View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk brought to you by CORE

provided by ScholarWorks at Central Washington University

Central Washington University

ScholarWorks@CWU
Electronic Theses Student Scholarship and Creative Works

1951

A Study of Group Dynamics as a Classroom

Process
C. Bruce Schwarck
Central Washington University

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd

Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, Educational Methods
Commons, and the Teacher Education and Professional Development Commons

Recommended Citation
Schwarck, C. Bruce, "A Study of Group Dynamics as a Classroom Process" (1951). Electronic Theses. Paper 67.

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship and Creative Works at ScholarWorks@CWU. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Electronic Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU.
A STUDY OF GROUP DYNAMICS AS A CLASSROOM PROCESS

by

C. Bruce S chwarck

A paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master
of Education, in the Graduate
School of the Central
Washington College
of Education

August, 1951
 ii

The following paper is approved as partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of Master of Education.

_____________________________
J. Wesley Crum, Chairman

___________________________
Loretta M. Miller

_____________________________
Eldon E. Jacobsen
 iii

The writer of this paper wishes to acknowledge his sincere

appreciation for the excellent help and the vast amount of

encouragement given to him by Professor J. Wesley Crum, advisor,

and to Loretta M. Miller and Eldon E. Jacobsen as cor:imi ttee

members.
 iv

TABLE OF CON'I'EN'l'S

CHAPTER PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY • • 1

Purpose of the study 1

Importance of the study • • • 2

Limitations of the study • 2

Definitions of terms used • • 3

Group dynamics. 3
Rapport • • 3
Autocracy • • 3
Democracy • 4
Laissez-faire • • 4
Group Discussion 5
11 Buzz 11 Session • 5
Resource Person • 5
Role Playing. 5
Sociodrama. • 6

Psychodrama • 7

Group Observer 7

Feedback. 7

Sociogram • 7

Organization of remainder of the paper • 8

 v

CHAP'fER PAGE
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .. .. . . . . ... ... 10

Democracy promoted by use of group dynamics

in American Education ... ...... 10

Points of view 10

Democratic teaching is guidance ... .... • • 11

Teaching for a democracy • • • • .. 12

Ideal skills of democratic living • .. . .. 13

Group dynamics for education . . . . . . . . . . 14
We can work together. • ~• • .. .. • • 15
Trends in teacher education • • • .......
• 16
Building group rapport . . . ......... 21

The concept of group rapport .. .. 21

Bases for group rapport •• · • . . . . . . . . . . 22

Characteristics of a cohesive group • • • .. 23

Procediires in establishing group rapport .. 24
Consequences of group rapport • • • . . . . . . . 25

Criteria for evaluating teaching in

terms of group rapport. 27

Teacher-student sharing • • .. .. ...... 29

Goals of teacher-student sharing ........ 29
Sharing all phases of learning activities •• 33
Establishing a basis for sharing .... 34
Organizing for sharing. • • • • • • • • • • • • • 34
 vi

CHAPTER PAGE
Principles of student-teacher sharing • • • • • 36

Procedures for sharing ............ 36

Types of organization for shared action . . . . 37
Results of research support teacher-

student sharing • • • • • • ......... 38

The development of group action • • • • • • • • • 38

The need to belong . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 38

Concept of the group ...........

• • 40
Concept of group dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Nature of group participation . . . . . . . . . 41
Techniques for changing groups • • • • • • • • • 42
Group discussion • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 42
11 . .... . . . . . . . . ...
Buzz 11 session 47
Sociodraroa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Role playing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Play activity • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 49

Group interview • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 49

Decision-making practice ........... 49

Leadership practice • • • • . . . . . . . . . . 50

Evaluation in group dynamics • • • • • • • • • • 50

Questions about organization and activities • • 50

Group observer • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 54
Feedback of observer's findings ........ 55
 vii

CHAPTER PAGE
Group self-evaluation ... . .. .. .... 57

Social distance scale . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Summary • • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . 59
III. AN INFORM.AL EXPERIMENT IN GROUP DYNAMICS WITH A

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL CLA5S ........ . ... 60

Points of view and assumptions • • • • • • • • • 60

Contrasts in ability • • • • • • • • • • • • • 60
Problem of belonging • • • • • • • • • • • • 61
Importance of co-operation .......... 62
Potential of pupil assumed • • • • • • • • • • 6.3
Procedure a classroom problem • • • • • • • • • 6.3
Procedure used .... . . .. ...... 64
Problem of seating • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 64
Organization of class •..... . ...... 65

