ERIC ED347632: Making Small Groups Productive.

18 Pages·1992·1.1 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 347 632
EA 024 056
TITLE
Making Small Groups
Productive.
INSTITUTION
Center on Organization
and Restructuring of
Schools,
Madison, WI.
SPONS AGENCY
Office of Educational
Research and Improvement
(ED),
Washington, DC.
PUB DATE
92
CONTRACT
R117000015-92
NOTE
17g.
PUB TYPE
Collected Works
- Serials (022) -- Guides
Non-Classroom Use (055)
JOURNAL CIT
Issues in Restructuring
Schools; n2 Spr 1992
EDRS PRICE
MF01/PC01 Plus
Postage.
DESCRIPTORS
*Cooperative Learning;
*Educationally Disadvantaged;
*Instructicnal Effectiveness;
Interaction;
Intermediate Grades;
Learning Activities; Middle
Schools; Self Directed
Groups; *Small Group
Instruction; *Teaching
Methods
IDENTIFIERS
*Complex Instruction
ABSTRACT
Issues in making
small-group instruction
effective
are addressed in this
theme issue, which
focuses on am approach
called Complex
Instruction (CI). Developed
by Elizabeth Cohen
at
Snanford University
(California), the
approach is designed
for middle
school students in
heterogeneous classes.
The program is based
on
fdur goals to help
teachers foster high
level interactions
among
students:
(1) bolster
students of low status
by identifying multiple
abilities; (2)
raise the expectations
for student competence;
(3)
develop student
responsibility for each
others' performance and
learning; and (4)
promote higher order
ttinking. This document
includes a summary of
Cohen and Cazden's
forthcoming review of
research literature
on small groups;
a report on two middle-grade
classrooms wto use the
program; and an interview
with a stal
developer who helps
teachers implement
tne program. Cohen's
work
concentrates on the
challenge of using
small groups to develop
higher-order thinking
in heterogeneous
classrooms where status
differences between
high and low performing
students usually
pose
problems for teachers
and students. Nine
sources for further reading
are provided. (14 references)
(LMI)
********************************************************
* **** ***eke***
Reproductions supplied
by EDRS are the
best that can be made
from the original
document.
***********************************************************************
AP"-
7ffillirwal6")
in restructuring
sch
Is
Making Small
Groups Productive
oday's lesson is
on the Crusades. One crusade known
to students who go through
middle school is that of
Christians marching
in triumph over infidels.
Another
movement, going on behind the
scenes, is for improved methods of
small group
instruction.
Small group instruction
is not new. In fact,
cooperative learning has been
praCticed
and studied in the United
States for more than
twenty years. Research shows that
with
well-designed small
groups, both academic and social skills
improve significantlyeven
with the most challenging
students. After
two decades, small groupwork
is now experi-
encing the wide-spread
implementation researchers
support.
In cooperative learning,
students interact in
a group small enough that all
can par-
ticipate in a collective task.
Thinking
processes can vary from
routinemastery of
basic skills, to
abstractinvestigation of complex
problems with
no definite answer.
However, a key
target for cooperative learning
is the promotion of higher
level dis-
course and higher order thinking.
ti S DEPARTIVENT Of EDUCATIOk
There are several approaches
Vice ce Educetronel Research end improvement
to cooperative learning. We
focus here
on an approach
IUCAT1ONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
called Complex
Instruction (CI), developed
CENTER (ERIC)
by Elizabeth Cohen
at Stanford Univer-
Thds document hes been fepioducect as
sity, and designed for middle
school students in
wowed from the person Or argani:at.0"
heterogeneous classes. CI
requires that
Oncilinittrtg it
teachers foster high level
r
interactions 'among students,
not to simply transfer
nave
men made to nnwove
Minor changes
a set of
information. At Stanford,
,eproductOn
Clvallty
-----------------------_
teachers train for
two weeks in the theory and
practice of CI,
have follow
up sessions by staff developers
poolts OS vq-w of oprrtrons stated , I, Mot% docu.
in their classrooms through
the year, and
memt do f`c't ^eCOSSA"Y rep, asent otficisi
reconvene for a one-day review workshop.
Of RI poson or poti-cy
The following four goals
of CI influence the
practice of teaching and advance
the broader agenda for
school restructuring:
Bolster students of low
status by identifying multiple abilities.
Any of several conditions
can brand a student
as low status, including language
accent,
ethnic appearance, lower
socio-economic background, perceived
reading and academic
ability. Such students
often experience
rejection of their ideas,
or exclusion from the
group project. As their interactions
within the
group decline, their intellectual
devel-
opment is hampered. The teacher
can point out that completion of
ISSUE REPORT NO.
the group task
2
requires multiple abilities
not vested in any one individual,
and that
SPRING 1992
every individual
will be good
at something.
If students believe that
Making Small Groups
the group requires the
capabilities of all, then low
status
students will be brought
Productive
into the interactions. The
students will seek
contributions
from each other, and
expectations will he raised by
healthy peer
Director's Introduction
pressure rather than
2
demands by the teacher.
