Team spirit motivated slower teams to persist, and the co-located classroom setting revealed the physical, face-to-face nature of teamwork¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · qualitative r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? For teams who took longer to finish, team spirit was a key motivating factor, and students found additional physical ways of interacting beyond their screens. → Elina Riivari 2021

Evidence¶

Elina Riivari 2021¶

Elina Riivari, Marke Kivijärvi, Anna-Maija Lämsä. (2021). Learning teamwork through a computer game: for the sake of performance or collaborative learning? Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10009-4

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Finding summarized in Table 1 from the qualitative analysis of feedback and team reports; students reported good team spirit enabled trial-and-error strategies, humor built cohesion, and positive feedback centered on group morale.

"For the teams who took longer to finish the game, team spirit was a key factor motivating them to continue playing"

Elina Riivari 2021 (2)¶

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Authors' observation during game sessions in the computer classroom: students walked to each other's computers, demonstrated mouse movements, and turned monitors so teammates could see their screens, revealing the physical nature of teamwork.

"Therefore, the students found additional ways of interacting with one another."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

Collaboration — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Students predominantly evaluated team success as fast gameplay, equating efficiency and victory with good teamwork despite prior instructions — reports the opposite
Hackathon teams face 16 general challenges across seven types that hamper teamwork — a broader claim this one bears on
Specific teamwork challenges hinder development of mutual trust and shared mental models in a hackathon CSCL setting — a broader claim this one bears on
Good quality coach-athlete relationships are associated with satisfaction with performance, personal treatment and training, higher motivation and physical self-concept, and greater team cohesion and collective efficacy — related
Local teams learn more than geographically distributed teams, but dispersed teams can communicate as effectively as co-located teams given sufficient time to develop group relationships — related

Page metadata

Field	Value
`type`	`claim`
`id`	`team-spirit-and-face-to-face-benefits`
`title`	`Team spirit motivated slower teams to persist, and the co-located classroom setting revealed the physical, face-to-face nature of teamwork`
`description`	`Team spirit motivated slower teams to persist, and the co-located classroom setting revealed the physical, face-to-face nature of teamwork`
`status`	`review`
`evidence_strength`	`moderate`
`newest_evidence`	`2021`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-10-29`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
`sources`	2 — `elina-riivari-2021`, `elina-riivari-2021-2`

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.