Case # 1: The 9:30 am Team

Index

• Team Members
• Experiences in Each Department
• Human Resources Department
• Accounting Department
• Purchasing Department
• Marketing Department
• Operations Department
• Final Exam Week
• Analysis of Case # 1: The 9:30 am Team
• Background Perspective
• Employee Profile Information
• Summary of Peer Evaluation Data
• Summary of Survey Data
• Comments on the Instructors
• Comments on Realism and Relevancy
• Applying the Construct of Ownership Factors
• Jack's Ownership for Learning
• Mary's Ownership for Learning
• Mike's Ownership for Learning
• Bert's Ownership for Learning
• Linda's Ownership for Learning
• Summary of Ownership by 9:30 am Team Members

Team Members

ï Jack was about 6 feet tall with an athletic build and short, sandy hair usually hidden under a baseball cap. He wore wire rim glasses and always had a small smile ready. He dressed in jeans and sweatshirts.

ï Bert was about 5'11, with an athletic build and dark brown hair. He played inter-collegiate sports. He dressed in loose fitting casual clothes and usually wore a baseball cap during class.

ï Mike was about 5'11" with a heavier build and short black hair. He and Bert belonged to the same fraternity. Mike was interested in computers and used them productively. He usually wore a baseball cap, running shoes, baggy jeans and long sleeved shirts or sweatshirts.

ï Mary was about 5'5" tall, stocky with thick blonde hair usually worn in a pony tail. She had a cheerful disposition and quickly became the organizer for the group. She kept copies of completed letters and disk copies of other material. She always seemed to have answers or know where to find information about the course. She often wore hiking boots, jeans and heavy sweaters or sweatshirts.

ï Linda was about 5'4" tall, stocky with long, thick blonde hair. She was a very outgoing, sociable person and active in her sorority. She added an positive energy to the team with her chatter and witty comments. Linda wore the most expensive clothes of anyone on any of the teams.

Experiences in each department

Human Resources Department

The folder was passed around and each person took a Wall Street Journal article. There was social talk about the previous weekend and general chatter as the team members found out about each other. Mike and Bert compiled a list of names, e-mail addresses and phone numbers of the team members. Mike offered to type up the list and give everyone a copy next class. Bert asked a general question about what they were supposed to do regarding the WSJ articles. Mary opened her Employee Handbook and found the information for him. Mike asked which teacher they e-mailed their WSJ summaries to, and Mary provided that information also.

At 10:05 am (35 minutes into the 75 minute session) Mary suggested they look through the textbook and decide what type each letter was and mark it on the sheets. Mike and Bert worked on that task while Mary and Linda sent the absent Jack the following e-mail message:

Dear Jack,

This is your awesome Business Communications group. We are in class and you aren't. We just wanted to say hello and we hope that you are not sick, or that someone you know is not sick or you are not skipping class. Don't worry we have saved some work for you! See you on Wednesday.

Concerning the third assignment Weston said, "Design is really important. The employee will keep this memo as a reference, so be sure to use proper headings and bullet points for the important information." Mary asked if there was a chapter in the textbook that explained the design. Weston replied that Chapters 6 or 7 dealt with the direct approach. Concerning the fourth assignment on sexual harassment Weston said, "This one letter serves multiple purposes and goes to different readers, so the task is to define sexual harassment and how to report it. The document must appear inviting and be easy to read."

Weston left the team with a reminder to use the textbook and Samples book as resources, always take the reader's perspective and look for her in the other computer lab whenever they needed her. In the remaining minutes the team made their plans. Mike volunteered to write a draft for the next class and everyone else said they would read the chapters suggested by Weston and think about their scenarios. At 10:45 am the team members said their good-byes. Bert and Mike left together followed by Mary. Linda stayed behind to check her e-mail messages.

Human Resources, Day 2, Wednesday: Mike delivered a printed draft of the memo as promised and received congratulations and praise for a job well done from his teammates. The printout needed to be re-typed because of a virus on Mike's disk and in the process of being re-typed several changes were made. Linda, who was a better typist, sat at the keyboard. The other four team members clustered around her and made suggestions for changes to format, (i.e. spaces between headings), verb tense, grammar, and specific word choices. Bert referred to his notes from Weston's visit to ensure the letter contained all her suggestions. He also shared his notes with Jack so he was aware of Weston's comments.

Mary found information in the textbook related to the memo format and read the pertinent part aloud for the team. The original author, Mike, was quiet while the team modified his draft. Mary referenced the Employee Handbook to determine which division of Starr Corporation the team was in so that the memo could be addressed correctly. This first memo written collaboratively by all team members took 45 minutes to complete. When Mary retrieved the final copy from the printer and showed it to the group, team members gave a genuine cheer and applauded their efforts. This pattern of collaborative writing and group ownership was repeated often during the semester. Bert led a group discussion of the remaining writing assignments while Mary made a disk copy of the first letter, did a Save As, deleted the old text and started to write the next letter on the template. The team clustered around Linda's computer and debated how to use different types of bullets in their document. The team members pointed at the screen, gave directions and brainstormed ideas. As they left at 10:45 am Bert and Mike said, "See you Monday," to each person. Mary organized the final draft of the memo and the floppy disk into a team binder. At 10:55, Mary and Linda concluded their discussion of the writing projects with "If all else fails, we can get together on Monday night to finish up."

Human Resources, Day 3, Monday: Linda and Mary arrived 10 minutes before class to check their e-mail. Jack arrived a few minutes later. Bert and Mike strolled in right at 9:30 as the session started. Linda asked Bert if he had his disk with his draft letter on it. He jokingly replied, "I don't think so." Immediately, Linda and Mary chimed together, "Well, have a nice walk home to get it!" This was just one example of many with this group where peers held each other accountable for assigned tasks. The team had two memos completed and printed. Jack checked the finished drafts while Linda, Bert and Mike revised a third memo. Mary worked on the fourth writing assignment and was joined by Mike. Linda reviewed Bert's letter on the screen and suggested a change. Bert commented, "That's fine. I just kinda wrote a rough draft to get us going."

Weston visited the group and reviewed the two completed memos. For about 10 seconds the team members watched her face for reactions, then gave up and returned to their writing tasks. Weston wrote comments on the drafts and also gave the team verbal feedback. Jack stood behind Weston and looked over her shoulder while the other four sat facing her. Linda and Bert took her written comments, incorporated the changes and printed new versions within 10 minutes. The team members left at 10:45, but Mary remained to copy the letter files to a diskette.

Human Resources, Day 4, Wednesday: The team completed their writing assignments and handed in their package with a cover sheet.

Accounting Department

The group divided the WSJ articles with some good-natured teasing about the length of the article the last person received. Linda and Mary advised McCloud of a missing WSJ article and requested a "really long article" for Mike. A task repeated in each department was the preparation of a Payroll report. Bert volunteered as he had done the team attendance for the previous department. A few moments later, he discovered that in the Accounting Department his task was to produce a Payroll Report for the entire Starr Distribution division. After his teammates stopped laughing they gave him some suggestions and offers of assistance. The remaining assignments were de-stapled and passed out. The assignments included revising a procedural memo, preparing a collection letter and drafting a form letter for refusing credit. At 10:17 am, McCloud met with the team to discuss the writing assignments. She provided general rules for writing and page references in the textbook. Each student took notes on the specific comments she made regarding their assignment.

At 10:35 am, Weston returned the graded assignments from the Human Resources department. The team received a score of 8.1/10 based on three memos scored Acceptable and one scored Acceptable minus. It was the difficult memo on sexual harassment that was graded Acceptable minus. Bert's immediate reaction was, "That's terrible!" while Mike asked, "What didn't she like?" Mary used her calculator to figure out a letter grade while Linda read Weston's comments and nodded, "Oh, I see..." Mary said to the group, "It'll be okay. It's a B but we'll do better on the next one." Bert, Mike and Jack left at 10:40 am, but Mary and Linda remained behind to study the comments on each graded assignment.

Accounting, Day 2, Wednesday: All team members were present. At 9:37 am McCloud announced that, "Even though this course is not a lecture format, I'm going to lecture for about ten minutes to call your attention to things that showed up on the quiz. Get out your textbooks and write the page references I'll give you." Her lecture was crisp and precise. She reinforced the business context for the course by saying:

"In Business, people are busy and they will decide in eight seconds if your memo or letter is worth their time to read fully. Think beyond the limited scope of the information given because seldom will someone tell you everything you should put in a memo. Put yourself in the position of the reader. Ask and answer specific questions such as how long, and when."

