Fostering Critical Thinking Through Collaborative Group Work: Insights from Hong Kong

175 Pages·2019·3.817 MB·English

by  Dennis Chun-Lok Fung, Tim Weijun Liang

Dennis Chun-Lok Fung 
Tim Weijun Liang
Fostering Critical
Thinking Through
Collaborative
Group Work
Insights from Hong Kong
Fostering Critical Thinking Through Collaborative
Group Work
Dennis Chun-Lok Fung Tim Weijun Liang
(cid:129)
Fostering Critical Thinking
Through Collaborative Group
Work
Insights from Hong Kong
123
DennisChun-LokFung Tim Weijun Liang
TheUniversity of HongKong TheUniversity of HongKong
Hong Kong,HongKong Hong Kong,HongKong
ISBN978-981-13-2410-9 ISBN978-981-13-2411-6 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2411-6
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018953714
©SpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.2019
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
orinformationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilar
methodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom
therelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinor
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictionalclaimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.
Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:152BeachRoad,#21-01/04GatewayEast,Singapore189721,
Singapore
Preface
This book was written for scholars of education and curriculum policy as well as
educational practitioners in both local and global contexts. Specifically, with the
dualgoalofexaminingboththeacademicandattitudinalfacetsofcriticalthinking,
we aim to share our significant empirical findings with international scholars who
arekeentoexploretheeffectivenessofgroup workinfostering critical thinking in
Hong Kong and beyond. Informed by the findings from both the primary and
secondaryclassrooms,wehopetoprovidepedagogicalimplicationswithaviewto
helping frontline teachers to translate the curriculum goal of nurturing critical
thinkersintoclassroompractice.Wealsostrivetoshedlightontheimplementation
of group work strategies in line with the Hong Kong government’s Small-Class
Teaching Initiative, since our research not only strengthens the theoretical and
practical roots of group work, but also provides examples of good classroom
practicesofgroupwork.Despitegroupworkandcriticalthinkingbeingemphasised
as important educational goals in Hong Kong and other educational settings, their
potential is comparatively unrealised in school practice and is even far from being
maximised. In response to the urgent need for practical and strategic models of
teachingcriticalthinkingwiththeaidofgroupworkinclassrooms,webelievethat
this book weaves these two notions together by exploring their potential relation-
ship and group work’s affordances for critical-thinking development in particular.
Hong Kong Dennis Chun-Lok Fung
Tim Weijun Liang
v
Contents
1 Has Critical Thinking Been Fruitfully Married to Group
Work in Hong Kong?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Background: Education Reform and Small-Class Teaching
Policy in Hong Kong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Curriculum Development in Primary and Secondary
Schools in Hong Kong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Scenario of General Studies and Liberal Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Paradigm Shift: Group Work as a New Pedagogical
Approach in Hong Kong Classrooms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5 The Buzzword of ‘Critical Thinking’ and the Present Study . . . . 6
1.6 Significance and Urgency of Bridging Critical Thinking
and Group Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 The Research on Group Work, Critical Thinking and Confucian
Heritage Culture: What Does a Thematic Review Tell Us? . . . . . . . 11
2.1 Review of Collaborative Group Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1.1 The Nature of Group Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1.2 The Theoretical Roots of Group Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1.3 Study of Group Work in Hong Kong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.1.4 Knowledge Gap and Proposed Research Questions . . . . . 16
2.2 Review of Critical-Thinking Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.1 Definition of Critical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.2 Teaching of Critical Thinking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2.3 Critical Thinking in Hong Kong. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2.4 Approaches to Teaching Critical Thinking. . . . . . . . . . . . 21
vii
viii Contents
2.3 Review of the Influence of Confucian Heritage Culture
on Classroom Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.1 Conceptualisation of Learning in Confucian Heritage
Cultures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.2 The Use of Group Work in Confucian Heritage
Cultures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.3.3 Learners from Confucian Heritage Cultures. . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.4 Problematising Cultural Influences on Student
Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.4 Conceptual Framework and the Present Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.4.1 Teaching Intervention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.4.2 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3 Research Design: A Mixed Methods Approach with
a Three-Theme Investigation and Pedagogical Intervention . . . . . . . 35
3.1 Statement and Significance of the Research Questions . . . . . . . . 35
3.2 Research Design Underpinnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.2.1 Theoretical Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.2.2 Epistemology and Theoretical Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.3 Research Design and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.3.1 Research Design: Three-Theme Investigation. . . . . . . . . . 40
3.3.2 Methodology: Mixed Methods Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.4 Quasi-experimental Settings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.5 Teaching Interventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.6 Research Domains, Methods and Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.6.1 Theme 1: Effectiveness in Students’ Academic
Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.6.2 Theme 2: Effectiveness in Students’ Attitudinal
Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.6.3 Theme 3: Influence of Chinese Culture
on Group Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.7 Training Workshop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.8 Pilot Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.9 Main Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.9.1 Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.9.2 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.9.3 Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.10 Ethical Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Contents ix
4 How Effective Is Group Work in Improving Students’
Academic Performance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.1 TCTS-PS in the Main Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.2 Students’ Dialogue and Interaction in the Liberal Studies
Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.2.1 Interrater Reliability of Coding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.2.2 Results of Students’ Dialogue and Interaction . . . . . . . . . 74
4.2.3 Analysis of the Students’ Written Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.3 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5 How Effective Is Group Work in Improving the Attitudinal
Aspects of Student Learning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.1 Results of Critical-Thinking Dispositions in the Main Study . . . . 103
5.1.1 Results for CCTDI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.1.2 Results of the Questionnaire-Based Survey . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.2 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
6 How Does Chinese Culture Exert an Influence on Group
Work?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
6.1 ‘Chinese Ground Rules’ Governing Group Work . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
6.2 Results of In-Depth Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
6.2.1 Interviews with Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
6.2.2 Interviews with Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
6.3 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
7 Summary, Concluding Remarks and the Way Forward. . . . . . . . . . 153
7.1 Summary of the Reported Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
7.2 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
7.2.1 Hypothesis One . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
7.2.2 Hypothesis Two. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
7.2.3 Hypothesis Three. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
7.2.4 Hypothesis Four . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
7.2.5 Cultural Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
7.3 Implications for Teaching Practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
7.4 Validity, Reliability and Research Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
7.5 Recommendations for Future Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
Chapter 1
Has Critical Thinking Been Fruitfully
Married to Group Work in Hong Kong?
Abstract This chapter comprises six sections. It begins with a description of the
education reform implemented in Hong Kong in the early 2000s, in which group
workwassuggestedtoplayasignificantroleinclassroominstruction.Thesecond
sectiontracesthedevelopmentaltrajectoryoftheHongKongschoolcurriculum,as
illustratedbytheemergenceofGeneralStudiesandLiberalStudiesinprimaryand
secondaryschools.Thethirdsectiondescribesthetwosubjects’curriculumframe-
worksandintendedgoals,whichhighlighttheimportanceofbothgroupworkand
criticalthinking.Thefourthsectionprovidesanoverviewofthecontroversialissues
surroundingcriticalthinkingandhowtheresearchreportedhereinaddressedthem.
Thefifthsectionarguesthatgroupworkhasthepotentialtoacceleratetheparadigm
shiftfromateacher-centredtostudent-orientedapproach.Finally,theconcludingsec-
tions(i.e.Sects.1.5and1.6)emphasisethatthisbookconstitutesatimelyresponse
tothecallforscholarshipexaminingthepotentialrelationshipbetweengroupwork
andcriticalthinking.
