Thursday, February 10, 2011

ID Meets IT Part 4: Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning has probably played a role in public education long before the radical new models shunning traditional learning spawned during the '60s. In its simplest form, cooperative learning is a small group of students working together on a specific task (Millis, 2002). This is something students have been doing in American schools since the time of the one-room schoolhouse. As part of some enjoyable self-assigned readings in preparation for future read-alouds with my baby girl, I've been blazing through the the Little House series and can recall several instances of cooperative learning that happened both out of necessity and out of intention. In one instance, the children were simply too poor have their own separate readers, so consequently they shared the materials and worked through the exercises together. In another, Laura Ingalls and classmates were working together on a recitation for the folk living in and around the little town on the prairie. Outside of the classroom, I would wager that cooperative learning has taken some shape or form since the first band of wandering neanderthals roamed the earth in search of mammoth meat.

Officially, "Cooperative Learning" proper differs from traditional small group work through its careful structuring designed to maximize the learning potential inherent in the possible interaction between students (Millis, 2002). And unlike the "natural learning" that occurs when members of a community simply work collaboratively on a common task, such as Almazo Wilder learning the ropes of farming by working along side his brother and Pa, cooperative learning results from highly structured situations (Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 1998).

The premise behind cooperative learning is simple: students learn better by interacting with their peers than by learning alone (Haller et al., 2000). The bold claim is not without evidence. Slavin stated that cooperative learning is "one of the most thoroughly researched of all instructional methods" (as cited in Millis, 2002).  Among the documented benefits are improved students achievement, interpersonal relationships, attitude and self-esteem.  Millis noted that this "enhanced learning" is conditional upon number best practices related the "structure" mentioned earlier. These key principles include heterogeneous grouping to maximize knowledge base and talents, individual accountability, criterion-reference grading, continuous monitoring, and formative assessments of progress.

Given these potential benefits, one would expect to find cooperative learning in nearly every classroom, yet I think that is seldom the case. Based on my experience as an elementary educator, I think this approach fall prey to number of barriers mentioned in my previous post. The key principles laid out by Millis, as well as number of other suggestions she recommends, require an intense commitment from the teacher in terms of detailed planning, as well as a deep faith by teachers that students can be trusted with taking responsibility for their own learning by working productively with their peers. I think many teachers fear that students will see cooperative learning as an opportunity to socialize rather than learn, though ideally the latter results from the forum. In addition, from my own experience with arranging what I believe to be potentially functioning groups, and from creating a second set of instructional materials because this approach is seldom incorporated into the materials I've been provided by my school (with the exception of what are feel are some excellent programs such as Investigations and Battle Creek Area Math and Science Center's Science Curriculum) and calls for a lot of time-consuming planning and structuring that many teachers simply don't have. 

Since this is ID meet IT, I feel it's necessary to address the translation of the approach to today's technology enhanced or fully online classroom. For classrooms with the luxury of 1:1 learning, the accountability and monitoring piece of cooperative learning can be facilitated through networked spaces such Moodle, Ning, Edmodo or even Facebook allowing teachers to easily access student work and provide feedback both in and out of the classroom. Since much of the communication aspect is done face to face, technology becomes an additional tool at the student's and teacher's disposal and can extend learning beyond the classroom.  For distance learners working entirely online, cooperative learning is certainly feasible with the plethora of online tools aimed at collaboration and communication, but poses additional challenges for both the instructor and student. Communication, especially among a small group, is certainly easier face-to-face than it is online. While there are a number of video conferencing tools such as Skype that can simulate this process, students and teachers need to place a certainly amount of effort into not only learning how to use these tools, but also focusing part of their attention on using these tools that could be directed towards their group. With the exception of incredibly well designed and supported tools, technology becomes a distraction to the conversations and collaborative effort rather than and enhancement.

Personally, I feel that cooperative learning both powerful and problematic. When I've used cooperative learning in my own practice, it was either because I had the desire to make learning more engaging for my students and the time to due so, or because I had the luxury of curriculum designed with cooperative learning in mind. Cooperative learning taps into a way of learning that humans have been using since the prehistoric hunt, the medieval apprenticeship, or life on the prairie. In fact, the classroom is one of the few places in which you will find a group of people not interacting and learning from one another; where columns and rows of students studiously working in quiet independence is likely to elicit praise from parents and administrators. I think Johnson summed it up when when he stated, "While it is never easy to implement, when all the critical elements are in place, it is very powerful."

Haller, C. R., Gallagher, V. J., Weldon, T. L., &  Felder, R. M. (2000). Dynamics of peer education in cooperative learning workgroups. Journal of Engineering Education 89(3), 285-293.

Millis, B. J. (2002). Enhancing learning and more! Through cooperative learning. Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns To college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 27-35.

5 comments:

  1. Shawn -- I love how you add images to each of your posts! You should see how it looks in Flipboard on my iPad! Very pleasing to the eyes!!!

    I enjoyed your Laura Ingalls Wilder example and agree with you that Cooperative Learning has been around a lot longer than any of us have documented. I am glad you pointed out the components that set CL apart from typical small group learning. The structure element is necessary and I feel students and teachers appreciate having 'mini jobs' and making smaller contributions for the good of the group.

    Would you ever consider using Cooperative Learning in the online environment with elementary students? Why or why not?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm extremely jealous you can read these on an iPad. I'll be getting paid for some SMART Board PD I've been doing on the side and plan to use those hard earned funds for the latest iPad when it arrives.

    Glad you enjoyed the Little House book tie-in. It a great series and can't wait til my daughter is old enough to enjoy them.

    Regarding online CL for elementary students, I think web supported cooperative learning would be preferable as asking kids that young to communicate and collaborate productively is challenging enough without them having the learn the ins and outs of the all the tools necessary to do so online. Perhaps if they were already familiar with the tools, and there was a genuine reason to do so, such as a joint effort between another classroom in a distant location, then perhaps it would be a valuable experience worth the additional effort on the part of the teacher and student, but otherwise, I think the use of technology would be more appropriate just as a supportive tool for tasks such as information gathering or presentations.

    Great question by the way!

    ReplyDelete
  3. ...and home schools use cooperative learning almost all the time (I know some women/students that home school - they rely heavily on cooperative learning for the social interaction their kids need due to the potential isolation that takes place with home school)...but what I really wanted to post on is that I believe a good classroom uses aspects of all the learning models out there. I agree with you in that cooperative learning enhances learning because of the interaction, but I also think sometimes students do need to experience, and think through material individually and without group influences. I guess I'm finding this "study and comment on one module style at a time" hard because, for example, I've done Cooperative learning with the Problem/Solution process. I can't imagine just doing one type of learning.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jessica, great comment! Agreed, often it seems like the content and context guide the instructional strategy. For example, some standards may be best achieved through CL, while others though PSI. The student also factors into this was well. Could you imagine a classroom where only a single model was used?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great reflection Shaun. I like your use of examples from Little House. When we get into apprenticeships later in the semester, keep that Almanzo example in mind! And lest we forget our beloved southern equivalent--the Walton's! I was glad you mentioned Facebook. I'm not exactly sure how that environment might translate to cooperative learning (it does in an informal way, just not in a formal structure I'm familiar with), but the idea of other social network platforms like Ning seem entirely feasible to carry out a cooperative lesson. In those, you can form small groups, share resources, discuss, etc., and that could happen in a traditional class (with computers) or an online class. That idea intrigued me.

    ReplyDelete