Restructuring the
Classroom
Raise the expectations fin
4
competence.
The teacher
can reverse negative perceptions by
Staff Development
acknowledging the capabilities
of a
low status student
Interview
to the group. Since students
tend to trust their teacher's
8
evaluations,
ointintied on
page 3
BEST
COPY
2
AVAILABLE
CENTER ON
ORGANIZATION AND
RESTRUCTUR; :G
OF SCHOOLS
DIRECTOR'S INTRODUCTION.
In addition to cognitive objectives, small groups offer
"restructured" to improve
How should classrooms be
opportunities to pursue affective and social goals such as
instruction! Teachers and researchers know that in
building student respect for individual and cultural diversity
of whole
many situations the prevailing structure
and developing cooperative social skills.
class instruction, what John Goodlad called "frontal" teach-
But like other interventions (e.g. block scheduling, team
ing, just doesn't work. A promising possibility, pursued in
teaching, core curriculum, charter schools, abolition of
thousands of schools, is to have students spend more time
tracking, school choice), the general idea of groupwork,
in small groups. But merely assigning students to work in
however sensible, offers no assurance that any of its theoreti-
small groups is no panacea. This Issue Report discusses how
cal potential will be fulfilled. If poorly designed, small group
to make small groups effective.
activities can decrease students' engagement, their under-
Why don't students seem to learn when the teacher
standing of the subject, and their respect for peers. The/
stands at the front of a class and tries to communicate with
question then, is, "What are the conditions under which
all students simultaneously, by transmitting information
small groupwork will maximize its theoretical potential in
and instructions, or quizzing them and leading discussions?
achieving specific educational goals?"
One explanation is individual differences: students come to
Under the banner of "cooperative learning," a host of
class with so many different motivations, abilities, styles of
researchers, teachers, curriculum specialists and staff devel-
learning, and histories of prior knowledge that a lesson pre-
opers have been working on this question for many years.
sented in a single format, at the same pace for all, fails to
There are several interpretations of the term, but the obvi.
get across to many students.
ous implicationthat students should help one another to
Research offers further explanation for the shortcomings
learnreflects the need for active processing and individual
of whole class frontal instruction. Researchers have discov-
feedback so absent in the typicial whole-class lesson.
ered that learning is an active process in which the student
Diverse approaches to research and program development
needs an opportunity to use, to experiment or try out, to
within the cooperative learning movement have raised sever-
play with, to make sense of new knowledge. For most stu-
al issues. The most fundamental is, "What are the essential
dents this cognitive activity will not occur just by listening,
goals or reasons for students working in small groups?" Goals
reading, or viewing, and then being called upon to give
for cognitive learning can include memorization of factual
back what was said by the teacher, text, or video. Instead,
information, laarning how to apply aVorithms, and solving
students need sustained opportunities to apply and express
complex higher order tasks. Basic skills goals include learning
knowledge in their own words, drawings, or other activities.
how to use a library, outlining and taking notes, working with
Second, in order to process knowledge productively, most
computers. Some teachers use small groups primarily for affec-
students need reactions and feedback to their individual
tive goals, especially to build individual self-esteem, to nurture
work. Constructive individual feedback is critical not sim-
respect for different racial, ethnic, cultural, and economic
ply to certify the level of student success, but more impor-
groups, and to develop a cooperative ethic. If small groups are
tantly, to stimulate mental activity in processing and mak-
to be effective in accomplishing such diverse goals, then the
ing sense of knowledge. Since most individuals have great
work 'must be structured specifically with the goals in mind.
difficulty generating within themselves the kind of critical
Once the goals are clear, issues such as the following
conversation needed to stimulate further inquiry, if they are
need to be considered in designing the groups' work:
to learn, they need meaningful interaction with a teacher
that
or peers about progress in their work. The problem is
To what extent does the goal require collective action,
for most students whole class instruction offers no opportu.
such as production of a group product or performance to
nity to work actively with knowledge in a sustained way,
which all students contribute, in contrast, for example, to
and no opportunity for individualized feedback.
individuals producing their own work with the help of peers?
Well-designed small groups have the potential to solve
How will student differences in motivation and ability be
both of these problems and they have other advantages too.
handled within groups so as to insure that all students have
With appropriate tasks and enough flexibility in use of
opportunity to participate and to learn? Realizing that in
time and resources, small groups afford all students the
any group, some members will work harder and contribute
opportunity to work with knowledge activelythrough
more than others, to what extent should this problem be
writing, talking, dramatization.
minimized through homogeneous vs heterogeneous group-
ing, and can individual differences within heterogeneous
Small groups increase opportunities for feedback on indi-
groups best be handled?
vidual work from peers and from the teacher
ho can c ir c u
late throughout the class and give sustained attention
to
What incentives and assessment procedures will be used
specific groups and students.
to maximize student engagement and learning? Will groups
compete? Will individuals be held accountable for their
Small groups offer a motivational boost, because they situ-
own performance and their contribution to the group
ate learning in a social setting that many students find more
effort? How will grades be awarded?
satisfying than working alone.
