 |
| Click to hear podcast |
Based on studies from
previous chapters, instruction improves if students have more opportunities to
work collaboratively. Two research groups support this claim:
Csikszentmihalyi and Hunter:
"Teenagers ascribe
happiness to their moods when they are in situations of relative freedom, in
the company of age-mates, able to engage in flow activities that stretch their
skills and makes them feel alive and proud."1
Alex Pentland:
Teams function best
when they share
1. Substantial
number of ideas: many short contributions rather than a few long ones;
2. Dense
interactions: a continuous, overlapping cycling between making
contributions and very short (less than one second) responsive comments (such
as “good,” “that's right,” “what?” etc.) that serve to validate or invalidate the
ideas and build consensus; and
3. Diversity
of ideas: everyone within a group contributing ideas and reactions."2
(p.89)
Moreover, interaction
promotes the cognitive-emotional centers in the brain that amplify the drive to
accomplish academic tasks and effectively facilitate large volumes of content.
Students are engaged and derive novelty from face-to-face encounters and the
secretion of the neurotransmitter dopamine increases to help
the individual sustain focus. It impacts two vital cognitive skills as well:
patterning and prediction. Teachers that use collaborative strategies from
short worksheets to project-based opportunities are doing their students a huge
service in two realms: developing their minds and advancing social maturity.
The fact of the matter is that many have evaluated the progress of students in
such settings and observed improvement in subject mastery, motivation to learn, trust, and tolerance.1
Am I implying that
teacher-led classes, or lectures, should be eliminated from the
educational sphere? No. They are a necessity in the academic world – an
effective means to communicate content. When well-crafted, they are crucial in
presenting facts and structuring curriculum in a meaningful manner, the basis
for the range of pedagogy used in a course.
They establish you as the leader of the educational process. The issue in my
mind is that the classrooms in America are by and large student listening
events for a significant portion of the school day, with spurts of discussion
in some classes, and occasional group tasks. As Pentland found through
hundreds of thousands of hours of metered interactions (sociometer) in a variety of settings, group settings are productive
and creative, particularly when there is even distribution of ideas and
peer-approving words.3
Unless the education industry acknowledges that children are
more attentive during interactive lessons where they share in the flow of
knowledge and behavior, the monotony of the school environment and the
consequential turn-off generated in a huge segment of our population will
continue.
Collectively, many
students will get through high school lacking inspiration to learn, struggle
through post-secondary education, with a dwindling number certain about
choosing a major. The present system is witnessing a fraction of the enrollment
excelling in school, and typically these are auditory-able children that do
well in the teacher lecture format. The result
is that fifty-three percent of those that enter college are potentially ready
for that level of work (American College Testing 2014). As mentioned before,
the High School Survey of Student Engagement found that many students are bored
or essentially not connected to school, not comprehending the significance of
well-articulated content areas, nor realizing the value and relevance
of well-endowed educational programs tailor-made to their ability and talents.
They are energetically poised to perform and can become prolific learners if
given a chance to assert themselves in a solo demonstrative role or
collaborative setting, and thus be
affirmed by peers that their ideas and solutions have merit. Brain research
supports this claim (see Part I and Appendix F).
Moreover, the combination of
teacher-student with student-student communication develops a powerful
classroom dynamic, validating their accomplishments, furthering trust and camaraderie.
Researching
the effectiveness of cooperative tasks
To investigate the
value of cooperative learning as professors of
education at The University of Minnesota, David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson devoted research to observing children in
group settings in schools. The results were published in the 1975 text Learning together and alone, cooperation,
competition, and individualization.3
They found that
cooperative learning exceeded the
traditional 'seated in rows' (competitive) approach at two levels. One was
cognitive performance and the other included human characteristics such as
interpersonal communication and mutual liking. Their research is extensive and
the updated versions of Learning together
and alone as well as journal publications have caught the attention of
educators across America.4,5,6,7
The
Johnsons
strongly advocate for collaborative work in the
classroom because it promotes strong alliances and trust between members,
which drives individuals to learn the material and be engaged while performing
tasks. They list several options to incorporate cooperative learning starting from
occasional group work to multiple classroom sessions devoted to this process.