1.1 Background:EducationReformandSmall-Class
TeachingPolicyinHongKong
Hong Kong has undergone substantial political and economic changes in recent
decades, accompanied by a series of transformations in many sectors. In con-
templating the educational landscape since the beginning of the twenty-first cen-
tury,theeducationalinitiativeoutlinedinthepolicydocumententitledLearningto
Learn—TheWayForwardinCurriculumDevelopment (CurriculumDevelopment
Council(CDC)2001)offersablueprintforcurricularreforminHongKongschools.
Oneofitsvisionsistheenhancementofstudents’classroomparticipationthrougha
widerangeofteachingstrategies(e.g.self-directedandcooperativelearningactiv-
ities) (Tsai 2003). However, although several studies (e.g. Fung and Howe 2012;
Keppell and Carless 2006) have demonstrated the increased use of collaborative
group work in classrooms since the launch of the reform, that use is fraught with
pragmaticchallenges,andgroupwork’spotentialforimprovingteachingandlearn-
©SpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.2019 1
D.C.-L.FungandT.W.Liang,FosteringCriticalThinkingThrough
CollaborativeGroupWork,https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2411-6_1
2 1 HasCriticalThinkingBeenFruitfullyMarriedtoGroup…
ingisyettobecompletelyrealised.Forinstance,acommonphenomenonobserved
andproblematisedinGaltonandPell’s(2009)studywasparticularstudentsdominat-
inggroupactivitieswhileothersremainedoff-task.Hence,thereisapressingneed
foreducationalscholarsandteacherstoaddressthepotentialunder-exploitationof
groupwork.
Againsttheaforementionedbackdropandinresponsetothedecliningstudentpop-
ulationinrecentdecades,theEducationBureau(EDB)introducedtheSmall-Class
Teachingpolicyasameasuretoreduceclasssizes,andtherebyimproveteacher–s-
tudentratios,in2009(EDB2009).Thepolicyallowedpublicsectorprimaryschools
todecreasetheirclasssizefromtheexisting32–35studentsto25,withthedualaims
of tackling the challenges of insufficient student enrolment and enhancing teach-
ing and learning quality. To fully capitalise on the advantages of the Small-Class
Teachingenvironment,itisrecommendedthatteachersfollowthesixkeyprinciples
proposed by Galton and Pell (2009), for example, ‘Increasing pupil participation’
and‘Developingaspiritofcooperationbetweenpupilsthroughtheuseofgroupand
pairwork’(p.5).Accordingly,thepromotionofgreatergroupworkusehasattracted
considerableattentionandbeenaccordedhighpriorityintheHongKongeducation
reformagenda(FungandHowe2014)(seeChap.2foramoredetaileddiscussion).
1.2 CurriculumDevelopmentinPrimaryandSecondary
SchoolsinHongKong
One noteworthy curriculum development in primary education is the introduction
of General Studies. The CDC developed the General Studies for Primary Schools
Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 to 6) in 2002 to revamp the subject’s curriculum
framework,whichwasestablishedin1996.Sincethen,theguidehasbeenperiodi-
callyupdatedtomeetstudents’needs(e.g.informationtechnologycompetencyand
critical-thinkingstrategies)andrespondtosocietalchanges,withthemostup-to-date
versionlaunchedin2011(CDC2011).Atthesametime,curriculumdevelopment
hasalsooccurredinsecondaryeducation.Forexample,theEDBinitiatedtherecon-
structionofsecondaryeducationinHongKongin2009tocombatrotelearningand
enhancestudents’learningmotivation,resultinginthedevelopmentandimplemen-
tation of the New Senior Secondary (NSS) academic structure. More specifically,
Hong Kong’s previous academic structure, which comprised five-year Certificate
Level education followedbytwo-year Advanced Level education and athree-year
universityprogramme,hasnowbeentransformedintosixyearsofsecondaryeduca-
tionfollowedbyfouryearsofuniversityeducation.Accompanyingthissecondary
education reform, a revamped Liberal Studies curriculum has been introduced for
mandatorystudyin2009(FungandYip2010).