Assignment #7: Complete the 4 part assignment format as you read, reflect, and respond to Chapter 7 – Cooperative Learning.
Remember: Although your course packet asks you to post to blog for parts A, B, C, and D…we are asking that you only post part C and D. We’re trying to make the blog easier to read and more user- friendly. Thanks!
A. Self Assessment of Current Beliefs and Practices: This component asks you to reflect on how and why you currently use the instructional strategy of Cooperative Learning in your classroom. The intent of this is to activate your prior knowledge of your strategy use so that you can make comparisons as you read the chapter. Below are the questions to help you complete your self-assessment. After completing your self assessment please post a thought or two as a comment (click on comment link below) to this posting labeled Week Seven: Cooperative Learning.
• What is your purpose for using cooperative learning in your classroom?
• What kind of cooperative learning activities do you use with your students?
• Think of a time when you used cooperative learning and was pleased with the results. Why did it work well?
• Think of a time when you used cooperative learning and was not pleased with the results. Why didn’t it work well?
B. Read & Reflect “Research & Theory”: This portion of the assignment asks you to read chapter 7 and reflect briefly on your thinking after reading the “Research and Theory” section for Cooperative Learning After completing your chapter reflection, please post it as a comment (click on comment link below) in the posting labeled Week Seven: Cooperative Learning.
C. Practice: Choose one of the specific “classroom practice” strategies or techniques shared in this chapter to try out with your students (If you are not currently teaching, you may share how you would use this strategy in your classroom). Please post a brief reflection of how this went to the posting labeled Week Seven: Cooperative Learning. Click on the “comment” link below.
D. Final Strategy Reflection: Use the following sequence of questions/prompts to reflect on what you’ve learned about both the strategies presented in the chapter and what you’ve learned about yourself as both a teacher and a learner. Please post your brief reflection to the posting labeled Week Seven: Cooperative Learning by clicking on the “comment” link below.
How has the information you read in this chapter on Cooperative Learning effected your thinking about teaching and learning? What have you learned about yourself as a teacher and learner? Use the following questions to assist you in writing a brief strategy reflection:
• How might I change how use cooperative learning in my classroom?
• What is something you now understand better about cooperative learning?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
C. Practice
The one strategy that I am going to adopt for next year is ‘base groups’ (page 90-91). I currently use a lot of informal grouping (pair-share, appointment clock, etc.) for processing activities during class. Besides supporting the “chunking” of the 90 minute period into smaller, more manageable blocks of time it also allows students to get up and move out of their seats. (I am sure to remind them that this movement generates blood flow that is good for the brain!) I model the expectations and we rehearse so that this type of grouping is an integrated part of class procedures.
While base groups would be used for different types of activities, I think that they would be a great addition to my class and I love the idea of having them check in with each other on homework/progress on assignments, etc. Of course, using more formal grouping is going to require time to teach Johnson & Johnson’s 5 elements of cooperative learning (pages 85-86). I would be interested to hear from those who have explicitly taught cooperative learning to get some ideas about how best to go about it.
D. Final Strategy Reflection
The ‘Research and Theory on Cooperative Learning’ section of this chapter reinforced some of my experiences with grouping. Even though ability grouping is not the focus of this chapter (or this book) it is an area of personal interest to me. For the past 3-4 years we have been trying to ‘de-track’ the freshman classes at MHS. The Science department went to a blended model two years ago, and the Social Studies class next year will follow that model. There is a lot of conflict around de-tracking the English classes. I have long felt that differentiation within the classroom is best for students and was interested to see Marzano’s research about the effect size of ability grouping.
I am excited about using the base groups and would love to hear from anyone who has used them in the past. How did you determine the groups (student input?) and how did you prepare them for formal cooperative learning? In my experience it is best to model & spend time up front teaching the expectations so any suggestions you have would be welcome! Thanks!
C. One technique I would like to try is "base groups." One of my goals this year is to have more of a "community" within the classroom. I want the kids to get to know each other really well and learn social skills and how to get along with others. I've been reading The Morning Meeting and I'm really hoping I can incorporate that into my day (you never know what the schedule will be like!). The base group example in the book goes along with that quite well... I could see the beginning of the year starting out with learning the basics about each other, but what I really liked was the supportive piece. I think it's a wonderful idea to have other peers to "check in" with at the beginning of the day and the end of the day. Students will learn responsibility, leadership, social skills...and countless other skills. Having a "core group" they can depend on, whether or not they are friends, can make them feel safe, less anxious and as if they are never alone. However, I can see myself adapting it to maybe having more than one group for the year - they can get tired of that. Third graders like to "change partners" a lot. So it could possibly be a monthly "base group." It could be as simple as the students they are sitting in groups with.