Sitting in
rows
Based on research, they
conclude that the lecture-heavy format restricts
students to designated locations in the classroom curtailing interaction with
peers. They learn subjects competitively to achieve higher grades than their
peers, at times obstructing the success of others to that end. Moreover, they
define it as an approach deliberately structured to ensure that students do not
communicate or exchange information.
Traditional classroom teaching practices do not give enough
attention to the passive or reticent student, thereby impeding the learning
process and leading to unnecessary attrition as stated in a 1984 report from
the National Institute of Education.
Furthermore, by not enabling
interactive elements in the day
to day education of children, you are reducing the opportunity to enhance their
genetically endowed capacity at three levels:
interpretation, planning, and tolerance.
In addition, they do
not experience the spontaneity of extemporaneous speaking, a talent
that pays big dividends in academic and work settings leaving high school with little or no excitement for academic
success mainly because they rarely have a chance to assert themselves in the
classroom and prove to others that they have value as thinkers and
contributors.9
Robert Sylwester, Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of
Oregon, adds that:
The problem
with the authoritarian model is that it is designed principally around the
misbehavior of a small number of the students in a class. Most students relate
reasonably positively to school.10 (p.11)
He adds that compliance
is okay, but we should help students become self-starters because they need to
manage their "energy, space, time, within biological limitations and
cultural expectation". (p. 12)
In his book, No Contest, Alfie Kohn American author and
lecturer, states that individualistic efforts are unproductive and serve to
make others fail, creating anxiety, selfishness, self-doubt, and poor communication.
Individualism overall nurtures competition that leads to a negative view of
human nature as individuals strive to maximize personal gain.11
Shared
identity and mutual causation
Dave and Roger Johnson feel that when the instructor organizes the
collaborative experience
appropriately the opposite occurs. Group settings are successful because
· Students are bound by their mutual fate,
shared identity, and mutual causation and, therefore, celebrate each other's
successes.
· Relevant ideas, information, conclusions, and
resources tend to be made available, exchanged, and utilized in ways that
promote collective and individual insights and increase energy to complete the
task.3 (p.197)
They add that students
perceive a greater chance to be successful when learning cooperatively. Furthermore, the effort
to execute tasks forms an emotional bond that drives the team to succeed with
the mutual benefit leading in many instances to valuing the relationships more
than the accomplishment of tasks. In the
process, the members experience validation, building trust and tolerance.
Because of the frequent
banter and feedback, students challenge one another and consequently promote
higher-level reasoning, novel ideas, and application to other contexts.3
A particularly
important observation was made by Joe Cuseo, professor of psychology at
Marymount College in Palos Verde, California:
Cooperative
learning has the potential to capitalize on the contemporary wave of student
diversity – converting it from the pedagogical liability into a pedagogical
asset fashioned by capitalizing on the multiple, socio-cultural perspectives
that can be experienced when students from diverse backgrounds are placed and
heterogeneously-formed cooperative learning groups.12 (p. 24)
Judy Willis, neurologist and classroom teacher, an authority on brain
research and best teaching practices, remarks that students feel valued when
they are included in a group and therefore develop resiliency. A
well-structured group setting stimulates abstract conceptualization, promoting
social confidence, empathy, and problem solving.13
Psychological
and sociological characteristics
In this context, therefore, they are respected
and manage discourse by holding each other accountable for appropriate social
conduct, internalizing good values, and promoting self-control.