Before she returned the quizzes, McCloud announced that only six people in the class received an Acceptable score and four of them were on the same team - Linda, Mike, Mary and Bert. As she handed the team their quizzes she remarked, "Very impressive." Mary turned to Jack (who had not passed the quiz) and patted him on the knee. He smiled forlornly.

After brief congratulations the team focused on the writing assignments. Linda gave Mike a hand-written draft of her letter along with a brief description of the purpose and scenario. Mike said he liked it so Linda opened a template with the letterhead and typed it in. Jack penned a draft of his letter. Mary left to confer with McCloud and when she returned remarked to Linda and Mike, "I picked a hard one." Jack showed Bert his draft letter with the comment, "I wrote this draft, then I saw the Samples book. I found a sample that's almost identical to ours so I just copied their format." Together they edited the draft. Linda and Mike debated alternative words and expressions to use in the letter they were co-authoring.

Bert explained to Mary what McCloud expected of the Payroll report regarding format. He switched his attention to proofread Linda's letter which he returned with a simple "It's good," comment. Linda then coached Bert through the steps required to save the letter and retain the template as a separate document to be re-used. Mike and Jack moved away from the group to a different computer to type Jack's letter. Mary worked on the form letter for refusing credit which proved to be the most difficult writing assignment. At various times team members sat with her and offered suggestions. Mary said to Linda, "This is causing be stress. Will you read this opening buffer?" Linda looked over Mary's shoulder and asked, "What's the secondary purpose of the letter?" They discussed options then Linda moved to help Mike and Jack with their draft. Mary commented, "I have a total mental block here. I'll just skip the start and write the next part. I've spent the whole class period looking at this problem. I think I need another example. The one in the textbook is no good." McCloud suggested an example from the Samples book.

At 10:35, Bert explained to the team what was required to make the Payroll Report acceptable (i.e., alphabetical order, last name first) and said to Mike, "Let's go. I'm dismissing class early." Mary said, "Maybe I'll just give up on this letter and give it to someone else." Linda said, "No way! I did my two letters." However, her tone was friendly and she added, "If there's anything to stress about it's certainly not Business Communications!" Bert, Mike and Jack promised to help Mary finish on Monday and left at 10:40 am. Linda remained to chat with Mary for a few minutes then left. Mary remained to check her e-mail.

Accounting, Day 3, Monday: All team members were present. Mary asked for help with her difficult form letter assignment. Mike and Bert sat beside her and offered suggestions which she typed into her draft. Jack made final revisions to his letter. Linda printed a copy of her letter. They shared their drafts and co-edited. At 9:55 they gave Bert edited copies to review. He marked them up with pen and explained his edits to Linda and Jack. Mike and Mary continued to work on the form letter. Linda, Jack and Bert crowd behind Mary while Mike moves down the row to review the letters by Linda and Jack. Linda suggested using the on-line Thesaurus to find different words. Mike discussed his edits with Linda and re-joined the group with Mary. At 10:08 Mary sent a draft of the credit refusal letter to the printer with the comment, "This letter sucks! I worried about it all weekend but my roommate said Don't worry. Your teammates will help you on Monday, and she was right." Linda and Jack printed revised copies of their letters to show to McCloud before making any other changes. McCloud was busy with other teams so they worked on the cover page for the department.

McCloud met with the team at 10:26 and was handed the three letter drafts. The team gathered around her. McCloud read aloud the opening sentence of Linda's letter, "We wanted to thank you..." and responded, "What? We did then we changed our mind?" McCloud suggested, "When you eyeball a letter look at the start of each sentence. Here it's, "We want...We need... Our company. The letter is writer centered." McCloud described the second letter as "Good," and the form letter as "needs work." She shared a story about her experience working in a bank and the consequences of an incorrectly written credit refusal letter. The team listened attentively to her comments and after she left immediately made changes and further edits to their letters. They then reviewed and made further edits to the letters. A final copy of the cover page was printed and shared with the team by Jack. The team finished at 10:43 am.

Accounting, Day 4, Wednesday: All team members were present. Bert added attendance information to the spreadsheet for the Payroll assignment. He left to check on attendance with other teams in the room. Jack worked with Mary on the credit refusal form letter while Mike and Linda polished another letter. At 9:50 am McCloud passed out the first peer evaluation forms with instructions on how to complete it. Linda, Mike and Bert briefly discussed their Spring Break vacation plans then returned to their editing tasks. Mary read the form letter aloud to herself. Bert and Mike join her to help with final revisions. Jack had accidentally deleted part of his letter, but Linda showed him how to use the Undelete option to recover his work.

McCloud left to attend the presentation by the Operations team. At 10:10 am, Weston reviewed Linda's letter and commented that it had parallel structure problems and too many "I" sentences which suggested it was writer centered. Linda returned to her computer to make further revisions. Weston reviewed Mary's form letter and after she left Mary crumpled the letter into a ball and tossed it into the trash. Mike said, "Weston is a harder grader." Bert noticed an inconsistency between the student names provided by the teachers and the names provided by team members. He went to the group to get clarification.

By 10:30 the team had completed all the writing assignments and the package was assembled with the cover page. At 10:35 Jack left, followed by Mike and then Bert who made a final check that the package was complete. Linda joked that, "Four of the dumbies in my group were up until 3:00 am so they're all tired today." She and Mary remained for an additional ten minutes to check their e-mail, then left.

Purchasing Department

By 9:48 am the team had finished chatting and started to work. Linda wrote her WSJ summary for the last department, while the other four planned how to write the assignments. Mary checked the Samples book while Jack looked up information in the textbook. Bert asked if they should start writing the letters today or were they just going to sit around and wait for the teacher to visit. Jack and Linda selected assignments to work on and Bert volunteered to do attendance. Mary left to make photocopies of the different assignments and visited the next room to find Weston. Mary returned to say that Weston was still meeting with another group. McCloud suggested a sample letter to Mary who read it, said, "Well this isn't too bad," and typed a draft on her computer. Linda also typed a draft of her letter assignment. Mike read his WSJ article while Jack read the textbook. Mike borrowed a dime from Linda to make a photocopy of the sample letter recommended by McCloud for his writing assignment.

At 10:18 am Weston met with the team and discussed each writing assignment. To Linda she said, "It's a Sales letter so check Chapter 6. Remember, it's easy to focus on what the company didn't do... so instead focus on getting more business. That's the purpose." To Mary she said, "You're writing because you need answers to questions. Focus on the information you need to complete the order. Make sure its well organized. Address different issues in each paragraph and identify an action in the closing." To Mike she said, "Get attention in the first paragraph. There is a full page of material so organization and design are very important. Use bolding or underlining so it appears easy to read. Keep it to one page, be concise, anticipate questions the reader might ask." The students noted these heuristics and worked on their drafts. Mike asked how to make a graphic so Mary gave him the handout (Appendix B) on using Freelance Graphics.

At 10:40 am McCloud announced that the highest score for all groups on the last project was the Accounting department (the participating team). She awarded them with campaign buttons labeled "Go Business" and a round of applause. After examining the many comments on the returned letters Mike said, "I can't believe it, a 9.5 and its still ripped apart." As team left at 10:45 Bert explained to Mary that he had the attendance sheet on disk and he would fill it in when he returned next Wednesday. Mary commented as she left, "That was really good. I like getting presents - even buttons. That's twice our group was the highest; the first quiz and now this."

Purchasing, Day 2, Wednesday: Bert was absent. The other team members worked intently at separate computers on their assignments. Jack referenced information in the textbook while Mike added a graphic to his letter. Linda and Mary chatted about several topics while working on their assignments. The printer had problems so Mary went to the adjoining lab to use the printer there. Jack continued to write his draft letter. At 10:10 Linda joined him and they joked/flirted with each other for several minutes. Mary returned and with Linda's suggestions created a cover page for this Purchasing department. Mary, Jack and Linda huddled together in from of the computer and their body language suggested they were comfortable with the close proximity. Mike printed a draft and said, "Now I'll have Weston chew it apart." He returned four minutes later and started making changes based on her comments. Linda and Jack continued their teasing and flirting. At 10:40 Mary showed a print out of the cover page to McCloud who made comments which Mary immediately incorporated. At 10:45 as Mike, Jack and Linda prepared to leave Mary showed off her cover sheet and said, "Ta Da! I really like this."

