Goal profiles differ between effective and ineffective CL teams: mastery and social responsibility goals prevail in effective teams, entertainment, certificate and work avoidance goals in ineffective teams¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2007 · checked against its sources 2026-10-22 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Interview-based goal profiles of effective and ineffective CL teams showed moderate congruity (C = 0.55) and no configurative similarity (ES = 0.09), with mastery goals most salient in effective teams and entertainment goals as salient as certificate goals in ineffective teams. → Hijzen 2007
q2 i? Students in ineffective teams were less conscious of their goals, producing fewer goal statements (27) than effective-team students (54). → Hijzen 2007
Evidence¶
Hijzen 2007¶
Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., & Vedder, P. H. (2007). Exploring the links between students' engagement in cooperative learning, their goal preferences and appraisals of instructional conditions in the classroom. Learning And Instruction, 17(6), 673-687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.020
q2 · i? · associational · r1
Content analysis of stimulated-recall group interviews, with goal statements categorized and profile congruence computed (Lemos's coefficients). The article reports "a moderate congruity" (C = 0.55) and "no configurative similarity" (ES = 0.09) between the two profiles.
"The goal profiles of students in effective and ineffective CL teams showed a moderate congruity (coefficient C between the two profiles ¼ 0.55) and no configurative similarity (coefficient ES between the two profiles ¼ 0.09)."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Achievement Goal Orientation — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- In ineffective CL teams, belongingness goals are negatively related to socially oriented task engagement, and no other goal domain relates significantly to engagement — related
- Effective and ineffective cooperative learning teams differ significantly only in socially oriented engagement, with ineffective teams showing lower socially oriented engagement — related
- Students explain effective and ineffective cooperative learning mainly by instructional conditions: type of task, teacher, and group composition are the most frequently mentioned factors — related
- Only 11.1% of interactions pair mastery-oriented aims with advanced strategies such as epistemic justification — related
- Readers with an entertainment goal make more evaluative comments than readers with a study goal, with no difference in affective responses — related
- Work-avoidance goals show a small positive association with academic dishonesty — related
- Readers with a study goal paraphrase and repeat text more often than readers with an entertainment goal — related
- Mastery goals are negatively associated with academic dishonesty across studies — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cl-goal-profiles-effective-ineffective-teams |
title |
Goal profiles differ between effective and ineffective CL teams: mastery and social responsibility goals prevail in effective teams, entertainment, certificate and work avoidance goals in ineffective teams |
description |
Goal profiles differ between effective and ineffective CL teams: mastery and social responsibility goals prevail in effective teams, entertainment, certificate and work avoidance goals in ineffective teams |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2007 |
source_checked |
2026-10-22 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — hijzen-2007 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.