Unit 5: Collaborative Teaching and Learning Strategies Collaborative learning is an instructional method in which students team together on an assignment.

In this method, students can produce the individual parts of a larger assignment individually and then assemble the final work together, as a team. Whether for a semester-long project with several outcomes or a single question during class, collaborative learning can vary greatly in scope and objectives. Cooperative learning, sometimes confused with collaborative learning, describes a method where students work together in small groups on a structured activity. Students are individually accountable for their work but also for the work of the group as a whole, and both products are assessed. Learning Objectives To explore various instructional approaches to collaborative learning To understand team-based learning as an approach to collaborative learning To practice integrating collaborative learning into a course in a way that aligns with student learning objectives and intended outcomes Participants may have varied experience and a limited understanding of collaborative learning and its potential to enhance instruction. Unit 1 of this workshop guide suggests a poll and activity to better understand participants background and experience in this area. Once the workshop facilitators have a better understanding of the group, they might decide to introduce some examples that illustrate various collaborative learning methods. The Illinois Online Network offers several strategies for collaborative learning (see http://www.ion.illinois.edu/resources/tutorials/pedagogy/instructionalstrategies.asp). Some activities or assignments well suited for collaborative learning include: Case studies Discussions Student-moderated discussions Debates Collaborative writing Collaborative presentation Games Demonstrations Activity Ask participants to spend at least 15 minutes reviewing the resources identified in this module that provide examples of collaborative learning in practice as well as strategies and methods. Next, have them consider a segment or set of learning objectives in their course that would be well suited for collaborative learning, and spend another 15 minutes designing an instructional Unit 5 2

collaborative learning activity paying particular attention to any setup or training requirements, assessment, learning outcomes, and potential technologies. Once the activity is designed, group team participants with others in the same or related discipline and ask them to share the following: Brief overview of the activityshort abstract that summarizes the activitys strategy. Desired learning outcomesidentify the learning objectives for the activity and consider how these will be communicated to students. Strategy for setting up the activity, e.g., pre-work, team building required, and so forth What work might students be asked to do so that they are prepared to begin the collaborative activity, i.e., reading, quiz, writing? What tools can the instructor use to determine if students are ready? Strategy for assessing the activityHow will student work be assessed: individually, by team by role, by work product? Anticipated issues or challengesWhat difficulties might the instructor or students encounter while working on a collaborative project: workload issues, meeting deadlines, combining their individual pieces into one, work distribution, and so forth? What can be done to address these issues proactively? To conclude this activity, you might ask a few participants to share on each of the areas above or to share in groups of two to three. Depending on the size of the group, you might also post a summary of the activities to a wiki so that the group can share ideas, teaching strategies, and solutions. Student Teams and Collaborative Learning The use of student teams can be an especially effective teaching strategy for several reasons. First, it allows the instructor to support students in learning a valuable skill that employers continually rank as critical to workplace success: how to work together and support each other in learning and discovery. Second, becoming effective and productive team members allows students to develop their independent learning skills by working individually on a portion of a group project that makes them accountable not only to the instructor but also to team members. And finally, integrating teamwork into a course can result in adding structure to outof-class time and increasing student accountability for their learning. Obviously, team-based learning is not appropriate for all content, but it can usually be adopted in some form in any course. Larry Michaelsen (Team Based Learning, http://teambasedlearning.apsc.ubc.ca/?page_id=9), a business professor at the University of Central Missouri, finds that successful student teams are built around three components: promotion of ongoing accountability, linked and mutually reinforcing assignments, and practices that stimulate idea exchange. Students must be accountable for both in-class and out-of-class work; the learning that takes place in class must be reinforced and well integrated into the out-ofclass activities; and, finally, students must be actively engaged in the entire course. The strategies and tools discussed below can dramatically improve student-learning outcomes in team-based learning. Collaborative Teaching and Learning Strategies 3

Team Contracts Contracts can be used in instruction in a variety of forms, but they are especially useful in working with student teams and long-term projects. Once student teams have been formed, consider asking the team to develop a contract that includes the following items: Purpose, goal, and mission of the teamwhat the team will accomplish Expectations for the team as a whole as well as for individual members Roles for each individual Conflict-resolution strategies to employ when the team encounters disagreements, doesnt meet deadlines, or doesnt deliver on milestones Meeting schedules, locations, agendas, and minutes Communication strategies: e-mail, phone, in-person Decision-making policy: consensus, majority rules, other Project plan: deadlines, objectives, activities, and so forth The task of developing a team contract is something that can be introduced in class and then completed on students own time outside class. Contracts can then be signed with copies distributed to the faculty member and members of the team. However its done, developing contracts for teamwork can be highly effective in proactively addressing some of the most frequently experienced team issues, from identifying times across busy schedules to establishing ground rules for discussion and debate. Michaelsen also suggests guidelines for creating and maintaining successful teams:1 Assigning roles Using permanent groups Allowing some in-class group work Placing students in groups that have between four and seven members Carefully and clearly outlining learning goals for the teams Spending time to teach team development skills Providing clear and detailed instructions for deliverables Providing rubrics for students to evaluate their deliverables before submitting them Purposely selecting and applying concepts from the course to be addressed in the teams Team-Based Learning Video Demonstrations Michaelsens videos (see http://teambasedlearning.apsc.ubc.ca/v/michaelsenvid.html) are extremely useful in understanding and also demonstrating to students the way in which teams evolve and become productive. At the conclusion of the team-based learning segment, ask participants how the team-based learning approach or parts of the approach might fit their course. Participants could be given a few moments to consider this teaching and learning strategy and then could be asked to share their concerns (pedagogic, logistic, time), support needs, and modified approaches to team-based learning in small groups or in the larger group while one member captures the comments on a wiki or flip chart. Collaborative learning and the community building that it supports can greatly enhance the student experience. When community exists in the course, students are more committed to the content and the activities surrounding the content; are more comfortable asking questions; Unit 5 4

ultimately become more actively involved in their learning; and are more likely to complete the course. Through a variety of collaborative activities, starting early and persisting throughout the course, participants can foster and encourage community, collaboration, and team building among their students. Focus Session Resources All Collaborative Learning Focus Session Proceedings: http://net.educause.edu/Proceedings/1022124. Project Parlors: A Lightning Round of Innovative Projects in Interdisciplinary Collaboration, Roger Debo, North Carolina State University; Michael Reese, Johns Hopkins University; Cyprien Lomas, Kathryn Gretsinger, and Andrew Riseman, University of British Columbia, https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a729300474/p25185337/. Building Campus-Wide Collaborative Relationships to Support Innovation and Maximize Achievement, Beth Martin, Christine Lupton, and Lauren Shawl, University of Wisconsin Madison, https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a729300474/p73404814/. Readings Assessment and Collaborative Learning: http://bit.ly/d3dEy5. Four Collaborative Learning Strategies: http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/c-learn/strategies.html. Collaborative Learning Structures Strategies and Techniques: http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/clearn/methods.html. Collaborative Learning: http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/c-learn/index.html. University of WisconsinMadisons Engage Program: http://engage.wisc.edu/collaboration/index.html. Team Contract Sample 1: http://pheatt.emporia.edu/CCSC_ARCHIVE/ccsc2007presentations/managing_student_projects/ ccsc-TeamContract.doc. Team Contract Sample 2: http://www.augsburg.edu/ppages/~schwalbe/team_contract.doc. Team Contract Sample 3: http://math.arizona.edu/~sgfoster/115b/teamcontb.doc. Endnote 1. See http://teambasedlearning.apsc.ubc.ca/. Instructional Strategies for Online Courses

Effective online instruction depends on learning experiences appropriately designed and facilitated by knowledgeable educators. Because learners have different learning styles or a combination of styles, online educators should design activities that address their modes of learning in order to provide significant experiences for each class participant. In designing online courses, this can best be accomplished by utilizing multiple instructional strategies. Teaching models exist which apply to traditional higher education learning environments, and when designing courses for the online environment, these strategies should be adapted to the new environment.

ONLINE COURSES AND MULTIPLE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES Traditionally, in a teacher-centered classroom, instructors control their environment because they have a monopoly on information. In an online course, with instant access to vast resources of data and information, students are no longer totally dependent on faculty for knowledge. As faculty are beginning to teach online, learning is becoming more collaborative, contextual and active. Educators must first design their curriculum, goals and objectives and then consider how the online environment can best serve the instructional objectives and activities of that curriculum.This requires changes in pedagogy, with instructors taking the role of facilitators of information while guiding students toward solutions. In order for online learning to be successful, teachers as well as learners must take on new roles in the teaching-learning relationship, and faculty must be willing to release control of learning to the students. Online learning environments permit a full range of interactive methodologies, and instructors have found that in adapting their courses to online models, they are paying more attention to the instructional design of their courses. As a result, the quality, quantity, and patterns of communication students practice during learning are improved. Of the many instructional strategies available for use in the online learning environment, most have not been developed specifically for online instruction, but are currently used in traditional classrooms, and can be successfully adapted for facilitating online learning. Educators should choose instructional strategies that are most effective for accomplishing a particular educational objective. From this perspective, instructional strategies are tools available to educators for designing and facilitate learning . Below are ten instructional strategies which have been effectively used in the traditional classroom and can likewise be used in the online learning environment: LEARNING CONTRACTS Learning contracts connect educational needs to individual student needs and are useful when there is diversity in learner needs and interests in a class. A learning contract is a formal agreement written by a learner which details what will be learned, how the learning will be accomplished, the period of time involved, and the specific evaluation criteria to be used in judging the completion of the learning. Learning contracts help the educator and learner share the responsibility for learning.

Contract learning can bring about many practical benefits, including deeper involvement of the learner in the learning activities which they themselves have been involved in planning. Once a learner passes through the stage of confusion and anxiety associated with developing a contract, he/she will get excited about carrying out their own plans. Another benefit of utilizing contract learning is an increase of accountability, since the learning contract provides more functional and validated evidence of the learning outcomes. The contract also provides a means for the learner to receive continuous feedback regarding progress toward accomplishing learning objectives. Learning contracts can be extremely effective in the online environment. Because physically meeting with the class to discuss learning goals, objectives, and expectations is not possible online, instructors must be very clear and concise in what is expected from the learner. Likewise, the learner must also be clear about what he/she expects from the instructor and the course. A learning contract can facilitate negotiation and clarity of learning goals and outcomes. Sample learning contracts can be placed on a web page for the student to use as examples, and students can be encouraged to brainstorm ideas for learning contracts with their online peers as well as negotiate the final contract with the instructor through utilizing email or online conferencing.

LECTURE The lecture is one of the most frequently used instructional methods in adult education. It assumes the educator to be the expert and is an efficient way of disseminating information. Most educators agree that the purpose of lectures is to lay foundations as the student works through the subject, and good lecturers know their students and develop their lectures according to the students' needs. Most importantly, lectures are most effective when used in combination with other instructional strategies. Online lectures can be presented in a variety of ways. Lecture notes can be placed on a web page for the learner to review. Notes can be put together in a packet and either downloaded from the Internet or sent via snail mail. Lectures can also be presented via audio or video over the Internet. Also, links to related resources and other Web sites can be embedded in online lectures. Online lectures are likely to be shorter and more to the point than lectures in live classrooms which often extend far beyond the attention span of the audience. Short lectures provide enough information to serve as a basis for further reading, research, or other learning activities. Another obvious advantage of online lectures is that they are readily available for students to revisit again and again as needed.

DISCUSSION

Discussion is the instructional strategy most favored by adult learners because it is interactive and encourages active, participatory learning. The discussion format encourages learners to analyze alternative ways of thinking and acting and assists learners in exploring their own experiences so they can become better critical thinkers. The discussion is often the heart of an online course. The Internet offers several modes for discussion including mailing lists (listservs) which focus on particular topics and online conferencing programs. Both of these options utilize asynchronous communication. Synchronous (real time) communication can be offered by utilizing chat rooms or text-based virtual reality environments, better known as Multi-user Domains (MUDs) or Multi-user Object Oriented Environments (MOOs).

SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING Self-directed learning is learning initiated and directed by the learner and can include self-paced, independent, and individualized learning as well as self-instruction. Whatever terminology is used, self-directed learning places the responsibility for learning directly on the learner. Learners who take the initiative in learning and are proactive learners learn more and better than passive learners (reactive learners). Proactive learners enter into learning more purposefully and with greater motivation. They also tend to retain and make use of what they learn better and longer than reactive learners. The independent learner is one who is more involved and active within the learning process. Online learning supports the self-directed learner in pursuing individualized, self-paced learning activities. The learner, working at a computer at a convenient time and pace, is able to search and utilize the vast resources of the Internet research nearly any topic imaginable. Students can visit libraries, museums and various institutes world-wide, talk to professionals, access recent research, and read newspapers and peer reviewed scholarly journals online. Students can write collaboratively with peers and even publish written and multimedia products on web pages. MENTORSHIP The aim of mentorship is to promote learner development drawing out and giving form to what the student already knows. A mentor serves as a guide rather than a provider of knowledge and serves the function of introducing students to the new world, interpreting it for them, and helping them to learn what they need to know to function in it. Mentors in education teach by interpreting the environment and modeling expected behaviors. They also support, challenge, and provide vision for their students. A major benefit to online mentorship is the opportunity for frequent, convenient communication between mentor and student. Weekly or even daily journals and communications can be sent between mentor and student via e-mail, providing an ongoing "dialogue" which

supports the development of the mentor relationship and offers numerous opportunities for timely feedback on student questions, concerns and issues. SMALL GROUP WORK In small groups learners can discuss content, share ideas, and solve problems. They present their own ideas as well as consider ideas put forth by others. In this way, they can be exposed to a variety of viewpoints on a given subject. There are many small group formats that encourage and provide opportunities for interaction: The discussion group allows learners to reflect on a subject under discussion and present their views. Discussion within the small group is often on high intellectual levels - specifically analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Guided design encourages interaction in small groups. Here the focus is on developing learners' decision-making skills as well as on teaching specific concepts and principles. Participants work to solve open-ended problems which require outside class work to gather information. This format encourages learners to think logically, communicate ideas, and apply steps in a decision-making process. Learners are also required to apply the information they have learned, exchange ideas, and reflect on suggested solutions. The instructor's role is to act as a consultant to the groups. Role playing is another format available for use with small groups and involves recreating a situation relating to a real-world problem in which participants act out various roles. This promotes an understanding of other people's positions and their attitudes as well as the procedures that might be used for diagnosing and solving problems. Role playing can be used to simulate real-life group work situations and can help learners gain a fuller understanding of a problem or situation. Games requiring two or more groups to compete while attempting to meet a set of objectives is another form of small group learning. The game follows a set of rules and procedures and information is provided which requires decision making. Most instructional games reflect typical real-life situations. The rules, procedures, and objectives of the game should be clear and concise. Online learning environments offer several distinct benefits for small group work. First, they allow small groups to work independently while still having access to the instructor. In some cases where it is difficult for all members of an online class to meet synchronously, small groups can be organized according to their time zones, making it possible to find a convenient time to meet synchronously. Larger groups can benefit by communicating asynchronously via conferencing programs. A second benefit of online environments for group work is that they equalize control among participants. Factors such as geography, gender, or disabilities do not disadvantage learners in this environment. Finally, the instructor is able to respond directly to questions and needs of particular groups without taking the time of other groups.

PROJECT Online projects give students an opportunity to pursue their special interests and can be done individually or within groups. Projects also provide students with practical experience and a sense of accomplishment. Using projects in a learning activity makes the learning more relevant to the learners. Products can be shared with others in the class and critiqued. Many times an individual project is only critiqued by the facilitator, but by sharing individual projects with other participants, the learner has the opportunity to obtain more diverse viewpoints and feedback. Many of the instructional strategies discussed above can be considered group projects. Group projects can include simulations, role playing, case studies, problem solving exercises, group collaborative work, debates, small group discussion, and brainstorming. As with individual projects, participants in group projects should receive peer feedback to expose them to diverse viewpoints. With independent and group projects learners pursue special interests, write or create for an audience, and publish or present their findings and conclusions via the Internet. The Internet provides the potential of receiving feedback from experts or interested peers outside the course by accessing the project online. COLLABORATIVE LEARNING Collaborative learning is the process of getting two or more students to work together to learn. Students often work in small groups composed of participants with differing ability levels and using a variety of learning activities to master material initially developed by an instructor, or construct knowledge on substantive issues. Each member of the team is responsible for learning what is taught and for helping teammates learn. Collaborative learning methods are now used in over a third of higher education courses, and their use has increased in the past six years more than any other learning method, according to a recent survey conducted by UCLA's Higher Education Research Institute. Employers want workers with collaborative skills and are looking for graduates of educational programs that teach these skills. Collaborative learning can be more effective than interpersonal competitive and individualistic efforts in promoting cognitive development, self-esteem, and positive studentstudent relationships. Online learning models are natural environments for collaborative learning, but they are not collaborative learning environments by definition. Learners may interact with other participants without collaborating, for example when receiving on-line tutorial help. Learning activities have to be specifically and somewhat carefully designed to work effectively.

CASE STUDY The case study is a teaching strategy which requires learners to draw upon their past experiences, is participatory and has action components which are links to future experience. The key to a successful case study is the selection of an appropriate problem situation which is relevant both to the interests and experience level of learners and to the concepts being taught. The case report should include facts regarding the problem, the environmental context, and the characters of the people involved in the case. It should be factual, but also contain the opinions and views of the people involved. Learners should have access to the problem solution, but not until they have reached their own conclusions and can then compare their results with the actual decision taken to resolve the problem. The case analysis can be carried out with the learners working independently or in groups One advantage of using the case method is that it emphasizes practical thinking and it assists learners in identifying principles after examining the facts of the case and then applying those principles to new situations Case analysis is equally effective when used in combination with other instructional strategies. In the online environment case studies can be presented on web pages and discussed in conferencing groups. Cases can be developed by class groups as collaborative projects. In addition, the vast resources of the Internet can be tapped by students and educators to contribute data, information and expert advice to case development and analysis. FORUM The forum is an open discussion carried on by one or more resource people and an entire group. The moderator guides the discussion and the audience raises and discusses issues, make comments, offers information, or asks questions of the resource person(s) and each other. There are two variations of the forum: the panel and the symposium. The panel is usually a group of three to six people who sit in the presence of an audience and have a purposeful conversation on a topic in which they have specialized knowledge. Guided by a moderator, the panel is informal in nature, but allows for no audience participation. The symposium is a series of presentations given by two to five people different aspects of the same theme or closely related themes. Although the symposium is formal in nature, questions from the audience are encouraged following the presentations. An obvious benefit of the symposium is that it gives learners exposure to a variety of experts' viewpoints and offers an opportunity for the audience to ask questions. Because the online environment facilitates group communication, it is ideal for the types of information exchange typical in forums. In fact, the forum can be more convenient and effective in the online environment than in the traditional classroom because speakers, experts and moderator can participate without having to travel or even be available at a particular time. Both synchronous and asynchronous communication can be utilized to support online learning forums.

CONCLUSION The online learning environment allows educators and students to exchange ideas and information, work together on projects, around the clock, from anywhere in the world, using multiple communication modes. Given the advantages and resources of this rich learning environment, how can multiple instructional strategies best be utilized for online learning? Just as in the traditional classroom, instructional strategies are most effective when employed specifically to meet particular learning goals and objectives. Effective course design can begin with asking and answering the key question: what are the major learning goals and objectives for this course? Once these goals and objectives have been identified and clearly articulated, the question of which learning strategies, activities, and experiences to employ can be addressed. Online learning can employ any of the strategies discussed here. Much of the power of learning via the Internet lies in its capacity to support multiple modes of communication including any combination of student-student, student-faculty, faculty-student, faculty-faculty, student-others, others-students, etc. Taking into account the varied learning styles of learners and providing opportunities for self-directed and collaborative learning, educators can facilitate powerful, effective courses geared to achieve specific learning goals and outcomes using the vast resources and capacities of online learning. The online learning environment is, after all, just another learning environment, in some ways similar to and in some ways different from more traditional environments such as conventional classrooms, seminar rooms, or labs. When we move our class onto the Internet, we should plan for and make the best use of the online environment. The various instructional strategies we use to meet the goals and objectives of our courses are likely to be similar in each environment. However, the ways in which we utilize the strategies will differ as we make the best use of the characteristics and capacities of each environment.

Cooperative

Learning

Cooperative learning is a successful teaching strategy in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of a subject. Each member of a team is responsible not only for learning what is taught but also for helping teammates learn, thus creating an atmosphere of achievement. Students work through the assignment until all group members successfully understand and complete it.

Cooperative efforts result in participants striving for mutual benefit so that all group members:

gain from each other's efforts. (Your success benefits me and my success benefits you.) recognize that all group members share a common fate. (We all sink or swim together here.) know that one's performance is mutually caused by oneself and one's team members. (We can not do it without you.) feel proud and jointly celebrate when a group member is recognized for achievement. (We all congratulate you on your accomplishment!).