Purchasing, Day 3, Monday: Bert was absent. The other team members worked on revisions to their drafts. Mike was interviewed during the class session and Mary after class. Printer problems were repeated this session. Jack, Linda and Mary spent most of the session in Room 417 using the computers and printer there. Weston reviewed the drafts by Jack and Mike and they made changes based on her suggestions. All four members left at 10:40 am.

Purchasing, Day 4, Wednesday: All present. Jack, Linda and Mary sat in a cluster proofreading completed letters. Bert was catching up and reading the scenario descriptions. Mike printed his letter and handed it into the proofreading cluster. Linda moved to the computer to make revisions to a letter. Bert, obviously tired, sat beside her . Linda re-typed the letter instead of simply editing. Bert picked up the draft she had been craning her neck to read and held it beside the monitor so she could see it better. At 10:10 am Bert asked the team if it was okay for him to leave for his interview with me. Linda replied jokingly, "Oh, are you still part of our group?" After the interview with Bert, Jack eagerly participated in his interview. By 10:40 the completed assignments had been sorted, stapled together with the cover page and turned in. All members left at 10:45.

Marketing Department

Mike presented his teammates with a bundle of pages containing the letters and memos the team had written in each of the previous departments. He said they would be useful in preparing for the next quizzes. Bert asked Mary for the form letter she had written in the previous department so he could use it as a model. Mary suggested he re-use the heading and address where everything was in brackets. Mary coached Bert through the procedures to use the Save As option in the word processor. She began with a high level explanation then simply showed him the steps to follow. McCloud mentioned to the class that "...everyone should be sure they have letterhead on their own disk - especially for the next class." Bert and Mary exchanged a look and said in unison, "Quiz on Wednesday." At 10:10 am, Mary asked each person which assignment they were working on and typed that information onto the cover page template. Bert, Mike and Linda continued their conversation about their vacations in Mexico. McCloud walked by the group twice while this conversation was going on, but neither she nor the students reacted or seemed concerned.

At 10:20 Bert searched the Samples book for an example of a form letter; Jack drafted his letter on the computer, Linda read the textbook, Mary made changes to the cover page and Mike moved from person to person to help where he could. At 10:30 McCloud returned the graded assignments. All five team members gathered around Linda who flipped through the package. Bert announced, "Three A's and a B." Each team member took time to examine the comments on the graded assignments while Mike calculated the team's grade. Four team members left at 10:40 am. Mary remained to check her e-mail.

Marketing, Day 2, Wednesday: Linda, Jack and Mary arrived 10 minutes early. Jack worked on his writing assignment while Linda and Mary checked their e-mail. Six minutes before class, Mike and Bert arrived. Each team member had letterhead ready on their screen. At 9:30 am McCloud entered the room and walked by the group. She noticed their monitors and asked if they were ready. Mary responded, "Oh yeah, we're ready to go!" The team members wrote the quiz and were among the first completed.

After the quiz, Mary opened her draft of the writing assignment and said to Mike and Bert, "Want to come and see what I have so far and see if you like it?" Mike asked a few questions and Mary expanded on the writing situation. Mike used the keyboard to correct a punctuation error. Mary said to Mike, "You go through all this time writing paper after paper and you want to make it long - and then you write in this class and it's got to be short. Somehow it just seems all wrong." Together they discussed the meaning of the letter and what it was supposed to say. They exchanged ideas, suggestions and alternative wordings.

While they were discussing their letter, Bert and Linda collaborated on another letter. Jack sat between the two pairs and worked on his letter while the noisy debates took place on either side. Linda printed a draft of her letter and gave it to Jack to proofread. While he read her letter she sat at his computer and read his draft on the screen. Mary told Linda that "except for this last sentence we're almost done." She said later in response to Bert's question, "Yeah, I think we can help you. We're pretty much done. We rattled this one off in like half an hour." Linda and Jack exchanged edits and socialized. Bert read the textbook.

At 10:35 am Mary asked each person the status of their assignments. She said, "We are just ripping this stuff off! We still have two more days." Mike said "And then Operations." Mary replied, "Yeah I know. Wouldn't it be nice if we could get it earlier?" Mary reviewed Linda's letter and suggested she add the department name and date, "just in case it got lost or something." Linda asked her to pencil it on the draft. There were a few minutes of social talk concerning other classes and the pending Operations project then team members left the lab. Mary remained to update the team folder and check her e-mail.

Marketing, Day 3, Wednesday: All team members were present. Mary and Linda arrived 10 minutes early to check their e-mail. McCloud discussed the quizzes from the previous class and stressed the need for the students to understand the meaning behind labels such as direct and indirect. She spoke about the psychology of the Bad News letter type and passed around a positive example written by a student in the 8:00 am class. Bert alone on the team took notes. The body language of the team members (head down, arms crossed, slouching) suggested they knew they had not done well on the quiz. At 9:50 am the team received their graded quizzes and no one had passed.

At 10:00 am, Jack made changes to his letter while Mary and Mike made final edits to their letter. Bert asked Linda if she was finished and could she help him? He showed her the writing situation and explained the problem he was having. Over the next 20 minutes, Linda and Bert collaborated to build the letter using models from the textbook and the Samples book. Mike and Mary took their letter to McCloud for a review. Mary said, "We may need to lean on each other on the way back."

McCloud offered some positive suggestions on how they could improve the transitions between the good ideas in their letter. They returned and opened the Samples book to a page McCloud had recommended. Jack took his letter to McCloud. She identified its strengths and weaknesses and put a check mark on a punctuation error. Jack fixated on the check mark. Later Jack took his quiz response to McCloud to clarify what he had done wrong and how to correct it.

Bert and Linda took their print out and questions to McCloud. When they returned Bert said, "She literally told us what to do. We can have this done in 10 minutes." Ten minutes later Bert was staring at the screen saying, "I know what I want to say, I just don't know how to say it!" As they made their changes, they used the same phrases as the teachers had been using with them during the semester. Linda referred to the scenario for key words to include in the letter.

At 10:30 am Jack gave Linda his final draft to proofread. She called it a "really good letter," and returned it unmarked. Bert asked about the use of quotation marks and Jack replied, "They were like that in the assignment sheet." They returned to their writing task with Linda dictating and Bert typing. Bert paused to analyze what they had done and identify by name the parts of the letter they had partially written. He concluded with, "Let's do the last paragraph so it looks like we got something done." At the end of class he made a point of thanking Linda for her help. Four team members left by 10:40. Mary remained to update the team folder and check her e-mail.

Marketing, Day 4, Wednesday: All team members were present and working at separate computers. Mary typed her hand written WSJ summary, Mike completed his peer evaluation form, Linda checked her e-mail, Jack checked his letter against an example in the Samples book and Bert struggled with his form letter writing assignment. Bert asked Mary for her help. Jack went to the other lab to print his letter. At 9:48 am only Bert's form letter remained to be completed.

All members of the team clustered around Bert to offer suggestions and support. Mary remained to help while the other members assembled final versions of the other three assignments. At 10:07 am Bert received feedback from McCloud on his letter and made the suggested revisions. Linda made further revisions to her letter. At 10:12 am Mike talked with Jack and Mary about the Operations project and suggested they get an early start on it. At 10:20 am Mary placed her final version of the writing assignment in the team folder and completed the peer evaluation form. Jack placed his final version in the folder followed by Bert and Linda. At 10:27 am, after some social talk, Mike and Bert left followed by Mary. Linda volunteered to hand in the final assignments for this department.

When asked if he had finished his WSJ summary Jack replied, "Not yet. I usually do it the first day to get it out of the way. It only takes me 10 minutes. In fact, I thought about it last night. I guess I'm getting slack. I can do it now. There's still 10 minutes left in class." At 10:45 he e-mailed his WSJ summary to McCloud. Linda turned in the completed assignments and checked her e-mail before leaving.

Operations Department

At 9:45 am McCloud met with the team to discuss the assignment. She sat on a chair with the group and explained why the report was needed, who the audience was and how it was important to focus on what the reader needed to know. Everyone on the group took notes. McCloud suggested everyone read Chapters 10 through 13 in the textbook on how to write reports and the WSJ article about employees working overseas included with the assignment package. She told the team to make a workplan for their own planning purposes which she would review to make sure they were not wasting their time. Finally, she told the team to give her a draft of their report so she could look at it. She said, "I'll mark it sooner or later so give it to me in time that I can make suggestions for revisions before you print and bind a final copy."