The caring models
commitment in relationships, a cornerstone for psychological health and social
competency. Furthermore, a child is more likely to ask for help compared to the
large class setting.12
Our increasingly
diverse society encourages citizens to appreciate and benefit from different
perspectives. In that context, learning to listen carefully, think critically,
participate constructively, and collaborate productively to solve common
problems are vital components of an education for citizens in the 21st Century.14
Collaborative learning occurs when students
and faculty work together to create and facilitate knowledge. It is a pedagogy that has at its
center the assumption that people make meaning together and that the process
enriches and enlarges them.15
The college
setting
Richard Light, Professor of Teaching and Learning at Harvard Graduate
School of Education, focuses on higher education policies and controversies,
states:
That student
who gets the most out of college, who grows the most academically, who as a
rule is happiest, is the one that organizes their time to include interpersonal
activities with faculty members, or with fellow students built around
substantial, academic work.16 (p.6)
Withdrawn prone
students and disadvantaged minorities tend to be passive participants in
academic settings. One 1985 study noted that the five-year retention rate for
black students majoring in math or science at the University of California
Berkeley was twenty-four percent higher in cooperative settings.17
A group from the
University of Wisconsin encouraged
instructors to switch from the lecture mode to a team-based approach and devised a
special program for ethnically diverse calculus students. Millar reported
positive findings on the effectiveness of learning in groups since it
emphasized three factors: intensive group work, carefully chosen and very
difficult problems, and instructors who function as guides. The results were remarkable: students
learning under these conditions were twice as likely to receive a B or above in
calculus, and they showed higher levels of confidence in their mathematical
ability by performing a range of problems, incorporating creative means to
solve problems, and develop an interest to acquire the deeper, more conceptual
understanding of calculus. 18 (pp. 8-9) A Harvard study showed that
students receiving degrees in science tend to work in small, student-centered
study groups, whereas students that abandon a science major rarely worked with
others.19 These findings may be especially significant for women,
who for many years tended to transfer out of sciences more frequently than men.
In another study,
Wright and associates evaluated Analytical Chemistry at The University
Wisconsin for both lecture/discussion classes with cooperative learning. Students in the latter had quantifiably better reasoning
and communication skills than those taught in lecture/discussion classes. This extended to the students' preparation
for future science courses – a remarkable finding for such a challenging
curriculum.20 (p.987)
Kenneth Bruffee, professor at Brooklyn College adds this very important
comment:
Students must be clearly and unequivocally on their own to
govern themselves and pursue the task in the way that they see fit. This helps
students become autonomous, articulate, and socially and intellectually mature
and results in a social process of inquiry.21 (p.17)
Instruction is to reach
the entirety of the classroom and these researchers have laid out convincing
examinations of what the interactive collaborative
process can do to amplify learning and create confidence. I saw how students in
the collaborative mode for small as
well as extended assignments assimilated more information in a shorter period,
were more relaxed, and noticeably engaged. There was considerable validation of effort and
thought. I witnessed considerably more attention when a student modeled a
problem at the board and in many cases enlisted their classmates to join in on
the discussion. It is the intent of this unit to show how group associations coupled
with other student-centered avenues significantly augment the achievement level
and joy in the classroom.
How much?
Is this book advocating
total immersion in cooperative pedagogy? No, but students
should have classroom experiences that maximize the nervous system's ability to
assimilate information and exercise higher-level cognition. It is my contention
that having students lead discussions or facilitate problem-solving with their
peers be expedited frequently for both short and long assignments with
close-order collaboration and projects because it amplifies subject mastery and
generates enthusiasm for courses. However, I believe it would be an overkill to
have students in the face-to-face mode in every class
just as my colleagues attempted after an in-service many years ago.
Nevertheless, the benefits of structured team-based lessons from cognitive and
personal validation perspectives need to
be reckoned and implemented by the education industry because many teachers
acknowledge its value and have their students in the cooperative setting
frequently.
We should draw
inspiration from the above studies and seek ways to implement team-based instruction.
For instance, grade level meetings should discuss the merits in their school
curriculum and ascertain the extent short and long-term inclusion could be
employed among the staff. The science
teacher may be using it for quizzes and a test review for a week, the history
instructor may have a week-long group project next month, but the math teacher
is giving a test and will then deliver teacher-led presentations to introduce
new material, postponing cooperative sessions for several days. This book is
written to inspire teachers to use novel methods to raise cognition and bring out expressive and spontaneous qualities in
children occurring frequently when they serve as proctors and facilitators or
in close-order face-to-face settings. It is a
powerful validating mechanism that has
ramifications academically and emotionally in an era distracted by hand-held
devices.