Methods of presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Uni ts of exploration • • • • • • • • • • • • • 67

Chairman checks groups ...... .. .... 68

Class observers • • . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Sharing experiences • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 69
Methods of presentation used • • • • • • • • • 70

Democratic living • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 72
Example of democratic practices • • • • • • • • 7.3
Student statements • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 74
 viii

CHAPTER PAGE
Summary • • .• ....• .• .• • •
• • • • • 76
IV. SLR JMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . • • • • . • • . . . . . •
1
77
Summary • . . . • . . • • . • • • . . • • . . . • 77
The literature • • .....• ....• •
• • 77
The informal experiment . • • • • • . • • • • • 78
Conclusions • • • • • • . • . . . . • • . • . • • 79
Recommendations . • . . • • . • • . . • . • • . • 79

Further Research needed • . . • • • • • • . • • • 80

BIBLIOGRAPHY • • • . • • . • • • • . . . • . • • • . . • 81
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

For many years educators have sought ways to improve classroom

procedure. Institutions, agencies and professional organizations

throughout the country have been setting up workshops to study the

problem.

As world conditions have grown more complex it has been

necessary to improve teaching teclmiques in order to assist students

to meet the demands of a rapidly moving society. It seemed necessary

to many people that classroom procedures be made more effective;

thus the study of group dynamics as a classroom procedure seemed

inevitable.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was threefold:

1. To review the literature on the subject of group dynamics

as it applies to classroom situations.

2. To watch same of the techniques in operation with a

group of eighth grade students in United States history.

3. To learn how teaching can be made more effective through

utilization of group dynamics.

 2

Importance of the Study

Classroom procedure has long been a problem for educators

that has become more complex as the gap between the school world
and the world of industry has widened.

School people have been looked upon as the educational

leaders in a community and the quality of leadership has been

judged by the product that was turned out. This leadership has
depended upon the techniques used in leading the youth of the

community. The feeling in many communities has been that the

old classroom procedures were outmoded and that better methods for
guiding children should be used~

The problem, then, for study was a real one, one that was

alive and one that required the best efforts that educators could

give.

Limitations of the Study

This study was concerned only with a survey of the literature

on the subject of group dynamics, observing the progress of the

class that was conducted by using some of the techniques of this

procedure, and discovering how teaching can be made more effective

through the use of group procedure.

The class was not operated parallel to a control group and

no attempt was made to make it a comprehensive scientific research

 3

of the subject. The class was conducted as an experiment in which

the investigator attempted to put some of the procedures of group

dynamics into practice and to observe group reactions. No detailed

record of classroom techniques was made and no graphs nor charts

to show progress were attempted.

Definition of Terms Used

Group Dynamics. Stiles and Dorsey defined group dynamics

as follows:
Group dynamics may be defined as the force or power that
underlies group productivity. Study of group dynamics leads
to understanding cause and effect of forces operating in a
group and to helping the group become sensitive to its
problems and competent to solve them. 1

Rapport. Stiles and Dorsey have interpreted rapport to

mean:
The concept of rapport as an important aspect of teaching
method is based upon the definition that rapport implies
the establishment and maintenance of harmonious interpersonal
relationships within a group that are characterized by respect,
mutual confidence, understanding, and a sense of interdependence. 2

Autocracy. The term autocracy was defined only as it applied

to teaching in the public schools. Stiles and Dorsey pointed out

that, "The autocratic leader made plans for group and individual

1 Lindley J. Stiles and Mattie F. Dorsey, Democratic Teaching

in Secondary Schools, (New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1950),
pp. 370-371.
2 Ibid., p. 271.
 4

action and gave orders to each member of the group with respect to

his responsibility.113

Democracy. Stiles and Dorsey construed democracy to mean

shared power and shared respect with economic balance and enlighten-

ment contributing qualities of shared power and shared respect.4

The authors stated further that:

••• the two signs, shared respect and shared power, are
characterizations of democratic life. When they are absent,
democracy cannot exist: when present, the degree to which
they are utilized in the total life of the society determines
the quality of living possible. The extent to which a social
group is living democratically can be ascertained by examining
the degree in which these two qualities exist among members
of the group.5

Cunningham stated, "Democracy is not merely an idea; it is a

way of behaving. 11 6
Laissez-faire. Stiles and Dorsey defined Laissez-faire

clearly when they said, "The Laissez-faire leader let the group do

just about as it pleased, offering help only when approached. 11 7

3 Ibid., p. 275.

4 ill§., pp. 22-29.

