Introduction. The article examines the problem of significant differences between student groups with pronounced positive and negative dynamics of team development. Identifying these differences will lead to appropriate teaching interventions in order to prevent the disintegration of the group and developing a negative psychological atmosphere in it. The purpose of the study is to identify socio-psychological differences between student groups who have experienced a pronounced positive and negative dynamics of the team’s development during their studies at the university.
Materials and Methods. The theoretical and methodological basis of the study was the parametric conception of the team. In order to achieve the objective of the study and verify the hypothesis, the authors used theoretical (analysis, comparison, generalization, systematization) and empirical (in-depth interview and retrospective self-report) methods. The total sample size of participants in the interview was 38 people, including 13 people from the group with positive dynamics of team development (group 1) and 25 people from the group with negative dynamics (group 2). The obtained data were processed using statistical methods: the multifunctional Fisher test (to identify differences in the expression of variables obtained by content analysis), the Wilcoxon T test (to assess statistically significant changes in the group participants).
Results. The article presents a theoretical analysis of approaches to the problem of researching a student group as a permanent educational team. In the course of the study, the authors revealed socio-psychological differences between student groups with pronounced positive and negative dynamics of team development: the presence/absence of a positive image of the group shared by the majority as a cohesive and unified team; transforming this image into a group target; the presence/absence of a positive set of values, reflecting the ideas of collective action and individual well-being; the presence/absence of transfer of target and meaningful guidelines for joint activities from extra-curricular creative activities to the field of professional activities; the existence/absence of community-accepted norms and rules of compatibility, which are not protective, but developing; the presence/absence of a conflict atmosphere, competition and isolated microgroups, which collectively increase the group's closeness and its lower inclusion in the university environment. The authors revealed that the negative group dynamics is more clearly recognized by the respondents, the reasons for it are conflicts and the influence of informal leaders with different values and norms. The impact of the university environment is strongest in the first year and has been declining since the second term of the second year. Adult activity is not perceived by students as a factor in changes in the group. A significant discrepancy was revealed between the cyclical nature of educational activities and the changing request of a student from year 3. The most significant influence on students is exerted by the formats where students occupy the most subjective position and the most active formats of education, which are distinguished by a high degree of subjective novelty. The influence of the group on each student (both positive and negative) is perceived as very significant. The modality of assessing this influence depends on the nature of the group dynamics.
Conclusions. Based on the data obtained, the authors identified significant socio-psychological differences between student groups with pronounced positive and negative dynamics of team development.
Targeted teaching interventions on these significant differences will reduce the likelihood of negative socio-psychological dynamics in student groups.