Will you have to create
entirely new lessons in the cooperative mode? No. I simply used my regular
worksheets and quizzes that
were done individually and adjusted them over the years to accommodate deeper
analysis in the group setting.
Teacher and Student Comments
My favorite is when I am paired with someone and you get to
know their different ideas and you get to tell them your ideas. It is fun
because you get to know another person's point of view.
6th
Grader, Portland, Oregon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZxNldBEU6o
The individual learner achieves a deeper level of applied
knowledge using team-based learning at Duke's Medical School the past two
years than I have seen in my previous eighteen years. If you were to visit
such a class you would see a lot of active engagement, students huddled
together in small groups, face-to-face, debating, and questioning one another, testing out their
ideas.
Leonard
White, PhD
Associated
Professor, Duke Institute for Brain Sciences
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFdVfycAWg4
I retain more knowledge after working in the team-based
format compared to the lone wolf method in my library cubicle I had used
previously. Closing the gap between my argument and that of a teammate to
come to a correct point of view is very important.
Neuroscience
major, Duke University Trinity Arts & Sciences
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFdVfycAWg4
Your groupmates help if you have a problem and everyone is
ready to lend a hand.
9th
Grade Math Student, The College Preparatory School, Oakland, CA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEwv_qobpU
The classroom problem is designed to be harder and meatier
than the basic homework problems. The
students have to communicate to solve these challenging problems. The best
groups talk about the problems before putting the pencil to paper. Their
faces are directed toward each other, and they are learning so much more, to
be proactive, depending on their peers.
Math
Teacher, The College Preparatory School, Oakland, CA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEwv_qobpU
I establish my fifth-grade class so that collaborative work is structured
with specific behaviors. These include such things as ways to ask questions,
how to disagree, or even something as basic as who is to speak first. It
becomes increasingly more efficient as the year progresses and the effort to
coordinate this structure is well worth it. Even if they quickly solve a math
problem, but can they explain their thinking process to others?
Chris
Opitz, Teacher, Willard L. Bowman Elementary School
Edutopia.org
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZxNldBEU6o
The lecturer was in front of the room talking. There was no
interaction. As an undergraduate, I took notes ferociously and tried to
remember every single detail…
The team-based style allows my lecturer to have a two-way
interaction with us. The class is structured so that we have to ask questions
and you came to a consensus. You can approach the faculty on any issue. They
become your friend…
I retained more information in this team-based course than
I did in my entire undergraduate years in lecture classes.
Students,
Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School Singapore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlVPLYGdBLg
Have a set of guidelines in the first classes and for each
lesson. These include respect, listening to one another, be courteous. I
carefully arrange students to have eye contact and tell them to check their
egos at the door, take risks, have fun, and to offer ideas. I give roles so
that every student ends up being fully engaged in the conversation.
Julie
Anderson, 9th Grade English Teacher, The College Preparatory
School, Oakland, CA
Edutopia.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEwv_qobpU
Team-based learning is preparing me for my years as a doctor
because the field is increasingly more collaborative. There is a wealth of information that no one person can know. It
gets me into my classroom with my peers talking about things, to have a goal
in mind, and feel like part of a team.
First-year
medical student, Duke University School
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW_M426V2E0
I got to see how other people feel; you learn through
disagreement; I like to disagree with people to see if it right or wrong in
the debate and learn something.
4th
Grade students
Teachers Network Video
http://www.teachersnetwork.org/videos/
My organic chemistry
class had a yearly failure/withdrawal rate of 17%. This pattern continued even as I worked
harder to make my lectures more interesting and entertaining. I switched to a
full-scale collaborative approach and saw a significant change that included
better relationships among students, a failure/withdrawal rate less than 5%,
final exam scores quite a few percent points higher, two additional chapters
covered, and a 90% satisfaction rate amongst students.
Frank J. Dinan, Canisius College, Buffalo, NY
Michaelsen, L., Knight, A.B., Team-Based Learning: A
Transformative Use of Small Groups in College Teaching, Stylus Publishing,
2004
|
Excellent
resources
Here is a sampling of
interesting video discussions of the effectiveness of cooperative learning used
at various grade levels and disciplines.
