Virtual collaboration is becoming increasingly more common in work life and education, a development that has been accentuated by the Covid-19 pandemic. Working together via online platforms enables collaboration across the globe, which is considered key for realizing the UN’s sustainable development goals, as people from all over the world and from different professions and disciplines can be brought together to solve global problems. The same holds true for education, where online platforms allow student collaboration across institutions and geographical borders and thus for exposing students to viewpoints and the diversity of people from different places (Usher & Barak, 2020). It is thus imperative that students learn to work in and as teams in online settings. One pedagogy to facilitate such learning is project-based learning, a form of student-centric, collaborative learning whereby students work on projects with real-world problems (Guo et al., 2020; Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006).

However, virtual collaboration brings challenges, particularly those related to the social dimensions of teamwork. Social interaction is more difficult when communication happens digitally (Janssen & Kirschner, 2020). Without the non-verbal communication that occur in face-to-face interactions, digital interactions are often more formal (Pérez-Mateo & Guitert, 2012). A team is inherently a social entity and the interaction between team members is critical to develop and sustain beneficial team emergent states (Akan et al., 2020). Social interaction in a team is furthermore essential for learning and general wellbeing (Sjølie et al., 2022).  Scholars in education have therefore focused on how social interaction can be enabled and stimulated in online environments.

Despite abundant research on online student collaboration, researchers have only to a limited extent explored learning settings where student teams self-organize their collaboration (Sjølie et al., 2022). Research has primarily focused on how online learning environments can be designed to improve learning or on how teachers and technology can facilitate social interaction. What has been missing is a focus on students as agents rather than passive learners who are molded by teachers or technology. To understand how student teamwork and learning are enabled and constrained within virtual environments we need to explore how student collaboration play out in online settings when students (primarily) organize and lead themselves, in interaction with a variety of online platforms and tools.

This paper provides insight into the social aspects of student teamwork in a digital or hybrid environment. With a qualitative design, the study explores how students experienced the social climate in their virtual and hybrid teams in an interdisciplinary project-based course during the COVID-19 pandemic and whether and how they took actively part in creating and sustaining the social climate in their teams.

We use the term social climate for the key characteristics of the socio-emotional dimension of interaction within a team. The socio-emotional dimension is typically fostered in non-task contexts and is characterized as more casual than task-related interaction (Kreijns et al., 2013). Some researchers understand the socio-emotional dimension as the interaction that is perceived to go beyond what is strictly necessary to achieve an academic goal (Pérez-Mateo & Guitert, 2012). Using these existing accounts from the literature, the social climate is fostered both in task and non-task contexts, and it describes the students’ perceptions of being part of a team. We will also draw on Sias’ (2009) three types of peer relationships – information peer relationships, collegial peer relationships and special peer relationships. Sias argues that the quality of peer relationships affects satisfaction, commitment, and stress on the individual level. While Sias (2009) is concerned with peer relationships within an organization, it is reasonable to assume that there are similarities between peer relationships and team member relationships.

The study was conducted in an interdisciplinary project course at a Norwegian University. In each year cohort, approximately 3200 students from all faculties are divided into about 110 classes of 25-30 and teams of 5-7 students. The teams work on real-world problems and define their own project. No specific guidelines are provided regarding how to distribute team roles and tasks. The teaching staff in each class comprise one faculty and two learning assistants who are trained in team facilitation. The learning assistants' primary role is to stimulate reflection on situations in the teams throughout the project life cycle. The student teams are assessed based on two exam reports, each accounting for 50% of the final grade: one process report with reflections on situations from their collaboration and one product report. In its original form, the majority of the classes meet face-to-face for entire workdays, while 12 classes meet via online platforms. Due to the covid pandemic, the face-to-face classes also had to be conducted partly or fully online. A qualitative research design was employed, including interviews with 21 students in three individual interviews and five focus groups. The participants were from different teams who collaborated only virtually (voluntary if in one of the original virtual classes or involuntary due to the pandemic), or in a combination of face-to-face and online. All interviews were conducted via Zoom and lasted for about one hour. In the group interviews an emphasis was put on creating a safe and dynamic group discussion by initiating the interviews with ice-breaker questions and structured rounds were the students answered more introductory questions. However, the main part of the interview was a group conversation where the students talked about what supported and what hindered a good collaboration in their group. During the group conversation the researchers, two in each interview, mainly observed, but also asked a few facilitative questions. The individual interviews aimed to cover the same topics as the focus group, through the use of a semi-structured interview guide. Transcribed interviews were analyzed in NVivo using open coding, and subsequently codes about similar topics were grouped together in code groups. The code groups related to the social climate were analyzed by a team of four researchers using conventional qualitative content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).

The findings show large variations regarding how the students related to the social aspect of teamwork and to what extent they chose to take actions to facilitate a social environment. Common for most of the teams was that social interaction and social connectedness were more challenging in the online mode. However, there was differences in how students valued the social aspect of their work and to what extent they believed that it is possible to be social in an online environment. There was also a variation between teams in how much effort the members had put into creating and sustaining a good social environment. Empirically, the study contributes to the scarce body of knowledge on self-organized online student project teams, and thus deepens our understanding of how student collaboration and learning play out in online settings when students (primarily) organize and lead themselves. The study implies two barriers to the social aspect of online student teamwork: Firstly, not all students view the social aspect as an integrated part of the teamwork which is important for the team's productivity, learning and team members' well-being. Secondly, many students consider the digital environment to be an obstacle for being social and they lack both the belief and skills to act as agents and take the necessary actions to create and sustain a beneficial social environment in their team. A practical implication of this study is that providing the students with an understanding of what role the social aspect plays in teamwork, as well as the necessary digital social competence, will make them better equipped to foster the social aspect in their virtual teams.

Akan, O. H., Jack, E. P., & Mehta, A. (2020). Concrescent conversation environment, psychological safety, and team effectiveness: Examining a mediation model. Team performance management, 26(1-2), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-07-2019-0079 Guo, P., Saab, N., Post, L. S., & Admiraal, W. (2020). A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures. International Journal of Educational Research, 102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101586 Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 Janssen, J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2020). Applying collaborative cognitive load theory to computer-supported collaborative learning: towards a research agenda. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 783-805. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09729-5 Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (2006). Project-based learning. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317-333). Cambridge University Press. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Social Aspects of CSCL Environments: A Research Framework. Educational psychologist, 48(4), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.750225 Pérez-Mateo, M., & Guitert, M. (2012). Which social elements are visible in virtual groups? Addressing the categorization of social expressions. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1234-1246. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.014 Sias, P. M. (2009). Peer Coworker Relationships. In Organizing relationships : traditional and emerging perspectives on workplace relationships. SAGE. Sjølie, E., Espenes, T. C., & Buø, R. (2022). Social interaction and agency in self-organizing student teams during their transition from face-to-face to online learning. Computers & Education, 189. Usher, M., & Barak, M. (2020). Team diversity as a predictor of innovation in team projects of face-to-face and online learners. Computers & Education, 144, Article 103702. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103702