2
Does successful execution of the group task first require
forthcoming review of the research literature on small
specific training tor students to perform roles fur which they
groups; a report on two middle grade classrooms who use
may have little competence (e.g. summarizing discussion,
the program; and an interview with Patty Swanson, a staff
keeping a group on track, making an oral report)?
developer who helps teachers to implement the program.
Finally, how can the teacher interact with students most
The field of cooperative learning includes a variety of
effectively? A common role for the teacher is to act as a rov-.
emphases. Cohen's work concentrates on the challenge of
t need
ing resouree, interacting with students as an appr
using small groups to develop higher order thinking in het-
arises. This often involves brief exchanges te ke rstudents
erogeneous classrooms where status differences between high
on task or to raise provocative questions, but without taking
and low performing students (often associated with race,
time to teach the subject in a Focratic or seminar style.
ethnicity, class and gender) usually mse major problems for
Teachers and researchers have noted that pedagogy of this
teachers and students alike. Other approaches to cooperative
sort can deprive students of powerful intellectual interac-
learning define the central issues and their programmatic
tion. How cao teachers develop pedagogy that allows them
solutions differently. Alternative approaches that have also
to interject substantive expertise into the group conversa-
developed a research base on the use of small groups include
tions while at the same time allowing students to construct
the work of Robert Slavin, Johns Hopkins University, David
knowledge in their own terms?
and Roger Johnson, University of Minnesota, and Shlomo
Sharan and Yael Sharma, University of Tel Aviv. (For further
This Issue Report addresses some of these matters by
focusing on the work of Elizabeth Cohen and her colleagues
reading, see back page.)
at Stanford University, home of their Program in Complex
Instruction. We include a summary of Cohen and Cazden's
Fred M. Newmann, Director
cimtinued from page /
they begin to believe in the potential
of their previously ignored peers.
Deuel, up student responsibility for each
others per-for/nal:cc and learning.
If the student tasks are interdepen-
dent, each will bear some responsibili-
ty tor the success of others. One tech-
nique to foster such interaction is to
assign roles to different students, such
as facilitator, harmonizer, reporter. In
order tor a student to fulfill one ot
these roles, the student must assume
some responsibility for the perfor-
mance of others.
Promote higher order thinking.
A main purpose of CI, promoting
A group discusses the U.S. amendments
higher order thinking requires selec-
tion of appropriate tasks for the group.
dents and promote higher level think,
Washington and Paul Revere in revo-
The teacher must choose topics and
ing and social skills. We illustrate how
lutionary war garb. Photographs of st
tasks which ,ire open-ended, perhaps
dents posed in front of the Capitol in
their teaching reflects the goals of Cl.
uncertain and complex. The activity
Washington, D.C. stand in sharp con-
Bolstering Itm status by
must require multiple input, points of
trast to the rolling green foothills of
identifying multiple abilities
view, and high level interactions.
the Silicon Valley. National statistics
The elassrtmm at Steinbeck Middle
In this imue, We visit the ciassriroms
may _cry American students' lack of
of two social studies teachers in
School in San Jose, California shows
knowledge of the Bill of Rights, but
California who trained in Cl. In each
the unmistakable signs of American
Compton's kids just may refute the
case we observe an adaptation of the
social studies. Models of Philadelphia's
findings. Bruce (7,ompton, eighth
essential elements of the theory; each
Independence Hall dot side tables
uses techniques designed to engage stu-
under life-size wall hangings of George
continued on page 10
3
1
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
RFS': ARCH
Restructuring the Classroom:
Conditions for Productive Small Groups
Student interactions
BN Elizabeth C; Cohen
ence between the type of interaction
useful for the more routine types of aca-
Theorists of group interaction in
C--' ooperative learn ng in small
demic learning and the type of interac-
classrooms differ as to how
groups embodies many of the
tion desired when the objective is
explicit and rational discourse should
social and academic goals of school
learning for understanding or concep-
be for productive small groups. The
restructuring. Its advantages have keen
tual learning. For more routine learn-
social constrw:tivists have divumented
trumpeted for decades, and it has
ing, students should help each other to
how groups negotiate meaning moment
gained increasing acceptance world-
understand what the teacher or the
hy moment while others see effective
wide as a means to enhance achieve-
textbook is saying and should offer each
c(xiperative learning as an explicit
ment on both basic skills and higher
other substantive and procedural infor,
strategy in which groups must manage
order thinking, and to promote pr,l
o
mation. For conceptual learning, the
the process of problem solving with
._..uc-
nye social behavior and improve racial
interaction desired is more of a mutual
conscious planning and execution of
and ethnic harmony. Cooperative
exchange process in which ideas,
tasks. Researchers who have actually
learning also presents a method for
hypotheses, strategies and speculation
recorded interaction within coopera-
managing a class or group with a wide
are shared. The main challenge for
tive learning groups have often been
range of academic achievement such as
teachers is to stimulate the type of
disappointed by what they have heard.
chase found in untracked schools.
interaction desired according to their
For example, in the de-bugging of com-
Early research on cooperative learn-
teaching objective. Courtney Cazden of
puter programs, students with no prepa-
ing yielded apparently conflicting
Harvard University and I have recently
ration in group interactions, interact
results. In some studies, group learning
synthesized research findings. The
only at the level of line-by-line debug-
was observed to substantially improve
results, summarized here, have major
ging, with little discoum on the overall
achievement and social relations,
implications tor teachers of small
strategy or logic of the program. 1
whereas in others, the results on
groups, and tor principals, staff develop-
Observers have also witnessed interper-
achievement tests were no different
ers, and district administrators.
sonal processes that are anything hut
from those in traditional instructikm.
cooperative among untrained partici-
What is a Cooperative
These varad results suggest that the
pants in "cooperative learning."