5 Loe. cit.
6 Ruth Cunningham and Associates, Understanding Group
Behavior of Boys ~ fillli, (New York: Bureau of Publications,
Teachers College, Columbia University, 1951), p. 108.

7 Stiles and Dorsey, ..QE· cit., p. 275.

 5

Group Discussion. Group discussion has been defined as:

1. A cooperative effort to use facts in the solution of
a problem.

2. The testing of facts proposed in the solution of a

problem.

3. The proposal of alternative solutions to a problem.

4. The presentation of divergent points of view on a
problem.8
11 Buzz 11 Session. Stiles and Dorsey have defined the 11 buzz 11
session as:

A procedure for stimulating wide participation in the

discussion of group problems is that called 11 buzz 11 session.
Through this simple technique large groups are divided into
small subgroups of four to eight members for the purpose of
considering for the larger group a problem of concern to all.
The results of 11 buzz 11 session deliberations are then reported
to the larger group for consideration. Stress is usually
placed in this type of group discussion upon identifying
critical issues rather than upon finding convenient answers.9
Resource Person. The resource person was defined as meaning

a person who supplied information or material at the request of the

group or a coilllllittee.
Role Playing. Stiles and Dorsey interpreted role playing
as a method of creative dramatics.10 They explain further that:

8 G. H. Revis, Keith Tyler, Watt A. Long, Robert Kennedy, and

C. L. McKelvie, Learning Through Group Discussion, (Columbus, Ohio:
The Junior Town Meeting League, 1949), p. 4.

9 Stiles and Dorsey, .QE• cit., p. 395.

10 Loe. cit.
 6

This technique represents modifications of what many teachers

will recognize as the dramatic method, or the method of creative
dramatics. Essentially it is the procedure of arranging for
several members of a group to enact, in the presence of other
group members a situation, a problem, a procedure, or a type
of group structure. Through the use of this technique it is
possible to sensitize members of a group to operations, member
participation or roles, emotional factors, and blocks to group
productivity. Analysis by group spectators in an important
aspect of role playing. Through the study of an example of
group operation, members are offered an opportunity, in an
unemotional and impersonal manner, to study their own group
problems.ll

It should be added that actions and words are spontaneous

and unrehearsed in role playing.

Sociodrama. The term sociodrama was defined a little

differently from role playing. Sociodrama encouraged all members

of a group to take part in common discussions through dramatic

participation. Sociodrama bas released tensions and pent up feelings
that grew out of some problems discussed in the classroom. Jennings

gave a good explanation of the term when she said, Sociodrama is

11

an intensive, vivid, living through of experiences of common concern

to the group members; experiences which may have been cut short in
life and blocked from full expression, leaving unresolved, buried
emotional impacts.nl2

Like role playing, actions and words are spontaneous and

unrehearsed in sociodrama.

ll I&£. cit.
12 Helen Hall Jennings, Fostering Mental Health in .Q1ll: Schools,
(Washington, D. c.: Association for Supervision and Curriculmn
Development, National Education Association Yearbook, 1950), p. 263.
 7

Psychodrama.. Psychodrama is a term used often in dealing

with group dynamics. It is most easily defined by showing how it

differs from sociodrama. Jennings stated that: "A crucial

difference between psychodrama and sociodrama is the greater

emphasis upon the •private' or •personalized' world of the individual

in the one case (psychodrama), and the greater emphasis upon what

is common in the social roles of one individual with others in the

second case (sociodrama) • "1.3

Qroup Observer. The part of the group observer was that of

watching the group in action, pointing out difficulties which the

group encountered, encouraging them and suggesting ways to act more

effectively.

Feedback. Feedback was interpreted to mean a method by

which the group secured information about itself by the use of an

observer. This person would feed back information and stimulate

the group to better efforts.
Sociogram. Jennings has defined a sociogram as a picture of

the choices of the class members for one particular situation only.14

She further illustrated her definition as follows:

You are seated now as you happened to get seated in our

homeroom, but now that we all know one another, every
pupil should have the opportunity to sit near the other
pupils he most wants to sit beside. Then the classroom

1.3 Loe. cit.

14 Ibid., p. 20.3.
 8

can be arranged to suit everyone. Write your own name

and under it three choices of pupils you would like to
sit near in this room. Put a 11 1 11 next to your first choice,
a 11 211 for your second, and a "3 11 for your third choice. I
will try to fit in as many of everyone's choices as possible.
But since there are many pupils and each of you may be
choosing in many different ways, you can see how it is that
I can only do my best to arrange the seats so everyone gets
at least one choicei and more only if I can figure the
seats out that way. 5

Organization of Remainder of the Paper

The remaining chapters of this paper are organized about

different aspects of the study.