I do a lot of research activities using cooperative learning, as well as summarizing, partner reading, questioning, and math games (to name a few).
D. I use cooperative learning a lot and definitely see the benefit. I feel it brings the lower achieving students up and helps the higher achieving students learn patience and leadership. I think it's also good for the students to know that everyone learns in different ways, and they see that when doing cooperative learning activities. I tend to do mostly informal cooperative learning, but when I do formal groups, I agree that structure is important. They need to know the task to be completed and all the aspects of it - otherwise, it just gets crazy and turns into social time. I try to have them figure out different "jobs" for each person to make sure everyone is contributing.
As far as changing cooperative learning in my classroom, as mentioned above, I would like to add base groups for different activities/responsibilities. I also agree that cooperative learning can be overused. I think I have a good balance going right now, but could probably add more formal opportunities.
Something I understand better about cooperative learning is the five components (positive interdependence, face-to-face promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, interpersonal and small group skills and group processing). It's good to know these components to make sure they are being met based on my expectations. It will help make cooperative learning groups more beneficial. I think it's very important for the students to be able to reflect on how it went in their groups - and why it went the way it did. Did someone not participate? Did they argue? Did they vote to choose a consensus? Did they follow the directions? They need to be able to be held accountable and know their group mates are going to be as well.
On the "ability grouping" topic -- I have always felt it important to have all levels in one room - everyone can learn something from someone else, regardless of level. After teaching "low math" for many years, I found the students never really had a reason to "rise to the occasion" and didn't have role models to look up to and learn from. We stopped ability grouping for math after a few years and didn't do any ability grouping for awhile. Last year was our second year doing "Walk to Read" where the students ARE ability grouped for small group reading instruction. They are with the whole class for the "whole group" reading (45 minutes of each). I feel doing it for small group reading is a bit different, since we do that within our own classrooms for reading instruction, but I was very hesitant. However, I was SOLD on it after just a few months. The "high" level is able to extend much more than we could have done before, and the lower level students have many more interventions and people working with them at their level. Everyone meets many more times per week with an instructor than I was able to provide in my classroom. Of course, we still differentiate within our small ability groups.
In otherwords, I can see both sides of the 'ability grouping' topic, having done it both ways for many subjects. I think what we're doing in reading now really works, but it may not always work. Parents are thrilled about it and have many have noticed a difference in their child's reading. So for now, it's working for us! :)
C) Practice
With regards to formal groups, this is something that I would like to make better use of (intermittently) during the course of the year. I would like to be more intentional about using a team sign-in sheet, which ensures both individual and group accountability. When working on group projects, students in each group choose a different colored pen/marker to work on, and use the same color on their team sign-in sheet. This way, I am able to see how each member has contributed to the end product. In addition, asking students to reflect on their team work after a project would give me as well as the students a better sense as to how they could improve the second time around. Just as importantly, however, it would give students the opportunity to, as the book mentions, “applaud their successes”.
D) Final Strategy Reflection
In my own classroom, students sit in groups of 5 and are placed in random heterogeneous groups. The groups are comprised of students with a range of abilities from low to high, and even range in behavior as well. However, it was interesting to me being able to see some of the research findings comparing homogeneous to heterogeneous groups that validate this. In addition, it was interesting to me that the chapter mentioned the advantage of placing students in small groups of three to four, which allows for greater collaboration. This is something that I will keep in mind as I begin the school year. In addition, what I might change about how I use cooperative groups in my own classroom is ensuring that there is an adequate balance between cooperative group work and independent work, which allows students to practice the same skills on their own.
This year, I also want to be more intentional about providing significant opportunities for quick discussions in informal groups of two, for instance, the 10/2 strategy in which the teacher talks for 10 minutes, and then students discuss the answer to a question in pairs for 2 minutes. This example was also mentioned in the book, and while I do make use of it, I really would like to be more intentional about it throughout the day. Not only does it focus students’ attention, but it teaches students how to listen to others and allows them to process the new information.