Bert and Mike offered the team the use of the computers at their fraternity house so they could work at more convenient times. Each person talked about the time constraints they had in the upcoming weeks. Mary said she could not do anything this week as she had two tests and a 15 page paper due. Mike said he had a friend visiting in two weeks so, "Let me do lots of work up front now while I have some time." Linda said, "Okay, let's make plans. By Wednesday, everyone will do the readings. We only need to worry about research so we should each find three resources." Jack suggested they should pick topics to research. Linda typed the list of topics from the handout onto her computer screen while the team made suggestions for how they could be sorted.

By 10:00 am team members had picked a topic area to be responsible for and they knew what each of their teammates was doing. Mike said, "Let's decide on which word processor we'll all use." Word Perfect was selected. Bert said, "And let's decide on the font too." The team decided on the default font; 12 point New Times Roman. Jack acted as scribe for the group and kept detailed notes during this discussion. Bert volunteered to do attendance again. Mary suggested they finish their WSJ summaries and at 10:15 everyone was working on that task. At 10:30 the graded assignments were returned. The group received a score of 9.6/10 and were pleased. Bert showed mock anger and wanted to know where they lost the 4 points.

Operations, Day 2, Wednesday: Mary was absent with neck spasms that needed emergency chiropractic care. The other four team members wrote Spot Quiz #3. Mike was the first on the room to hand in his completed quiz response. All team members (except Bert) had e-mailed their WSJ summaries to McCloud on Monday. At 10:05 am after everyone had finished with the quiz, Mike and Bert distributed photocopies of information about The Netherlands they had printed out from the CIA information pages on the World Wide Web. Each packet was personalized with the name of the team member on the cover page.

Bert and Jack asked McCloud for more information about the employees being transferred. McCloud suggested they could set their own parameters but to write a list of their assumptions to show her. The team members discussed their plans. Linda and Mike admitted they had not read the assigned chapters yet. (Linda had a 20 page paper due and a test.) McCloud provided sample reports on Denmark and Mexico as models of what to do and not do on their report. The team carefully studied the positive example, the Denmark report, and made notes on the features to include in their report. Bert asked how the writers got the Denmark report to be so big and Mike showed how they had used a larger font size. For the remainder of the session Jack and Linda read the material provided by Bert and Mike and identified the information that applied to their topics.

Operations, Day 3, Monday: Jack was absent. Mike shared reference books on The Netherlands he had brought to class. McCloud returned the previous quiz with a brief lecture on the questions students should be asking themselves before they start to write. (It was a lecture on the use of higher-order thinking strategies.) Bert filed his returned quiz in his binder with the previous two quizzes. Linda typed additions to the team workplan while Mary read the Denmark report and caught up with the team's progress.

At 10:15 am Bert and Linda used the Table of Contents from the Denmark report to make further adjustments to their workplan. Mary and Mike used Freelance Graphics to create a cover page for the report. The team discussed their time constraints and when they could get together to work on the report. The next weekend was Easter weekend and everyone was out of town. The weekend after was an annual bicycle race between fraternities and sororities that would involve Bert, Mike, Linda and Mary. No decision was reached.

Bert and Linda gave a copy of the workplan to McCloud for comments. The computer Mary was working on locked up so she moved to another machine and re-created the cover page. Her teammates joined her and approved of the design. Mike helped Mary save the graphic file to a disk. At 10:35 am Mike and Bert left. Mary added the cover sheet and workplan to the team folder, then left with Linda.

Operations, Day 4, Wednesday: All team members were present. Comments on the workplan from McCloud were discussed and Linda, Mary and Jack made revisions. Bert finished the biweekly payroll report and gave it to the team currently in the Accounting department. Mike used the university's on-line registration system to enroll in classes for the next semester. He also passed out photocopies of resource material he had obtained for the group.

At 9:55 am Mike and Mary discussed their need for more information on their respective topics. They checked out with their teammates, gathered their backpacks and left for the Business School library. Linda, Bert and Jack modified the workplan to resemble the Main Points/Headings as described in the initial description of the assignment. At 10:15 am Mary and Mike returned from their unsuccessful trip to the library. Bert printed the workplan and the team discussed schedules. They agreed to meet and work at Mike's fraternity house on Sunday night at 10:00 pm. Jack had each team member commit to the topics on the workplan for which they would be responsible. Additional copies were printed so they knew each others topics. At 10:43 all team members left.

Operations, Day 5, Monday: Mike was absent. The team met and worked for one hour on Sunday night. At 9:45 am, McCloud visited with the team. Linda and Mary asked if they could turn in a draft report on Friday. McCloud suggested Wednesday and pick it up at her office on Friday. Mary asked, "Do we need to dress up for the presentation?" McCloud said she would remark on professional appearance. Linda turned to Bert and said teasingly, "So you'll be sure to shower before?" Bert replied he had done well to get up at 9:10 this morning for a 9:30 class, but promised to be earlier on the day of the presentation.

McCloud said, "Do rehearse your presentation so you're sure of your time. Practice your transitions. I'll show you the grading sheet I use so you'll know what to watch out for." At 9:52 the team left to do research in the Main library. As they left, Mary asked if anyone in the group knew how to use Freelance graphics to make a presentation but no one did.

Operations, Day 6, Wednesday: All team members were present. Mike was recovering from his cold and Jack admitted to being slightly hung-over. Linda, Bert, Jack and Mary participated in 10 minute interviews (as part of the study) during this class session. Individuals worked at separate computers on their respective topics for the entire session. At 10: 30 am Linda volunteered to combine the different documents into one large document. She collected floppy diskettes from each person and left. After she left, the team discussed the tasks remaining and agreed to meet Sunday afternoon and work the rest of Sunday to finish. Bert sent Linda an e-mail message advising her of the time and place for the meeting. The team agreed to pull the report together by working hard on Sunday.

Operations, Day 7, Monday: All team members were present although Mike and Bert arrived ten minutes late. At 9:45 am McCloud met with the team and discussed the criteria she would use to evaluate their oral presentation. She told them what to look out for and how to rehearse. Linda took notes for the team during this explanation. The team gave her the draft of the report they completed on Sunday for her to review.

At 10:20 McCloud gave the team feedback on their draft. She identified format errors with headings and sub-headings, mechanical errors, changes in voice and a particular section (Mike's) as an information dump. She discussed with the team how to focus their report on the needs of the relocated employees. Jack studied McCloud's comments on the draft while Mary and Bert worked on the Freelance graphics presentation slides and Linda wrote an executive summary. Later, Mike gave Linda a disk copy of the revised version of his section. The team agreed to meet in the computer lab in Room 415 at 7:30 that evening to finish the report.

Operations, Day 8, Wednesday: All team members were present. They gave McCloud their bound copy of the report before their presentation. She said, "Yellow, my favorite color," and skimmed the report. She smiled and nodded to the group to indicate that the report was acceptable. The team members wore their best clothes and appeared very professional. The presentation was effective and transitions between speakers went well. McCloud received tulips as a symbol of the Netherlands.

The Operations department was the least structured writing assignment and tested the ability of individuals and teams to be self-directed and self-regulating. This team wrote a good report (9/10) and made a well organized presentation (9/10). The Operations survey (Appendix C) asked six questions that probed the students' awareness of their learning in this unstructured environment and how they felt about the products of their efforts. The questions addressed student interest, satisfaction/pride with the written report and oral presentation and the advice they would give another team starting the Operations department. Their responses indicate how each individual experienced this project.