Why use Cooperative Learning? Research has shown that cooperative learning techniques:

promote student learning and academic achievement increase student retention enhance student satisfaction with their learning experience help students develop skills in oral communication develop students' social skills promote student self-esteem help to promote positive race relations

5 Elements of Cooperative Learning It is only under certain conditions that cooperative efforts may be expected to be more productive than competitive and individualistic efforts. Those conditions are:

1. Positive (sink or swim together)

Interdependence

Each group member's efforts are required and indispensable for group success

Each group member has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of his or her resources and/or role and task responsibilities Interaction

2. Face-to-Face (promote each other's success)

Orally explaining how to solve problems Teaching one's knowledge to other Checking for understanding Discussing concepts being learned Connecting present with past learning Individual Accountability

3. & Group ( no hitchhiking! no social loafing)

Keeping the size of the group small. The smaller the size of the group, the greater the individual accountability may be. Giving an individual test to each student. Randomly examining students orally by calling on one student to present his or her group's work to the teacher (in the presence of the group) or to the entire class. Observing each group and recording the frequency with which each member-contributes to the group's work. Assigning one student in each group the role of checker. The checker asks other group members to explain the reasoning and rationale underlying group answers. Having students teach what they learned to someone else. Interpersonal &

4. Small-Group Skills

Social skills must be taught: o Leadership o Decision-making o Trust-building o Communication o Conflict-management skills

5. Group Processing

Group members discuss how well they are achieving their goals and maintaining effective working relationships Describe what member actions are helpful and not helpful Make decisions about what behaviors to continue or change

Class Activities that use Cooperative Learning Most of these structures are developed by Dr. Spencer Kagan and his associates at Kagan Publishing and Professional Development. For resources and professional development information on Kagan Structures, please visit: www.KaganOnline.com 1. Jigsaw - Groups with five students are set up. Each group member is assigned some unique material to learn and then to teach to his group members. To help in the learning students across the class working on the same sub-section get together to decide what is important and how to teach it. After practice in these "expert" groups the original groups reform and students teach each other. (Wood, p. 17) Tests or assessment follows. 2. Think-Pair-Share - Involves a three step cooperative structure. During the first step individuals think silently about a question posed by the instructor. Individuals pair up during the second step and exchange thoughts. In the third step, the pairs share their responses with other pairs, other teams, or the entire group. 3. Three-Step Interview (Kagan) - Each member of a team chooses another member to be a partner. During the first step individuals interview their partners by asking clarifying questions. During the second step partners reverse the roles. For the final step, members share their partner's response with the team. 4. RoundRobin Brainstorming (Kagan)- Class is divided into small groups (4 to 6) with one person appointed as the recorder. A question is posed with many answers and students are given time to think about answers. After the "think time," members of the team share responses with one another round robin style. The recorder writes down the answers of the group members. The person next to the recorder starts and each person in the group in order gives an answer until time is called. 5. Three-minute review - Teachers stop any time during a lecture or discussion and give teams three minutes to review what has been said, ask clarifying questions or answer questions. 6. Numbered Heads Together (Kagan) - A team of four is established. Each member is given numbers of 1, 2, 3, 4. Questions are asked of the group. Groups work together to answer the question so that all can verbally answer the question. Teacher calls out a number (two) and each two is asked to give the answer. 7. Team Pair Solo (Kagan)- Students do problems first as a team, then with a partner, and finally on their own. It is designed to motivate students to tackle and succeed at problems which initially are beyond their ability. It is based on a simple notion of mediated learning. Students can do more things with help (mediation) than they can do alone. By allowing them to work on problems they could not do alone, first as a team and then with a partner, they progress to a point they can do alone that which at first they could do only with help. 8. Circle the Sage (Kagan)- First the teacher polls the class to see which students have a special knowledge to share. For example the teacher may ask who in the class was able to solve a difficult math homework question, who had visited Mexico, who knows the chemical reactions

involved in how salting the streets help dissipate snow. Those students (the sages) stand and spread out in the room. The teacher then has the rest of the classmates each surround a sage, with no two members of the same team going to the same sage. The sage explains what they know while the classmates listen, ask questions, and take notes. All students then return to their teams. Each in turn, explains what they learned. Because each one has gone to a different sage, they compare notes. If there is disagreement, they stand up as a team. Finally, the disagreements are aired and resolved. 9. Partners (Kagan) - The class is divided into teams of four. Partners move to one side of the room. Half of each team is given an assignment to master to be able to teach the other half. Partners work to learn and can consult with other partners working on the same material. Teams go back together with each set of partners teaching the other set. Partners quiz and tutor teammates. Team reviews how well they learned and taught and how they might improve the process. Credits: David and Roger Johnson. "Cooperative <http://www.clcrc.com/pages/cl.html>. Learning." [Online] 15 October 2001.

David and Roger Johnson. "An Overview of Cooperative Learning." [Online] 15 October 2001. <http://www.clcrc.com/pages/overviewpaper.html>. Howard Community College's Teaching Resources. "Ideas on Cooperative Learning and the use of Small Groups." [Online] 15 October 2001. <http://www.howardcc.edu/profdev/resources/learning/groups1.htm>. Kagan, S. Kagan Structures for Emotional Intelligence. Kagan Online Magazine. 2001, 4(4). http://www.kaganonline.com/Newsletter/index.html Reference Kagan, Spencer. Cooperative Learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing, 1994. www.KaganOnline.com

3. THE CONDITIONS FOR EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING Scholars started with a simple question 'is collaborative learning more efficient than learning alone' ? While a majority of studies have shown that collaborative learning is often efficient [7], some studies brought contradictory evidence. Sometimes, collaborative learning does not work properly. The discrepancy between these findings led scholars to seek for conditions under which collaborative learning occurs to be efficient or not. A wide range of conditions or independent variables have been studied. These conditions can be clustered into

three categories: the group composition, the task features and the communication medium. We attempt to relate these conditions with the features found in some Internet tools. 3.1 Group composition One factor that determines the efficiency of collaborative learning is the composition of the group. This factor is defined by several variables: the age and levels of participants, the size of the group, the difference between group members, etc. Regarding the number of members, small groups seems to function better than large groups in which some members tend be 'asleep' or excluded from interesting interactions [20, 21]. Most of the mechanisms described in the previous section, e.g. mutual regulation, social grounding, shared cognitive load, ..., can only occur between a few participants. This does not argue in disfavor of large group sessions. It simply means that distance learning activities should also include 'closed' sessions, in which a restricted number of subjects collaborate and/or 'monitored' session in which the teacher takes care that no learner is left out the interaction. Regarding the participants, some developmental level is necessary to be able to collaborate, but this is only an issue for children and does hence not directly concern current distance education activities which mainly concern adult learners. The most intensively studied variable is the heterogeneity of the group. It refers to the objective or the subjective differences (how subjects perceive each other) among group members. These differences can be general (age, intelligence, development, school performance, ...) or task specific. Results indicate there exists some 'optimal heterogeneity', i.e. some difference of viewpoints is required to trigger interactions, but within the boundaries of mutual interest and intelligibility. Heterogeneity can easily be understood as a condition to trigger conflicts and require social grounding, two important mechanisms described above. Heterogeneity is also implicit in the socio-cultural theory and its related mechanisms (internalization and appropriation) which rely on the observation of adult-child pairs or at least pairs with one member being more knowledgeable on the task than the other. Internet-based information and communication tools have a great potential with respect to heterogeneity: no infrastructure can better cross geographic, cultural and professional boundaries. Nevertheless, human beings have a natural trend to assemble with those who are the most similar to them. When participants join the group on their own decision, there is no control of heterogeneity. If the tutor observes too much homogeneity among the group members, he may modify some conditions in order to activate anyway the mechanisms that normally rely on heterogeneity. He may for instance allocate role to participants which will inevitably create conflict or provide them with contradictory information. 3.2 Task features The effects of collaboration vary according to the task. Some tasks prevent the activation of the mechanisms described above, while other tasks are appropriated. For instance, some tasks are inherently distributed and lead group members to work on their own, independently from

each other. Interaction occurs when assembling partial results, but not during each individual's reasoning process. Without interaction, none of the described mechanisms can be activated. Some tasks are so straightforward that they do not leave any opportunity for disagreement or misunderstanding. Some tasks do not involve any planning and hence create no need for mutual regulation. Some tasks cannot be shared, because they rely on processes (e.g. perception) which are not open to introspection or on skills (e.g. motor skills) that leave no time for interaction. If distance teachers want to take these features into account, a first attitude would be to use only collaborative learning for tasks for which it will get its optimal efficiency. Another solution is to modify the task, as explained in the previous paragraph, to make them more suited for collaboration. For instance, the 'jigsaw' method consists of providing group members with partial data. This method artificially turns a monolithic problem into a task which requires collaboration. Task features also include the environment in which the task has to be performed. This is especially important in computer-based tasks. The software features may modify interactions among learners. For instance, if a computer-based task provides the learner immediately with a feed-back on their actions, it may prevent them to discuss the consequences of their action 3.3 Communication media

Whatever task and group members have been selected, the collaboration may not work because the medium used for communication is not adequate. It would be beyond the scope of this paper to describe each available media. Basically, most of current widely available Internetbased tools use text-based communication, synchronous or asynchronous, with mostly fixed graphics and images. Voice and video interaction or voice and video mail are of course available, but the overload of standard networks and the limits of currently available hardware has postponed their larger use in current distance education. Most of the mechanisms described in the previous section can be conveyed via text-based communication, but with some perturbations. For instance, the cost of interaction being higher with text, the group members may reduce the number of disambiguating sub-dialogues used in social-grounding. At the opposite, in asynchronous text messages, they have more time to build sentences which are less ambiguous. Without video link, members also loose facial expressions which are useful to monitor the partner's understanding. Even with video images, they may see their partner but ignore where the partner looks, something which is important for understanding what she refers to. Some video system support eye contact with appear to be related to metacognitive aspects [22].

Collaborative learning From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Collaborative learning is a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together.[1] Unlike individual learning, people engaged in collaborative learning capitalize on one anothers resources and skills (asking one another for information, evaluating one anothers ideas, monitoring one anothers work, etc.).[2][3] More specifically, collaborative learning is based on the model that knowledge can be created within a population where members actively interact by sharing experiences and take on asymmetry roles.[4] Put differently, collaborative learning refers to methodologies and environments in which learners engage in a common task where each individual depends on and is accountable to each other. These include both face-to-face conversations[5] and computer discussions (online forums, chat rooms, etc.).[6] Methods for examining collaborative learning processes include conversation analysis and statistical discourse analysis.[7] Collaborative learning is heavily rooted in Vygotskys views that there exists an inherent social nature of learning which is shown through his theory of zone of proximal development.[8] Often, collaborative learning is used as an umbrella term for a variety of approaches in education that involve joint intellectual effort by students or students and teachers.[9] Thus, collaborative learning is commonly illustrated when groups of students work together to search for understanding, meaning, or solutions or to create an artifact or product of their learning. Further, collaborative learning redefines traditional student-teacher relationship in the classroom which results in controversy over whether this paradigm is more beneficial than harmful. [10][11] Collaborative learning activities can include collaborative writing, group projects, joint problem solving, debates, study teams,and other activities. The approach is closely related to cooperative learning. Contents [hide]

1 Examples of Collaborative Learning 2 Collaborative Scripts o 2.1 Conceptual Components of Scripts 3 See also

4 References [edit] Examples of Collaborative Learning

Collaborative Networked Learning is a form of collaborative learning for the selfdirected adult learner. Youth directed collaboration, another form of self-directed organizing and learning, relies on a novel, more radical concept of youth voice.

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is a relatively new educational paradigm within collaborative learning which uses technology in a learning environment to help mediate and support group interactions in a collaborative learning context. [4][6] CSCL systems use technology to control and monitor interactions, to regulate tasks, rules, and roles, and to mediate the acquisition of new knowledge.[4] Most recently, one study showed that using robots in the classroom to promote collaborative learning led to an increase in learning effectiveness of the activity and an increase in the students motivation.[4] Researchers and practitioners in several fields, including cognitive sciences, sociology, computer engineering have begun to investigate CSCL, thus, it constitutes a new trans-disciplinary field. Learning Management Systems is a context that gives collaborative learning particular meaning. In this context, collaborative learning refers to a collection of tools which learners can use to assist, or be assisted by others. Such tools include Virtual Classrooms (i.e. geographically distributed classrooms linked by audio-visual network connections), chat, discussion threads, application sharing (e.g. a colleague projects spreadsheet on another colleagues screen across a network link for the purpose of collaboration), among many others. Collaborative Learning Development Enables developers of learning systems to work as a network. Specifically relevant to e-learning where developers can share and build knowledge into courses in a collaborative environment. Knowledge of a single subject can be pulled together from remote locations using software systems. An example of this could be Content point from Atlantic Link Collaborative Learning in Virtual Worlds Virtual Worlds by their nature provide an excellent opportunity for collaborative learning. At first learning in virtual worlds was restricted to classroom meetings and lectures, similar to their counterparts in real life. Now collaborative learning is evolving as companies starting to take advantage of unique features offered by virtual world spaces - such as ability to record and map the flow of ideas,[12] use 3D models and virtual worlds mind mapping tools. Collaborative learning in thesis circles in higher education is another example of people learning together. In a thesis circle, a number of students work together with at least one professor or lecturer, to collaboratively coach and supervise individual work on final (e.g. undergraduate or MSc) projects. Students switch frequently between their role as cosupervisor of other students and their own thesis work (incl. receiving feedback from other students).

[edit] Collaborative Scripts Collaborative scripts structure collaborative learning by creating roles and mediating interactions while allowing for flexibility in dialogue and activities.[13][14] Collaborative scripts are used in nearly all cases of collaborative learning some of which are more suited for face-toface collaborative learningusually, more flexibleand others for computer-supported collaborative learningtypically, more constraining.[13][14] Additionally, there are two broad

types of scripts: macro-scripts and micro-scripts. Macro-scripts aim at creating situations within which desired interactions will occur. Micro-scripts emphasize activities of individual learners.[13] [edit] Conceptual Components of Scripts

Objectives: Help participants (i.e. learners and teachers) work together to engage in efficient collaboration processes to reach specific objectives.[14] Activities: Identify the activities, and possible constraints, for completing the activities. Activities can include summarizing, questioning, giving an argument, state a claim, etc.[14] Sequencing: Explain the expectations of the participants by specifying which activities should be performed and in what order.[14] Distribute Roles: Clarify the roles individuals will assume throughout the activity to encourage participants to adopt and consider multiple perspectives.[14] Type of Representation: Textual, graphical, or oral representations of explicit instructions are presented to the participants.[14]

[edit] See also

Computer-supported collaborative learning Collaborative information seeking Educational psychology Teaching for social justice Intergenerational equity Youth/adult partnerships Learning by teaching (LdL) Collaborative learning in thesis circles Learning circle

[edit] References 1. ^ Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Advances in Learning and Instruction Series. New York, NY: Elsevier Science, Inc. 2. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2000). Group problem solving processes: Social interactions and individual actions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 30, 1, 27-50.600-631. 3. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2008).Flowing toward correct contributions during groups' mathematics problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17 (3), 415 - 463. 4. ^ a b c d Mitnik, R., Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., & Soto, A. (2009). Collaborative Robotic Instruction: A Graph Teaching Experience. Computers & Education, 53(2), 330342. 5. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2008). Effects of argumentation on group micro-creativity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 383 402.

6. ^ a b Chen, G., & Chiu, M. M. (2008). Online discussion processes. Computers and Education, 50, 678 692. 7. ^ Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2005). A new method for analyzing sequential processes: Dynamic multi-level analysis. Small Group Research, 36, 600-631. 8. ^ Lee, C.D. and Smagorinsky, P. (Eds.).(2000). Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. 9. ^ Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. T. (1992). What Is Collaborative Learning?". National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment at Pennsylvania State University 10. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2004). Adapting teacher interventions to student needs during cooperative learning. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 365-399. 11. ^ Harding-Smith, T. (1993). Learning together: An introduction to collaborative learning. New York, NY: HarperCollins College Publishers. 12. ^ Naone, E. 2007. Unreal meetings: Second Life's virtual conference rooms might be more useful if they did not resemble their real-world counterparts. Technology Review, July 11. 13. ^ a b c Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in Macro-Scripts for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 1-13. 14. ^ a b c What Is Collaborative Learning?

Having your students engage in cooperative and collaborative learning within the classroom will lay a foundation for your students in understanding the dynamics of participating in a collaborative project. 1. How does cooperative and collaborative learning impact student achievement? More than 70 major studies by federally sponsored (US Department of Education, 1992) research centers, field-initiated investigations, and local districts examining their own practices have demonstrated cooperative and collaborative learning's effectiveness on a range of outcomes: 1. Positive Growth in Student Achievement: When two necessary key elements--group goals and individual accountability--are used together, the effects on achievement are consistently positive. 2. Improved Relations among Different Ethnic Groups: One of the earliest and strongest findings shows that students who cooperate with each other like each other. 3. Mainstreaming Students with Learning Disabilities: Significant improvements in relationships occur between these students and other children in their class when these learning strategies are used.

2. What is the difference between cooperative and collaborative learning? There is a fine-line that separates cooperative and collaborative learning. Here are just a few Cooperative Learning Definition: Cooperative learning is a successful teaching strategy in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of a subject. Each member of a team is responsible not only for learning what is taught but also for helping teammates learn, thus creating an atmosphere of achievement. (U.S. Dept. of Ed. Office of Research, 1992) each person is responsible for a portion of the work many times the teacher already knows the problem and solution students will be working towards Resource Links: U.S. Dept of Ed: Cooperative Learning U of Tennessee: Learning Cooperative Collaborative Learning Definition: "Collaborative learning is based on the idea that learning is a naturally social act in which the participants talk among themselves (Gerlach, 1994). It is through the talk that learning occurs."

participants work together to solve a problem many times teacher does not have a pre-set notion of the problem or solution that students will be researching Resource Links: Collaborative Learning: group learning page small

Using the links above:

Using the link above:

Explore the above links for further tips and activity ideas.

Explore the above links for further tips and activity ideas.

3. Clearly Establish Cooperative Learning Guidelines Introducing and posting visible signs that define cooperative learning guidelines for your class will help your students remember what they should be practicing when they are working in cooperative or collaborative groups. If you see that students are not keeping on task or including everyone, rather than telling groups what they are doing wrong, challenge your students to identify which rules they are not following. This will challenge your class to identify your rules for group participation, analyze which ones they are not implementing, and challenge them to share and problem-solve how they should adjust their activity to meet these rules. Here is a suggested list of group participation rules used by a fifth grade teacher. She used the acronymn KISSES and dis

Group Participation Rules Keep with the Group Include Everyone Share ideas and Feelings Stay on Task Amy Norton, Rome City Elementary Encourage Others Six Inch Voices

played each rule on a separate poster board: This is a cooperative learning technique that reduces racial conflict among school children, promotes better learning, improves student motivation, and increases enjoyment of the learning experience. The jigsaw technique was first developed in the early 1970s by Elliot Aronson and his students at the University of Texas and the University of California. Since then, hundreds of schools have used the jigsaw classroom with great success. The web site was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation, and it contains free resources, tips, links, and information on cooperative learning.

Resources Cooperative Learning. U.S. Dept. of Ed. Office of Research. 1992. http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/cooplear.html (05 December 2003). Collaborative Learning: Small Group Learning Page. Wisconsin Center for Education Research (05 December 2003). Gerlach, J. M. (1994). "Is this collaboration?" In Bosworth, K. and Hamilton, S. J. (Eds.), Collaborative Learning: Underlying Processes and Effective Techniques, New Directions for Teaching and Learning No. 59. Panitz, Ted. A Definition of Collaborative vs Cooperative Learning. 1996. http://www.lgu.ac.uk/deliberations/collab.learning/panitz2.html (05 December 2003).

These are the learning objectives for this tutorial.

Learners will understand what it means to collaborate. Learners will experience how to collaborate locally before they collaborate globally. Learners will understand why it is important to collaborate. Learners will know what safety issues they should practice. Learners will know how to communicate effectively. Learners will be aware of the different kinds of collaboration they can do. Learners will identify learning standards for their activity. Learners will develop assessment measurements for online collaboration. Learners will explore sites where they can join a collaborative project. Learners will design their own collaborative project. Learners will develop their own collaborative project. Learners will discover how they can announce their collaborative project.

Ready to begin? Then select Prepare the Way: What Is Collaboration? in the menu on the left-hand side to continue the lesson.

