Araştırma Makalesi | Açık Erişim
Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi 2026, Clt. 8(1) 20-35
How are Self-Selected Groups Formed in University Classrooms: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective Based on Evidence from Chinese Universities
ss. 20 - 35 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2026.1415.2
Yayın Tarihi: Haziran 29, 2026 | Görüntüleme Sayısı: 0/0 | İndirilme Sayısı: 0/0
Özet
While student self-selection is a prevalent method for forming cooperative learning groups in higher education, the underlying decision-making processes, particularly in non-Western contexts, remain underexplored. Based on in-depth interviews with 20 college students from different universities and disciplines, we revealed how self-selected groups are formed in Chinese university classrooms. Taking the social exchange theory as the analytical framework, it systematically explored the formation motivations, type characteristics and internal mechanisms of self-selected groups in course learning. The research finds that self-selected grouping can be divided into three major categories: convenience-based, utilitarian and free-riding, among which convenience-based type is the main grouping method. Furthermore, the three types are not isolated but dynamically adjust and present integrated features in accordance with the type of course and individual circumstances. The convenience-based grouping focuses on minimizing interaction costs and maximizing the convenience of interpersonal communication, aiming for low transaction costs and high emotional returns, as well as low integration costs and emotional security. The utilitarian-based grouping focuses on maximizing instrumental returns and practical goals, and is further divided into symbolic returns (high-score-oriented type) that pursue high-score-oriented acquisition of scarce academic resources and process-based gains from optimizing the collaboration process (complementary advantage type). The free-riding grouping is manifested as an imbalanced exchange system in social exchange, including strategic avoidance of input through active free-riding (with higher expected returns than personal investment) and passive free-riding due to structural constraints (forced to accept low-cost returns due to unequal exchange power). In this paper, we conducted a systematic study on the “passive free-riding” grouping, a type often overlooked. It depicts the behavioral dilemma of individuals who lose the opportunity to participate and are passively marginalized under the dual constraints of resource endowment and environmental division of labor, providing a new perspective for understanding the unequal exchange relationships in course learning groups.The Chinese students continuously weigh cost and benefit in group decision-making to achieve maximum benefit. This study reveals the rational exchange motives and formation logic of self-selected groups, making up for the limitation of insufficient attention to the group decision-making process in existing studies. This study illuminates the micro-level decision-making in group formation, offering a framework for educators to better guide cooperative learning and providing crucial empirical insights from a non-Western educational context to the broader literature on group dynamics.
Anahtar kelimeler: Chinese College Students, Self-selected Groups, Cooperative Learning, Group Formation, Social Exchange Theory
APA 7th edition
Yang, X., Liu, H., Li, J., & Zhao, X. (2026). How are Self-Selected Groups Formed in University Classrooms: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective Based on Evidence from Chinese Universities. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 8(1), 20-35. https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2026.1415.2
Harvard
Yang, X., Liu, H., Li, J. and Zhao, X. (2026). How are Self-Selected Groups Formed in University Classrooms: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective Based on Evidence from Chinese Universities. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 8(1), pp. 20-35.
Chicago 16th edition
Yang, Xinrui, Huichao Liu, Jiawen Li and Xiantong Zhao (2026). "How are Self-Selected Groups Formed in University Classrooms: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective Based on Evidence from Chinese Universities". Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi 8 (1):20-35. https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2026.1415.2
Beck, L. L., & Chizhik, A. W. (2013). Cooperative learning instructional methods for CS1: Design, implementation, and evaluation. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 13(3), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2492686
Bergtold, J. S., & Shanoyan, A. (2024). Assessment of group formation methods on performance in group-based learning activities. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1362211
Bousalem, Z., Qazdar, A., & El Guabassi, I. (2023). Cooperative Learning Groups: A New Approach Based on Students’ Performance Prediction. International Journal of Online & Biomedical Engineering, 19(12), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v19i12.41181
Brouwer, J., Flache, A., Jansen, E., Hofman, A., & Steglich, C. (2018). Emergent achievement segregation in freshmen learning community networks. Higher Education, 76(3), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0221-2
Chen, C.M., & Kuo, C.H. (2019). An optimized group formation scheme to promote collaborative problem-based learning. Computers & Education, 133, 94–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.011
Feichtner, S. B., & Davis, E. A. (1984). Why Some Groups Fail: a Survey of Students’ Experiences with Learning Groups. Journal of Management Education, 9(4), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256298400900409
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
Hilton, S., & Phillips, F. (2010). Instructor-Assigned and Student-Selected Groups: A View from Inside. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2010.25.1.15
Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1086/222355
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Interaction Book Company.
Krouska, A., & Virvou, M. (2019). An Enhanced Genetic Algorithm for Heterogeneous Group Formation based on Multi-Characteristics in Social Networking-based Learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(3), 465–476. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2019.2927914
Küchle, V. A. B., Smith, J. P., Hwang, J., & Menon, R. (2025). How university mathematics instructors form groups and how students experience them. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 56(9), 1804–1831. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2369651
Lambić, D., Lazović, B., Djenić, A., & Marić, M. (2018). A novel metaheuristic approach for collaborative learning group formation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(6), 907–916. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12299
Liu, Y., & Huang, W. (2021). An analysis of the “marginalized person” phenomenon in group cooperative learning. 小组合作学习中的”边缘人”现象探析. Basic Education Curriculum, 2021(07), 37–43. [In Chinese]
Maina, E. M., Oboko, R. O., & Waiganjo, P. W. (2017). Using Machine Learning Techniques to Support Group Formation in an Online Collaborative Learning Environment. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications, 9(3), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijisa.2017.03.04
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2019). China’s education modernization 2035. http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/s6052/moe_838/201902/t20190223_370857.html
Ning, H. (2011). Adapting cooperative learning in tertiary ELT. ELT Journal, 65(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq021
Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Westview Press.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Webb, N. M. (2009). The teacher’s role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908x380772
