Page 153 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Cooperation Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 153
theoretical, empirical and practical insight into team cooperation ...
Team regulation
Task episodes are cyclic and consist of: (a) preparation for task engagement;
(b) engagement; and (c) disengagement/reflection (Kozlowski & Ilgen,
2006). Regulation involves setting the goals and task strategies; allocation
of team member resources in response to shifting task demands, reflection/
feedback on processes, goal attainment and this then serves as an input for
subsequent goals and strategies. Feedback is an integral part of team regu-
lation because it affects the setting of the goals as well as the investment of
members’ resources. However, depending on what exactly needs to be ac-
complished one has to distinguish individual-level feedback from team-lev-
el feedback. Team regulation is crucial for the team’s performance (ibid.).
In the context of ESL teams, regulation is especially important in the
context of feedback as an integral part of team regulation. After every cycle
of team functioning (i.e. dealing with one student), feedback to each mem-
bers as well as the team as a whole (e.g. about the strategies and resourc-
es used, about how well they responded to changes in task demands, about
the interpersonal processes) serves as an input for the next cycle (i.e. deal-
ing with another ESL student).
Conclusion
The effectiveness of ESL teams can be conceptualised in three ways:
group-produced output (e.g. the number of ESLers who returned to school/
training), the consequences for team members (e.g. job satisfaction, im-
proved attitude to working with the ESL student) and an improvement in
the team’s capability to perform effectively in the future (Guzzo & Dickson,
1996). If we want ESL teams to fulfil this mission, simply putting people
together in a team will not suffice. Given the complexity of ESL and ESL
teams, the theoretical, empirical and practical insights into team coopera-
tion presented in this and the related article (namely, parts I and II) should
be carefully taken into consideration.
Based on the literature review, it is recommended that ESL teams do
not rush into their main task – dealing with (a potential) ESL student.
Instead, in the formation (transition) phase time and attention should be
given to finding an agreement on interpreting the team’s mission and iden-
tifying the main goal. This may pose a challenge given that members of
the ESL team have different professional backgrounds and may come from
different sectors. Moreover, in this phase developing trust among team
153
Team regulation
Task episodes are cyclic and consist of: (a) preparation for task engagement;
(b) engagement; and (c) disengagement/reflection (Kozlowski & Ilgen,
2006). Regulation involves setting the goals and task strategies; allocation
of team member resources in response to shifting task demands, reflection/
feedback on processes, goal attainment and this then serves as an input for
subsequent goals and strategies. Feedback is an integral part of team regu-
lation because it affects the setting of the goals as well as the investment of
members’ resources. However, depending on what exactly needs to be ac-
complished one has to distinguish individual-level feedback from team-lev-
el feedback. Team regulation is crucial for the team’s performance (ibid.).
In the context of ESL teams, regulation is especially important in the
context of feedback as an integral part of team regulation. After every cycle
of team functioning (i.e. dealing with one student), feedback to each mem-
bers as well as the team as a whole (e.g. about the strategies and resourc-
es used, about how well they responded to changes in task demands, about
the interpersonal processes) serves as an input for the next cycle (i.e. deal-
ing with another ESL student).
Conclusion
The effectiveness of ESL teams can be conceptualised in three ways:
group-produced output (e.g. the number of ESLers who returned to school/
training), the consequences for team members (e.g. job satisfaction, im-
proved attitude to working with the ESL student) and an improvement in
the team’s capability to perform effectively in the future (Guzzo & Dickson,
1996). If we want ESL teams to fulfil this mission, simply putting people
together in a team will not suffice. Given the complexity of ESL and ESL
teams, the theoretical, empirical and practical insights into team coopera-
tion presented in this and the related article (namely, parts I and II) should
be carefully taken into consideration.
Based on the literature review, it is recommended that ESL teams do
not rush into their main task – dealing with (a potential) ESL student.
Instead, in the formation (transition) phase time and attention should be
given to finding an agreement on interpreting the team’s mission and iden-
tifying the main goal. This may pose a challenge given that members of
the ESL team have different professional backgrounds and may come from
different sectors. Moreover, in this phase developing trust among team
153