Chapter II will deal with the material in the literature

relevant to the study. A report on an informal experiment in group

dynamics with a junior high school class will comprise Chapter III.
Chapter IV will summarize the entire paper.

15 Ibid., p. 204.

Llbyary
Central 'N" ·' ·" '"n Colle~
c{ r· '"~· ~ : • ·,;.}\

Ellensbmr:, \V.::.shington
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Group dynamics as a classroom procedure is a relatively new

development and material on the approach is not yet extensive.

Writers on the subject have confined their efforts to magazine

articles and a very limited number of books. Research for material

has led to the periodical guides. These guides point to the evidence
that is in existence concerning group dynamics. The following are
universities, colleges, and organizations which have done work in

group dynamics:
1. The University of California
2. The University of Michigan

3. The University of Maine

4. Cornell University
5. Purdue University
6. Springfield College
7. Teachers College of Columbia University

8. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Research Center

for Group Dynamics

9. Adult Education Division of the National Education
Association
10. Association of Supervision and Curriculum. Development

of the National Education Association.

 10

The techniques of group dynamics have been slowly creeping

into the public school classroom. To the writer•s knowledge only

one book has been written that would guide a teacher at any level to

set up a program of group dynamics. The book referred to is

Democratic Teaching in Secondary Schools.I

Democracy Promoted by use of Group Dynamics

in American Education

Points of View. The philosophy implied in the above has four

points of view which are fundamental to .American education and the

American way of life.

The first point of view was that youth has lived as it has
learned to live. Behavior patterns of youth were probably picked

up from the group with whom they associated. It is believed that

the kind and quality of instruction provided by a society have had

an important bearing on the way youth have lived. American schools

have founded their curriculum on the thesis that our customs of

living and ideals should be perpetuated.

The second point of view emphasized democracy as a way of
life. Democracy has always meant participation. The democratic
way of life was built on the precepts of participation of all

members of society. Stiles and Dorsey wrote that:

1 Lindley J. Stiles and Mattie F. Dorsey, Democratic Teaching

in Secondary Schools (New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1950), 579 pp.
 11

The goal of democratic living is the establislunent and

perpetuation of a pattern of group life that increasingly
makes possible a greater amount of personal happiness and
well being. Such a pattern provides for creative expression
and self-determination. It utilizes free inquiry and insures
freedom from externally imposed control. It makes these
provisions for all members of the group.2

Good teaching has been necessary to foster the above way of

life.
The third point of view maintained that becoming democratic
was a developmental process and that it never just happenedo Those

persons who have learned the democratic ways were not born with
democratic characteristics but had to acquire them through democratic

participation which they had experienced in childhood.

The fourth point of view was slanted toward the fact that

growth toward democracy required help. The teacher's job was to

incorporate good guidance techniques so youth would become competent

in democratic living.
Democratic Teaching is Guidance. We have assumed that

guidance has been considered imperative to democratic living. Since

Democratic thinking has never been inherited, it must of necessity

have depended upon acquisition. Guidance then has waJ.ked hand in

hand with teaching. The two have been inseparable. Good guidance in
our culture should have taught youth to be democratic.

2 Ibid., p. 4.
 12

Teaching for ~ Democracy. Our nation was created soon after

the Revolutionary War. The new govermnent was established upon

democratic principles which left the way open for participation b'J
all. Many of our great political leaders stressed the democratic

ideology which was the core of our constitution.

Since our democracy was founded upon co-operative living,

schools should have been among the first to guide youth toward the

democratic way of life. However, the opportunity to do so was

by-passed because the American school was born of European ideology

and did not burst into a democratic way of life as the new American

govermnent had done. Edwards and Richey wrote:

Of all the institutions of the old order, none resisted
change more than the school. A long history and the
sanctions of religion had given to the content, method,
and the arrangements for control and administration of
education a vitality which led to the survival of a class
system of education in a society which had repudiated
class rule.
Education needed to be oriented around the concept of
citizenship in the democratic state. This was not a
simple task. But men of vision, aware of this necessity,
united in the effort to provide, freely and as a right
which citizenship implied, adequate opportunity for all--
opportunity which was not the kindly offering of an
altruistic church, nor yet the contribution of hopeful,
well-meaning philanthropists.3
The gap that has always existed between the American schools
and American governmental practices has been caused, in part at least,

3 Newton Edwards and Herman G. Richey, The School in the

American Social Order (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1947),
pp. 360-61.
 13

because the development of democracy in the governr.ient and in the

schools did not grow in parallel fashion.