C: One of the classes I teach is an Advisory group, like a homeroom concept where the students start together as freshman and stay with the same teacher through graduation. So it is a perfect example of a base group for cooperative learning. However my introduction last year to my advisory during their sophomore year would be a perfect example of misuse of cooperative learning. It met very few of the defining elements and seemed to be more free time than anything. I tried to implement a schedule with the students, Mon-reading, Tues & Thurs-Word of the Day from the New York Times, etc. It seemed to help focus the students and build my relationship with them, but much more improvement is needed. So having the five defining elements and the additional information about other types of cooperative learning will be very helpful as I plan for this year. I know it will be very useful to have small informal and formal groups as I begin to work with them on preparing for the senior projects. Being aware of grouping them in a variety of ways is a good reminder to change up the groups as well.
D: As I mentioned above, I plan to make many changes in how cooperative learning has been used in my advisory class. I also plan to use cooperative learning more in informal and formal groups in my Child Development class. I think it will help the information become more “alive” if the students work in groups to observe children at the child care center, create projects together and do some presentations together. Last year I had them work in pairs for most of the last few months and did not have them change partners once. Whoops!
I definitely understand much more about changing the groups and not overusing cooperative learning now than I did previously.
C. Base groups are something that I want to do better. I have my students' desks organized in groups (4-6 students) in the classroom and that seems to be an easy way to manage my classroom behavior. I need to think about possibly organizing these into smaller more intimate groups and using the checking in strategies mentioned in this chapter. We do a lot of switching between classes for reading and math. We automatically group according to ablities in those subject areas so that students are working more at their level. What I want to do this year is make sure that we are also grouping in other ways. I don't know if anyone has any thoughts on how to move away from ability grouping in math and reading and still meet each student's needs?
D. What I didn't realize before reading this chapter is that you can do "too much" cooperative learning. This is one area that I have been pushing myself to do more of and it is good to step back and take a look at how I am doing it. I realize now that less cooperative learning may be better if it is being done in the correct way. I am definately going to keep this new information in mind when I begin this school year and share this information with my teammates to see if we are grouping our students as effectively as we possibly can!
Thanks,
Kimberly Lewis
It looks like everyone took away some good ideas from this chapter.
Kelly, I think you have it right. You are going to have to take the time and teach your kids at the beginning of the year. You could model and use rubrics and revisit as the need arises during the year.
Base groups serve many different purposes, so how you form them depends on what you want to use them for. You can decide the length that you want to keep the base group for; perhaps it's a month, grading period, or all year. What they are designed for is to give the students a support system, build camaraderie and to create a sense of teamwork. They are suitable for many different purposes in all grades. The benefit of using base groups is that students are able to give each other feedback, identify strengths and weaknesses, practice for oral presentations, or clarify misconceptions with students they have come to know and trust.
Lindsay, do you have any suggestions for Kim about how your school moved away from the ability groups in math? What program are you using for math instruction? I imagine that it must allow for differentiating for the students? Is there a lot of extra prep this way for you? And lastly, do you have an assistant during math time to help you with instruction?
As you said, Lindsay, I can also see both sides to the ability groups. In another class that I teach, a student brought up she had just read research that was showing how mixed grouping is not good for the high level students. It was an interesting, lively discussion as the push in the last few years has been to move away from ability groups. Many students in the class chimed in and said as higher level students they were often "bored" during classes because the teacher had to focus on the middle and low students. Perhaps true differentiating wasn't happening back then. Thoughts anyone?
Sarah, I like the 10/2 strategy too. One thing I wanted to mention was that I was in a Responsive Classroom week long training in July and the pace of the class is very structured. Since this was level 2, everyone had already had the first couple of trainings before. One thing that many of us brought up the first day is that we found it VERY frustrating to engage in conversation on a topic and have the chime ring and the teacher move onto the next thing. (It made me think how our students must feel as we often do this to them.) What the teacher did was have us to raise our hand at the chime with 2 fingers, 1 finger or a fist to indicate 2 more minutes were needed, 1 more minute was needed or no more minutes were needed. This did a lot to ease the anxiety everyone was feeling and allowed us enough time to finish up our conversations or at least finish our point before leaving the topic or moving into whole group conversations. Another thing that was built into the day was break time so that we knew 3 times during the day we could continue our discussion or ask additional questions if need be. I'll def. be utilizing this with my classes next year. I imagine it will take some work for the students to gage how much more time they truly will need to finish their thoughts, 1 or 2 minutes, but over time with practice they should be able to grasp it. Perhaps this would be a useful model to introduce to other grade levels for the students to have similar language as they move from grade to grade.