Collaborative Group Work and Study Teams

Learning:

[From the hard copy book Tools for Teaching by Barbara Gross Davis; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco, 1993. Linking to this book chapter from other websites is permissible. However, the contents of this chapter may not be copied, printed, or distributed in hard copy form without permission.] Students learn best when they are actively involved in the process. Researchers report that, regardless of the subject matter, students working in small groups tend to learn more of what is taught and retain it longer than when the same content is presented in other instructional formats. Students who work in collaborative groups also appear more satisfied with their classes.

(Sources: Beckman, 1990; Chickering and Gamson, 1991; Collier, 1980; Cooper and Associates, 1990; Goodsell, Maher, Tinto, and Associates, 1992; Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991; Kohn, 1986; McKeachie, Pintrich, Lin, and Smith, 1986; Slavin, 1980, 1983; Whitman, 1988) Various names have been given to this form of teaching, and there are some distinctions among these: cooperative learning, collaborative learning, collective learning, learning communities, peer teaching, peer learning, reciprocal learning, team learning, study circles, study groups, and work groups. But all in all, there are three general types of group work: informal learning groups, formal learning groups, and study teams (adapted from Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991). Informal learning groups are ad hoc temporary clusterings of students within a single class session. Informal learning groups can be initiated, for example, by asking students to turn to a neighbor and spend two minutes discussing a question you have posed. You can also form groups of three to five to solve a problem or pose a question. You can organize informal groups at any time in a class of any size to check on students' understanding of the material, to give students an opportunity to apply what they are learning, or to provide a change of pace. Formal learning groups are teams established to complete a specific task, such as perform a lab experiment, write a report, carry out a project, or prepare a position paper. These groups may complete their work in a single class session or over several weeks. Typically, students work together until the task is finished, and their project is graded. Study teams are long-term groups (usually existing over the course of a semester) with stable membership whose primary responsibility is to provide members with support, encouragement, and assistance in completing course requirements and assignments. Study teams also inform their members about lectures and assignments when someone has missed a session. The larger the class and the more complex the subject matter, the more valuable study teams can be. The suggestions below are designed to help you set up formal learning groups and study teams. If you have never done group work in your classes, you might want to experiment first with informal learning groups. Two other tools, "Leading a Discussion" and "Supplements and Alternatives to Lecturing: Encouraging Student Participation," describe a variety of easy ways to incorporate informal learning groups into your courses. "Helping Students Write Better in All Courses" discusses informal collaborative writing activities. General Strategies Plan for each stage of group work. When you are writing your syllabus for the course, decide which topics, themes, or projects might lend themselves to formal group work. Think about how you will organize students into groups, help groups negotiate among themselves, provide feedback to the groups, and evaluate the products of group work.

Carefully explain to your class how the groups will operate and how students will be graded. As you would when making any assignment, explain the objectives of the group task and define any relevant concepts. In addition to a well-defined task, every group needs a way of getting started, a way of knowing when its task is done, and some guidance about the participation of members. Also explain how students will be graded. Keep in mind that group work is more successful when students are graded against a set standard than when they are graded against each other (on a curve). See "Grading Practices." (Source: Smith, 1986) Give students the skills they need to succeed in groups. Many students have never worked in collaborative learning groups and may need practice in such skills as active and tolerant listening, helping one another in mastering content, giving and receiving constructive criticism, and managing disagreements. Discuss these skills with your students and model and reinforce them during class. Some faculty use various exercises that help students gain skills in working in groups (Fiechtner and Davis, 1992). See "Leading a Discussion" for examples of guidelines for participating in small groups. (Sources: Cooper, 1990; Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991) Consider written contracts. Some faculty give students written contracts that list members' obligations to their group and deadlines for tasks (Connery, 1988). Designing Group Work Create group tasks that require interdependence. The students in a group must perceive that they "sink or swim" together, that each member is responsible to and dependent on all the others, and that one cannot succeed unless all in the group succeed. Knowing that peers are relying on you is a powerful motivator for group work (Kohn, 1986). Strategies for promoting interdependence include specifying common rewards for the group, encouraging students to divide up the labor, and formulating tasks that compel students to reach a consensus. (Source: Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991) Make the group work relevant. Students must perceive the group tasks as integral to the course objectives, not just busywork. Some faculty believe that groups succeed best with tasks involving judgment. As reported by Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (1991), for example, in an engineering class, a faculty member gives groups a problem to solve: Determine whether the city should purchase twenty-five or fifty buses. Each group prepares a report, and a representative from each group is randomly selected to present the group's solution. The approaches used by the various groups are compared and discussed by the entire class. Goodsell, Maher, Tinto, and Associates (1992, pp. 75-79) have compiled a detailed bibliography of discipline-specific efforts in collaborative learning that can be useful for developing tasks and activities. Create assignments that fit the students' skills and abilities. Early in the term, assign relatively easy tasks. As students become more knowledgeable, increase the difficulty level. For example, a faculty member teaching research methods begins by having students simply recognize various research designs and sampling procedures. Later, team members generate their

own research designs. At the end of the term, each team prepares a proposal for a research project and submits it to another team for evaluation. (Source: Cooper and Associates, 1990) Assign group tasks that allow for a fair division of labor. Try to structure the tasks so that each group member can make an equal contribution. For example, one faculty member asks groups to write a report on alternative energy sources. Each member of the group is responsible for research on one source, and then all the members work together to incorporate the individual contributions into the final report. Another faculty member asks groups to prepare a "medieval newspaper." Students research aspects of life in the Middle Ages, and each student contributes one major article for the newspaper, which includes news stories, feature stories, and editorials. Students conduct their research independently and use group meetings to share information, edit articles, proofread, and design the pages. (Sources: Smith, 1986; Tiberius, 1990) Set up "competitions" among groups. A faculty member in engineering turns laboratory exercises into competitions. Students, working in groups, design and build a smallscale model of a structure such as a bridge or column. They predict how their model will behave when loaded, and then each model is loaded to failure. Prizes are awarded to the groups in various categories: best predictions of behavior, most efficient structure, best aesthetics. (Source: Sansalone, 1989) Consider offering group test taking. On a group test, either an in-class or take-home exam, each student receives the score of the group. Faculty who have used group exams report that groups consistently achieve higher scores than individuals and that students enjoy collaborative test taking (Hendrickson, 1990; Toppins, 1989). Faculty who use this technique recommend the following steps for in-class exams:

Assign group work at the beginning of the term so that students develop skills for working in groups. Use multiple-choice tests that include higher-level questions. To allow time for discussion, present about twenty-five items for a fifty-minute in-class exam. Divide students into groups of five. Have students take the test individually and turn in their responses before they meet with their group. Then ask the groups to arrange themselves in the room and arrive at a group consensus answer for each question. Score the individual and group responses and prepare a chart showing the average individual score of each group's members, the highest individual score in each group, and the group's consensus score. Ninety-five percent of the time, the group consensus scores will be higher than the average individual scores (Toppins, 1989).

For more information on group exams, see "Quizzes, Tests, and Exams." Organizing Learning Groups Decide how the groups will be formed. Some faculty prefer randomly assigning students to groups to maximize their heterogeneity: a mix of males and females, verbal and quiet

students, the cynical and the optimistic (Fiechtner and Davis, 1992; Smith, 1986). Some faculty let students choose with whom they want to work, although this runs the risk that groups will socialize too much and that students will self-segregate (Cooper, 1990). Self-selected groups seem to work best in small classes, for classes of majors who already know one another, or in small residential colleges (Walvoord, 1986). Still other instructors prefer to form the groups themselves, taking into account students' prior achievement, levels of preparation, work habits, ethnicity, and gender (Connery, 1988). They argue for making sure that members of each group are exclusively graded students or exclusively pass/ not pass students and that well-prepared students be placed in groups with other well-prepared students. Other faculty, however, try to sprinkle the more able students evenly among the groups (Walvoord, 1986). A middle ground, proposed by Walvoord (1986), is to ask students to express a preference, if they wish, then make the assignments yourself. You could, for example, ask students to write down the names of three students with whom they would most like to work. Be conscious of group size. In general, groups of four or five members work best. Larger groups decrease each member's opportunity to participate actively. The less skillful the group members, the smaller the groups should be. The shorter amount of time available, the smaller the groups should be. (Sources: Cooper, 1990; Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991; Smith, 1986) Keep groups together. When a group is not working well, avoid breaking it up, even if the group requests it. The addition of the floundering group's members to ongoing groups may throw off their group process, and the bailed-out troubled group does not learn to cope with its unproductive interactions. (Source: Wolvoord, 1986) Help groups plan how to proceed. Ask each group to devise a plan of action: who will be doing what and when. Review the groups' written plans or meet with each group to discuss its plan. Regularly check in with the groups. If the task spans several weeks, you will want to establish checkpoints with the groups. Ask groups to turn in outlines or drafts or to meet with you. Provide mechanisms for groups to deal with uncooperative members. Walvoord (1986) recommends telling the class that after the group task is completed, each student will submit to the instructor an anonymous assessment of the participation of the other group members: who did extra work and who shirked work. If several people indicate that an individual did less than a fair share, that person could receive a lower grade than the rest of the group. This system works, says Walvoord, if groups have a chance in the middle of the project to discuss whether any members are not doing their share. Members who are perceived as shirkers then have an opportunity to make amends. Here are some other options for dealing with shirkers:

Keep the groups at three students: it is hard to be a shirker in a small group. Make it clear that each group must find its own way to handle unproductive group behavior.

Allow the groups, by majority vote, to dismiss a member who is not carrying a fair share. Students who are dropped from a group must persuade the group to reconsider, find acceptance in another group, or take a failing grade for the project.

Perhaps the best way to assure comparable effort among all group members is to design activities in which there is a clear division of labor and each student must contribute if the group is to reach its goal. (Sources: Connery, 1988; Walvoord, 1986) Evaluating Group Work Ensure that individual student performance is assessed and that the groups know how their members are doing. Groups need to know who needs more assistance in completing the assignment, and members need to know they cannot let others do all the work while they sit back. Ways to ensure that students are held accountable include giving spot quizzes to be completed individually and calling on individual students to present their group's progress. (Source: Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991) ive students an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of their group. Once or twice during the group work task, ask group members to discuss two questions: What action has each member taken that was helpful for the group? What action could each member take to make the group even better? At the end of the project, ask students to complete a brief evaluation form on the effectiveness of the group and its members. The form could include items about the group's overall accomplishments, the student's own role, and suggestions for changes in future group work. Rau and Heyl (1990) have developed a form that can be used for an interim or final evaluation. (Sources: Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991; Walvoord, 1986) Decide how to grade members of the group. Some faculty assign all students in the group the same grade on the group task. Grading students individually, they argue, inevitably leads to competition within the group and thus subverts the benefits of group work. Other faculty grade the contribution of each student on the basis of individual test scores or the group's evaluation of each member's work. If you assign the same grade to the entire group, the grade should not account for more than a small part of a student's grade in the class (perhaps a few bonus points that would raise a test score from a B - to a B). (Sources: Cooper, 1990; Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991) Dealing with Student and Faculty Concerns About Group Work "I paid my tuition to learn from a professor, not to have to work with my classmates, who don't know as much." Let students know at the beginning of the term that you will be using some group techniques. Students who are strongly antagonistic can drop your class and select another. Inform students about the research studies on the effectiveness of collaborative learning and describe the role it will play in your course. Invite students to try it before deciding whether to drop the class. (Source: Cooper and Associates, 1990)

"Our group just isn't working out." Encourage students to stick with it. Changing group membership should really be a last resort. Help your students learn how to be effective group members by summarizing for them some of the information in "Leading a Discussion" and "Encouraging Student Participation in Discussion." "Students won't want to work in groups." Some students may object, in part because most of their education has been based on individual effort, and they may feel uncomfortable helping others or seeking help. The best advice is to explain your rationale, design wellstructured meaningful tasks, give students clear directions, set expectations for how team members are to contribute and interact, and invite students to try it. (Source: Cooper and Associates, 1990) "Students won't work well in groups." Most students can work well in groups if you set strong expectations at the beginning of the term, informally check in with groups to see how things are going, offer assistance as needed, and provide time for groups to assess their own effectiveness. Some groups may indeed have problems, but usually these can be resolved. See "Encouraging Student Participation in Discussion" for suggestions on how to minimize monopolizers, draw out quiet students, and generally engage all students in active participation. "If I do group work, I won't be able to cover as much material during the semester as I do when I lecture." Yes, adding group work may mean covering fewer topics. But research shows that students who work in groups develop an increased ability to solve problems and evidence greater understanding of the material. Some instructors assign additional homework or readings or distribute lecture notes to compensate for less material "covered" in class. (Source: Cooper and Associates, 1990) Setting Up Study Teams Tell Students about the benefits of study teams. Study teams meet regularly outside of class to study together, read and review course material, complete course assignments, comment on each other's written work, prepare for tests and exams, and help each other with difficulties that are encountered in class. Study teams are guided by the notions that students can often do as a group what they cannot do by themselves and that students can benefit from peer teachingexplanations, comments, and instruction from their coursemates. xplain how study teams work. Study teams can work in a number of ways. In one model, all students read the assignments but each member agrees to provide to the group indepth coverage of a particular segment of the material and to answer as fully as possible whatever questions other members of the study team might raise. In this model, then, each member agrees to study all the material yet each also tries to become an "expert" in a certain area of the material. In another model, the teams' activities vary from meeting to meeting. For example, at one meeting, teams might review class notes to see whether there is agreement on the most important points of the lecture or discussion. In another session, teams might go over a class quiz or test to

ensure that all team members clearly understand each of the questions, especially those that were answered incorrectly by one or more members. Another session might be devoted to reviewing problem sets or exchanging drafts of written papers for peer editing. In a third model, the main agenda for each study team session is a set of study questions. Early in the term, the study questions are provided by the professor or graduate student instructors. After three or four weeks, each team member must bring a study question related to the week's lecture material to the team meeting. The questions structure the discussion and are modified, discarded, or replaced by the group as the session proceeds. At the session's end, the study questions that the group chooses as the most valuable are turned in for review by the instructor. You can let students decide for themselves how to structure their study teams, or you can offer advice and suggestions. (Sources: Gushy, 1988; Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991; Light, 1992; "Study Groups Pay Off," 1991) If Study teams are optional, offer students extra credit for participation. For example, students who are members of an official study team might get bonus points for each assignment, based on the average grade received by the individual group members. (Source: "Study Groups Pay Off," 1991) Let students know what their responsibilities are as a study team member. Students who participate in study teams agree to do the following:

Prepare before the study team meeting (for example, do all the required reading or problem sets) Complete any tasks that the group assigns to its members Attend all meetings and arrive on time Actively participate during the sessions in ways that further the work of the group Help promote one another's learning and success Provide assistance, support, and encouragement to group members Be involved in periodic self-assessments to determine whether the study team is working successfully (Is too much work being required? Is the time in study team meetings well spent?)

In addition, let students know that they can improve the effectiveness of their study teams by making sure each session has a clearly articulated agenda and purpose. They can also work more efficiently if all logistical arrangements are set for the semester: meeting time, length, location. Help students locate meeting rooms. Arrange with your department or campus room scheduler to make available small meeting rooms for study teams. If appropriate, consider using group rooms in the residence halls. Limit groups to no more than six students. Groups larger than six have several drawbacks: it is too easy for students to become passive observers rather than active participants; students may not get the opportunity to speak frequently since there are so many people; students' sense of community and responsibility may be less intense in larger groups.

Let students select their own study teams unless you have a large class. Since the groups are designed to last the term and will meet outside of class, give students the opportunity to form groups of three to six members. Arrange one or two open groups for students who do not know others in the class. If students will be selecting their own groups, offer several small group activities during the first three weeks of class and rotate the membership of these ad hoc groups so that students can get to know one another's interests and capabilities before forming study teams. See "Personalizing the Large Lecture," "Supplements and Alternatives to Lecturing," "Encouraging Student Participation in Discussion," and "The First Day of Class" for ideas on small group activities and how to help students get to know one another. If your class is very large and letting students select their own groups seems too difficult, have students sign up for teams scheduled to meet at particular times. This means that students will form groups based solely on when they can regularly attend a study team meeting. Try to form the groups by sections rather than for the large lecture class overall. Students in the same section are more likely to know each other and feel a sense of responsibility for their study team. (Source: Walvoord, 1986) Use a portion of class time for arranging study groups. Announce that study groups will be set up during the third or fourth week of the course. At that time, hand out a description of study teams and students' responsibilities, and let students talk among themselves to form groups or to sign up for scheduled time slots. Suggest that all members of the study team exchange phone numbers. Encourage the study teams to select one person as the convener who will let all members know where the group is to meet. Devote a class session to study teams. Ask students to meet in their study teams to review course material or prepare for an upcoming exam or assignment. Use the time to check in with the groups to see how well they are operating. Some faculty regularly substitute study team meetings for lectures. To the extent possible, meet with a study team during an office hour or review the work of a study team sometime during the semester. References Beckman, M. "Collaborative Learning: Preparation for the Workplace and Democracy" College Teaching, 1990, 38(4), 128-133. Chickering, A. W, and Gamson, Z. F (eds.), Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no.47. San Francisco: JosseyBass, 1991. Collier, K. G. "Peer-Group Learning in Higher Education: The Development of Higher-order Skills." Studies in Higher Education, 1980, 5(1), 55-62. Connery, B. A. "Group Work and Collaborative Writing." Teaching at Davis, 1988, 14(1), 2-4. (Publication of the Teaching Resources Center, University of California at Davis)

Cooper, J. "Cooperative Learning and College Teaching: Tips from the Trenches." Teaching Professor, 1990, 4(5), 1-2. Cooper, J., and Associates. Cooperative Learning and College Instruction. Long Beach: Institute for Teaching and Learning, California State University, 1990. Fiechtner, S. B., and Davis, E. A. "Why Some Groups Fail: A Survey of Students' Experiences with Learning Groups." In A. Goodsell, M. Maher, V. Tinto, and Associates (eds.), Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education. University Park: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, Pennsylvania State University, 1992. Goodsell, A., Maher, M., Tinto, V, and Associates (eds.). Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education. University Park: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, Pennsylvania State University, 1992. Guskey, T R. Improving Student Learning in College Classrooms. Springfield, Ill: Thomas, 1988. Hendrickson, A. D. "Cooperative Group Test-Taking." Focus, 1990,5(2), 6 (Publication of the Office of Educational Development Programs, University of Minnesota) Johnson, D. W, and Johnson, R. T. Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Edina, Minn.: Interaction Books, 1989. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. Cooperative Learning:Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity. ASHE-FRIC Higher Education Report No.4. Washington, D.C.: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University, 1991. Kohn, A. No Contest: The Case Against Competition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1986. Light, R. J. The Havard Assessment Seminars: Second Report. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1992. McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P R., Lin, Y.-G., and Smith, D.A.F. Teaching and Learning in the College Classroom: A Review of the Research Literature. Ann Arbor: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, University of Michigan, 1986. Rau, W., and Heyl, B. S. "Humanizing the College Classrooms: Collaborative Learning and Social Organization Among Students." Teaching Sociology, 1990, 18(2), 141-155. Sansalone, M. "Teaching Structural Engineering Through Case Studies and Competitions." CUE, 1989, 2(2), 7. (Newsletter available from Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y) Slavin, R. F. "Cooperative Learning." Review of Educational Research, 1980, 50(2), 315-342. Slavin, R. E. "When Does Cooperative Learning Increase Student Achievement?" Psychological Bulletin, 1983, 94(3), 429-445.