Learning Group?
advantages ot coopenitive learning
Our review of studies of interaction..
might be realized only under certain
In a cooperative learning group
suggest this useful generalizanon: if
e'C't
conditions. However, research that
students work together in a ,roup
students are not taught differently,
compared cooperative instructional
small enough so that everyone can par-
they will tend to operate at the most
methods to non-cooperative methods
ticipate on a task that has been clearly
concrete level. If teachers want high
on outcomes alone without examining
assigned. Students afe expected to
level operation, particularly verbal,
what was happening in the interaction
carry out their task without direct and
the students will require specific
of group members could not reveal just
immediate supervision of the teacher.
development of skills for discourse,
what these critical conditions were.
The level of learning involved can
either in advance of cocperative learn-
In the past decade, research has
vary from routine to abstract; however,
ing or through direct ..i.,.stance when
gone beyond this approach to concen-
ccx,perative learning groups are often
the groups are in operation. In addi-
tri,te on the effects ot changing various
promoted to facilitate higher level dis-
tion, since interpersonal skills do not
features of ccoperative learning so as to
course and higher order thinking. They
dev#1op as an a atoinat ic consequence
highlight the importance of particular
can also be used to foster general coop,
of beitg placed in cooperative settings,
conditions fiir silccess on different
erative behavior and equal-status inter-
something must he done in the way of
kinds of instroc tional outcomes. This
action between students who differ in
deliberate sk ills building or through
research can help teacher,: dors, coop,
status due to income, ethnicity, race or
special motivational devices to pro.
erative learning activities with the con-
perceived abilitv. Cooperative learning
duce the desired behaviors.
ditions chosen to produee desired
groups contrast with traditional mdi-
Interaction and Achievement
learning goals.
vidualist lc instruction. The teacher Of
Both researchers and practitioners
a small cooperative group plays quite a
If group learning is hei,eficial, then
would do well to focus directly on the
different role than usual, giving direc-
one would expect achievement to
type of interaction that is desired.
tion to new patterns ot interaction
increase as student interaction
There is, for example, a major differ-
among snidents.
increases. But Webb's reviews of .1 large
4
body of meticulously conducted stud-
each other and tackle the task as indi-
rewards. Such rewards are not used in
ies indicate that the simple frequency
vidual work despite the teacher's
either the Shorans' Group
of interaction of individuals does not
instructions to work together and to
Investigation technique that produced
predict their achievement.2 In con-
help each other. This is why it is com-
superior results to STAD on items mea-
trast to this body of work, stand a
monly recommended that the task
suring higher order thinking, nor are
number of studies conducted on com-
instructions make the students interde-
they used for complex instruction
plex instruction in multilingual ele-
pendent, either through using each
where the activities are intrinsically
mentary classrooms where interaction
t)ther as resources (resource interdepen-
interesting and have also been shown
consistently predicts gains on stan-
dence) or through working towards a
to be effective in raising scores on mea-
dardized achievement tests whether at
mutual goal (goal interdependence).
sures of achievement.6 Slavin's original
the individual or classroom level'1
According to our analysis, the effects of
proposition would apNar to apply bet-
One explanation of these differ-
resource and goal interdependence on
ter to more routine learning and to the
ences is that groups which did not
pnxhictivity will depend on how well
kinds of collective or collaborative seat-
benefit from interactions were not
these task arrangements stimulate
work tasks that are s) common in
given authentic "group tasks." A
interaction. By themselves, neither is
cooperative learning. In those situa-
group task has two characteristics.
sufficient to motivate group members
nons, it is of vital importance to moti-
First, it requires the resources (infor-
to participate.4
vate those who could do the task by
mation, skills, materials) that no sin-
One way to persuade group members
themselves to assist those who are hav-
gle person pi)ssesses; success on the
to assist those in need of help is to
ing difficulty.
task requires the contribution of
make a group reward contingent on the
Structuring the Interaction
many. Some of the groups where
performance of individual members.
interaction was not beneficial
Based on extensive research and
Wc found considerable research
involved straightforward math exer-
reviews of research, Slaviii ha.s made
on the relative effectiveness of
cises which did not require collective
the strong assertion that cooperative
structuring the interaction within
action. Second, there must be interde-
learning results in reliable achievement
.small groups by telling students what
pendence, and the interdependence
gains only through a combination of
to say, providing them with en licit
between students must be reciproeal.