Jack - 25 hrs. outside of class

• Working together with everybody to get the whole thing done. (Teamwork)
• It looked good and it took a lot of time. (Reward for effort)
• It was short but pretty good so I was satisfied. (Conditional praise)
• Start early and get it out of the way. (Task oriented)

• Interesting-learning about the country and its culture. Challenging- finding usable information and deciding the format of the paper. (Very specific criteria)
• The table of contents is a little messed up, the numbers are not in line. (Awareness of specific flaws)
• It ROCKS! Many cool graphics. (Emotional involvement and pride)
• Start working on it ASAP. Don't wait until the last minute and don't do it during Little 500 or Easter. (Pragmatic advice)

• The whole process. Organizing everyone's information and putting it together in order. (He organized the entire semester)
• It took us a lot of work, effort and time. (Basis for pride)
• I thought that it went better than we expected. (Positive outlook)
• To get it done earlier! (Pragmatic advice)

• I really enjoyed working with my group and loved learning about a country I had completely no idea about. (Positive about group and project)
• I wish the numbering on our table of contents looked more presentable and we would have added more pictures. (Aware of flaws)
• I wish the presentation could have lasted maybe 5 or 10 more minutes. (Desire to do more/better)
• Throughout the four weeks, average your time appropriately. We as a team did most of the work in the last couple of days. DON'T PROCRASTINATE! (Pragmatic advice with concrete suggestions)

• This was a very busy week for me. Finding time to complete this project was hard. Also, finding time when we all could meet was hard. (Challenge was not subject matter but logistics)
• I wished we could have had more visuals. (Reflect on improvements)
• It is hard to give a speech and I thought everyone did a super job. (Positive about her teammates)
• Make sure to plan to meet far enough in advance. (Pragmatic advice)

Final Exam Week

There was remarkable consistency between the scores received by members of this team throughout the semester in this course.
 

Background Perspective

This team had their first "big success" at Week 6 when four of the five team members passed the first Spot Quiz. Their second success came during Week 8 when they received symbolic awards - campaign buttons labeled "Go Business" - and public recognition for achieving the highest score of the teams in their room on the previous week's writing assignments. Like the 8:00 am team, they completed all four of the standard two week departments before encountering the less well structured Operations department. The team scores (maximum score was 10) for each department were: Human Resources (9.05), Accounting (9.25), Purchasing (9.1), Marketing (9.6) Operations report (9.0) and Operations Presentation (9.0). Overall the team received 53.9/60 on group assignments. All five students received an A- for the course. Table 3 shows individual students scores.

Name	Attendance /10	Peer Evals /15	WSJ Sums /5	Tests  /10	Total Score /40
Jack	9	14.6	5	6.5	35.5
Mary	9.5	15	5	6.5	36
Mike	10	15	5	6	36
Bert	9	15	5	6.5	35.5
Linda	10	15	3	6	34

Employee Profile Information

Mary and Bert indicated assigning tasks to others as a strength, and during the semester they helped keep the team organized. The team members indicated a lack of strength in conducting research and proofreading/editing. The five members were highly verbal and used that skill to proofread and correct their letters. This group was an example of the well-balanced team the teachers attempted to create. Recall that the teachers attempted to avoid having members of the same fraternity or sorority on the same team. In this instance, the friendship of Bert and Mike who were in the same fraternity had a positive influence on the group dynamics. Jack worked six hours per week and Mary worked about 20 hours per week.

Summary of Peer Evaluation Data

Of the eight points total deducted, four related to attendance and four related to doing only as much as expected. No points were deducted on categories related to teamwork or personality issues.

Summary of Survey Data

Patterns

Jack, Mary and Linda rated themselves as more responsible than the teachers, whom they rated as least responsible. The category Other, which may also be interpreted as "Anyone but Me" was rated most responsible overall. Mike and Bert rated themselves as least responsible despite rating all categories very high. They rated either the Teacher or the Team as most responsible. Table 6 below summarizes the number of times each student rated themselves as most responsible (5) or second most responsible (4) for the quality of the team's final product.
 

Name	Most Responsible (5)	Second Most Responsible (4)	Total Points
Jack	1	5	25
Mary	2	4	26
Mike	5	7	53
Bert	0	9	36
Linda	4	0	20

These responses strongly indicate shared responsibility for letters the team produced. The secondary responsibility category was used most frequently. While Jack has understated his responsibility, Mike and Bert have exaggerated the significance of their contributions. Mary noted her responsibility for two assignments although she made contributions to all the final products. Linda accepted responsibility for her writing assignments but not for any others. She also assisted with almost every letter and memo written.

Comments on the Instructors

The students were receptive to McCloud's suggestions, willing to accept that business really was demanding high quality writing, and make the effort needed to achieve higher standards. In their comments, the students noted that McCloud made them feel special, used humor, knew her stuff and pointed them in the right direction without telling them outright. These are the qualities of an expert coach and definitely contributed to the development of ownership for learning by these five students.

Comments on Realism and Relevancy

Jack's Ownership for Learning

Q1: Cognitive and Metacognitive Factors (14/20)

Sets meaningful goals: Jack took this course because it met a requirement in his academic program. He said, "I've talked to some people who took this one and they've said it's a fun class which it is! I mean, you get to work with people. I've talked with one of my friends who's in the lecture and he says, "Yeah, you've got to take a test over all this and you've got to do all the material by yourself." I mean why not do it with four other people. I guess I figured it would be a little bit easier... I like working with people so it's fine with me." (Week 9)

Self-directed learning skills: Jack read the textbook and Samples book to find the information needed to write the letter. He used his teammates as resources and he conducted research for his portion of the Operations project. He met with McCloud to determine exactly why his response to the second quiz was unacceptable and how he could improve it.

Self-monitoring skills: Jack was organized and consistently completed assignments on time. He was aware of group dynamics. He identified when he was lacking in knowledge, and took steps to correct the situation (i.e., referenced textbook, Samples book, asked teammates or the teacher.) He said, "I don't do anything outside class really. Couple times I've taken my disk home and looked at my memo or my letter and maybe made a couple of changes but so far I haven't really done or spent too much time outside class. I usually get my WSJ summary done on the Monday we get it. I read it when I get home, write the summary and send it to Weston that night."

Constructing knowledge: During the Week 15 interview, Jack demonstrated how he would solve the problem situation involving the collection letter. He identified the critical information in the scenario, said he would probably "consult with my group." Then he would look for an example in the Samples book, "because they usually help out," and then "review the chapters in the textbook and start writing." He was unaware of how to write a letter in this specific situation, although he was aware of how to use resources to solve the problem.

Q2: Affective Factors (10/15)

Motivation: Jack was motivated to pass the course. He occasionally became engrossed in a letter writing task but was more often disinterested. Jack did not see the writing assignments as particularly relevant to his personal goals. His primary motivation came from his confidence in his own abilities to succeed academically. As he said about the Operations department presentation, "It was short but pretty good, so I was satisfied."

Control of the learning environment: Jack missed only two classes, was often early for class, used his class time effectively and attended team meetings during the Operations department. He occasionally left class 10 minutes early (as did his teammates) but only when assignments were at an appropriate stage of completion. He participated in team activities during class, gave and accepted criticisms well. He was observed using most of the available resources in class. He said the course was a "low priority simply because we can get everything done in class," and that he would recommend it to a friend because, "It's not a hard class at all."

Engagement with learning activities: Jack said, "none of the assignments was very difficult or challenging." The hardest writing task he recalled was the form letter written by Mary that he helped with a small amount. Over the semester Jack appeared at times to be working hard and engaged with the writing task. At other times he was not. Perhaps in discounting his level of engagement he was giving additional weight to the times he was a slacker.

Q3: Personal and Social Factors (18/25)

Teamwork skills: Jack was an collaborative team member who took responsibility for his assigned tasks and completed them on time. He reviewed drafts, contributed time and effort to helping teammates and was considerate when providing feedback. He learned new computer skills from his teammates.

Communication/Listening skills: Jack was an effective listener and able to communicate his thoughts and feelings to his teammates. He was not overly chatty, but had a wry sense of humor. Jack was the only member of the team not in the School of Business and not involved in the fraternity/sorority community. Despite being an outsider on these two counts he was an active participant in conversations during class sessions. He was also respectful of the teachers and his teammates.

Maturity/Self esteem: Jack was conscientious in his dealings with his teammates. As he said, "I have to work with four other people and so I have to make sure my stuff is done and done well." Jack accepted responsibility for his tasks and helped his teammates with theirs. He did not blame others nor make excuses and was confident in his abilities.

Q4: Individual Differences (12/15)

Ability: Jack's score (35.5/40) tied him for the sixth highest individual score of the 20 students participating in the study. Jack did not exert himself in this course and did not work to capacity except during the Operations project.

Attitude toward learning: Jack said, "I don't really know if this course is [special]... I mean, I take ownership in all of my work in all my classes. I don't know if this course really does anything in particular besides the fact that you have to work with four other people and you have to make sure your stuff is done and done well. I don't know if ownership plays a part any more than it does in other classes." Jack enjoyed being a university student and recognized that passing courses was a necessary part of being a student. This course was an elective so it was perhaps less important to him than courses in his major. However, his attitude toward learning in this class was positive throughout.