Smith, K. A. "Cooperative Learning Groups." In S. F. Schmoberg (ed.), Strategies for Active Teaching and Learning in University Classrooms. Minneapolis: Office of Educational Development Programs, University of Minnesota, 1986. "Study Groups Pay Off." Teaching Professor, 1991, 5(7), 7. Tiberius, R. G. Small Group Teaching: A Trouble-Shooting Guide. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education Press, 1990. Toppins, A. D. "Teaching by Testing: A Group Consensus Approach." College Teaching, 1989, 37(3), 96-99. Walvoord, B. F Helping Students Write Well: A Guide for Teachers in All Disciplines. (2nd ed.) New York: Modern Language Association, 1986. Whitman, N. A. Peer Teaching: To Teach Is to Learn Twice. Washington, D.C.: ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.4. Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education, 1988 From the hard copy book Tools for Teaching by Barbara Gross Davis; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco, 1993. Linking to this book chapter from other websites is permissible. However, the contents of this chapter may not be copied, printed, or distributed in hard copy form without permission. Available at the UCB campus library (call # LB2331.D37). The entire book is also available online as part of netLibrary (accessible only through computers connected to the UC Berkeley campus network). It is available for purchase at the Cal Student Store textbook department, the publisher, and Amazon. Note: Barbara Gross Davis is working on the second edition of Tools for Teaching. Publications and Teaching Tips | Office of Educational Development | UC Berkeley

What is Collaborative Learning? * by Barbara Leigh Smith and Jean T. MacGregor *This is an abbreviation of Smith and MacGregors article, What Is Collaborative Learning?" in Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education, by Anne Goodsell, Michelle Maher, Vincent Tinto, Barbara Leigh Smith and Jean MacGregor. It was published In 1992 by the National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment at Pennsylvania State University. Collaborative learning is an umbrella term for a variety of educational approaches involving joint intellectual effort by students, or students and teachers together. Usually, students are working in groups of two or more, mutually searching for understanding, solutions, or meanings, or creating a product. Collaborative learning activities vary widely, but most center on students exploration or application of the course material, not simply the teachers presentation or explication of it. Collaborative learning represents a

significant shift away from the typical teachercentered or lecture-centered milieu in college classrooms. In collaborative classrooms, the lecturing/ listening/note-taking process may not disappear entirely, but it lives alongside other processes that are based in students discussion and active work with the course material. Teachers who use collaborative learning approaches tend to think of themselves less as expert transmitters of knowledge to students, and more as expert designers of intellectual experiences for students-as coaches or mid-wives of a more emergent learning process. Assumptions about Learning Though collaborative learning takes on a variety of forms and is practiced by teachers of different disciplinary backgrounds and teaching traditions, the field is tied together by a number of important assumptions about learners and the learning process. Learning is an active, constructive process: To learn new information, ideas or skills, our students have to work actively with them in purposeful ways. They need to integrate this new material with what they already know-or use it to reorganize what they thought they knew. In collaborative learning situations, our students are not simply taking in new information or ideas. They are creating something new with the information and ideas. These acts of intellectual processing- of constructing meaning or creating something new-are crucial to learning. Learning depends on rich contexts: Recent research suggests learning is fundamentally influenced by the context and activity in which it is embedded (Brown, Collins and Duguid, 1989). Collaborative learning activities immerse students in challenging tasks or questions. Rather than beginning with facts and ideas and then moving to applications, collaborative learning activities frequently begin with problems, for which students must marshal pertinent facts and ideas. Instead of being distant observers of questions and answers, or problems and solutions, students become immediate practitioners. Rich contexts challenge students to practice and develop higher order reasoning and problemsolving skills. What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education Learners are diverse: Our students bring multiple perspectives to the classroom-diverse backgrounds, learning styles, experiences, and aspirations. As teachers, we can no longer assume a one-size-fits- all approach. When students work together on their learning in class, we get a direct and immediate sense of how they are learning, and what experiences and ideas they bring to their work. The diverse perspectives that emerge in collaborative activities are clarifying but not just for us. They are illuminating for our students as well. Learning is inherently social: As Jeff Golub points out, Collaborative learning has as its main feature a structure that allows for student talk: students are supposed to talk with each other....and it is in this talking that much of the learning occurs. (Golub, 1988) Collaborative learning produces intellectual synergy of many minds coming to bear on a problem, and the social stimulation of mutual engagement in a common endeavor. This mutual exploration, meaning-making, and feedback often leads to better understanding on the part of students, and to the creation of new understandings for all of us.

Goals for Education While we use collaborative learning because we believe it helps students learn more effectively, many of us also place a high premium on teaching strategies that go beyond mere mastery of content and ideas. We believe collaborative learning promotes a larger educational agenda, one that encompasses several intertwined rationales. Involvement. Calls to involve students more actively in their learning are coming from virtually every quarter of higher education (Astin, 1985; Bonwell and Eison, 1991; Kuh, 1990; Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in Higher Education, 1984). Involvement in learning, involvement with other students, and involv ement with faculty are factors that make an overwhelming difference in student retention and success in college. By its very nature, collaborative learning is both socially and intellectually involving. It invites students to build closer connections to other students, their faculty, their courses and their learning. Cooperation and teamwork. In collaborative endeavors, students inevitably encounter difference, and must grapple with recognizing and working with it. Building the capacities for tolerating or resolving differences, for building agreement that honors all the voices in a group, for caring how others are doing -- these abilities are crucial aspects of living in a community. Too often the development of these values and skills is relegated to the Student Life side of the campus. Cultivation of teamwork, communitybuilding, and leadership skills are legitimate and valuable classroom goals, not just extracurricular ones. Civic Responsibility: If democracy is to endure in any meaningful way, our educational system must foster habits of participation in and responsibility to the larger community. Collaborative learning encourages students to acquire an active voice in shaping their ideas and values and a sensitive ear in hearing others. Dialogue, deliberation, and What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education consensus-building out of differences are strong threads in the fabric of collaborative learning, and in civic life as well. Collaborative Learning Approaches Collaborative learning covers a broad territory of approaches with wide variability in the amount of in-class or out-of-class time built around group work. Collaborative activities can range from classroom discussions interspersed with short lectures, through entire class periods, to study on research teams that last a whole term or year. The goals and processes of collaborative activities also vary widely. Some faculty members design small group work around specific sequential steps, or tightly structured tasks. Others prefer a more spontaneous agenda developing out of student interests or questions. In some collaborative learning settings, the students task is to create a clearly delineated product; in others, the task is not to produce a product, but rather to participate in a process, an exercise of responding to each others work or engaging in analysis and meaning-making. Cooperative Learning Cooperative learning represents the most carefully structured end of the collaborative learning continuum. Defined as the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each others learning (Johnson et al. 1990), cooperative learning is

based on the social interdependence theories of Kurt Lewin and Morton Deutsch (Deutsch, 1949; Lewin, 1935). These theories and associated research explore the influence of the structure of social interdependence on individual interaction within a given situation which, in turn, affects the outcomes of that interaction (Johnson and Johnson, 1989). Pioneers in cooperative learning, David and Roger Johnson at the University of Minnesota, Robert Slavin at Johns Hopkins University, and Elizabeth Cohen at Stanford, have devoted years of detailed research and analysis to clarify the conditions under which cooperative, competitive, or individualized goal structures affect or increase student achievement, psychological adjustment, self-esteem, and social skills. In cooperative learning, the development of interpersonal skills is as important as the learning itself. The development of social skills in group work-learning to cooperate is key to high quality group work. Many cooperative learning tasks are put to students with both academic objectives and social skills objectives. Many of the strategies involve assigning roles within each small group (such as recorder, participation encourager, summarizer) to ensure the positive interdependence of group participants and to enable students to practice different teamwork skills. Built into cooperative learning work is regular group processing, a debriefing time where students reflect on how they are doing in order to learn how to become more effective in group learning settings (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec, 1990). Problem-Centered Instruction Problem-centered instruction, widely used in professional education, frequently is built around collaborative learning strategies. Many of these spring from common roots, especially the work of John Dewey in the early part of this century. Dewey endorsed discussion-based teaching and believed strongly in the importance of giving students What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education direct experiential encounters with real-world problems. Guided Design, cases, and simulations are all forms of problem-centered instruction, which immerse students in complex problems that they must analyze and work through together. These approaches develop problem-solving abilities, understanding of complex relationships, and decisionmaking in the face of uncertainty. While problem-solving has long been a focus of professional education, it is increasingly regarded as an important aspect of the liberal arts as well. In collaborative endeavors, students inevitably encounter difference, and must grapple with recognizing and working with it. Guided Design: Guided Design is the most carefully structured approach to problemcentered instruction. The approach asks students, working in small groups, to practice decision-making in sequenced tasks, with detailed feed-back at every step. Developed in the late 1960s in the engineering program at West Virginia University, the Guided Design approach has since been adopted in many disciplines and professional programs, most notably in engineering, nursing and pharmacy, but in many liberal arts and sciences courses as well (Borchardt, 1984; Day et al, 1984; deTornay and Thompson, 1987; Miller, 1981; Roemer, 1981; Vogt et al., 1992). Cases: Case studies have long been a staple for teaching and learning in the professions, particularly in the fields of business, law and education, and they are now being used in many other disciplines as well (Christensen and Hanson 1987). A case is a story or narrative of a real life situation that sets up a problem or unresolved tension for the students to analyze and resolve. The use of cases does not necessarily imply collaborative learning or small seminar discussion. However, case method teaching frequently asks small groups of students to tackle cases in class or in study group sessions.

Problem-centered Instruction in Medical Education. Problem-centered instruction has also emerged in recent decades in the field of medical education. This work began in England, then spread to Canada and ultimately to the U. S. M.L.J. Abercrombies research in England in the 1950s made a compelling case for discussion methods of teaching, contending that when people work in teams, they make more valid judgments than when working alone. This pioneering research had a profound impact on collaborative learning in medical education both in England and North America (Abercrombie, 1961, 1970). McMaster University in Canada was one of the early leaders in problem-centered medical education (Barrows and Tamblyn, 1980), followed by Western Reserve University, the University of New Mexico, and others. In 1985, the Harvard Medical School adopted a problem-based curriculum entitled New Pathways that has garnered national attention. Simulations: Simulations are complex, structured role-playing situations that simulate real experiences. Most simulations ask students, working individually or in teams, to play the roles of opposing stakeholders in a problematic situation or an unfolding drama. Taking on the values and acting the part of a stakeholder usually gets students What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education emotionally invested in the situation. The key aspect of simulations, though, is that of perspective-taking, both during the simulation exercise and afterwards. Following the simulation, there is usually a lengthy discussion where students reflect on the simulation and explore their own actions and those of others. This is where important concepts and lessons emerge. There are now a large number of simulations or educational games, as they are sometimes called, relating to many disciplinary areas (Abt, 1987; Bratley, 1987). Writing Groups Both in theory and practice, the most concentrated effort in undergraduate collaborative learning has focused on the teaching of writing. The writing group approach, (known variously as peer response groups, class criticism, or helping circles) has transformed thousands of college writing classes. Through the spread of writing-across-the-curriculum initiatives, writing groups increasingly are appearing in other courses as well. Peer writing involves students working in small groups at every stage of the writing process. Many writing groups begin as composing groups: they formulate ideas, clarify their positions, test an argument or focus a thesis statement before committing it to paper. This shared composing challenges students to think through their ideas out loud, to hear what they sound like, so they will know what to say in writing. Writing groups also serve as peer response groups. Students exchange their written drafts of papers and get feedback on them either orally or in writing. This is a challenging process, one that requires students to read and listen to fellow students writing with insight, and to make useful suggestions for improvement. Word processors have helped peer writing enormously; in many writing labs, students share their drafts and revise them right on the screens. Peer Teaching With its roots in our one-room schoolhouse tradition, the process of students teaching their fellow students is probably the oldest form of collaborative learning in American education. In recent decades, however, peer teaching approaches have proliferated in higher education, under

many names and structures (Whitman, 1988). The following examples represent three of the most successful and widely adapted peer teaching models. Supplemental Instruction: The Supplemental Instruction approach is an undergraduate teaching assistant model developed by Deanna Martin at the University of Missouri- Kansas City. It has been adopted at hundreds of colleges in the United States and abroad. This urban campus recognized the need to offer tutoring help to students, but budgetary constraints made one-to-one tutoring too expensive. Its search for an alternative approach led to Supplemental Instruction. This approach focused not on at risk students, but rather on at risk classes, entry-level classes in health sciences, and later in general arts and sciences classes, where more than 30 per cent of the students were either withdrawing or failing. The university invites advanced undergraduates who have done well in those classes to become SI leaders. These students are paid to attend the class, and to convene Supplemental Instruction sessions at least three times a week at hours convenient to students in the class. (Blanc, DeBuhr and Martin, 1980) What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education Writing Fellows: The Writing Fellows approach, pioneered by Tori Haring-Smith at Brown University, is a peer teaching approach somewhat parallel to Supplemental Instruction. The writing fellows are upper-division students who are strong writers. After extensive training, these students are deployed to an undergraduate class (generally in the discipline of their major) where they read and respond to the papers of all the students. Haring-Smith calls this a bottom-up approach to sustaining writing-across-thecurriculum initiatives, particularly in large classes where many faculty flag at assigning writing because there are simply too many papers to which to respond. Over 50 colleges and universities have created Writing Fellows Programs. Mathematics Workshops: A third peer teaching approach that spread rapidly in the late 1980s is the intensive mathematics workshops program developed by Uri Treisman while he was at the University of California at Berkeley. Treisman wanted to address the drawbacks of traditional tutoring models-particularly those geared to minority students in academic difficulty. Finding that study groups made a difference in student success, he created a co-peer teaching approach called the Professional Development Program. The program assumes the culture of an honors program rather than a remedial program. Graduate instructors (usually doctoral candidates) lead math workshops built around small group problem-solving, with an explicit emphasis on peer teaching. These workshops supplement the regular lecture and discussion sections of mathematics courses. This intensive small group workshop approach, which emphasizes developing strength rather than remediating weakness, and peer collaboration rather than solo competition, completely reversed the prevailing patterns of failure by Hispanic and African American students in calculus classes at Berkeley (Treisman, 1985). This intensive math workshop approach has since spread widely in the mathematics community in high schools, as well as in both two- and four-year colleges. Writing Fellows... are a bottom-up approach to sustaining writing-across-the curriculum initiatives... Discussion Groups and Seminars The terms discussion group and seminar refer to a broad array of teaching approaches. In college settings we usually think of discussions as processes, both formal and informal, that

encourage student dialogue with teachers and with each other. All the approaches we have described above involve discussion. Most, however have distinct protocols, goals, or structures framing the activity. What we are describing heremore open-ended discussion or seminars-puts the onus on the teacher or the students to pose questions and build a conversation in the context of the topic at hand. There is enormous variability, then, in terms of who sets the agenda, who organizes and monitors the discussion, and who evaluates what. Some discussions or seminars may be heavily teacher-directed, others much more student-centered. There are myriad possibilities for discussions, and many good resources on strategies exist (Christensen et al.,1991; Eble, 1976; McKeachie, 1986; Neff and Weimer, 1989). What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education Learning Communities Collaborative learning practitioners would say that all collaborative learning is about building learning communities. However, we use the term learning community here in a broader but more specific sense, in terms of intentional reconfiguration of the curriculum. In the past 15 years, a number of colleges have recognized that deep-seated structural factors weaken the quality of undergraduate learning and inhibit the development of community. These schools have attacked the problem directly by developing learning communities, a purposeful restructuring of the curriculum to link together courses so that students find greater coherence in what they are learning and increased interaction with faculty and fellow students (Gabelnick, MacGregor, Matthews, and Smith, 1990). As such, learning communities are a delivery system and a facilitating structure for the practice of collaborative learning. Learning community curriculum structures vary from campus to campus. They can serve many different purposes, but have two common intentions. They attempt to provide intellectual coherence for students by linking classes together and building relationships between subject matter, or by teaching a skill (e.g., writing or speaking) in the context of a discipline. Second, they aim to build both academic and social community for students by enrolling them together in a large block of course work. Learning communities directly confront multiple problems plaguing under-graduate education: the fragmentation of general education classes, isolation of students (especially on large campuses or commuter schools), lack of meaningful connection- building between classes; the need for greater intellectual interaction between students and faculty; and lack of sustained opportunities for faculty development. By altering the curricular structure to provide larger units of study, learning communities frequently provide more time and space for collaborative learning and other more complicated educational approaches. Small group workshops and book seminars are staples of most learning communities. Peer writing groups and team projects associated with labs and field work are also fairly common. Study groups emerge in learning communities, both intentionally and spontaneously. These programs provide a unique social and intellectual glue for students that results in high rates of student retention, increased student achievement and more complex intellectual development (MacGregor, 1991). Creating a collaborative classroom can be wonderfully rewarding opportunity but it is also full of challenges and dilemmas. Collaborative Learning: Challenges and Opportunities Creating a collaborative classroom can be a wonderfully rewarding opportunity but it is also full of challenges and dilemmas. Few of us experienced collaborative work in our own undergraduate settings, and much of our graduate school training reinforced the teacher-centered, lecture-driven

model of college teaching. For each of us, stepping out of the center and engaging students in group activity is hard work, especially at first. What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education Designing group work requires a demanding yet important rethinking of our syllabus, in terms of course content and time allocation. If some (or a great deal) of the classroom time is considered an important social space for developing understandings about course material, or if some of the out-of-class time is devoted to study groups or group projects, how should we design the rest of the class time (lectures, assignments, examinations)? How do we ensure students are learning and mastering key skills and ideas in the course, while at the same time addressing all the material of the course? Teaching in collaborative settings puts front and center the tension between the process of student learning and content coverage. As we become more involved in using collaborative learning, we discover what radical questions it raises. Collaborative learning goes to the roots of long-held assumptions about teaching and learning. Classroom roles change: both teachers and students take on more complex roles and responsibilities. (Finkel and Monk, 1983; MacGregor, 1990 ). The classroom is no longer solo teacher and individual students- it becomes more an interdependent community with all the joys and tensions and difficulties that attend all communities. This degree of involvement often questions and reshapes assumed power relationships between teachers and students, (and between students and students), a process that at first can be confusing and disorienting (Romer and Whipple, 1990). Not only is course content reshaped, so are our definitions of student competence. Because the public nature of group work makes demonstration of student learning so continuous, collaborative learning both complicates and enriches the evaluation process. Challenges to collaborative learning at the classroom level are compounded by the traditional structures and culture of the academy, which continue to perpetuate the teacher-centered, transmission- of-information model of teaching and learning. The political economy of the academy is set up to front load the curriculum with large lower division classes in rooms immutably arranged for lectures, usually in classes limited to fiftyminute hours. Student-student interaction; extended, careful examination of ideas; the hearingout of multiple perspectives; the development of an intellectual community - all these are hard to accomplish under these constraints. The lecture-centered model is reinforced (both subtly and blatantly) by institutional reward systems that favor limited engagement in teaching, and give greater recognition to research. Achievement for teachers and students alike is assumed to be a scarce honor, which one works for alone, in competition with peers. This assumption of scarcity is the platform for norm-referenced grading, or grading on the curve, a procedure that enforces distance between students and corrodes the trust on which collaborative learning is built. Moreover, our definitions of our selves as teachers, as keepers and dispensers of disciplinary expertise, are still very much bound up in the lecture podium. For example, a colleague recently told us a poignant story about his dean coming to observe his teaching. The dean looked into the room where students were avidly engaged in small group work. What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education today. Ill come back when youre teaching. We have a long way to go. What really has propelled us and our colleagues into collaborative classrooms is the desire to motivate students by getting them more actively engaged. Nonetheless, wanting to be a facilitator of collaborative learning and being good at it are very different things. As with all kinds of teaching, designing and guiding group work takes time to learn and practice. And for students, learning to learn well in groups doesnt happen overnight. Most teachers start with modest efforts. Many work with colleagues, designing, trying and observing each others approaches. At their best, collaborative classrooms

stimulate both students and teachers. In the most authentic of ways, the collaborative learning process models what it means to question, learn and understand in concert with others. Learning collaboratively demands responsibility, persistence and sensitivity, but the result can be a community of learners in which everyone is welcome to join, participate and grow. References Abercrombie, M. L. J. Aims and Techniques of Group Teaching. Surrey, England: Society for Research into Higher Education. 1970. Abercrombie, M. L. J. The Anatomy of Judgement. London: Book Guild, 1961. Abt, C. Serious Games. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1987. Astin, A. Achieving Educational Excellence. San Francisco, Jossey Bass, 1985. Barrrows, N.S. and R.M. Tamblyn. Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education. New York: Springer Publishing, 1980. Blanc, R. A. and L.E. DeBuhr, and D. C. Martin. Breaking the Attrition Cycle. Journal of Higher Education. 54, (1), 1983. Bonwell, C. and J. Eison. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report (1),1991. Borchardt, D. Think Tank Theatre: Decision-Making Applied. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984. Brown, J.S., A. Collins, and P. Duguid. Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher. 18 (1), 1989. Bratley, P. et. al. A Guide to Simulations. 2nd edition. Springer-Verlag, 1987. Bricker, David C. Classroom Life as Civic Education: Individual Achievement and Student Cooperation in Schools. New York: Teachers College Press, 1989. Christensen, C. R., and A.J. Hansen. Teaching and the Case Method. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School, 1987. What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education Christensen, C.R., D. Garvin, and A. Sweet. Education for Judgement: The Artistry of Discussion Leadership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Busi-ness School, 1991. Day, P.J., H.J. Macy and E.C. Jackson. Social Working: Exercises in Generalist Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984. de Tornay, R. and M.A. Thompson. Strategies for Teaching Nursing. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1987.

