effects by looking at how the addition of planning prior to group discussions may positively and negatively influence performance. 24 Japanese university students performed three weekly discussions in groups of four. Prior to each discussion, they undertook either no planning, strategic planning or an oral rehearsal with a partner outside of their group. Discussion were recorded and transcribed, and performance assessed using 14 measures related to participation, complexity, accuracy, fluency and discourse complexity. One-way repeated measures ANOVA results showed significant statistical effects on performance by both types of planning, especially with students who spoke less often than others within discussions. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed that rehearsal significantly improved participation (words spoken) and fluency (speech rates and pauses), while strategic planning reduced pauses and enabled students to give more reasons within speaking turns. However, strategic planning also resulted in students referring to the turns of others less often during discussions. These findings show that the addition of planning for group discussions can have a positive impact on participation and fluency, but that strategic planning may negatively affect how often students will directly address the turns of others.

摘要

本文通过研究在小组讨论之前添加计划如何对绩效产生积极和消极影响，扩展了对任务计划效果的研究。24 名日本大学生每周进行 3 次四人小组讨论。在每次讨论之前，他们要么没有进行任何规划、战略规划，要么与团队外的合作伙伴进行口头排练。讨论被记录和转录，并使用与参与度、复杂性、准确性、流畅性和话语复杂性相关的 14 项措施评估绩效。单向重复测量方差分析结果显示，两种类型的计划对表现都有显着的统计影响，尤其是对于在讨论中发言频率低于其他人的学生。事后成对比较表明，排练显着提高了参与度（说的话）和流利度（语速和停顿），而战略规划减少了停顿，并使学生能够在轮换中给出更多理由。然而，战略规划也导致学生在讨论中较少提及他人的转变。这些发现表明，为小组讨论增加计划可以对参与度和流畅性产生积极影响，但战略计划可能会对学生直接解决其他人的问题的频率产生负面影响。战略规划还导致学生在讨论中较少提及他人的变化。这些发现表明，为小组讨论增加计划可以对参与度和流畅性产生积极影响，但战略计划可能会对学生直接解决其他人的问题的频率产生负面影响。战略规划还导致学生在讨论中较少提及他人的变化。这些发现表明，为小组讨论增加计划可以对参与度和流畅性产生积极影响，但战略计划可能会对学生直接解决其他人的问题的频率产生负面影响。