Cooperative Learning
Practice: This chapter was very interesting to me simply because I have heard so many different theories about ability grouping. Unfortunately, I feel that ability grouping is overused because it is sometimes the easiest for teachers, but not always the best for students. I think that ability grouping is good in some cases, but not always. Providing students opportunities to work with many different levels of achieving students can give them the motivation to do better in academics and social skills. In my classroom with older students, I tend to give them a lot of independent work, but to provide movement, I use think-pair-share, and a lot of different stretch your brain activities. Occasionally I split students into small groups for projects, but generally we work on our own. I feel like having more cooperative learning opportunities would not only help get my creative juices flowing, but it would be more interesting and exciting for the kids.
I think that having a bunch of different grouping strategies is a great idea. It gives the students an opportunity to interact with many of their peers, rather than just a few. This way the classroom would have more of a community feel as well. I especially liked the idea of Base Groups and what Mrs. Ramos did with her class. In the past, I have tried the Morning Meetings to create a stronger community atmosphere, but found that it took too much of our instructional time. Therefore, I think this 5-10 minute meet and greet with the students Base Groups would be a really great alternative. I’m not sure if I would keep the same groups all year long, or switch groups periodically. Maybe I could have them switch groups each trimester. I also think that it would give my students a different way to hold each other accountable for homework, and it’s a great way to have them all remind each other at the end of the day what is due the next day. I will definitely be using this strategy this coming year.
Reflection: I definitely can see how cooperative learning can be overused. I use groups for a lot of activities, although I feel that I really probably overuse direct instruction strategies instead. When I do use groups, it is usually just informal small groups for a quick activity. It helps to know the 5 components of cooperative learning so that I can make sure when using this strategy they student’s needs are being met. I think that even having these 5 defining elements displayed in the classroom will remind students of how they are expected to work together.
I would really like to change my teaching approach this year because I feel that if I continue teaching this way I will get burnt out, and my students will be frustrated and bored. Before starting at the school that I teach at now, I thought of myself as a pretty creative and fun teacher, however after joining my current team I felt that I had to conform to the same teaching style as my teaching partners. This has not only diminished my creativity, but it has caused me to feel that I am not being the best teacher that I can be. I would really like to incorporate more cooperative learning and nonlinguistic representations into my teaching this year. Now that I am teaching a new grade, (although with the same teaching partners) perhaps I’ll be able to go out on my own a little, and even give them some of these ideas I have learned from this book.
Lindsay - What you had to say about ability grouping really hit home because we ability group for both math and reading as well. This year will be our first year using the Walk to Read model. I’m glad to hear that it was so successful for you! As with math, our team decided to do a similar approach as with reading. We have two different math classes, one that is ability grouped, and one that we do with our whole class. I completely agree that with the lower math group, the students seem to be just skating by rather than rising up and achieving at higher levels. It is no secret as to who is in what group, and I think that is detrimental to some of our students. However, I also have seen the opposite in which the higher achieving students are left out to dry because they teacher has to focus on helping the low group become at-level. Either way, I think it’s hard to know what is truly best for all of our students.
Sarah C. - I had completely forgotten about the 10/2 strategy until you mentioned it. I think that is a great strategy, and it would work well in the students base groups or seating groups. I completely agree that I need to be more intentional about providing students the opportunity to talk with each other and discuss their learning. It also gives them the opportunity to move around and get their brain juices flowing.
indsay, do you have any suggestions for Kim about how your school moved away from the ability groups in math? What program are you using for math instruction? I imagine that it must allow for differentiating for the students? Is there a lot of extra prep this way for you? And lastly, do you have an assistant during math time to help you with instruction?
To answer Jackie and Mary's question in regards to Kim wanting to possibly move away from grouping for everything:
Our school does not require grouping for any subject - it's up to each grade level. We felt we didn't know enough about our own students in math and weren't able to communicate with parents regarding their progress. Parents actually complained a bit too, which is why we stopped. When we started the Walk to Read in reading two years ago, we were nervous about this happening again (not knowing enough about our students in reading/parents not knowing enough). That's why we chose to do half whole group, half small group (Walk to Read). I felt I really knew my own class in reading and also really knew my reading students. We also made it very clear to the parents in the beginning that they could contact their child's reading teacher and we were accessible for that.
The math we're using this year (Bridges) is definitely differentiated. We do not have assistants for this, but we do for reading, which is how it works! :) With the old math, I had a lot of parent help with kids who were struggling. I had to find time to meet with the kids who "didn't get it" and that was sometimes hard - especially for the ones who really didn't "get it." We did a lot of partner work which is helpful for the kids who struggle too - they get to listen to someone who does understand.
I'm really excited to start using Bridges. We were asked this year to not ability group in math at any grade level due to the new curriculum and the belief that it will meet the needs of all students! We shall see!:)
Post a Comment