Deutsch, M. A Theory of Cooperation and Competition. Human Relations, 2. Eble, K. The Craft of Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976. Finkel, D. L. and G. S. Monk. Teachers and Learning Groups: Dissolution of the Atlas Complex. In C. Bouton and R. Y. Garth (Eds.) Learning in Groups. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 14 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983. Gabelnick, F. and J. MacGregor, R. Matthews, and B.L. Smith. Learning Communities: Creating Connections Among Students, Faculty and Disciplines. San Francisco: Jossey Bass New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Number 41, Spring 1990. Gere, A. Writing Groups: History, Theory and Implications. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1987. Golub, J. (Ed). Focus on Collaborative Learning. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1988. Johnson, D.W. and R.T. Johnson. Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company, 1989. Johnson, David W., R. Johnson, and E. Holubec. Circles of Learning: Coopera-tion in the Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company, 1990. Kuh, G. et al. Involving Colleges: Successful Approaches to Fostering Student Learning and Development Outside the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991. Lewin, K. A Dynamic Theory of Personality. New York: McGraw Hill, 1935. MacGregor, J. What Difference Do Learning Communities Make? Washington Center News, (6) 1, 1991. Olympia, WA: Washington Center for Undergraduate Education, The Evergreen State College. MacGregor, J. Collaborative Learning: Shared Inquiry as a Process of Reform. In M. Svinicki, (Ed.) The Changing Face of College Teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 42, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990. McKeachie, W. Teaching Tips: A Guidebook for the Beginning Teacher. Lexing-ton, MA: D.C. Heath, 1986. Miller, D.I. Experience in Decision Making for Students of Industrial Psychol-ogy. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1981. Neff, R and M. Weimer. Classroom Communication: Collected Readings for Effective Discussion and Questioning. Madison, WI: Magna Publications, 1989. Roemer, K.M. Build Your Own Utopia. Washington D.C.: University Press of America, 1981.

Romer, K. and W. Whipple. Collaboration across the Power Line. College Teaching, 1990, 39 (2). What is Collaborative Learning? Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education Spear, K. Sharing Writing: Peer Response Groups in English Classes. Ports-mouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1988. Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in Higher Education, Involvement in Learning: Realizing the Potential of Higher Education. Washington D.C. National Institute of Education, 19841. Treisman, U. A Study of the Mathematics Performance of Black Students at the University of California, Berkeley. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California-Berkeley. Dissertation Abstracts International 47: 1641-A. 1985. Vogt, R., B. Cameron and E. Dolan. Economics. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston of Canada, 1992. Wales, C. and Stager. The Guided Design Approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, The Instructional Design Library, Volume 9, 1978. Whitman, N. Peer Teaching: To Teach is to Learn Twice. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.4, 1988. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.

Cooperative learning From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article's citation style may be unclear. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking. (April 2011 This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (Consider using more specific clean up instructions.) Please improve this article if you can. The talk page may contain suggestions. (May 2010) Cooperative learning is an approach to organizing classroom activities into academic and social learning experiences. Students must work in groups to complete tasks collectively. Unlike individual learning, students learning cooperatively capitalize on one anothers resources and skills (asking one another for information, evaluating one anothers ideas, monitoring one anothers work, etc.).[1][2] Furthermore, the teacher's role changes from giving information to facilitating students' learning. [3][4]Everyone succeeds when the group succeeds. History

Prior to World War II, social theorists such as Allport, Watson, Shaw, and Mead began establishing cooperative learning theory after finding that group work was more effective and efficient in quantity, quality, and overall productivity when compared to working alone.[5] However, it wasnt until 1937 when researchers May and Doob[6] found that people who cooperate and work together to achieve shared goals, were more successful in attaining outcomes, than those who strived independently to complete the same goals. Furthermore, they found that independent achievers had a greater likelihood of displaying competitive behaviours. Philosophers and psychologists in the 1930s and 40s such as John Dewey, Kurt Lewin, and Morton Deutsh also influenced the cooperative learning theory practiced today.[7] Dewey believed it was important that students develop knowledge and social skills that could be used outside of the classroom, and in the democratic society. This theory portrayed students as active recipients of knowledge by discussing information and answers in groups, engaging in the learning process together rather than being passive receivers of information (e.g. teacher talking, students listening). Lewins contributions to cooperative learning were based on the ideas of establishing relationships between group members in order to successfully carry out and achieve the learning goal. Deutshs contribution to cooperative learning was positive social interdependence, the idea that the student is responsible for contributing to group knowledge. [7] Since then, David and Roger Johnson have been actively contributing to the cooperative learning theory. In 1975, they identified that cooperative learning promoted mutual liking, better communication, high acceptance and support, as well as demonstrated an increase in a variety of thinking strategies among individuals in the group.[8] Students who showed to be more competitive lacked in their interaction and trust with others, as well as in their emotional involvement with other students. In 1994 Johnson and Johnson published the 5 elements (positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face interaction, social skills, and processing) essential for effective group learning, achievement, and higher-order social, personal and cognitive skills (e.g., problem solving, reasoning, decision-making, planning, organizing, and reflecting).[9] Types Formal cooperative learning is structured, facilitated, and monitored by the educator over time and is used to achieve group goals in task work (e.g. completing a unit). Any course material or assignment can be adapted to this type of learning, and groups can vary from 2-6 people with discussions lasting from a few minutes up to a period. Types of formal cooperative learning strategies include jigsaw, assignments that involve group problem solving and decision making, laboratory or experiment assignments, and peer review work (e.g. editing writing assignments). Having experience and developing skill with this type of learning often facilitates informal and base learning.[10] Informal cooperative learning incorporates group learning with passive teaching by drawing attention to material through small groups throughout the lesson or by discussion at the end of a lesson, and typically involves groups of two (e.g. turn-to-your-partner discussions). These groups are often temporary and can change from lesson to lesson (very much unlike formal learning where 2 students may be lab partners throughout the entire semester contributing to one anothers knowledge of science). Discussions typically have four components that include formulating a response to questions asked by the educator, sharing responses to the questions

asked with a partner, listening to a partners responses to the same question, and creating a new well-developed answer. This type of learning enables the student to process, consolidate, and retain more information learned.[10] In group-based cooperative learning, these peer groups gather together over the long term (e.g. over the course of a year, or several years such as in high school or post-secondary studies) to develop and contribute to one anothers knowledge mastery on a topic by regularly discussing material, encouraging one another, and supporting the academic and personal success of group members. Base group learning is effective for learning complex subject matter over the course or semester and establishes caring, supportive peer relationships, which in turn motivates and strengthens the students commitment to the groups education while increasing self-esteem and self worth. Base group approaches also make the students accountable to educating their peer group in the event that a member was absent for a lesson. This is effective both for individual learning, as well as social support.[10] Elements Brown & Ciuffetelli Parker (2009) discuss the 5 basic and essential elements to cooperative learning:[11] 1. Positive Interdependence

Students must fully participate and put forth effort within their group Each group member has a task/role/responsibility therefore must believe that they are responsible for their learning and that of their group

2. Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction

Member promote each others success Students explain to one another what they have or are learning and assist one another with understanding and completion of assignments

3. Individual Accountability

Each student must demonstrate master of the content being studied Each student is accountable for their learning and work, therefore eliminating social loafing

4. Social Skills

Social skills that must be taught in order for successful cooperative learning to occur Skills include effective communication, interpersonal and group skills

i. Leadership ii. Decision-making iii. Trust-building iv. Communication v. Conflict-management skills 5. Group Processing

Every so often groups must assess their effectiveness and decide how it can be improved

In order for student achievement to improve considerably, two characteristics must be present a) Students are working towards a group goal or recognition and b) success is reliant on each individuals learning[12] a. When designing cooperative learning tasks and reward structures, individual responsibility and accountability must be identified. Individuals must know exactly what their responsibilities are and that they are accountable to the group in order to reach their goal. b. Positive Interdependence among students in the task. All group members must be involved in order for the group to complete the task. In order for this to occur each member must have a task that they are responsible for which cannot be completed by any other group member. Research supporting cooperative learning Research on cooperative learning demonstrated overwhelmingly positive results and confirmed that cooperative modes are cross-curricular.[13] Cooperative learning requires students to engage in group activities that increase learning and adds other important dimensions.[11] The positive outcomes include: academic gains, improved race relations and increased personal and social development.[11] Brady & Tsay (2010) report that students who fully participated in group activities, exhibited collaborative behaviours, provided constructive feedback and cooperated with their group had a higher likelihood of receiving higher test scores and course grades at the end of the semester. Results from Brady & Tsays (2010) study support the notion that cooperative learning is an active pedagogy that fosters higher academic achievement (p. 85). Slavin states the following regarding research on cooperative learning which corresponds with Brady & Tsays (2010) findings.[12]

Students demonstrate academic achievement Cooperative learning methods are usually equally effective for all ability levels. Cooperative learning is affective for all ethnic groups Student perceptions of one another are enhanced when given the opportunity to work with one another Cooperative learning increases self esteem and self concept Ethnic and physically/mentally handicapped barriers are broken down allowing for positive interactions and friendships to occur

Limitations Cooperative Learning has many limitations that could cause the process to be more complicated then first perceived. Sharan (2010) discusses the issue regarding the constant evolution of cooperative learning is discussed as a threat. Due to the fact that cooperative learning is constantly changing, there is the possibility that teachers may become confused and lack complete understanding of the method. Teachers implementing cooperative learning may also be challenged with resistance and hostility from students who believe that they are being held back by their slower teammates or by students who are less confident and feel that they are being ignored or demeaned by their team.[7] References 1. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2000). Group problem solving processes: Social interactions and individual actions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 30, 1, 27-50.600-631. 2. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2008).Flowing toward correct contributions during groups' mathematics problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17 (3), 415 - 463. 3. ^ Chiu, M. M. (2004). Adapting teacher interventions to student needs during cooperative learning. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 365-399. 4. ^ Cohen, E. G. (1994). Designing group work. New York: Teacher's College. 5. ^ Gilles, R.M., & Adrian, F. (2003). Cooperative Learning: The social and intellectual Outcomes of Learning in Groups. London: Farmer Press. 6. ^ May, M. and Doob, L. (1937). Cooperation and Competition. New York: Social Sciences Research Council 7. ^ a b c Sharan, Y. (2010). Cooperative Learning for Academic and Social Gains: valued pedagogy, problematic practice. European Journal of Education, 45,(2), 300-313. 8. ^ Johnson, D., Johnson, R. (1975). Learning together and alone, cooperation, competition, and individualization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 9. ^ Johnson, D., Johnson, R. (1994). Learning together and alone, cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Needham Heights, MA: Prentice-Hall. 10. ^ a b c Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1988). Advanced Cooperative Learning. Edin, MN: Interaction Book Company. 11. ^ a b c Brown, H., & Ciuffetelli, D.C. (Eds.). (2009). Foundational methods: Understanding teaching and learning. Toronto: Pearson Education. 12. ^ a b Brown, H., & Ciuffetelli, D.C. (Eds.). (2009). Foundational methods: Understanding teaching and learning, p. 507. Toronto: Pearson Education. 13. ^ Brown, H., & Ciuffetelli, D.C. (Eds.). (2009). Foundational methods: Understanding teaching and learning, p. 508. Toronto: Pearson Education. Further reading

Aldrich, H., & Shimazoe,J. (2010). Group work can be gratifying: Understanding and overcoming resistance to cooperative learning. College Teaching, 58(2), 52-57.

Baker,T., & Clark, J. (2010). Cooperative learning- a double edged sword: A cooperative learning model for use with diverse student groups. Intercultural Education, 21(3), 257268. Kose, S., Sahin, A., Ergu, A., & Gezer, K. (2010). The effects of cooperative learning experience on eight grade students achievement and attitude toward science. Education, 131 (1), 169-180. Lynch, D. (2010). Application of online discussion and cooperative learning strategies to online and blended college courses. College Student Journal, 44(3), 777-784. Naested, I., Potvin, B., & Waldron, P. (2004). Understanding the landscape of teaching. Toronto: Pearson Education. Scheurell, S. (2010). Virtual warrenshburg: Using cooperative learning and the internet in the social studies classroom. Social Studies, 101(5), 194-199. Tsay, M., & Brady, M. (2010). A case study of cooperative learning and communication pedagogy: Does working in teams make a difference? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2)

6. Cooperative learning series Cooperative and Collaborative Learning Cooperative or collaborative learning is a team process where members support and rely on each other to achieve an agreed-upon goal. The classroom is an excellent place to develop team-building skills you will need later in life. Cooperative/collaborative as a team member, you:
o o o

learning

is

interactive;

o o

develop and share a common goal contribute your understanding of the problem: questions, insights and solutions respond to, and work to understand, others' questions, insights and solutions. Each member empowers the other to speak and contribute, and to consider their contributions are accountable to others, and they are accountable to you are dependent on others, and they depend on you

What makes for a good learning team?

o

o o

Team activities begin with training in, and understanding group processes. An instructor begins by facilitating discussion and suggesting alternatives but does not impose solutions on the team, especially those having difficulty working together Three to five people Larger teams have difficulty in keeping everyone involved Teacher-assigned groups They function better than self-assigned groups

Diverse skill levels, backgrounds, experience 1. Each individual brings strengths to a group 2. Each member of the group is responsible to not only contribute his/her strengths, but also to help others understand the source of their strengths 3. Any member who is at a disadvantage or not comfortable with the majority should be encouraged and proactively empowered to contribute 4. Learning is positively influenced with a diversity of perspective and experience increasing options for problem solving, and expanding the range of details to consider Commitment of each member to a goal that is defined and understood by the group 1. Confidential peer ratings are a good way to assess who is and who is not contributing 2. Groups have the right to fire a non-cooperative or non-participating member if all remedies have failed. (The person fired then has to find another group to accept him/her) 3. Individuals can quit if they believe they are doing most of the work with little assistance from the others. (This person can often easily find another group to welcome his/her contributions) Shared operating principles and responsibilities, defined and agreed to by each member. These include: 1. Commitment to attend, prepare and be on time for meetings 2. Have discussions and disagreements focus on issues, avoiding personal criticism 3. Take responsibility for a share of the tasks and carry them out on time You may need to perform tasks that you have little experience, feel illprepared for, or even think others would do better. Accept the challenge, but be comfortable in stating that you may need help, training, a mentor, or have to resign and take on different task.

Process: Refer to the Group Project Guide

o o o

Set up goals, define how often and with what means you will communicate, evaluate progress, make decisions, and resolve conflict Define resources, especially someone who can provide direction, supervision, counsel, and even arbitrate Schedule review of your progress and communication to discuss what is working and what is not working

Teams with problems should be invited or required to meet with the instructor to discuss possible solutions.

* "Cooperative learning" is often used in K-12 education, and "collaborative learning" in higher education See also: Online Collaborative Learning in Higher Education, primary sites a web site devoted to world's best practice in online collaborative learning in higher education, and related topics. Tim Roberts, Faculty of Informatics and Communication, Central Queensland University, Bundaberg, Queensland 4670 Australia "Cooperative learning in technical courses: procedures, pitfalls, and payoffs", Richard M. Felder, North Carolina State University & Rebecca Brent, East Carolina University

7. ERIC Identifier: ED306003 Publication Date: 1988-00-00 Author: Lyman, Lawrence Foyle, Harvey C. Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education Urbana IL. Cooperative Learning Strategies and Children. ERIC Digest. Cooperative learning is a teaching strategy involving children's participation in small group learning activities that promote positive interaction. This digest discusses the reasons for using cooperative learning in centers and classrooms, ways to implement the strategy, and the long-term benefits for children's education. WHY TRY COOPERATIVE LEARNING? Cooperative learning promotes academic achievement, is relatively easy to implement, and is not expensive. Children's improved behavior and attendance, and increased liking of school, are some of the benefits of cooperative learning (Slavin, 1987). Although much of the research on cooperative learning has been done with older students, cooperative learning strategies are effective with younger children in preschool centers and primary classrooms. In addition to the positive outcomes just noted, cooperative learning promotes student motivation, encourages group processes, fosters social and academic interaction among students, and rewards successful group participation. CAN COOPERATIVE LEARNING BE USED IN EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSES? When a child first comes to a structured educational setting, one of the teacher's goals is to help the child move from being aware only of himself or herself to becoming aware of other children. At this stage of learning, teachers are concerned that children learn to share, take turns, and show caring behaviors for others. Structured activities which promote cooperation can help to bring about these outcomes. One of the most consistent research findings is that cooperative learning activities improve children's relationships with peers, especially those of different social and ethnic groups.

When children begin to work on readiness tasks, cooperation can provide opportunities for sharing ideas, learning how others think and react to problems, and practicing oral language skills in small groups. Cooperative learning in early childhood can promote positive feelings toward school, teachers, and peers. These feelings build an important base for further success in school. WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS? According to Glasser (1986), children's motivation to work in elementary school is dependent on the extent to which their basic psychological needs are met. Cooperative learning increases student motivation by providing peer support. As part of a learning team, students can achieve success by working well with others. Students are also encouraged to learn material in greater depth than they might otherwise have done, and to think of creative ways to convince the teacher that they have mastered the required material. Cooperative learning helps students feel successful at every academic level. In cooperative learning teams, low-achieving students can make contributions to a group and experience success, and all students can increase their understanding of ideas by explaining them to others (Featherstone, 1986). Components of the cooperative learning process as described by Johnson and Johnson (1984) are complimentary to the goals of early childhood education. For example, wellconstructed cooperative learning tasks involve positive interdependence on others and individual accountability. To work successfully in a cooperative learning team, however, students must also master interpersonal skills needed for the group to accomplish its tasks. Cooperative learning has also been shown to improve relationships among students from different ethnic backgrounds. Slavin (1980) notes: "Cooperative learning methods [sanctioned by the school] embody the requirements of cooperative, equal status interaction between students of different ethnic backgrounds..." For older students, teaching has traditionally stressed competition and individual learning. When students are given cooperative tasks, however, learning is assessed individually, and rewards are given on the basis of the group's performance (Featherstone, 1986). When children are taught the skills needed for group participation when they first enter a structured setting, the foundation is laid for later school success. HOW CAN TEACHERS USE COOPERATIVE LEARNING STRATEGIES? Foyle and Lyman (1988) identify the basic steps involved in successful implementation of cooperative learning activities: 1. The content to be taught is identified, and criteria for mastery are determined by the teacher. 2. The most useful cooperative learning technique is identified, and the group size is determined by the teacher. 3. Students are assigned to groups.

4. The classroom is arranged to facilitate group interaction. 5. Group processes are taught or reviewed as needed to assure that the groups run smoothly. 6. The teacher develops expectations for group learning and makes sure students understand the purpose of the learning that will take place. A time line for activities is made clear to students. 7. The teacher presents initial material as appropriate, using whatever techniques she or he chooses. 8. The teacher monitors student interaction in the groups, and provides assistance and clarification as needed. The teacher reviews group skills and facilitates problem-solving when necessary. 9. Student outcomes are evaluated. Students must individually demonstrate mastery of important skills or concepts of the learning. Evaluation is based on observations of student performance or oral responses to questions; paper and pencil need not be used. 10. Groups are rewarded for success. Verbal praise by the teacher, or recognition in the class newsletter or on the bulletin board can be used to reward high-achieving groups. CONCLUSION Early childhood educators can use many of the same strategies and activities currently being used to encourage cooperation and interaction in older children. Effective cooperative learning experiences increase the probability of children's success throughout their school years. FOR MORE INFORMATION Clark, M.L. GENDER, RACE, AND FRIENDSHIP RESEARCH. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 1985. ED 259 053. Cohen, Elizabeth J. DESIGNING GROUPWORK: STRATEGIES HETEROGENEOUS CLASSROOM. New York: Teachers College Press, 1986. FOR THE

Dishon, Dee, and Pat Wilson O'Leary. A GUIDEBOOK FOR COOPERATIVE LEARNING: A TECHNIQUE FOR CREATING MORE EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS. Holmes Beach, FL: Learning Publications. Featherstone, Helen (editor). "Cooperative Learning." HARVARD EDUCATION LETTER (Sept. 1986): 4-6. Foyle, Harvey, and Lawrence Lyman. INTERACTIVE LEARNING. Videotape currently in production. (For further information, contact Harvey Foyle or Lawrence Lyman, The Teacher's College, Emporia State University, 1200 Commercial St., Emporia, KS 66801.)