Attitude toward assessment: Jack said, "I guess this is supposed to be like a business environment like they were saying, "In business you get either acceptable or not acceptable." I guess if that's how they're going to set this course up that's a good way to grade. On the first assignment we got like an 8.25 and I wasn't real happy with that because I thought we'd do a little better. Then like when we got those buttons "Go Business" and we got the what 9.2 or whatever, it seemed like we did just the same amount of work. I don't know if it was two different people that graded them? I guess the grading's fine." Jack usually reviewed the comments on graded assignments and used that information to improve his own writing and contribute to editing teammates documents.

Academic Achievement (11.5/15)

The model of ownership does not address actual performance in the content domain. Therefore the combined scores on WSJ article summaries (5 pts.) and the four tests (10 pts.) are included in the calculation of ownership for learning. Jack scored 5/5 on WSJ summaries and 6.5/10 on individual tests for an 11.5/15 total.

Summary Jack demonstrated a moderate level of ownership for learning. Since this was an elective course rather than a required course, he was possibly not as motivated to learn about the course content and writing situations. The fact that he said the writing assignments were not hard or challenging indicates a possible lack of involvement with the issues and problems associated with the writing situations. He described his ownership for learning as something he had for every course and did not attribute this ownership to the design of the course. He demonstrated positive behaviors in each quadrant, just not a great deal of intensity or frequency. Jack was a quiet, polite and well-behaved student. His goal was to pass the course with a nominal amount of effort. As he said, "I mean, why not take it with four other people? I like working with people. I guess I figured it would be a little bit easier."

Mary's Ownership for Learning

Q1: Cognitive and Metacognitive Factors (15/20)

Sets meaningful goals: Mary took this course because it was required and because, "I heard it was fun. A lot of people I've talked to have taken this one and a lot I've talked to have taken the other one and I guess this way it's easier to learn because you're actually doing it, versus sitting in lecture. I guess the tests are really hard because you haven't really done it. So we have to do it, and we have to turn it in, and so we get good grades." Despite her focus on grades, Mary was very interested in learning to use computers and learning how to write effective Business Communications.

Self-directed learning skills: Mary carefully read the information provided by the teachers. She identified gaps in her knowledge and used all available resources to obtain the information she needed. She used library and on-line resources to conduct research during the Operations project and she taught herself how to make a slide presentation using the graphics program.

Self-monitoring skills: Mary was effective at managing her time, completing tasks and being aware of problems. For example, recognizing and telling her team that she would be unable to help them during the first week of the Operations project as she had too many other assignments to complete. The following week she was back with the team and fully involved. During the exit interview, Mary was asked who held her accountable she said, "Myself, I think I do more so than others."

Constructing knowledge: Mary responded to the collection letter problem situation saying, "The first thing I'd do is make a phone call to find out more about his situation, but I guess I need to write a letter." Without using specific terminology, she identified the proper collection letter format with date, name, address and a three part structure; buffer introduction, main point of the letter and a conclusion with a date specified for a response. Mary stated the purpose of the letter clearly and structured it properly.

Q2: Affective Factors (10/15)

Motivation: Mary was definitely concerned about grades, but she also saw the relevance of the writing assignments saying, "I've had a lot of different jobs and I know that some crazy things happen like with this sales order assignment....{anecdote deleted}". Mary also said, "[this course has] taught me lots of stuff and some really, really important things. Like, my book! I had to write my resume and all the stuff I need is there in that book, all the format details." On balance, Mary appears to have been more motivated by external rewards (grades, teacher approval) than intrinsic satisfaction with learning.

Control of the learning environment: Mary missed only one class due to a neck problem. She consistently arrived early and stayed later updating the team binder. She made effective use of class time and still managed to socialize with her teammates. Mary used all available resources including the teachers, her teammates, the help systems on computer applications, spell checker and thesaurus. She was also a resource person for her teammates.

Engagement with learning activities: Mary's reactions were mixed. She acknowledged that there was less of a workload but found some of the writing tasks to be very challenging. Regarding the difficult credit refusal letter she said, ""I didn't realize I [had] the worst one out of the group until I started working on it. I worked on that one a lot... I hated it! It was horrible. I worried about it all weekend and worked on it and wrote it quite a few times. Write a draft, tear it up and start over. That was a hard one because there wasn't a good example in the book." Mary accepted the writing situations as realistic and worked to respond accurately and effectively.

Q3: Personal and Social Factors (22/25)

Teamwork skills: Mary's social and organizational skills kept the group functioning effectively. She contributed to team decision making, treated her teammates with respect, laughed, joked and teased frequently, worked collaboratively, shared her computer expertise and gave and accepted criticism effectively.

Communication/Listening skills: Mary was very effective as a listener and as a communicator with her teammates and with the teachers. She contributed to the camaraderie of the team with both social talk and focused discussion of writing tasks. When explaining something to a teammate she was articulate and clear in her suggestions and directions.

Maturity/Self esteem: Mary was conscientious in her dealings with her teammates. As she said, "I hold myself accountable for doing quality work." Mary accepted responsibility for her tasks, asked for help when she needed it and helped teammates with their assignments. She did not blame others or make excuses. She noted her sensitivity to teacher criticism saying, "...we have to think about [our writing] and evaluate it everyday and get yelled at if you do it wrong... [Who yells at you - your teammates?] Well, no you don't really get yelled at, but you know when she [teacher] goes and rips through your letter it's kind of personal. It upsets you!"

Q4: Individual Differences (12/15)

Ability: Mary's score (36/40) tied her with Mike for the fifth highest individual score of the 20 students participating in the study. Mary used her abilities well in this course and it appeared at times to stretch her capacity. The example of learning to make the slide presentation was a clear example of her applying herself fully.

Attitude toward learning: Mary said, "I think the teachers want us to learn on our own and in our group before we come to her and ask "How do I do this?" So I think that's good because then we have to look at it. Like she doesn't just sit down and explain how to do everything. She'll give us a few hints and pushes in the right direction, which is good."

Attitude toward assessment: Mary said, "I think I'll do well. We've done pretty good so far. I guess a shared grade is probably good because we only have to worry about part of it. Everybody wants to get a good grade so its not nearly as stressful because you're all working on it. And partly its bad because you're not working on every single one.

Academic Achievement (11.5/15)

Mary's combined scores on the five WSJ article summaries and the four tests are included in the calculation of ownership for learning. She scored 5/5 on WSJ summaries and 6.5/10 on individual tests for an 11.5/15 total.

Summary Mary demonstrated a high degree of ownership for her learning in this instructional environment. She was involved emotionally and intellectually with the problems and issues raised in this Business Communication course and related the course content to her personal experiences in the workplace. She behaved responsibly, took control of her own learning and was obviously self-monitoring and self-directed during the semester. She achieved the three instructional goals of teachers - success at group work, learning to write business correspondence and developing/improving skills with computer technology. Although grades driven, she achieved a deeper understanding of the domain of Business Communication by the conclusion of the course.

Mike's Ownership for Learning

Q1: Cognitive and Metacognitive Factors (12/20)

Sets meaningful goals: Mike took this course because it was a requirement for a future course (A-Core). He had also heard from a friend that there was a lot less work in this version of the Business Communications course. At the end of the course Mike gave a mixed response saying "I think it's probably the best class I've ever taken, like to prepare me for the actual real world. I'll use [and] keep the book because I'll be writing letters and memos daily when I get a job." However, he also said he wouldn't take this course if it wasn't required, "...because there's so many courses that you have to take that you don't have time to meddle with courses you don't need."

Self-directed learning skills: Mike used the textbook and other resources to help with course assignments as well as to write his resume and cover letters. During the Operations project, Mike provided the team with information obtained from the WWW and the library. He kept copies of memos the team had written as samples and used the Samples book provided by the instructors frequently. However, he was less effective where it concerned his writing assignments. He failed to develop a higher level understanding of the principles and heuristics of business writing, choosing instead to continue with his matching activities.

Self-monitoring skills: Mike said he appreciated working in a group because it was "five minds working together," and "In class I'm always working together with other people and more involved with it." Mike also said, "I think I'm learning a lot more in this class because I'm actually doing it in class with the teacher supervising. So if I have any questions she's right there. Instead of if I was at home, I think I'd just do it and there'd be a lot of errors." (see also his comments under Attitude toward Assessment).