The schools could not readily shake the shackles of arbitrary

standards conceived in the lore of educational practices whose roots

were imbedded deeply in European ideology.

The year 1951 found the situation unchanged in many cases.

Public school teaching has tended to be autocratic in method so that

teaching for democracy has been slow to mature. Stiles and Dorsey

wrote that:
Fascist societies excel in developing educational programs
and teaching methods geared to their objectives. Likewise
countries that adhere to the communistic doctrines of Karl
Marx follow a similar course in developing educational
programs to support their social philosophy.4
Leaders in the United States have been quite concerned over

its efforts to provide education for all but they have given little

thought to what is being taught. We should have been teaching for

democracy since the advent of our democratic nation.

Ideal Skills of Democratic Living. Stiles and Dorsey listed

the following twelve ideal skills of democratic living:

1. Willingness and ability to keep informed relative to
social issues
2. Ability and willingness to share responsibility for the
formulation of policies which affect the common good

3. Open-mindedness; willingness to see the other side of

the question
4. Skill in co-operative relationships

4 Stiles and Dorsey, .QE• cit., p. 30.

 14

5. Shared and mutual respect given to all

6. Faith in intelligence as a method of solving problems

7. Skill in helping others achieve belongingness

8. Ability to establish and maintain a home and the

responsibility of family living

9. Skill in democratic leadership; ability to function as

a "change agentll

10. Emotional stability and well integrated personal

adjustments
11. Skill in self discipline

12. Willingness to abide ~group decisions and regulations;

respect for will of majority

For the most part schools failed in the above ideal skills.

Homes and corrnnunities failed. Youth has not been nurtured in the

light of needs, needs of the home, the community or the nation.

All of the literature relative to group dynamics has stressed

democratic thinking for our schools.

Group Dynamics for Education. Most school people have had

trouble working in groups of one kind or another. Too often there

has been "• •• a distressing gap between what does happen and what
should happen. 11 6 Very little has been done by groups toward solving

the problem of group productivity. Serious study toward understanding

5 Ibid., pp. 44-46.

6 Leland B. Bradford, Kenneth D. Benne and Ronald Lippitt,
The Promise of Group Dynamics for Education," National Educational
11

Journal, September, 1948, p. 350.

 15

cause and effect which operate in a group, and toward making a

group become sensitive to its problems has long been needed.

The study of group dynamics hasn't found a cure for all the

ills in group situations but it has opened the way for a greater

understanding of the complex forces which have operated in group

situations. Bradford, Benne, and Lippitt stated that:

It can help us gain the instruments and skills for
diagnosing group ills. It can help us become familiar with
the many facets of leadership and membership as necessary
group responsibilities. It can help us train ourselves and
others as more productive group members and leaders. It
can help us measure and evaluate our progress in group
growth.7

The above quotation has told the story of group dynamics in

education so clearly that further effort to elaborate seemed futile.

We .Q§:!! Work Together. Group dynamics has been used as an
approach to the human relations problems of administration. Teachers

have felt that the principals, supervisors and others in administra-

tion made most of the decisions. Many principals have lalown that
this attitude existed. Teachers have long complained that they did

not receive the right kind of help from supervisors and administra-

tors. There has been a feeling along the line that teachers'

meetings have just been a waste of time. Group dynamics has made
strides toward correcting such conditions. Bradford and Lippitt
 78

There has been a slow trend in teacher education toward

training teachers for democratic situations. This trend has received

some emphasis from several colleges, universities and organizations

in various parts of the nation.

The methods utilized by group dynamics have been based upon

teacher-student sharing which was initiated by co-operative planning.

Rapport was stressed by several writers. The wholesome

relationship with others formed a basis for strong motivation.

Business men were aware of the importance of rapport to the success

of their businesses. A group that developed rapport attained a state

of cohesiveness which made it possible for that group to work as a

unit.
The preceding chapters have reviewed many of the techniques

used in creating cohesive groups. Teaching for democracy has relied

on many of the techniques mentioned in guiding youth toward demo-

cratic living.
~ Informal Experiment. A review was made of the experiences

of the students and teacher in sharing the explorations of a class

in eighth-grade social science. There was a feeling of enjoyment

supported by a strong current of genuine respect for each other among

members of the group.