Glasser, William. CONTROL THEORY IN THE CLASSROOM. New York: Harper and Row, 1986. Johnson, David W., Roger T. Johnson, Edythe Holubec Johnson, and Patricia Roy. CIRCLES OF LEARNING: COOPERATION IN THE CLASSROOM. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1984. Kickona, Thomas. "Creating the Just Community with Children." THEORY-INTO-PRACTICE 16 (1977): 97-104. Lyman, Lawrence, Alfred Wilson, Kent Garhart, Max Heim, and Wynona Winn. CLINICAL INSTRUCTION AND SUPERVISION FOR ACCOUNTABILITY (2nd edition). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1987. Slavin, Robert. "Cooperative Learning: Can Students Help Students Learn?" INSTRUCTOR (March 1987): 74-78. Slavin, Robert. COOPERATIVE LEARNING: WHAT RESEARCH SAYS TO THE TEACHER. Baltimore, MD: Center for Social Organization of Schools, 1980. Slavin, Robert. COOPERATIVE LEARNING: STUDENT TEAMS. West Haven, CT: NEA Professional Library, 1984. Professional Development Module on Collaborative Learning By Linda Brown and Vicky Lara, El Paso Community College Purpose: The purpose of this self-paced annotated webliography is to identify the rationale, benefits, and challenges of collaborative learning in small-group activities and to provide faculty with tools to effectively develop, integrate, assess and evaluate collaborative activities Module Objectives: Upon completion of this module, the participant will be able to: 1. 2. 3. 4. Define collaborative learning Identify the benefits of using collaborative learning activities Identify challenges in using collaborative learning approaches Select and use the appropriate tools to effectively plan, develop, facilitate, assess and evaluate short and long-term small group collaborative activities 5. Locate resources for further use in researching collaborative learning Select from the following sections:

Section 1: Collaborative Learning

The terms Collaborative Learning and Cooperative Learning have become murky in popular usage, and often, distinctions are not made between the two. Collaborative Learning is the umbrella term encompassing many forms of collaborative learning from small group projects to the more specific form of group work called Cooperative Learning. Cooperative Learning is a type of Collaborative Learning developed by Johnson and Johnson in the 1960's and is still widely used today. Differences Between Collaborative and Cooperative Learning from the University of California at Santa Barbara's Office of Instructional Consulting website: http://www.oic.id.ucsb.edu/Resources/Collab-L/Differences.html According to David and Roger Johnson of The Cooperative Learning Center at the University of Minnesota, cooperative learning includes five essential elements: positive interdependence, faceto-face promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, interpersonal and small group skills, and group processing. See their article "An Overview of Cooperative Learning" at: http://www.co-operation.org/pages/overviewpaper.html Roberta Matthews, et. al., point out in their article "Building Bridges Between Cooperative and Collaborative Learning" (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1254/is_n4_v27/ai_17382393) that the two strategies evolved separately: Followers of the two traditions have published in different journals, created bibliographies with few common names, sponsored different conferences, and for many years, had little contact with each other... Most of the well-known cooperative-learning researchers and theoreticians are educational or social psychologists or sociologists whose original work was intended for application at the K-12 level. Their primary research emphasis is on empirical comparisons of cooperative learning with other forms of instruction. Within the last decade, techniques have been extended and adapted at the college level, and many of the publications in the field offer practical advice. Cooperative learning tends to be more structured in its approach to small-group instruction, to be more detailed in advice to practitioners, and to advocate more direct training of students to function in groups than does collaborative learning.... Collaborative learning theoreticians and practitioners tend to come from the humanities and social sciences. Their work often explores theoretical, political, and philosophical issues such as the nature of knowledge as a social construction and the role of authority in the classroom. Many are concerned with drawing strong connections between collaborative practice and feminist pedagogy. Collaborative learning practitioners are inclined to assume students are responsible participants who already use social skills in undertaking and completing tasks. Therefore students receive less instruction in group skills and roles and perform less structured reflection on group interaction than in cooperative-learning classrooms. The terms overlap in that both indicate that students will be working in groups. It can get confusing because the term collaborative learning will sometimes be used in higher education

circles to designate the same practices that at the elementary and secondary level would be called cooperative learning. Rather than dwell too long on semantics, let's look at some practical examples of collaborative learning techniques. Examples Brainstorming: Brainstorming is designed to generate a large number of ideas in a short period of time. For collaborative brainstorming, it is helpful to structure the activity as a roundtable/round-robin sharing of information:

Faculty poses question that has multiple answers/positions One piece of paper and pen per group. First student writes one response, and says it out loud. First student passes paper to the left, second student writes response, etc. Continues around group until time elapses. Students may say "pass" at any time. Group stops when time is called. (http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/clearn/methods.html#roundtable)

Case studies: Clyde Freeman Herreid (Case Studies in Science: A Novel Method of Science Education, http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/teaching/novel.html) describes case studies as educational stories used to teach students about their field, that are: typically written as dilemmas that give a personal history of an individual, institution, or business faced with a problem that must be solved. Background information, charts, graphs, and tables may be integrated into the tale or appended. The teacher's goal is to help the students work through the facts and analyze of the problem and then consider possible solutions and consequences of the actions that might take. Visit the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science at http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/case.html for informative articles on how to develop and use case studies as a teaching tool. Don't miss "What Makes a Good Case?" Double-entry journal/ Paired annotations: After students read and reflect on the assigned reading, they write their observations about the critical points and their responses to them in their journal. In class, they swap journals with another student who has also read and made comments on the reading. The pair (or group) discusses the key points of the reading and looks for areas of agreement and disagreement. Finally, the group "prepares a composite annotation that summarizes the article, chapter, or concept." http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/clearn/methods.html#paired Dyadic Essays: Developed by L. W. Sherman, the dyadic essay confrontation (DEC) technique has students create an essay question on information previously covered in the course and compose the answer to the question as well. On a separate piece of paper, students write only the essay question. Barbara Millis describes the follow-up that occurs:

Randomly-paired students exchange questions, spending about 20 minutes writing an answer--either closed or open book depending on the complexity of the material--to their partner's essay question. The two then read, compare, and discuss the four answers, looking in particular for the differences between the in-depth responses prepared before class and the spontaneously generated in-class responses. This structure promotes critical thinking by requiring students to confront differing ideas, offers writing-to-learn opportunities, and provides solid and immediate feedback to students about their intellectual responses to discipline-specific material. http://www.utexas.edu/academic/cte/hewlettcls.html Group reports: Rather than just having each group report its findings, consider structuring the process as a poster session in which each group creates an outline or concept map. One person from the group serves as a spokesperson, explaining the poster as the rest of the group circulates to view the other groups' posters. Rotate roles so that each group member has the opportunity to serve as the group's spokesperson. Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning: This approach provides students with a series of generic, open-ended questions designed to encourage synthesis, comparison/contrast, and extrapolation to other contexts within the context of a small-group discussion, as developed by Alison King (1993). "From sage on the stage to guide on the side." College Teaching, 41(1), and (1995) "Guided peer questioning: a cooperative learning approach to critical thinking." Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 5 (2), 15-19. For an example, see: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/doingcl/peerqst.htm. Jigsaw: The jigsaw technique was first developed in the early 1970s by Elliot Aronson (http://www.jigsaw.org/overview.htm) and his students at the University of Texas and the University of California. Jigsawing divides a problem or issue into parts--as many parts as their are members of a group. Students who have been assigned the same piece of the puzzle join together temporarily as a focus group studying that piece. The purpose of these focus groups is for the students to:

Master the concepts in their section, and Develop a strategy for teaching what they have learnd to the other students in their original collaborative learning group.

See http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/CL/doingcl/jigsaw.htm for a more complete description and variations on the jigsaw method. Learning Community: A learning community is the purposeful restructuring of the curriculum to link together courses so that students find greater coherence in what they are learning and increased interaction with faculty and fellow students (Gabelnick, MacGregor, Matthews, and Smith, 1990). In their article, "What is Collaborative Learning?" Barbara Leigh Smith and Jean T. MacGregor explain the relationship between learning communities and collaborative learning:

By altering the curricular structure to provide larger units of study, learning communities frequently provide more time and space for collaborative learning and other more complicated educational approaches. Small group workshops and book seminars are staples of most learning communities. Peer writing groups and team projects associated with labs and field work are also fairly common. Study groups emerge in learning communities, both intentionally and spontaneously. http://learningcommons.evergreen.edu/pdf/collab.pdf See also Jodi Levines article, Beyond a Definition of Learning Communities (p.5) Online collaboration: Sarah Haavind of The Concord Consortium describes the best kind of elearning or webcourse as having many of the same qualities as "a well-run seminar." She continues: The key idea is that participants create their own learning through thoughtful conversation and collaboration, guided by a knowledgeable teacher who is expert in facilitating online groups. This design is pedagogically superior to other designs because it is based on social constructivist learning principles: having learners create their own understandings based on group conversations. When group-based learning is implemented online, inexpensive asynchronous technologies (typically, threaded discussion groups) are not only satisfactory, they are superior to synchronous ones. This online learning environment can be better than a seminar, because each participant has time to think about the conversation as it unfolds in slow-motion and to make thoughtful contributions. http://www.concord.org/newsletter/2002winter/online_courses.html For more information on making electronic collaboration, particularly through the use of asynchronous learning networks (ALNs) and computer-mediated communication systems (CMCS), more effective, see the following articles. Kim, K., & Bonk, C. (2002). Cross-cultural comparisons of online collaboration. JCMC 8 (1). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue1/kimandbonk.html Benbunan-Fich, R. (1999) Educational applications of CMCS: solving case studies through asynchronous learning networks. JCMC 4 (3). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue3/benbunanfich.html Gay, G. (1999). Document-centered peer collaborations: an exploration of the educational uses of networked communication technologies. JCMC 4 (3). Stacey, E. (1990). Collaborative learning in an online environment. Journal of Distance Education. Position papers/structured academic controversies:In their book Creative Controversy: Intellectual Challenge in the Classroom and at their website http://www.cooperation.org/pages/academic.html, David and Roger Johnson describe the process of using academic controversy as:

the instructional use of intellectual conflict to promote higher achievement and increase the quality of problem solving, decision making, critical thinking, reasoning, interpersonal relationships, and psychological health and well-being. To engage in an academic controversy students must research and prepare a position, present and advocate their position, refute opposing positions and rebut attacks on their own position, reverse perspectives, and create a synthesis that everyone can agree to. Additionally, their website describe the steps an instructor must take in order to facilitate the use of structured academic controversies. To see a sample exercise developed for an engineering class by Karl Smith, visit: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/CL/story/smithkar/TSKSD.htm. Problem-Solving: Collaborative problem-solving usually requires more planning and more time. Instructors cannot take for granted that their students will have a readily available protocol for solving problems, and must often outline a process or provide a checklist of steps. The method by which groups are selected and roles assigned within those groups will need to be considered. The task or problem to be studied and the criteria for measuring the accomplishment of the task need to be clearly explained to the students. The National Institute for Science Education at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, offers problem-solving models including Structured Problem-Solving, Discovery Method, Think-Pair-Square, Drill-Review Pairs, and Thinking Aloud Pair Problem-Solving for your consideration at: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/doingcl/prbsolv.htm Send-a-problem: Send-A-Problem can be used as a way to get groups to discuss and review material, or potential solutions to problems related to content information. The process and one variation on it are described at this site: http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/c-learn/methods.html#send Teamwork: Often one of the motivations for using collaborative learning techniques is to prepare students for their experience in the workplace where they will, undoubtedly, be asked to work in teams at some point. Successful teamwork requires a set of skills including communication and organization. The College of Engineering at Bucknell University has developed an indepth Practical Guide to Teamwork that covers everything you need to know to get started. Highly recommended! Think-Pair-Share: This is a quick collaborative learning activity in which the instructor asks an open-ended question and then allows students about a minute to think about it. Next, pairs of students discuss their ideas about the question or problem. Finally, the instructor solicits comments or other feedback such as a class vote regarding the question. For more details, see: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/doingcl/thinkps.htm

Section 2: Benefits of Using Collaborative Learning Strategies Johnson & Johnson largely base their examinations of instructional practices on social interdependence theory. For additional background, see http://www.cooperation.org/pages/SIT.html. As they explain it:

When individuals take action there are three ways what they do may be related to the actions of others. One's actions may promote the success of others, obstruct the success of others, or not have any effect at all on the success or failure of others. In other words, individuals may be: 1) Working together cooperatively to accomplish shared learning goals; 2) Working against each other (competitively)to achieve a goal that only one or a few can attain; 3) Working by oneself (individualistically) to accomplish goals unrelated to the goals of others. Their review of educational research since 1898 demonstrates that: ... cooperation, compared with competitive and individualistic efforts, typically results in higher achievement and greater productivity; more caring, supportive, and committed relationships; and greater psychological health, social competence, and self esteem. http://www.cooperation.org/pages/cl.html#why In statistical analyses comparing the various studies, they found that the average person cooperating performed at about 2/3 a standard deviation above the average person learning within a competitive (effect size = 0.67) or individualistic situation (effect size = 0.64), as illustrated in the table below. For future breakdown of the data, see Table 2: Mean Effect Sizes For Impact Of Social Interdependence On Dependent Variables in the Johnson & Johnson article "Cooperative Learning And Social Interdependence Theory." http://www.cooperation.org/pages/SIT.html Conditions Coop Comp Achievement Interpersonal Attraction vs. 0.67 0.64 0.30 0.67 0.60 0.08 Social Support 0.62 0.70 -0.13 SelfEsteem 0.58 0.44 -0.23

Coop vs. Ind Comp vs. Ind

For a graphic comparison of the types of learning objectives supported by individual, competitive and collaborative learning, see Susan Fountain's chart Intended Learning Objectives and Optimal Learning Methods, based on 122 research papers on the topic. http://www.gdrc.org/kmgmt/c-learn/types-learn.html

Anuradha Gokhale reiterates how Vygotsky's work provides the underpinnings for theories of collaborative learning. Her own research, described in "Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking," [(1995). Journal of Technology Education 7(1)] gives insight into the potential positives and negatives for students participating in collaborative learning activities. Students' open-ended responses to questions soliciting their reflections on the collaborative learning process and its social/emotional aspects including the following observations:

General comment category (number of answers in that category):

Helped understanding (21) Pooled knowledge and experience (17) Got helpful feedback (14) Stimulated thinking (12) Got new perspectives (9) More relaxed atmosphere makes problem-solving easy (15) It was fun (12) Greater responsibility- for myself and the group (4) Made new friends (3) Wasted time explaining the material to others (2). http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/jte-v7n1/gokhale.jte-v7n1.html

Section 3: Challenges in Using Collaborative Learning Strategies When you first consider using collaborative learning strategies with your classes, the task may seem daunting for several reasons. You may worry about losing time in class. You may be concerned about the time it takes to develop collaborative activities and integrate them into your coursework. And can anything be done about "slackers"--those non-productive members of a group? A cost-benefit analysis (like the simple comparison table below) might help you decide which of your lessons would benefit from the collaborative approach and which would not.

Advantages of Large Groups More ideas generated Greater diversity of ideas More people to complete the job More opportunity for members to "connect" with others Greater variety of skills available Disadvantages of Large Groups Greater opportunity for conflict among members More time required in decisionmaking More opportunities for sub-groups to form

Advantages of Small Groups More opportunity for each person to contribute More equal participation likely Less time required in decision-making Easier to meet due to fewer schedule considerations Disadvantages of Small Groups Fewer skills available Conflict can be detrimental with few members to rely on to complete the project Greater time and performance demands on each person

Greater demands on the leader

Retention of group members is important based on the demands of the project

Both faculty and students encounter challenges that accompany collaborative learning situations. Faculty may feel, especially at first, that there is never enough time: time to develop activities, time to teach group dynamics, time to implement collaborative learning activities, time in class for students to work on small group projects. It can be scary to implement new collaborative lessons because of the concern that the experimental activity may not work smoothly when assigned for the first time. And then there's the grading issue--how should group projects be evaluated? Students come to your class with varying degrees of interpersonal and academic skills. Collaborative learning may make introverted students apprehensive because it requires them to communicate verbally; they cannot remain passive or disengaged.Students who are academically competitive and self-motivated may resent collaborative learning at first; hey may fear that they will do all of the work and other group members will simply "hitchhike" on their achievements. And just as you will need to decide how to grade collaborative activities equitably, students will need to understand how group participation affects their grades. As an instructor, one way to begin overcoming these hurdles is to ask experienced colleagues to serve as "collaborative learning mentors." Find out what has worked for them. Ask them how they located or created resources for use in collaborative settings. Observe them in the classroom using collaborative strategies. If you can't find one locally, consider finding an electronic mentor! Additional resources for addressing these and other challenges:

The Doing CL website includes a section called "Tough Questions" [http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/question/TQ1.asp] which addresses many of the issues that make instructors reluctant to try collaborative learning, including:

I can't cover all the material I tried it before and it didn't work. My students need to work independently. The real world is competitive. My students don't like to work in groups. I teach in a large lecture hall.

Deliberations, an international website on issues of learning and teaching for the higher education community, offers insights contributed by their readers. An excellent resource to visit when you feel overwhelmed by the number of issues to consider surrounding the implementation of collaborative learning.

"Generic Issues Involved in Adopting Collaborative Learning" "Issues Raised for Students in Implementing Collaborative Learning"

Dr. Ted Panitz, Professor of Mathematics and Engineering and Coordinator of Developmental Mathematics at Cape Cod Community College, has written extensively about collaborative learning in higher education. His website http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/ includes links to archived electronic discussions (similar to the ones listed above), to his online book Ted's Cooperative Learning E-book, and to articles that he has authored, including: "Why More Teachers Do Not Use Collaborative http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/whyfewclusers.htm Learning Techniques"

"Assessing Students and Yourself Using the One-Minute Paper and Observing Students Working Cooperatively" http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/Assessment.htm "Using Cooperative Learning 100% Of the Time In Mathematics Classes Establishes A Studentcentered, Interactive Learning Environment" http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/coopmath.htm

Section 4: Implementing Small Group Collaborative Learning Experiences Having reached this section of the module, you have probably already explored many of the issues that should be addressed before you develop collaborative activities for use in a course or re-design an entire course so that its structure is significantly more collaborative in nature. If not, use the following questions as inspiration. About the students: How many students are in the course? What are the student demographics (freshmen or upperclassmen)? Are the students majors or nonmajors? What experiences have the students had with collaborative learning? What will motivate students to participate actively within their groups? About Is this the Am I new to Am I What is About How much yourself: course? activities? things? style? process: assignments?

first time or experienced comfortable my

I have taught this with collaborative learning trying new instructional the provide

structure

should

in

small

group

What is more important, the process or the product? Is it feasible to assign semester-long group projects considering student attendance and drops? Do I allow groups to self-select or do I identify the groups? How do I grade group work? How does group size and diversity impact group performance? How do I know if everyone participated and contributed? Should I have students evaluate each others contributions? What do I do if someone is adamant about not participating in a group project? How will I know if application of these skills or concepts has benefited my students or me? How will I measure success? Contemplating the questions listed above should lead you to the realization that successful collaborative activities require considerable planning and also an understanding of the way that groups function. Planning The National Institute for Science Education's website includes a clear, step-by-step guide to preparing and facilitating collaborative learning activities. http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/doingcl/start.htm The site incorporates research and recommendations from experts in the field, including a link to the Teaching Goals Inventory developed by Angelo and Cross. http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/doingcl/tgi.htm You can use this tool to help you assess "what you deliberately aim to have your students accomplish" and this process will, in turn, enable you to design goal-appropriate collaborative activities. Alternatively, you could complete the checklist below. Instructional Goal Memorization Socialization Critical Thinking/Problem Solving Effective Communication Personal Responsibility Productive Work Ethic Values Clarification Self-awareness Retention and transfer of knowledge Yes/No How would a collaborative activity support this goal?

Group Dynamics

Gerard M Blair, Senior Lecturer in Electrical Engineering at the University of Edinburgh, offers a concise look at group development, in his article "Groups That Work": It is common to view the development of a group as having four stages:

Forming Storming Norming Performing

Forming is the stage when the group first comes together. Everybody is very polite and very dull....Since the grouping is new, the individuals will be guarded in their own opinions and generally reserved....Storming is the next stage, when all Hell breaks loose and the leaders are lynched. Factions form, personalities clash, no-one concedes a single point without first fighting tooth and nail. Most importantly, very little communication occurs since no one is listening and some are still unwilling to talk openly....Then comes the Norming. At this stage the sub-groups begin to recognize the merits of working together and the in-fighting subsides. Since a new spirit of co-operation is evident, every member begins to feel secure in expressing their own view points and these are discussed openly with the whole group. The most significant improvement is that people start to listen to each other. Work methods become established and recognized by the group as a whole....And finally: Performing. This is the culmination, when the group has settled on a system which allows free and frank exchange of views and a high degree of support by the group for each other and its own decisions. http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~gerard/Management/ art0.html?http://oldeee.see.ed.ac.uk/~gerard/Management/art0.html The University of Vermont's Plant Science Department has created a helpful website, Developing an Excellent Group Process, with concrete suggestions on how to prepare for and implement collaborative work The site includes links to: a Learning-Styles Inventory; a worksheet for Individual and Group Assessment of Collaboration Skills; an example list of Group Norms; guidelines for Group Facilitation; and an excellent article on conflict within groups--its symptoms, causes, and resolution. When a group members needs are not met, they may engage in non-productive behaviors such as resistance, interruptions, or nonattendance. What are the needs motivating group members to contribute actively? One or more of these, perhaps:

A good grade Inclusion Power/control Status Desire to learn concepts/skills Belonging Esteem Affection

Self-actualization

Why Do Some Groups Fall Apart?