Constructing knowledge: In responding to the collection letter situation presented during the exit interview Mike said, "I guess I'd politely remind him about the missed payments and ask him to settle up. I'm not too familiar with the collection letter. Someone else in our group did that letter. I know you're not supposed to use a direct approach but rather lead him into it. I could look back through the book. This book had everything!" Although he did not answer the question, he did demonstrate a basic understanding of the purpose of the collection letter, his own awareness that he needed more information and identified a resource he would use.

Q2: Affective Factors (9/15)

Motivation: Mike was focused on grades and usually calculated the team score after each graded assignment was returned. He saw the course and assignments as relevant and useful for his purpose of getting into the School of Business. Mike's orientation was toward extrinsic rewards rather than intrinsic satisfaction with learning. He demonstrated a higher level of teacher dependent behavior than most students in the study.

Control of the learning environment: Mike missed one class due to illness. He often arrived just as class started and on several occasions left five or ten minutes early. He generally made effective use of class time and used the resources fully. He also used class time to work on other assignments and personal tasks (web surfing). There were at least three Mondays where his involvement with the team and attention to writing tasks was hampered by fatigue from partying on the weekend.

Engagement with learning activities: Mike had difficulty writing Bad News type letters or letters dealing with sensitive or controversial issues such as sexual harassment. McCloud criticized the approach he took in writing his section of the Operations report as it was an information dump, rather than informative writing. In general, he appeared concerned with his writing situations and engaged in critiquing his teammates written responses.

Q3: Personal and Social Factors (17/25)

Teamwork skills: Mike completed his assignments responsibly, proofread carefully, volunteered for assignments, contributed resources (including copies of completed team assignments for each person) and organized meetings. He collaborated effectively on writing assignments, handled criticism well and treated his teammates with respect.

Communication/Listening skills: Mike was less talkative than other members, but when he spoke it was often clear and to the point. He listened effectively and responded to what was said.

Maturity/Self esteem: Mike depended on the teacher and his teammates for approval of his writing assignments. He was less confident of his own work. He said, "I took my assignment home and typed it up. Then I brought it to class so McCloud could tear it up," and later, "I'll give it to Weston so she can chew it apart." Mike had difficulty taking criticism from authority figures. However, he accepted responsibility for his own work and seldom blamed anyone else for the consequences.

Q4: Individual Differences (10/15)

Ability: Mike's score (36/40) tied him for the fifth highest individual core of the 20 students participating in the study. It is unclear if Mike was using his full capabilities in this course. It is also unclear if he uses his full capabilities in any learning endeavors. He achieved his goal of a good grade and managed to not alienate his teammates of the teachers.

Attitude toward learning: Mike had a generally positive attitude toward being a university student; less so toward learning. He relied heavily on teacher direction and correction and failing that he relied on his teammates for revisions and edits. While he stated he understood the utility of business communications, his actions suggested he thought it was something he could learn about later or that could be handled by referencing the textbook for an "approved" example.

Attitude toward assessment: Regarding the first quiz Mike said, "Well, we got lucky. The first group of letters (assignments) were all memos. The quiz was on a memo so we just basically knew what we were doing. We got a B- on the first department and we had worked hard. So we worked hard on the second one and we got the highest grades. I hope my final grade is an A-. It'll just keep going up as we get better." He also commented, "I think McCloud's a lot easier. Weston's tougher in terms of grades. McCloud's more supportive because she's in our room all the time. We haven't gotten much help from Weston, but that's fine. Mrs. McCloud helps us plenty."

Summary Mike demonstrated a moderate level of ownership for learning and appears to have transferred skills learned in the course to writing his resume and cover letters. He completed his course assignments, but continued to have difficulty taking the reader's perspective. He saw the utility of effective business communication, enjoyed the benefits of collaboration and contributed to the team's success. However, he relied heavily on teachers and teammates to decide on the quality and effectiveness of his writing. His first drafts seldom resembled the final product. Mike was very candid and accurate when he said, "I don't know how much I'd be doing if I had to do it on my own at home… I'd just kinda write the paper to be done with it."

Bert's Ownership for Learning

Q1: Cognitive and Metacognitive Factors (10/20)

Sets meaningful goals: Bert took this course because it was required and because,"...some of my fraternity brothers have taken this course and they thought the class went really well. They said they learned a lot so I took their opinions and just signed up for this class." Bert was primarily interested in passing this required course. He commented that "…writing is not one of my favorite things to do in life."

Self-directed learning skills: Bert said he did the required reading in the textbook but had "fallen behind recently." He added, "...with Operations I had to go out and gather all my research by myself and then bring it back to the group so my small piece could be combined with everyone else's." In general, Bert reacted to directions from the teacher and others rather than originate self-directed learning activities.

Self-monitoring skills: Bert said at Week 9, "I'm hopefully looking for an A. There's no reason why we shouldn't as a group get an A. My individual grade should be an A too. If you show up for class, if you summarize your Wall Street Journals and you do well on your quizzes you should do very well too." Bert was asked (Week 15) if any of the writing situations made him think a lot. He said, "Some of them were really difficult. There was one I had to do that was (pause) informal... (longer pause). Shoot, I was just talking about doing my homework and now I can't think of it. It's in my notes I just can't remember what its called…" Bert did not make obvious efforts to increase his understanding n this content domain. He struggled with writing situations but soon asked for help rather than practice self-directed learning.

Constructing knowledge: Bert's response to the collection letter situation (Appendix C) in the Week 15 exit interview was vague, rambling and approval seeking. After reading the situation he said, "I feel bad for Bob." [the character in the scenario] When asked what he would write Bert said, "I would tell him that I can understand where he's at, especially with the loss of 100 employees at his business. It isn't where he wants it to be. But I'd also tell him that we're trying to run a business and we need his payments. I guess if he can't make his payments then he's gonna somehow have to return whatever it was he bought, or get a loan from the bank." When asked how he would plan out the letter Bert replied, "You'd have to decide whether it's gonna be a good news, bad news or persuasion letter. Once you decide what type of letter you're gonna write, then you go through the steps that are in those particular letters. Poor Bob, I feel sorry for him. I hope that's what you wanted to hear?" Bert obviously did not know how to write a collection letter as required in this situation and his plans for writing a letter are superficial. His closing comment, "I hope that's what you wanted to hear," were an extension of his classroom behavior where he often looked for approval from the teachers.

Q2: Affective Factors (8/15)

Motivation: Bert was highly motivated by grades. He said, "I'm sure later on down the road, you'll be wanting to learn for your own good, and I'm trying to learn for my own good, but I'm also there trying to get a good grade." Bert said he found the course content relevant because, "... I've gone to my Dad's work and every time I turn around he's writing memos and letters. So, I would say yeah, eventually its going to pay off in the end. I will be writing some letters and memos too." On balance, Bert was more extrinsically motivated.

Control of the learning environment: Bert had an extra-curricular commitment and missed two classes. With his fraternity brother Mike, he usually arrived a few minutes before class and left five or ten minutes before the end of the period. He generally used class time effectively and the classroom resources including the textbook, Samples book and spell checker.

Engagement with learning activities: Bert struggled with the form letter writing assignment but found good example letters to emulate for other assignments. He said, "Honestly? I'm not a big fan of writing. It's not one of my favorite things to do in life. But, I didn't dislike any of them. I wrote them. I didn't have any problem with that."

Q3: Personal and Social Factors (16/25)

Teamwork skills: Bert's perception of the process used by the team was slightly different than his teammates. Bert said the process was "I'll write a memo as a rough draft, either Weston or McCloud will look at it, they'll give us ideas then together we'll come as a group and form those ideas and put them together to create the final draft." The process actually used had individuals write drafts of letters, often collaboratively, share drafts with their teammates, then involve the teachers. Bert valued the teachers opinion more highly and so he saw the process differently. When asked what he would do if the group tore apart a memo he thought was excellent he said, "So be it. We'll change it. This isn't an individual class. It's more or less based on the group. If the group doesn't like it then, I don't know. They say in the business world you have to adapt to change so, if you can't handle it, get out of the kitchen [laughs]." Bert collaborated effectively with his teammates and treated each person with respect.

Communication/Listening skills:  Bert was talkative and an effective communicator during class on task-related topics and social topics. He phrased requests with consideration, "Mary, if you're finished, can you help me here?" His feedback and comments were always delivered as a tactful question and never as an accusation. He listened to the comments of others and accepted criticism gracefully.