Kagan Cooperative
Learning-Structures for Success
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0s_qxJDuas]
Duke School of Medicine
embraces Team-Based Learning
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW_M426V2E0]
Collaborative Learning
Builds Deeper Understanding (Edutopia)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEwv_qobpU]
*******
A Tale of Two Cities
|
A large cask of wine
had been dropped and broken, in the street. All the people within reach had
suspended their business, or their idleness, to run to the spot and drink the
wine. Some men kneeled down, made scoops of their two hands joined, and
sipped, or tried to help women, who bent over their shoulders, to sip, before
the wine had all run out between their fingers.
A shrill sound of
laughter and of amused voices—voices of men, women, and children—resounded in
the street while this wine game lasted. There was little roughness in the
sport, and much playfulness. There was a special companionship in it, an
observable inclination on the part of every one to join some other one, which
led, especially among the luckier or lighter-hearted, to frolicsome embraces,
drinking of healths, shaking of hands, and even joining of hands and dancing,
a dozen together.
Book 1 Chapter 5
Charles Dickens
|
References
1. Csikszentmihalyi,
M., Hunter, J., (2003). Happiness in Everyday Life: The Uses of Experience
Sampling, Journal of Clinical Psychology,
185-199.
2. Pentland, A.,
(2014). Social Physics: How Good Ideas
Spread-The Lessons from a New Science, Penguin Press.
3. Johnson, D.,
Johnson, R. (1975). Learning together and alone, cooperation, competition, and
individualization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Choi, J.,
Johnson, D., Johnson, R., (2011). The Roots of Social Dominance: Aggression,
Prosocial Behavior, and Social Interdependence, Journal of Educational
Research. Vol. 104 Issue 6, 442-454.
5. Johnson, F. P.
(2009). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (10th Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
6. Johnson, D.
W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). New
developments in social interdependence theory. Psychology Monographs 131, 285–358.
7. Johnson, D.
W., & Norem-Hebeisen, A. (1979). A
measure of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic attitudes. Journal of Social Psychology, 109, 253–261.
8. Michaelsen,
L., Knight, A.B., (2004). Team-Based
Learning: A Transformative Use of Apte, Groups in College Teaching, Stylus
Publishing,
9. Involvement in
Learning: Realizing the Potential of American Higher Education. Final Report of
the Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402
Retrieved
from:
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED246833
10. Sylwester, R.,
(2003). A Biological Brain in a Cultural
Classroom, Corwin Press.
11. Kohn, A.
(1992). No Contest Boston. Houghton
Mifflin.
12. Cuseo, J.B.,
(1996). Cooperative learning: A pedagogy
for addressing contemporary challenges & critical issues in higher
education. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press
13. Willis, J.,
(2009). Cooperative Learning is a Brain Turn-On. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing, Kagan Online Magazine,
Fall/Winter
14. Barkley, E.,
Cross, K., (2004). Collaborative Learning
Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty Paperback, Jossey-Bass,
15. Mathews, R.
(1996). Collaborative learning: Creating
knowledge with students, Teaching on solid ground: Using scholarship to improve
practice, San Francisco: Josey-Bass.
16. Light, R.J.,
(1992). The Harvard assessment Seminar,
2nd report, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Graduate School of Education
and Kennedy School of Government,
17. Triesman, P.,
(1985). A study of mathematics
performance and black student at the University of California, Berkeley,
Dissertations Abstracts International 47, 1641-A.
18. Millar, S.B.,
Learning through evaluation, adaptation, and dissemination: The LEAD Center. AAHE Bulletin, 51(8), 7-9.
19. Barkley, E.,
Cross, K., (2004). Collaborative Learning
Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty Paperback, Jossey-Bass.
20. Wright, C.,
Millar, S.B., Kosciuk, S., Penberthy, D., (August 1998) A Novel Strategy for
Assessing the Effects of Curriculum Reform on Student Competence, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 75 No. 8
21. Bruffee, K.,
(1995). Sharing our toys: Cooperative Learning versus Collaborative Learning. Change, 27(1), 12-18