Lack of understanding of the relevance of the assignmentuninterested in the assignment Lack of motivationpossibly due to concern with ability to be successful working as a group Personality conflictslack of appreciation of different approaches to problemsolving Poor leadershipuncertainty as to each persons roles or responsibilities Lack of organization Unclear goals Inability to meet due to time constraints Lack of understanding of the goals of the assignment Lack of understanding of decision-making options Lack of preparation for meetings

Steps to Developing Effective Meetings for Groups Engaged in Collaborative Learning

Provide an assignment before group meetings Identify a recorder to note decisions made at meetings and to summarize discussions. Choose a meeting place that is conducive to accomplishing meeting goals. Ask group members to prepare for meetings, i.e., gather information, read identified materials, summarize ideas. Discuss group norms and individual roles, expectations, and motivations. Encourage all group members to participate. Assign someone the role of challenging the ideas that are generated. Clearly identify each members responsibilities and set timelines Distribute meeting summaries to all group members

In addition, visit the "Small Group Communication" website [http://www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/group.html] developed by Tim Borchers at Moorhead State University. This site explores models of group development and decisionmaking and examines common group pitfalls such as "group-think" and conflict.

Grading Collaborative Efforts Evaluation of group work can be looked at from two perspectives: 1) assessment of the individual plus assessment of the group, or 2) assessment of the process plus assessment of the product. In some cases, the collaborative learning process is as important, or more important, than the product. Gokhale, citing Slavin's research in her article "Collaborative

Learning Enhances Critical Thinking," reminds us that effective collaborative learning includes group goals and individual accountability When it is the groups task to ensure that every group member has learned something, it is in the interest of every group member to spend time explaining concepts to groupmates (Gokhale, 1995, paraphrasing Webb, 1985). http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/jte-v7n1/gokhale.jte-v7n1.html The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development suggest several ways to grade students in groups:

All students get the same grade for group project All students are assigned separate tasks within a group project, which are assessed separately. All students get the same grades for the product of the group and then peers assess contributions to the group process for an additional grade or additional points All students get the same grade for original task and then get different grades for an additional task. All get the same grade for the original task, then an exam task based on the group work is given to assess individual student's understanding. http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/assess_grpwk.html

The Doing CL website http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/cl/doingcl/grades.htm addresses the pros and cons of these and other group grading schemes, adding: It is crucial that regular feedback (formative assessment) be provided to the students by the instructor and peers. This not only helps the students know whether they are "on track," it also makes the grading at the end easier because the instructor has observed the group process the tasks outcomes. Furthermore, students are informed on how they are doing every step of the way so there are no surprises at the end. Often students within a group are asked to contribute to the grading process by assessing their peers. Teresa Bulman, Portland State University, in her article "Peer Assessment in Group Work" observes: I have found that the peer assessment forms works as both peer pressure and as a release valve. Students know going into the project that they will evaluate their peers and be evaluated by them. This causes them (they tell me) to work harder on the project than they might if their grade only were at stake. On the rare occasion when a student does not do a fair share, the other members of the group have an opportunity to reveal that problem.

Section 5: Additional Resources

Angelo, T. A. and Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers, 2nd edition. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. Beebee, A. B., Masterson, J. T. (2003). Communicating in small groups: Principles and practices, 7th edition. Allyn & Bacon. Bonwell, C. C., and Eison, J. A. (1991). "Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1)." Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development. Bosworth, K. & Hamilton, S.J (eds.). (1990). Collaborative learning: Underlying process and effective techniques. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No.59. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Bouton, C., & Garth, R. (Vol. Eds.) & K. E. Eble, & J. F. Noonan (Series Eds.). (1983). Learning in groups. New directions for teaching and learning, 14. San Francisco: JosseyBass. Bruffee, K. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher educaiton, interdependence and the authority of knowledge. Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press. Chickering, A. W., Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 3-7. Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35. Cooper, J.L. & Mueck, R. (1990). Student involvement in learning: Cooperative learning and college instruction. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, 1 (1): 68-76. Cooper, J. L., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., & Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. Long Beach, CA: The California State University Foundation on behalf of California State University Institute for Teaching and Learning. Courtney, D. P, Courtney, M., & Nicholson, D. (1992, November). The effect of cooperative learning as an instructional practice at the college level. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Knoxville, TN. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 354 808) Cross, K. P. (2002). The role of class discussion in the learning-centered classroom. Educational Testing Service. Cross, K. P. (2001). Motivation: ErWill that be on the test? Educational Testing Service.

Cross, K. P. (2000). Collaborative learning 101.

Educational Testing Service.

Cuseo, J. (1992, Winter). Collaborative & cooperative learning in higher education: A proposed taxonomy. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 2, 2-5. Davidson, N., & Worsham, T. (Eds.). (1992). Enhancing thinking through cooperative learning. NY: Teachers College Press. Davis, B.G. (1993). Collaborative learning: Group work and study teams. In Tools for Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Davis, T. M., & Murrell, P. H. (1993). Turning teaching into learning: The role of student responsibility in the collegiate experience. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 8. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Dees, R. L. (1991). The role of cooperative learning in increasing problem-solving ability in a college remedial course. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 409-421. Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 275-319. Lincoln, NE:University of Nebraska Press. Eble, K, and Noonan, J. (eds.). (1983). Learning in groups. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. No. 14. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Engleberg, I. N., Wynn, D.R. (2003). Working in groups: Communication principles and strategies, 3rd edition. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin. Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R., & Smith, B.L. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 41. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Goodsell, A. S., Maher, M. R., and Tinto, V., Eds., (1992). Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, & Assessment, Syracuse University. Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics Teachers, 60, 627-636. Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Miller, N. (Eds.). (1992). Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Teaching students to be peacemakers (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. >

Johnson, D. W. (1993). Reaching out: Interpersonal effectiveness and self-actualization (6th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Cooperation in the Classroom (6th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D., Johnson, R. & Smith, K. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D. W. (1991). Human relations and your career (3rd. ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1986). Action research: Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science and Children, 24, 31-32. Kadel, S., & J. Keehner. (1994). Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. Volume II. National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment. Pensylvania State University. Kagan, S. (1992) Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers, Inc. MacGregor, J. (1990). Collaborative learning: Shared inquiry as a process of reform. In M. Svinicki (ed.) The changing face of college teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 42. San Francisco: jossey-Bass Publishers. Matthews, R. (1993). Enriching teaching and learning through learning communities. In Teaching and learning in the community college. Washington D.C.: The American Association of Community Colleges. Miller, J. E., Groccia, J. E., and Wilkes, J. M. (1996). "Providing structure: The critical element" In Sutherland, T. E., and Bonwell, C. C. (Eds.), Using active learning in college classes: A range of options for faculty, New Directions for Teaching and Learning No. 67. Millis, B. J., and Cottell, P. G., Jr. (1998). Cooperative learning for higher education faculty, American Council on Education, Series on Higher Education. The Oryx Press, Phoenix, AZ. Millis, B. J. (1991). Fulfilling the promise of the "seven principles" through cooperative learning: Action agenda for the university classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 2, 139-144. Millis, B. J., Sherman, L. W., and Cottell, P. G. (1993). Stacking the deck to promote

critical

thinking.

Cooperative

Learning

and

College

Journal,

3(1),

pp.

12-14.

Rau, W. & Heyl, B. S. (1990). Humanizing the college classroom: Collaborative learning and social organization among students. Teaching Sociology, 18, 141-155. Sherman, L. W. (1986). Cooperative vs. competitive educational psychology classrooms: A comparative study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(4), 283-295. Sherman, L. W. (1988). A pedagogical strategy for teaching human development:Dyadic essay confrontations through cooperative writing and discussion. Paper presentation to the 8th Annual Lilly Conference on College Teaching, Oxford, OH, November, 1988. ERIC DOCUMENT ED 299-873. Sherman, L. W. (1990). A pedagogical strategy for teaching developmental theories through writing: Dyadic confrontations. A paper presentation to the 5th International Convention on Cooperative Learning, 6-10 July, 1990. Baltimore Maryland. ERIC DOCUMENT 321-721. Sherman, L. W. (1991). Cooperative learning in post secondary education: Implications from social psychology for active learning experiences. A presentation to the annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, 3-7 April, 1991. Tinto, V., Goodsell Love, A. & Russo, P. (1993). Building community. Liberal Education, 79 (4). Tinto, V., Goodsell Love, A. & Russo, P. (1994). Building learning communityes for new college students. The National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning and Assessment. The Pennsylvania State University. Tinto, V., Russo, P. & Kadel, S. (1994). Constructing educational communities in challenging circumstances. Community College Journal. 64 (4): 26-30. Totten, S., Sills, T., Digby, A., & Russ, P. (1991). Cooperative learning: A guide to research. New York: Garland. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Webb, N. (1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research summary. Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn, 148-172. Whitman, Neal A., (1988). Peer teaching: To teach is to learn twice. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 4. Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education. Copyright 2007, Texas Collaborative for Teaching Excellence This project was funded by the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act through the

Texas Higher Fiscal Agent: Del info@texascollaborative.org

Mar

Education College.

Coordinating Website maintained

by

Board. CORD.

JTE Editor: Mark Sanders Volume 7, Number 1 Fall 1995 Article Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking Anuradha A. Gokhale The concept of collaborative learning, the grouping and pairing of students for the purpose of achieving an academic goal, has been widely researched and advocated throughout the professional literature. The term "collaborative learning" refers to an instruction method in which students at various performance levels work together in small groups toward a common goal. The students are responsible for one another's learning as well as their own. Thus, the success of one student helps other students to be successful. Proponents of collaborative learning claim that the active exchange of ideas within small groups not only increases interest among the participants but also promotes critical thinking. According to Johnson and Johnson (1986), there is persuasive evidence that cooperative teams achieve at higher levels of thought and retain information longer than students who work quietly as individuals. The shared learning gives students an opportunity to engage in discussion, take responsibility for their own learning, and thus become critical thinkers (Totten, Sills, Digby, & Russ, 1991). In spite of these advantages, most of the research studies on collaborative learning have been done at the primary and secondary levels. As yet, there is little empirical evidence on its effectiveness at the college level. However, the need for noncompetitive, collaborative group work is emphasized in much of the higher education literature. Also, majority of the research in collaborative learning has been done in non-technical disciplines. The advances in technology and changes in the organizational infrastructure put an increased emphasis on teamwork within the workforce. Workers need to be able to think creatively, solve

problems, and make decisions as a team. Therefore, the development and enhancement of critical-thinking skills through collaborative learning is one of the primary goals of technology education. The present research was designed to study the effectiveness of collaborative learning as it relates to learning outcomes at the college level, for students in technology. Purpose of Study This study examined the effectiveness of individual learning versus collaborative learning in enhancing drill-and-practice skills and critical-thinking skills. The subject matter was series and parallel dc circuits. Research Questions The research questions examined in this study were: 1. Will there be a significant difference in achievement on a test comprised of "drill-and practice" items between students learning individually and students learning collaboratively? 2. Will there be a significant difference in achievement on a test comprised of "criticalthinking" items between students learning individually and students learning collaboratively? Definition of Terms Collaborative Learning: An instruction method in which students work in groups toward a common academic goal. Individual Learning: An instruction method in which students work individually at their own level and rate toward an academic goal. Critical-thinking Items: Items that involve analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of the concepts. Drill-and-Practice Items: Items that pertain to factual knowledge and comprehension of the concepts. Methodology The independent variable in this study was method of instruction, a variable with two categories: individual learning and collaborative learning. The dependent variable was the posttest score. The posttest was made up of "drill-and- practice" items and "critical-thinking" items. Subjects The population for this study consisted of undergraduate students in industrial technology, enrolled at Western Illinois University, Macomb, Illinois. The sample was made up of students enrolled in the 271 Basic Electronics course during Spring 1993. There were two sections of the 271 class. Each section had 24 students in it. Thus, a total of forty-eight students participated in this study. Treatment The treatment comprised of two parts: lecture and worksheet. Initially, the author delivered a common lecture to both treatment groups. The lecture occurred simultaneously to both groups to prevent the effect of any extraneous variables such as time of day, day of week, lighting of room,

and others. The lecture was 50 minutes in length. It was based on series dc circuits and parallel dc circuits. Next, one section was randomly assigned to the "individual learning group" while the other section was assigned to the "collaborative learning group". The two sections worked in separate classrooms. The same worksheet was given to both treatment groups. It was comprised of both drill- andpractice items and critical- thinking items. The full range of cognitive operations were called into play in that single worksheet. It began with factual questions asking for the units of electrical quantities. Next, the questions involved simple applications of Ohm's law and Watt's law or power formula. The factual questions and the simple application questions were analogous to the drill- and- practice items on the posttest. The questions that followed required analysis of the information, synthesis of concepts, and evaluation of the solution. These questions were analogous to the critical- thinking items on the posttest. When designing the critical- thinking items it was ensured that they would require extensive thinking. Both sections had the same treatment time. Individual Learning In individual learning, the academic task was first explained to the students. The students then worked on the worksheet by themselves at their own level and rate. They were given 30 minutes to work on it. At the end of 30 minutes, the students were given a sheet with answers to the questions on the worksheet. In case of problems, the solution sheet showed how the problem was solved. The students were given 15 minutes to compare their own answers with those on the solution sheet and understand how the problems were to be solved. The participants were then given a posttest that comprised of both drill- and- practice items and critical- thinking items. Collaborative Learning When implementing collaborative learning, the first step was to clearly specify the academic task. Next, the collaborative learning structure was explained to the students. An instruction sheet that pointed out the key elements of the collaborative process was distributed. As part of the instructions, students were encouraged to discuss "why" they thought as they did regarding solutions to the problems. They were also instructed to listen carefully to comments of each member of the group and be willing to reconsider their own judgments and opinions. As experience reveals, group decision- making can easily be dominated by the loudest voice or by the student who talks the longest. Hence, it was insisted that every group member must be given an opportunity to contribute his or her ideas. After that the group will arrive at a solution. Group Selection and Size Groups can be formed using self- selection, random assignment, or criterion- based selection. This study used self- selection, where students chose their own group members. The choice of group size involves difficult trade- offs. According to Rau and Heyl (1990), smaller groups (of three) contain less diversity; and may lack divergent thinking styles and varied expertise that help to animate collective decision making. Conversely, in larger groups it is difficult to ensure that all members participate. This study used a group size of four. There were 24 students in the collaborative learning treatment group. Thus, there were six groups of four students each.

Grading Procedure According to Slavin (1989), for effective collaborative learning, there must be "group goals" and "individual accountability". When the group's task is to ensure that every group member has learned something, it is in the interest of every group member to spend time explaining concepts to groupmates. Research has consistently found that students who gain most from cooperative work are those who give and receive elaborated explanations (Webb, 1985). Therefore, this study incorporated both "group goals" and "individual accountability". The posttest grade was made up of two parts. Fifty percent of the test grade was based on how that particular group performed on the test. The test points of all group members were pooled together and fifty percent of each student's individual grade was based on the average score. The remaining fifty percent of each student's grade was individual. This was explained to the students before they started working collaboratively. After the task was explained, group members pulled chairs into close circles and started working on the worksheet. They were given 30 minutes to discuss the solutions within the group and come to a consensus. At the end of 30 minutes, the solution sheet was distributed. The participants discussed their answers within the respective groups for 15 minutes. Finally, the students were tested over the material they had studied. Instruments The instruments used in this study were developed by the author. The pretest and posttest were designed to measure student understanding of series and parallel dc circuits and hence belonged to the cognitive domain. Bloom's taxonomy (1956) was used as a guide to develop a blueprint for the pretest and the posttest. On analyzing the pilot study data, the Cronbach Reliability Coefficients for the pretest and the posttest were found to be 0.91 and 0.87 respectively. The posttest was a paper- and- pencil test consisting of 15 "drill- and- practice" items and 15 "critical- thinking" items. The items that belonged to the "knowledge," "comprehension," and "application" classifications of Bloom's Taxonomy were categorized as "drill- and- practice" items. These items pertained to units and symbols of electrical quantities, total resistance in series and parallel, and simple applications of Ohm's Law. The items that belonged to "synthesis," "analysis," and "evaluation" classifications of Bloom's Taxonomy were categorized as "critical- thinking" items. These items required students to clarify information, combine the component parts into a coherent whole, and then judge the solution against the laws of electric circuits. The pretest consisted of 12 items, two items belonging to each classification of Bloom's Taxonomy. Research Design A nonequivalent control group design was used in this study. The level of significance (alpha) was set at 0.05. A pretest was administered to all subjects prior to the treatment. The pretest was helpful in assessing students' prior knowledge of dc circuits and also in testing initial equivalence among groups. A posttest was administered to measure treatment effects. The total treatment lasted for 95 minutes. In order to avoid the problem of the students becoming "test- wise", the pretest and posttest were not parallel forms of the same test. Findings

A total of 48 subjects participated in this study. A nine item questionnaire was developed to collect descriptive data on the participants. Results of the questionnaire revealed that the average age of the participants was 22.55 years with a range of 19 to 35. The mean grade point average was 2.89 on a 4- point scale, with a range of 2.02 to 3.67. The questionnaire also revealed that eight participants were females and 40 were males. Nineteen students were currently classified as sophomores and 29 were juniors. Forty- five participants reported that they had no formal education or work experience in dc circuits either in high school or in college. Three students stated that they had some work experience in electronics but no formal education. The pretest and posttest were not parallel forms of the same test. Hence, the difference between the pretest and posttest score was not meaningful. The posttest score was used as the criterion variable. At first, a t- test was conducted on pretest scores for the two treatment groups. The mean of the pretest scores for the participants in the group that studied collaboratively (3.4) was not significantly different than the group that studied individually (3.1). The t- test yielded a value (t=1.62, p>0.05) which was not statistically significant. Hence, it was concluded that pretest differences among treatment groups were not significant. The posttest scores were then analyzed to determine the treatment effects using the t- test groups procedure which is appropriate for this research design. In addition, an analysis of covariance procedure was used to reduce the error variance by an amount proportional to the correlation between the pre and posttests. The correlation between the pretest and the posttest was significant (r=0.21, p<0.05). In this approach, the pretest was used as a single covariate in a simple ANCOVA analysis. Research Question I Will there be a significant difference in achievement on a test comprised of "drill- and- practice" items between students learning individually and students learning collaboratively? The mean of the posttest scores for the participants in the group that studied collaboratively (13.56) was slightly higher than the group that studied individually (11.89). A t- test on the data did not show a significant difference between the two groups. The result is given in Table 1. An analysis of covariance procedure yielded a F-value that was not statistically significant (F=1.91, p>0.05). Research Question II Will there be a significant difference in achievement on a test comprised of "critical- thinking" items between students learning individually and students learning collaboratively? The mean of the posttest scores for the participants in the group that studied collaboratively (12.21) was higher than the group that studied individually (8.63). A t- test on the data showed that this difference was significant at the 0.001 alpha level. This result is presented in Table 1.