group rewards (reward interdepen-
roles, or by teaching them strategies
An interdependence in which better
dence) and individual accountability.s
for discussion. We propose that the
students always aid weaker students k
Many of his own and other studies
effectiveness of stnicturing the inter-
a one-way dependence. Interdepen-
have documented the enhancement of
action will depend on the comple::ity
dence is reciprocal if each student is
individual achievement through
and uncertainty of the task and
on
dependent on the contributions of all
whether or not the instructions
rewarding pupils as a group. No aspect
others. We hypothesize that only
of cooperative learning has been 'AS
attempt to micromanage the process
when there is a group task requiring
controversial as the issue of giving
of thinking and talking within the
such mutual interchange, will interac-
rewards to competitive groups. The
groups. If the task is to apply concepts
tion become a direct predictor of pro-
issue relates to the ideological contro-
and procedures in a relatively routine
ductivity, e.g. learning gains.
versy of cooperation versus competi-
fashion (such as applying straightfor-
If the problem given to the group is
tion, and intrinsic versus extrinsic
ward map skills) or simply to under-
more routine and amenable to eix)k-
rewards. In Slavin's well-known tech-
stand a reading assignment, then
lxx)k solutions, collaborating may be
nique of STAD (Student Teams-
scripting the interaction has been
unnecessary for some individuals. In
Achievement Division), individual
shown to he very effective. For
exam-
contrast, groups which deal with ill-
accountability is just as important as
ple, in a paired interac tion in which
stmctured, non-routine, discovery-or
the use of group rewards; students are
they arc required to synopsize some
ented tasks become more productive
held accountable by having to prepare
presented material, one student
as
can
interactions increase beLause mutual
individual work and having to take an
he designated as the "learning leader"
interchange is a necessary condition for
individual test. At the Same rime the
and one as the "learning listener."
solving the problem.
group is held accountable by being
The leader summarizes and restates
Whether or not interaction is
given a group seore after the test based
the main points of the material, and
directly tAlated to achievement, design-
on the improvement of each individual
the listener asks probing questions,
ers of cooperative learning all have to
over the last test score.
encourages improved explanations,
contend with the problem of how to
The effectiveness of these group
and inserts on.itted information.7
motivate students to interact as a
rewards, however, should not be taken
This format is useful for learning
group. Especially if each individual
to mean that it is not possible to hold
to recall information and basic defi-
must turn out sonie kind of worksheet
individuak accountable or to inotivate
nitions, that is, lower order skills. As
or report, students may well ignore
them to participate without such
the tasks become more sophisticated,
5
selves and others during cooperative
markedly superior
learning. Collective tasks actually
to simply asking
activate expectations for competence
groups to discuss
and incompetence based on differ-
the controversy
ence in status.
and to come to
Teachers can alter these expecta-
consensus.
tions for competence. For example,
Although roles
they can convince students that many
given to students
different abilities are relevant to the
clearly structure
cooperative learning tasks and that
the interaction,
each person will be competent on at
they can either
least one ability while no one person
constrain or facil-
will be competent at all the required
itate high level
abilities. Research has shown that it is
discourse. If roles
possible for teachers to treat these sta-
are used to divide
tus problems in regular classrooms so
labor, e.g. artist,
that low status students participate
writer, the result
Students find their role assignment for small groupwork
more frequently and so that there are
may be very little
few differ,nces in interaction in the
interaction of any
classroom between high and low sta-
kind as students go about their jobs.
requiring higher order thinking for
tus students during the operation of
In contrast, Ehrlich found that a
more creative outcomes, we hypothe-
the small groups.11
reporter role can be used to foster
size that the interactions must be less
reciprocal interdependence resulting
constrained by the teacher. The stu-
Managing the Interaction
in significantly higher rates of scien-
dents need more freedom to define
Although group ta.sks diminish
tific behaviors such as observing and
problems and to construct knowledge
teachers' control over the specific
inferring on a criterion task.9 In this
independently. As the task objec-
directions of classroom discourse, the
case, the reporter prompted the
tives increase in cognitive complexi-
teacher is no less influential to the
group members to specify their pre-
ty, task arrangements and instruction
learning process than in the traditional
dictions for the experiment, to elab-
should foster more conceptual and
setting. It is quite a challenge for the
orate their reasoning and to pinpoint
elaborate discussions.
teacher to guide and insure the effec-
differences between their predictions
This proposition should not be
tiveness of the group without direct
and observations,
taken to mean that minimal proce-
supervision. This is accompl ished by
dures or task instructions work best
Insuring Equity in Interaction
building students' skills in discourse,
in fostering elaborated discourse. On
by assigning well-chosen tasks for the
f course, all group members will
the contrary, elaborate procedures
C
groups, and by holding students
_not make equal contributions.
