Student small groups can be used as a means to engage learners in critical thinking and in depth analysis of problems or concepts.
This session presents several methods to enhance the effectiveness of small group settings to facilitate learning including specific structured activities, effective feedback, and assessment techniques. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ
KcxnFUMxk&feature=related
2
Small Group Literature K-12 populations studied the most Collegiate research increasing rapidly Lack of integrative research
No theoretical basis Vocabulary issues Differences among experts in the field
All or none approach Take What Works and Leave the Rest
4
Vygotsky - Social constructivism Learning is a product of social interaction Collaborative learning Time for reflection and synthesis of
concepts Instructional methods:
Scaffolding, Participant modeling, Reciprocal teaching
Facultystudent Studentstudent
Social Cognition6
Higher order (critical) thinking skills Cognitive development Active (vs. passive) learning Social outcomes
Active listening Altruism Teamwork skills
7Astin, 1993
May have an positive impact on women and minority students
Effect of culture Generally superior to traditional
methods Achievement Attrition Attitude
8Springer, Stanne & Donovan, 1997
Resources Unsuitable classrooms, shortage of faculty,
library Students
Unwilling to engage the process Students may value it less! Student expectations about learning Class size Student heterogeneity (cultural
differences) Faculty attitudes
Faculty have less control Too much faculty prep time Students don’t come prepared
Michael, 2007 10
Communicate to students the rationale for this pedagogical approach
Imperative to set clear objectives Objectives /tasks must be explained
at the outset, reiterated; allow enough time for task completion
Ongoing feedback and assessment of management and content –allow time for debriefing /review (in group or plenary) 11
Be aware of group dynamics How students behave in groups (Belbin,
2010). Ground rules
Facilitator role build trust teach how to give and receive feedback resist temptation to teach!
12
1. Positive interdependence- sink or swim together!
2. Promotive interaction (preferably face to face)
3. Individual & group accountability4. Interpersonal & group skills5. Group processing
Johnson & Johnson, 198913
How should groups be formed? How large should groups be? How long should they stay together? What to do with freeloader /dominator
types? How to grade? How to overcome faculty resistance?
14
Physical space & arrangement Circle or face-to-face seating Computers & resources
Selection of groups Size of group
Affects intimacy, interaction and achievement.
Variety of sizes depending on purpose 3-6 is most widely advocated 7-10 upper limit for productive interaction
(most literature) 15
Cohesion & familiarity Combat dominance Ice breakers, dispersion of leadership,
open discussion of expectations Task Design
Reward structure interdependence Controversial tasks / “ill-structured
problems”
16
Instructional Materials Group dependency Variety – vary instructional materials; use
concrete objects; relevant and realistic problems
Task difficulty Make it challenging (discourages social loafing)
Personal involvement (reduces social loafing) E.g. counter attitudinal arguments; group therapy
exercises, role play, reflections students’ cultural backgrounds.
17
If students are not taught differently, they will operate at the most concrete level High level cognitive skills Interpersonal skills
Given an ill-structured problem and a group task, productivity will depend on the frequency of task-related interaction
18
Don’t divide the labor so each member does a different part of the task; ensure inter-dependence through limiting resources or setting a group goal.
Individual accountability can be created either by providing specific group rewards based on members’ learning or by having students perform unique tasks and providing incentives for students to learn from each other. (Slavin, 1983).
19
Simple task instructions (e.g. come to consensus) to detailed instructions (scripted interactions /role assignment)
For low level outcomes, limited interaction focusing on acquiring info and correct answers is better. For higher order thinking skills, the interaction must be more elaborate and less constrained.
Cohen, 1994 20
Benefits of Controversy (Johnson & Johnson, 1985; Cohen, 1994)
(reintroduction of wolf debate) debate in pairs-switch roles-debate-consensus group report
Dilemma: Not enough structure to the interaction
concrete response from students Too much structure miss gains of small
group
21
Academic ability (relative to group members)
Peer popularity Women and minorities Pre-training in group function or
facilitation processing can improve interaction and productivity
Facilitator role
22
It’s crucial to make evaluation procedures directly relevant to the group activity
Individual assignments derived directly from group tasks Reflects the skills students are expected to
acquire Demonstrate critical thinking, problem
solving, communication skills E.g. concept mapping, product creation,
portfolios, demonstrate capability
23
Assessment of group products Build in safeguards against freeloaders
E.g profile of each person’s contribution
Assessment of group behavior (process) Self and Peer assessment
Not well correlated with facilitator assessment Inform students well in advance Formative & Summative Don’t over–assess !
24
Worksheets (individual or group) Timed team challenges Case studies Simulations Group projects /presentations Audio / video sources Role play / debates / speech assignments Journaling /art / portfolios Field trips Creation /design of a product Games
25
Hybrid PBL D1 &
D2 ; D3 & D4Rounds & GLA
PBL 4-6 hrs/wk + ILA
The Problem
Facts Ideas hypotheses Learning Issues
Reorganize ideas
Learning Resources Revise ideas
26
Ill-defined problems, yet well-structured
Relevant problems Length / duration Objectives clear Objectives CAN be met by case
content & experiences
29
Learning activities Structured Problem solving /critical thinking
skills Independent study
Research Reflection
Group interaction Peer-to-peer teaching Field trips
30
Case formats Standardized Variety between Year 1 and 2
Case tasks ↑Individual & group accountability Individual assignments consensus
group assignment adds a layer of complexity
Pre /post activity reflection31
Case tasks Emphasize critical thinking /problem
solving skills
Case development Student case writing
Learning objectives Number & quality Distribution
32
Timing Daily verbal feedback Periodic (end of each “block”)
Formative Summative Triple Jump – process exercise Content exams
Compatibility with goals / values of small group instruction
33
Formative & Summative Process assessments Written & one to one meeting Simpler for students to understand and
facilitators to complete Triple Jump
Calibrated, shorter cases (2 pg) Orientation sessions ; practice cases Reward – no spring test for achievers
Content exams Compatibility with small group instruction –
testlets 34
Small group facilitators Initial Training Mentoring /shadowing Case reviews Calibration Feedback & Ongoing Learning
Opportunities
35
Facilitator feedback & thank you Initial Training
Modified based on feedback; simplified & shortened
Calibration More sessions (Need more videos) Reduced number of triple jump
examiners Employ more student facilitators
36
Done well – learning in small group settings can help bridge gap between science/theory and practice/application.
Considerations must be given to: Goals for the learning activity / learning
outcomes Resources Group formation, size & dynamics Tasks Assessment
38
Benware, C.& Deci, E. Quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. Amer Educ Res Journ. 1984; 21(4):755-65.
Haidet P. et al. A Controlled trial of active versus passive learning strategies in a large group. Advances in Health Sciences Educ. 2004; 9(1):15-27.
Michael, J. Faculty perceptions about barriers to active learning. College Teaching. 2007;55(2):42-47.
Cherney, I. The effects of active learning on students’ memories for course content. Active Learning in Higher Education. 2008; 9:152.
Bennett, C., Howe, C.,Truswell, E. Small group teaching and learning in psychology. ITSN Psychology Report and Evaluation Series No. 1. 2002; 1-36. 39
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. Cooperation and competition: theory and research. 1989. Edina, MN. Interaction Book Company.
Belbin, R. Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail. 2010. Butterworth Heinemann, 3rd ed.
Cohen, E.G. Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research. 1994;64(1): 1-34.
Astin, What Matters in College: Four Critical Years Revisited. 1993.San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. http://cte.umdnj.edu/active_learning/active_group.cfm
40