An analysis of covariance yielded a F-value that was significant at the same alpha level (F=3.69, p<0.001). Table Results of t-Test ItemClassification 1

Method of N Mean SD t p Teaching Individual 24 11.89 2.62 Drill-and-Practice 1.73 .09 Collaborative 24 13.56 2.01 Individual 24 8.63 Critical-thinking 3.53 .001*** Collaborative 24 12.21 2.52 Discussion of the Findings After conducting a statistical analysis on the test scores, it was found that students who participated in collaborative learning had performed significantly better on the critical- thinking test than students who studied individually. It was also found that both groups did equally well on the drill- and- practice test. This result is in agreement with the learning theories proposed by proponents of collaborative learning. According to Vygotsky (1978), students are capable of performing at higher intellectual levels when asked to work in collaborative situations than when asked to work individually. Group diversity in terms of knowledge and experience contributes positively to the learning process. Bruner (1985) contends that cooperative learning methods improve problem- solving strategies because the students are confronted with different interpretations of the given situation. The peer support system makes it possible for the learner to internalize both external knowledge and critical thinking skills and to convert them into tools for intellectual functioning. In the present study, the collaborative learning medium provided students with opportunities to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate ideas cooperatively. The informal setting facilitated discussion and interaction. This group interaction helped students to learn from each other's scholarship, skills, and experiences. The students had to go beyond mere statements of opinion by giving reasons for their judgments and reflecting upon the criteria employed in making these judgments. Thus, each opinion was subject to careful scrutiny. The ability to admit that one's initial opinion may have been incorrect or partially flawed was valued. The collaborative learning group participants were asked for written comments on their learning experience. In order to analyze the open- ended informal responses, they were divided into three categories: 1. Benefits focusing on the process of collaborative learning, 2. Benefits focusing on social and emotional aspects, and 3. Negative aspects of collaborative learning. Most of the participants felt that groupwork helped them to better understand the material and stimulated their thinking process. In addition, the shared responsibility reduced the anxiety associated with problem- solving. The participants commented that humor too played a vital role in reducing

anxiety. A couple of participants mentioned that they wasted a lot of time explaining the material to other group members. The comments along with the number of participants who made those comments are described in Table 2. Table 2 Categorical Description of Students' Open-Ended Responses Regarding Collaborative Learning A. Benefits Focusing on the Process of Collaborative Learning Comments (# of responses): Helped understanding (21) Pooled knowledge and experience (17) Got helpful feedback (14) Stimulated thinking (12) Got new perspectives (9) B. Benefits Focusing on Social and Emotional Aspects Comments (# of responses) More relaxed atmosphere makes problem- solving easy (15) It was fun (12) Greater responsibility- for myself and the group (4) Made new friends (3) C. Negative Aspects of Collaborative Learning Comments (# of responses) Wasted time explaining the material to others (2) Implications for Instruction From this research study, it can be concluded that collaborative learning fosters the development of critical thinking through discussion, clarification of ideas, and evaluation of others' ideas. However, both methods of instruction were found to be equally effective in gaining factual knowledge. Therefore, if the purpose of instruction is to enhance critical- thinking and problemsolving skills, then collaborative learning is more beneficial. For collaborative learning to be effective, the instructor must view teaching as a process of developing and enhancing students' ability to learn. The instructor's role is not to transmit information, but to serve as a facilitator for learning. This involves creating and managing meaningful learning experiences and stimulating students' thinking through real world problems. Future research studies need to investigate the effect of different variables in the collaborative learning process. Group composition: Heterogeneous versus homogeneous, group selection and size, structure of collaborative learning, amount of teacher intervention in the group learning process, differences in preference for collaborative learning associated with gender and ethnicity, and differences in preference and

possibly effectiveness due to different learning styles, all merit investigation. Also, a psychoanalysis of the group discussions will reveal useful information. References Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: An historical and conceptual perspective. Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives, 21-34. London: Cambridge University Press. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans Green. Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1986). Action research: Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science and Children, 24, 31-32. Rau, W. & Heyl, B. S. (1990). Humanizing the college classroom: Collaborative learning and social organization among students. Teaching Sociology, 18, 141-155. Slavin, R. E. (1989). Research on cooperative learning: An international perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 33(4), 231-243. Totten, S., Sills, T., Digby, A., & Russ, P. (1991). Cooperative learning: A guide to research. New York: Garland. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Webb, N. (1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research summary. Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn, 148-172.

Anuradha A. Gokhale is an Associate Professor at Western Illinois University in the Department of Industrial Education and Technology, and is currently a Visiting Associate Professor at Illinois State University.

Copyright, 1995, Journal of Technology Education ISSN 1045-1064 Permission is given to copy any article or graphic provided credit is given and the copies are not intended for sale. Journal of Technology Education Volume 7, Number 1 Fall 1995 Strategies to study productively with others One of the great things about being a university student is the social environment. There are a lot of bright, interesting people to talk to at university and some of your university contacts will become lasting friends. This social environment also provides many opportunities for you to work together and learn from each other. The term collaborative learning broadly refers to students working together and using a variety of practices in order to use course materials, answer questions or to solve

problems (Colbeck et al.,2000). Why study collaboratively? Although some students prefer to work alone, many students learn material better when they can discuss it with others. Two heads can be better than one! You can benefit from someone elses strengths, and they can benefit from yours. Teaching someone else is also an effective way to reinforce your own learning. Sharing and clarifying ideas in pairs or small groups both increases your interest in your studies and enhances critical thinking and interpersonal skills. Collaborative problem solving is thought to promote deep learning, which enables students to apply critical thinking skills in other contexts, and improves knowledge retention (Johnston et al, 2000). Your peers can also provide a supportive, non-threatening environment for you to try out your new skills or ideas. Many students find learning from each other enhances their problem-solving abilities. Similarly, students who work on group projects learn team-working skills that are highly valued in the professional workforce. This pamphlet presents some practical ideas about how you can study productively with your fellow students. -2Limits to working with others Before discussing collaborative learning strategies, it is important to understand the difference between collaborative learning and copying someone elses work. The first is a study strategy that enhances your own skills and knowledge through group work, the second is PLAGIARISM both yourself and the other person. The following table explains the differences: COLLABORATIVE STUDY EXAMPLES PLAGIARISM EXAMPLES Brainstorming or discussing an essay question Reading someone elses work and copying the ideas or the exact phrases Talking with someone who is familiar with the subject area about his or her opinions, ideas or resources on a particular topic. Getting a copy of the completed assignment from someone who did it last year, and copying the responses Sharing approaches and ideas about problem solving so everyone in the group then has the skills to attempt all the questions on an assignment or problem sheet Halving the workload on an individual assignment or problem sheet by dividing up the questions and sharing the answers Finding someone to work with Some faculties organize formal study groups to assist you to meet and share experiences with other students studying the same subjects. If you do not know other

people in your subject area then you may have to be more pro-active in your efforts to meet other students with whom to collaborate. Talk to fellow students in your tutorials or practical classes, or post notices on department list serves or bulletin boards. Working collaboratively The following time management and motivation strategies can encourage friends to work with and help one another. Rather than being overwhelmed with all your academic tasks, work together to help each other to finish tasks and achieve goals. (See also the LLSU flyer: Active learning.) -3Plan your study Plan what and where you will study with your colleagues. For example, go to the library with friends and agree on how long you will stay, what you will achieve and when you will have a break. Stay motivated and on track by sharing your study plan tonight, I plan to complete the tutorial questions for my history class tomorrow, and then compare progress afterwards. Organise a study group Schedule a regular collaborative group study time with people in your class who have similar timetables. You can focus on your academic tasks such as tutorial questions or discuss content or practice answering exam questions. Develop a routine to your study. Consider your group study sessions as important as your lectures and do not miss them. If you do you will let the group down and may miss valuable information or discussions. Arrange to meet with your group at the same place at a regular time each week. This will save time organizing subsequent meetings. Residential colleges or student housing provide many opportunities for collaborative learning, as students are located conveniently together. However you need to distinguish between time for productive study and social/fun time. Three is a good number for a study group as it ensures you have a responsibility to contribute, and the group can still continue if one person is away. More than three becomes difficult to organize. Review and revise the weeks work by discussing it with a small study group or in pairs. This can be helpful for subjects where cumulative learning is important. Always have a specific learning focus for your study time. For example: review your vocabulary, tackle difficult tutorial problems, talk about the case you all had to read, or discuss a contentious issue. Share the routine tasks and discuss management strategies There are many ways you can help one another save time. For example, it takes as long to make two copies of an article as it does to make one, so why both stand in the queue? One person can photocopy, and the other can find the next article. At the next library session, swap tasks. However always make sure that chores are shared fairly. Students in courses with high contact and outside class hours can also help one another by talking about and sharing strategies for managing and balancing both academic tasks and life demands. These strategies may seem fairly simple and obvious but they will all help you get into

the habit of working cooperatively with other people. This in turn improves learning and saves time. -4Collaboration as an active learning strategy Play the role of the client/patient This is particularly useful for students who have practical subjects where they have to work with people (for example, medicine, physiotherapy, psychology or information systems). Practicing your skills with other students is a basic active learning strategy; practising a clinical examination makes it more memorable than just hearing about it. Practising your interview techniques may also improve your interpersonal skills. Take turns to play the part of the interviewer or client/patient to develop your clinical skills. Play the role of examiner When you review a topic or sets of problems, think of possible questions an examiner might ask. Music students, for example, can prepare for their aural recognition exam by testing each other and sharing strategies of how to remember, link and categorize various pieces of music. Similarly, if you know people studying subjects that require large amounts of specialized vocabulary to be assimilated, such as anatomy or a language, you could test each other and share strategies for learning the terms you need to understand and apply. In these small group environments, you are more likely to focus on active learning strategies such as categorizing and problem-solving skills than on less successful study techniques such as rote learning without understanding or last minute cramming. Discuss and debate If you are a strong aural learner, verbally articulating ideas to others can help you to better understand your position on an issue. Talking and arguing, refuting others ideas or having to defend or refine your own, are good ways to test and clarify your ideas. They also help you to formulate an opinion, respond to an issue or to brain storm an essay topic. Thus you can enhance your understanding and problem solving ability by working with someone else. References: Colbeck, C.l L., Campbell, S.E & Bjorklund.S. A. (2000). Grouping in the dark: What college students learn from group projects. The Journal of Higher Education 71(1):6083. Johnston, C. G., James, R.H. Lye, J.N. &. McDonald, I.M. .(2000). An evaluation of collaborative problem solving for learning economics. Journal of Economic Education 31(1):13-29. Online collaborative learning. Retrieved October 25, 2005, from the Central Queensland University Web site:http://clp.cqu.edu.au/introduction.htm

Strategies for Collaborative Learning Building e-Learning and Blended Learning Communities Soren Kaplan, Ph.D. Managing Director, iCohere

How many times over the past few months have you heard that communities are the wave of the future? And how many times have you wondered how this common but ambiguous concept might actually apply to your organization? If you answered more than once to either of these questions, youre definitely not alone. In a recent survey of almost 2,000 learning professionals, online community was ranked as one of the top three most important components of e-learning portals1. Our goal here is twofold. First we will cut through the ambiguous term community by sharing a model that describes a number of practical applications for including community as part of your learning strategy. Second, we will outline specific strategies and approaches for building learning-focused communities. How does Community Relate to Learning? According to Websters Dictionary, a community is any group living in the same area or having interests, work, etc. in common. While communities have existed since the beginning of humankind, the growing interest around the concept today is largely a result of the breakdown of the geographic assumption underlying this simple definition. Most communities whether online or off share a number of qualities and characteristics: they are held together by distinct operating norms; members are distinguished by their formal and informal roles; trust must be built to ensure quality interactions; and a shared sense of purpose serves as the glue that bonds the community together. Communities focused on learning, in our opinion, are only communities if they possess these characteristics and engage people in a learning process over time. Arguably, the term community has become an ambiguous buzzword. In many instances, the concept has become synonymous with online discussion boards and chat rooms. When put into a learning context, however, community can be a vehicle for connecting people to other peoples stories, experiences, and mentoring, which results in accelerated learning and the sharing of tacit knowledge2 within an organization. Page 2 of 7 www.icohere.com Copyright iCohere, Inc. 2002 Here are three reasons why you should consider building community into your overall learning strategy: outside of formal training3 (e.g., on the job, through mentoring, etc.). Communities extend learning by creating a structure whereby people can learn from informal interactions. the informal knowledge about how things really get done around here and ultimately, how to be successful in ones job is extremely difficult to capture, codify and deliver through discrete learning objects and traditional training programs. Communities are a way to elicit and share practical know-how that would otherwise remain untapped. mentor, and learn from each other can help capture, formalize, and disseminate tacit knowledge, and thus accelerate learning and organizational effectiveness. Communities become a boundaryless container for knowledge and relationships that can be used to increase individual effectiveness and a companys overall competitive advantage. For most learning professionals today, the question isnt if building communities will

deliver value to the organization, but rather what kind of community is needed and what are the steps involved in building it. Types of Learning Communities For communities to yield results, they must be integrated fully into ones core learning strategy from creating e-learning content that connects to community technologies and processes to extending face-to-face training into blended learning solutions that include pre- and post-event online community-building. From our experience working as employees of large corporations, as external consultants, and as learners ourselves, we have identified two forms of learning communities e-Learning Communities and Blended Learning Communities. Within these, there are five ways to apply the community concept to foster collaborative learning. e-Learning Communities e-Learning communities are groups of people bonded together entirely through technology. These communities never convene physically their interactions and learning begin, and are carried out entirely through technology (on the web, through conference calls, via video conferencing, etc.). Page 3 of 7 www.icohere.com Copyright iCohere, Inc. 2002 e-Training Communities e-Training communities promote virtual collaboration that is focused on addressing a specific topic area, usually supported by one or more online learning tools and media. For example, a group of learners may be assigned to a cohort that meets together in a one hour web conference, are assigned to view an interactive CBT sometime during the following three days, and are then facilitated through a process whereby they work together online to address questions and issues raised by the CBT, and learn from each others own stories and experiences. Online Conference Communities Through integrating live web conferencing, streaming video, narrated PowerPoint presentations, and facilitated discussions, it becomes possible to deliver a conference, entirely online, over several days or even a several week period. Just like face-to-face professional or industry conferences, when facilitated artfully, online conferences allow learners to receive compelling content from presenters, ask questions, network with other attendees, and obtain practical resources and information. Unlike face-to-face conferences, however, people can attend from anywhere and at anytime that fits their schedule, which is ideal for a geographically dispersed group. The overall costs of an online event are far less than its physical equivalent, especially when factoring in travel time and related expenses. Online conference communities typically have life spans of a few days to a few weeks. Blended Learning Communities Blended learning communities integrate online learning and face-to-face meetings. There are two core assumptions that underlie approaches to building blended learning communities: (1) that the deeper the personal relationships between learners, the richer the collaborative learning experience; and (2) that relationships between learners may be strengthened through structuring group interactions (using technology) before and/or

after an face-to-face training event. Ice Breaker Community Face-to-Face Training Event Follow-on Community End-to-End Community Pre-Meeting Post-Meeting Page 4 of 7 www.icohere.com Copyright iCohere, Inc. 2002 Ice Breaker Blended Learning Communities Ice Breaker Communities involve pre-event activities to break the ice prior to a face-to-face meeting. Many consultants and trainers facilitate warm-ups or ice breakers to kick off meetings, the goal being to establish norms, ground rules, and an esprit de corps among participants. From a group dynamics perspective, ice breakers accelerate a groups ability to form, storm and norm so that they are able to more quickly and effectively perform the given task at hand4. By engaging learners in structured introductions and pre-work through web conferencing, online discussions, and conference calls prior to a face-to-face training, it becomes possible to accelerate openness, sharing, and collaborative learning when participants finally come together in-person. Follow-on Blended Learning Communities Follow-on Communities extend relationships and learning following a face-toface training event. Rather than end the learning experience when participants walk out the door, a structure and process is provided to keep people engaged, connected and productive for a designated period of time. Follow-on communities can serve as vehicles for sharing group projects, discussing findings from field research, and receiving mentoring from peers and instructors. Heres an example: A group meets for a two-day technical course where a substantial amount of information is shared. Individuals leave the course feeling a great deal smarter, but many questions arise when they get back to their jobs and try to apply their new knowledge. A follow-on community provides peer and instructor feedback and support for six weeks after the two-day training event questions are answered, coaching is provided, and learning is captured and shared across the group. End-to-End Blended Learning Communities End-to-end communities include both Ice Breaker and Follow-on learning activities. Some having likened the end-to-end community to a digital sandwich5 since the face-to-face meeting is typically sandwiched between group interactions supported by e-learning and collaboration tools and technologies. A leadership development program, for example, might include an ice-breaker community to provide pre-work and introduce participants, a face-toface experiential workshop to help clarify and define individuals development objectives, and a follow-on community focused on coaching and mentoring to overcome challenges as participants work toward achieving their development objectives.

Page 5 of 7 www.icohere.com Copyright iCohere, Inc. 2002 Creating Collaborative Learning Communities When creating collaborative learning communities, community builders should consider much more than just technology. Ideally the conversation begins by clarifying the business strategic objectives and how these translate into group-level and individual competency requirements. From there, learning objectives may be defined that support competency gaps. Group processes to achieve the learning objectives then become clear, along with the appropriate technology to support these processes. While differences between online and in-person facilitation definitely exist, many seasoned trainers and facilitators discount their skills when it comes to online community building. Just as any trainer might facilitate introductions, set expectations, and ensure equal participation, these same activities (and other common group processes) can and should be applied in the online world. A number of approaches can help engage learners in collaborative online learning environments. We have categorized these under the broad headings of people, group processes, and supporting technology. While not all of the following design principles may apply to a given community, our framework is intended to serve as a basic starting point when creating e-learning or blended learning collaborative environments. People Clearly Define Roles Describe the relationship between the different roles in the community (including the instructor, subgroups, group leaders/facilitators, and individual learners) and outline their responsibilities and interdependencies. Create Sub-Groups Create sub-groupings of learners that have their own online space for small group learning activities and group project collaboration. Support Individuality Provide a way for learners to create personal profiles that contain their photos and salient information to the topic at hand (e.g., for a course on marketing, for example, a profile item might include something fun such as favorite innovative television commercial). Business Strategy & Objectives Learning Objectives Group & Individual Competencies Group Processes Supporting Technology Page 6 of 7 www.icohere.com Copyright iCohere, Inc. 2002 Group Processes Establish Operating Norms Provide guidelines for online (and offline) etiquette and obtain agreement on the behavior that will lead to successful group and

individual learning outcomes (e.g., everyone logs in three times a week, everyone posts one question and one response on the discussion board, etc.). Foster an Environment of Trust Establishing and aligning learners expectations around shared objectives, including how individuals contributions contribute to the broader success of the group, helps create an environment characterized by sharing and openness. Explicitly and collaboratively defining the common values and behavior that will contribute to achieving the shared goals of the group also builds trust. Create a Buddy System Keeping learners engaged and participating in an online environment can be challenging. By creating a buddy system whereby pairs or groups of learners are responsible for joint participation and contribution (co-development of a case study, alternating postings in the discussion area, etc.), a support structure can be created to keep people engaged. Technology Provide an Integrated and Easy-to-Use Collaborative Learning Environment Online learning environments come in many shapes and sizes. Some typical features of these web-based environments include: Synchronous Tools Asynchronous Tools Content Integration Document Management Audio Conferencing Web Conferencing Video Conferencing Chat Instant Messaging White Boarding Discussion Boards Calendar Website Links Group Announcements Messaging / E-mail Surveys & Polls Decision Support Tools Interactive CBTs Streaming Audio & Video Narrated Slideshows Web books Resource Library Document Collaboration Version Tracking & Control Permission Based Access In addition to features, simplicity and ease-of-use are the most important attributes to consider when creating or selecting an environment. The goal of technology should be to serve the community through its transparency learners time should be spent learning about the topic at hand, not about how to use a given technology. Ideally technology should be transparent to the instructor as

well no technical knowledge should be required to customize or manage the environment. Page 7 of 7 www.icohere.com Copyright iCohere, Inc. 2002 Conclusion As workgroup collaboration, knowledge management, and learning technologies and processes converge, communities of all kinds will become increasingly prevalent. The challenge facing learning professionals is to link business strategy to learning strategy in ways that seamlessly incorporate community as a means of capturing the informal or tacit knowledge that exists within the organization but is not accessible through formal training programs. Whether creating a community for e-learning, or one that supports a blended learning approach, community builders must consider a variety of factors related to people, group processes, and technology, if they are to design and orchestrate online environments that inspire collaborative learning. About the Author Soren Kaplan, Ph.D. (soren@icohere.com) Soren Kaplan is Managing Director of iCohere, a software a consulting firm that helps teams, groups and organizations use collaboration software, groupware and knowledge management tools to create communities of practice, build learning communities, and deliver online and blended e-learning programs. Soren provides overall leadership for iCoheres strategic direction, including business development, marketing and client services. Prior to founding iCohere, Soren held numerous positions at Hewlett-Packard Company. Most recently, he served as Manager of HPs internal strategy consulting group where he led a team that assisted leadership across the organization with strategic planning and organizational development. Soren also served as Manager of HPs Process Innovation Lab, a business process R&D group that utilized behavioral science-based theory and methods to develop leading edge approaches for managing organizational change. Prior to joining HP, Soren was a consultant with Cambridge, MA based IdeaScope Associates and consulted to global 500 companiesincluding Kodak, Siemens, Nestle, Avery Dennison, and 3Min the areas of new opportunity identification, strategic innovation, and creating innovative organizational cultures. Soren has also consulted independently, working with both large and small for-profit and non-profit businesses including Bank of America, AT&T, the City and County of San Francisco, and other organizations. Soren holds Masters and Ph.D. degrees in Organizational Psychology. He has presented at institutions and universities, including the Creative Education Foundation and the Harvard Business School, and has written and published a number of articles.

1 Learning Portals: Rate of Adoption (2000). Learning Decisions Interactive Newlsetter, The MASIE Center. 2 Manville, Brook, & Foote, Nathaniel (1996). Strategy as if Knowledge Mattered, FastCompany, April 1996. 3 Henschel, Peter (2001). Understanding and Winning the Never-Ending Search for Talent: The Managers Core Work in the New Economy, LineZINE, Fall 2001. 4 Tuckman, B.W. (1965). Developmental sequences in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399. 5 LaBranche, Gary (2002). Meetings & Expositions, American Society of Association Executives, February 2002.