and roles have heen shown to foster
accountable as individuals and as
Those perceived by the group to
higher level diseourse. For example,
groups. The teacher does not instruct
have more academic ability or those
the technique of constructive contro
each group in its activity, but must
who are more popular usually inter-
versy has been shown to foster high-
delegate authority to the students,
act more frequently and are more
level discussion leading to conceptu-
Research on complex instruction
influential.1° The result is that the
al understanding with elaborate
shows that direct instruction while
low status members gain kss from the
procedures and the use of student
the groups are in operation cuts
group, and the group suffers from the
roles.8 A four-person group is divided
down on student interaction and
absence of their contribution. The
into two pairs, with each pair
thereby restricts gains in learning
difference in social status can also
assigned to espouse one side of an
arise from race, ethnicity, or gender.
outcomes, 1 2-
issue in a discussion. Within the
Many developers of cooperat ive
Expectations for competence based
pairs each person deals with different
learning strongly recommend that
on status can result in self-fulfilling
information relevant to his or her
team-building or skill-building activi-
prophecies. students who are viewed
role or position in the controversy.
ties designed to develop the pro-social
as having low status will often partic-
Then the sides switch. Finally, the
behaviors necessary for cooperation as
ipate less because they are expected
full group constructs a consensus
well aY some specific skills for elaborat-
to he less competent and because
viewpoint and expresses it in a
ed discourse take place prior to group-
they expect themselves to he less
report. This format aids the student
work. Or, adapting techniques from
competent. As a result, they will
in taking multiple perspectives as
group dynamics, they suggest that
appear to he less capable to them-
measured by achievement tests and is
7
6
References
erative learning. Moreover, even with
groups become aware of their interper-
1 Webb, N., Eider, P., SL Lewis, S. (1986),
sonal and work processes as they work
the most sophisticated and lengthy
Problem-solving strategies and group pro-
and take time to discuss how they are
programs, a significant number of
cesses in small groups learning computer
teachers tail to implement. There is
doing as a group. Available research
programming. American Educational
Research Journal, 13, 243-251.
also evidence that workshops that
on the effectiveness of such strategies
2 Webb, N. (1991). Task-related verixil inter-
place emphasis on the theoretical and
suggests that investing in such prepa-
action and mathematics learning in small
ration and time spent on group process
research underpinnings of specific
groups. Journal of Research in Mathematics
Education, 21, 366-389; Webb, N. (1983).
can definitely make for more produc-
instructional strategies can be very
Predicting learning from student interac-
tive groups. However, the research
effective, provided that teachers really
tion: Defining the interaction variable.
grasp the theory. A fundamental
shows that in order to be effective, the
EducalUmal Psychologist, IS, 33-41.
3, See for example: Cohen, E.G., Lotan, R., St
behaviors taught must not only be spe,
understanding of the underlying theo-
Leechor, C. (1989). Can classrooms learn
cific, but they should be directly rele-
ry permits teachers to move away
Sociotr of Educanon, 61, 75-94. For a
vant to the desired behaviors in the
from traditional roles of direct super-
description of-complex instructIon, see
"Making Small Groups Productive" in this
particular tasks that the teacher has
vision and to take on new and more
Issue Report
assigned to the groups.
challenging teacher behaviors. This is
4 Johnson, P., Johnson, R., Stanne, M. Si
especially critical when there is a
Garibaldi, A. (1990). Impact of group pro-
Unsettled Issues
cessing on achievement in cooperative
stress on conceptual learning and
groups. Journal of Social Psychology,
I 3
Two particular issues remain unset-
higher-order thinking and tasks which
507-516.
tled. First is the question of the
involve considerable uncertainty from
5 Svc lot example: Slaviri, R. (1983). When
does cooperative learning increase student
the students' point of view.
necessity tor special curricula for coop-
achievement? Psys.-hologIcal Bulletin, 94,
erative learning. lf, as many develop,
It is very difficult to provide effec-
429-445.
tive feedback to teachers without
ers believe, this is a necessity, there
6 Sharan, S., Kussell, P., Hertz-Latarowitz, R.,
Regarano, Y., Raviv, S., Sharan, Y. (1984).
are further questions on the changes
direct observations of their classes and
CooPeranve learning m LiW dassnxim:
in the curriculum needed. Second. the
face-to-face meetings.13 Teachers whO
Research in desegregated schools. Hillsdale,
optimal means of assessment of stu,
received up to three feedback sessions
NJ: Lawrence Erlhaum.
7 Yager, S. (1985). The effects of struciured oral
dents in cooperative learning has not
from developers were much more suc-
discussum durmg a set of cooperative learning
been studied extensively. Should there
cessful in their implementation than
lessons on student achievement and attitude.
be group or individual examinations?
teachers who received fewer ses,
Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University ot Iowa, Iowa City.
Conventional tests are still appropri,
sions.14 Peer coaching in the first year
8 Smith, K,, Johnson, D.W., St Johnson, R.T.
does not appear to provide evalua,
ate for certain outcomes of small
(19811. Can conflict be constructive!
groupwork, but not all.
tions for teachers that are seen as
Cont roveNy versus concurrence seeking in
learning groups. Journal of Educational
soundly based as those received from
Psychology, 73, 651-663.