Maturity/Self esteem: Bert participated with his team, contributed to discussions, took responsibility for his writing tasks and did not blame others for any problems. He also relied heavily on the teacher for approval and was the only student to rate the teacher as most responsible for the quality of the final written products.

Q4: Individual Differences (9/15)

Ability: Bert's score (35.5/40) tied him for the sixth highest individual score of the 20 students participating in the study. While Bert was sociable and collaborative with his teammates, it is not clear that he worked very hard on the cognitive aspects of the writing required in this domain.

Attitude toward learning: Bert said, "It's more or less, individually, with reading the book, taking what the teacher gives you, and learning from another book - the Samples book, and doing it on your own. It's not like a lecture where you sit in class and you have someone speak to you for an hour. It's completely different. I like it actually."

Attitude toward assessment: Bert was disappointed by the low team score on the first department and elated by the high team score on the second department. Overall his team did well and he had no complaints about the fairness or accuracy of the assessment. On quizzes where he did not get an Acceptable, Bert knew from the teacher's explanation what his mistakes were. (see his earlier comments under self-monitoring.)

Summary Bert demonstrated a low level of ownership for his learning in this domain. He struggled with the problems and issues related to writing specific types of business correspondence, saw the necessity and relevance of Business Communication, but relied on the teacher and his teammates to resolve the problems he encountered. In short, he delegated responsibility to others rather than taking ownership for his own learning. Bert admitted he was not a strong writer and to succeed in this learning environment he used the teacher and his teammates extensively. He volunteered for tasks he could handle effectively (i.e., attendance), assisted with organizational tasks, contributed to the positive team dynamics, completed his assignments on time and did his course readings. Without the support provided by teachers and peers in this learning environment it is doubtful that Bert would have learned as much or achieved as high a grade.

Linda's Ownership for Learning

Q1: Cognitive and Metacognitive Factors (17/20)

Sets meaningful goals: Linda took the course, "...because it's a requirement to get into A-Core which is next fall," and because her roommate who took the course said it was easier than lectures. She said she wanted to learn how to communicate better because "[it] was such an important part of business."

Self-directed learning skills: Linda failed to complete two WSJ summaries on time. She said she read the required chapters and proved to be effective at researching information for her part of the Operations project. She was able to identify gaps in her understanding and was very effective at getting answers to her questions from the teacher or other resources.

Self-monitoring skills: Linda said, "I think the biggest thing I've learned is to be direct and not flowery in your speech like, with your business letters, because I mean, writing social letters is... I mean, I put all the 'the's' and all the adjectives and all the cute little messages and stuff in that's obviously not...[trails off]... and I mean, I would have continued to write like that if I wouldn't of known. And now I've learned how to write you know, instead of "I want to thank you" it's "Thank you." You just like spit it out and that's definitely something that I wasn't aware of before." Linda was very conscious of her writing and struggled to make it cleaner and clearer. (see also her comments under Maturity/self esteem.)

Constructing knowledge: In response to the collection letter problem presented in the Week 15 interview Linda said, "If I were to write a letter to Bob, first I would be sympathetic, because he's only missed two payments. I would start off like, this is what happened and we're missing your checks. Then I'd say, if you have a problem, if you've overlooked this then just please send your check in right away. And then at the end, write if you have problems making payments then call this number and we can work something out." Linda also said, "I think the most important thing is to be casual and sympathetic at the beginning and like not start off on the offensive and go after the guy. I mean most people when they buy something expect to pay for it..." Linda apparently had understood the purpose of the first collection letter and how it should be structured.

Q2: Affective Factors (12/15)

Motivation: Linda said the course was relevant, "...business is always talking about communication skills so the proper way to write a memo is important." She had a pragmatic appreciation of the scope of business communication based on her work experience. She said, "I mean, they're realistic I think for this class, but I mean out where I worked... that's just the way that things ran (form letters and mass mailings). Also like communication to employees? Their memos were more like, they had little pictures in them. They weren't as straight forward as we do them here." More importantly she was able to relax concerning grades (see teamwork skills below) and focus on the challenges of the writing assignments. Although grades were important to Linda, on balance her motivation was more intrinsic than extrinsic.

Control of the learning environment: Linda had perfect attendance and often arrived early. She used her class time and all available resources effectively. She was skilled with the word processor and used the help, thesaurus and spell checker capabilities frequently.

Engagement with learning activities: Linda accepted the challenges of the writing tasks. She said, "The letters where you have to deliver the bad news were the hardest ones, yet they were the most interesting because you had to sit there and be like, what, I got this letter you know, somebody is like totally tearing me apart for whatever reason, whatever I did. I would want someone to cushion the blow and do all the things that we read in the book that we were supposed to do. Because I mean, you can look at it from our perspective. We're all going to graduate from college and get rejection letters. We're just wondering what the rejection letters will be like."

Q3: Personal and Social Factors (23/25)

Teamwork skills: Linda had a positive and supportive influence on the team and willingly contributed her typing skills. Although Linda teased and flirted with the three males team members, her mannerisms were not disruptive. She provided honest and direct criticisms where required, helped her teammates, but also expected them to perform their own tasks. She said, "I really trust the other four people in our group. I mean, I'm so lucky I got this group. They're so fair and they all do the work and they always come prepared. I wouldn't say there's one particular person who does all the work or anything either."

Communication/Listening skills: Linda was very talkative during the entire semester. Her chatter was both task related and social. She also listened to what others had to say and responded to what they said. She was also effective in her communications with the teachers.

Maturity/Self esteem: Linda said, "I'm usually the one that took like the leadership role just to make sure that I would get the good grade... I would rather be responsible for my own work because I don't trust other people... But with this group that hasn't been necessary." Linda treated her teammates and the teachers with consideration and respect.

Q4: Individual Differences (14/15)

Ability: Linda's score (34/40) gave her the eleventh highest individual score of the 20 students participating in this study.

Attitude toward learning: Linda's attitude was generally positive. She described herself as, "…such a lecture person. I could sit there and remember everything that was said. But in this class it's so much better because you get the interaction between the group and the computers and the writing problems."

Attitude toward assessment: Linda said, "I think its fair. I mean, we all have the option of working on every single memo...so I mean, I guess I'd probably feel differently if I didn't like my group but my group's really good and they're all smart and so I mean..."

Summary Linda demonstrated a high degree of ownership for learning. She engaged and identified with the problems and issues in the domain and related what she was learning to her prior knowledge of the workplace. Her debates with teammates during the crafting of a letter demonstrated a high level of understanding of why certain options would or would not work in specific situation. Her ability to take the reader's perspective was her greatest writing strength. Although her spoken communication was riddled with idioms, colloquialisms and asides, her written communication was well crafted.

Linda and Mary demonstrated a high degree of ownership for learning. They struggled, thought about and engaged with the problems and issues in the domain of Business Communication and related new learning to their prior knowledge of the workplace. When drafting letters and memos their comments to themselves and their teammates were often at a metacognitive level. They used the phrases and expressions modeled by the teachers when articulating their thoughts.

They achieved the three instructional goals of the teachers - success at group work, learning to write business correspondence and improving their skills with computer technology. Grades were important to both Mary and Linda but, their focus was on producing effective written communication. They demonstrated a deeper understanding of the domain of Business Communication at the conclusion of the course. Within this learner centered instructional environment they were two of the more successful learners.

Jack demonstrated moderate ownership for learning but his involvement with the domain of business writing was less than other students participating in the study. This may be because he was not part of the Business School milieu or it may be a general characteristic. He was self-directed and appeared to struggle with the writing tasks in the domain. His work experience did not include business writing. His motivation was more intrinsic than extrinsic, he negotiated meaning with his teammates, contributed to group discussions and controlled his learning environment.

Mike demonstrated moderate ownership for learning. He was an effective, collaborative team member who completed all his assignments in a timely fashion. However, Mike never mastered the most challenging aspect of the course; taking the reader's perspective. Mike relied heavily on the teachers and teammates to decide on the quality and effectiveness of their writing.

Bert demonstrated a low level of ownership for learning. He admitted he was not a strong writer and to succeed in this learning environment he made the fullest possible use of the teacher and his teammates. He contributed to team efforts, but by the end of the course he had only a superficial understanding of how to apply the heuristics and practices of business communication. He continued to be highly dependent on the teacher as an information resource. His appeared to learn the mechanics of writing rather than developing an understanding of the problems and issues of Business Communications.