Organizational Support and
staff developers. However, after the
9 Ehtlich, I/E. (1991). Moving beyond cooper.
Staff Development
first year, there is evidence for the
anon: Developing science thinking in interde-
pendent groups. Unpublished doctoral dmser-
The implementation of sophist icat-
effectiveness of peer coaching when
tat ion, Stanford Univenuty, Stanford, CA.
ed cooperative learning models
the peer coaches have good prepara-
ICI Cohen, E.G. (1984). Talking and working
have major implications for staff
tion for making observations and pro,
higether: Status interaction and learning. In
P. Peterson, L.C. Wilkinson, & M.
development, for the ways in which
viding specific feedback.
lallinan ( Eds.), Instructional groups in
teachers work together and for the
Finally, several school features
the classroom Organization and process
principal's role. Researchers have con-
contribute to the likely success and
Orlando, FL Academic Press.
11 Cohen, E.G. (1988). Producing equal MUCUS
cluded that teachers require signifi-
extent of cooperative learning in a
behavior in cooperative learrimg. Paper
cant support in their classrooms from
given school. Principals who have
presented at the tonventam of the
staff developers, from the principal
effective managerial skill in obtaining
International Association tor the Study of
Cooperation in Education, Shefayim, Israel,
and from their colleagues if imple-
and coordinating resourees, such as
12 Cohen, E.G., Loran, R., & Lcechor, C.
mentation is to be significant and sus-
adequate space and planning time
(1989), Can classrooms learn'.
,if
taMed. From a research perspective,
have better classroom implementation
Education, 62, 75-94,
i Putnam, J. (1985). Applications of class,
we know next w nothing about how
than less skilled principals. In addi-
1
room management research findings.
well teachers implement the simple
tion, effective implementation in the
Journal pf Education Ior Teaching, I
,
strategies typically taught in short-
classroom is associated with principals
145-164.
14 Ellis, N.11987). Collaboranve niter-action
term workshops.
who provide instructional leadership
and logistical luppurt for teacher change
Evaluation of more extensive staff
by setting high expectations that
.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
development programs suggest that
teachers will follow through after the
Stanford University, Sranlotd, CA.
initial workshop.
longer preparation is more effective in
helping teachers to implement coop-
7
INTERVIEW
A Staff Development Perspective:
Patty Swanson
Two types of videos a e used in the
Some say that behind
summer semMar. Videos made during the
every successful imple-
seminar allow teachers to analyze their
mentation strategy is a driv-
own teaching, while professional training
ing force. Meet Patty
videos model desired behaviors,
"sta-
Swanson, staff developer for
tus treatments." Swanson explain:i tl c
the Program for Complex
term: "Status differences naturally happen
Instruction (CI), a tall,
in any group of people. We think that
bushy-haired blonde who
such hierarchies get in the way of all kids
brightens at the phrase
learning. What we try to do is broaden the
"teacher education." I ier
notions of what kinds of intellectual con-
current research in pre-
tributions count in a classroom. The
service training investigates
broader the array of offerings, the more
how teacher understanding
people can contribute something that
of the theoretical :oncepts
counts, this in turns breaks down the hier-
behind instruction enhances
archy that excludes people. So, a status
classroom practice. She uses
N.
treatment is a means of acknowledging
a similar philosophy during
and convincing kids that many abilities
the summer workshops
eount in the classrtiom."
designed to introduce prac-
ticing teachers to this
1
"Video is the best teaching
method of small group work.
Staff detvlopment expert:
"The first week is devoted to the theory
Pam Swanson
tool to analyze the Nituation.
behind the program, although every idea IS
tied to an application. We try to model
You can do what Nou Can
each lesson on a CI format: introduce key
ideas, interact in a group work activity or
never do in a classroom, 1'014
proHem -solving task, then pull it all
can press `PAI.7SE,' and
together in :I wrap up. We cover positive
teacher-to-student interaction and also
stop to talk."
teach the teachers to critically assist one
another and work as :I team.
Swanson is determined to explain the
"The second week is practicum. Kids
importance of status treatments for teach,
tumi all over the area are brought into 1
yrs since research shows unequivocally that
classroom. The teacher's interactions with
students who interact more learn 'mire.
the studenTh are videotaped and discussed
"The kids who are more highly esteemed
in feedback sessions."
are going to talk more and
The use of video may be changing staff
they are goir4., to learn more. We try to
development. Videotaped sessions allow
of low status stu-
teachers to focus on interactions which
boost the part ic ipat
dents. If you don't think I can give any-
otherwise vanish in the blink of an eye.
thing to a task, you're probably nor ginng
"Video is the best teaching tool to analy:e
to let my idea influence it, or even talk to
the situation, You can do what you can
me. When I talk less, I learn less."
never do in a classroom, you can press
Status treatments were designed to
'PAUSE,' and stop to talk.
change students'
and perhaps society's
"I believe very strongly that tea< hing is a
perceptions of what ii means to be smare
problem-solving proecss. Y,)ii have to think
Once you widyn the perception, students
about choices every time you ,ipen vim!'
can have success in many more areaS. For
mouth: What <kk's it buy you? What do y(,ii
the teacher, identifying multiple talents
pay for it ? Video feedback shows them sonic
takes skill.
of the more sophisticated elements."
!4
"It's an intellectual challenge to
arc less powerful would never get to
conceptual understanding a principal
see multiple abilities. One because
be facilitator."
has, the stronger the principal's legiti-
you have to figure out what abilities
Can't students gain access by
macy as an instructional leader. The
might manifest themselves in a par-
developing social skills? Not entirely.
more support the teachers feel."
ticular task. Two, you have to talk to
Swanson emphasizes. "It's not okay tor
CI is only available to teachers from
students about them, literally trans-
kids to just be nice to each other. And
schools with certain organizational lea-
late them. You can't say, 'Y,n: have
itir priority is not ,m
this is why I say
visual/spacial abtlity.' That won't
social skills. I want them all interact-
"Using mles is One way
work. You have to gr,iund a in the
and with each
ing with a task
that students get access."
other. Being nice isn't going to do
Status treatments were
anything tor a child who has been
In CI, students never
nice to but can't get a word in edge-
designed to change
wise and can't get into the task- He
.:hange roles on their own.
isn't experiencing anything in terms
students'and perhaps
"Switching roles is
tit- learning. The child has to have
society'sperceptions
access to critical thinking skills.
a way that students
"To put it simply I would say we
of ichat it means to
are concerned with children grappling
get axed.
with big ideas, learning to generali7,.,
he smart.
learning to think. Our curriculum is
always eirganid iround central
tures, including t supportive' principal,
task, talk ;ibout in ability they can
themes, and we try to make problems
staff planning time, and a '.:iinimitment
carry away with them. And that is
,ipen-ended to get students to general-
to detract:, Swanson points out. "As
intellectual, And then you camit be
ize and grapple with basic concepts."
se), in as you have lexs kimeIgeneeius
Leinstrained by our current view if
Statt develtipers can't teaCh cl in-
grt iuping in your class'Axim you've got a
academic intelligence."
cepts such as these in a one Jay work-
much ttiugher instrue tional situation.
A former teacher who used
shop, says Swanson. "In the int.ist
Our strategies weKk hest in heteroge-
Complex Instruction fiir tour years in
crass sense of the word, a one day
nous classrooms."
btlingual elementary school,
wiirkshtip is a great way to make
In addition to strategies for status,
Swanson is careful to caution teachers
Iniiney. I've done it, It keeps me
the Program has developed curricular
not to limit student contributions by
happy all the way to the bank. But it's
materials for small groups in sonte
labeltng them ;is being talented in
not the way to do staff development,
Cnhtornia middle .cheiols. (See page
only one area. "The teacher may point
Teaching is hard. You can't make
tor a sample unit on the Crusades.)
I
I
out that a child has Nhown strong
thIngs substantially better for :my-
How often is it appropriate to Use
1,,,dy in inc day, yt,0 can heighten
but that doesn't mean
'artistic
the rather complicated process ot
their ;iwareness to issues, and we It
that the child Nhoulii be .ilways doing
"It would depend on what I wanted
the artwork in the gr,,up. I want them
that. I tee] okay about doing that. But
to teach. If the task is conceptually
reading, writing, and discussing tem.
it you really want to see classrooms
dif I icult and I have time to structure
We're not talk tng about ;I division ot
change, get ready to include presenta-
it, it's a good time to do Cl. I would
labor. I use multiple abilities to help
tlims, priiblem solving with teachers
mit do radical classroom restructur-
students get Aces, to the group act
and tolhiw- up in the classrixim. And
ing for memorizing. I'd teach it rote.
ivi-
ni it to peg them as iinly be ing
if You aren't willing to give follow-up
or have kids work in pairs. It the task
t
iit one thing,"
in the classnxim, in my book, dtin't
lot of other
is simple, there are ;1
In addition, the teacher ',hot' Id not
expect to see classroom ehang,e."
ways to manage the class that are
leave the decision of which roles chi].
Including principals in the work-
easier and Jt1t
is effective. It I'm
dren perform to the group. "I.lsing
shops is one way. to ensure change in
teaching multiplication tables, I
a
niles is one way that students get
budding. "When we get a principal
don't think grtitip work buys me
students never change
who goes through the training, that
aLcess." In (
what it's worth, It I'm trying to figure
1
roles on their own. "Switchmg roles is
puts some<inc in the system wh,
out what multiplicat um means,
knows what is gi iing on, who kiu,ws
,1 way that students get axed. It's a
grtiup work
Ill be f mt.."
WI. 1L1
fundamental rule of
thcre
how tit support the teachers. We
The most adaptive Ilassroom has
no student negiit itt kin to swift h
always try to get principals here tor at
sonic groups and N4 In pairs and shinc
riiles. If there were, then the kids
least a few ,Iays ot the seminar, part ic
whole class, "What this is, is a won-
with low icademic suitus would never
tilarly tor status treatments or the day
dertul, sluing strategy to add to
tut.
get to be the writer, imd the kids who
stilts," team meetings. T"he better
repenone ot teachmg strategtes."
I )