|
|
|
|
|
Based on this issue of the IASCE Newsletter, it looks like it’s getting to be time to add another row to our bookshelf, given the five new books we have to cram in somewhere. In no particular order, here they are. Book #1 is represented by its Table of Contents. #2, #3, and #5 are reviewed by the IASCE Newsletter editor. Book #4 is reviewed by an educator who will be presenting at the IASCE Conference June 21-25 in Singapore. 1. Cohen, E. G., Brody, C., & Sapon-Shevin, M. (Eds.) (2004). Teaching cooperative learning: The challenge for teacher education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. http://www.sunypress.edu/details.asp?id=60874 Table of Contents
Foreword: A Teacher Educator's
Perspective
Introduction Part I: The Cases
1.
Practices in Teacher Education and Cooperative Learning at the University
of Toronto
2.
Teacher Decision Making for Cooperative Learning in a Preservice Master's
Program
3.
Educating Teachers for Socially Conscious Cooperative Learning
4.
Cooperative Learning in Teacher Education: A Four-Year Model
5.
Cooperative Learning in Preservice Teacher Education at the University of
Maryland
6.
Preparing Secondary Teachers to Use Cooperative Learning Strategies
7.
Cooperation and Collaboration in a Foreign Language Teacher Training
Program: The LMR-Plus Model
8.
The Integrated Semester: Building Preservice Teachers' Commitments to the
Use of Cooperative Learning as Essential Pedagogy
9.
Teaching Demanding Strategies for Cooperative Learning: A Comparative
Study of Five Teacher Education Programs
10.
Stepping into Groupwork Part II: Commentaries
11.
The Instructional Design of Cooperative Learning for Teacher Education
12.
Pockets of Excellence: Implications for Organizational Change
13.
Cooperative Learning and Teaching for Social Justice
14.
The Role of the Classroom Teacher in Teacher Education
Conclusion 2. Gillies, R. M., & Ashman, A. F. (Eds.) (2003). Co-operative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups. London: RoutledgeFalmer. This book, edited by Robyn Gillies and Adrian Ashman of the University of Queensland, brings together work by researchers from Australia, Israel, the Netherlands, the UK, and the US. Many of their names are familiar ones in the area of cooperative learning (CL), while others may be less well-known. In the book’s opening chapter, the editors review the history and theory of the use of groups to promote socialization and learning. They begin with the work of Dewey, Lewin, and others in the first half of the 20th century, before moving on to more recent work. The rest of the book’s chapters offer a look at current developments in CL. What is noteworthy about the chapters is how they review relevant research and theory with a keen eye for how these can inform practical decisions made in the classroom and elsewhere. Chapter 2, by Victor Battistich and Marilyn Watson, focuses on pre-school and early elementary school students, providing ideas on why and how they can benefit from interacting in CL settings. Chapter 3, by Gillies, emphasizes the careful effort needed to help elementary school students interact successfully. Issues discussed include training for CL, the size and composition of groups, and tasks which the groups undertake. Chapter 4, by Jan Terwel, provides us a look at CL in secondary school mathematics learning. The focus is on the positive effects, particularly for low achievers, of instruction in the use of social and cognitive strategies. In Chapter 5, by Katherine McWhaw, Heidi Schnackenbert, Jennifer Sclater, and Philip Abrami, tertiary education provides the context. More specifically, the chapter explores CSCL (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning). Somewhat unique is the inclusion of social loafing theory - e.g., Sheppard, J. A. (1993). Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113(1), 67-81 - in the discussion of theories related to CL. Chapter 6, by Adrian Ashman, addresses how CL can help students with special learning needs. The author notes that “While many teachers support the principle of inclusion, the practicalities associated with its implementation find many teachers ill-prepared … .” In Chapter 7, Hanna Shachar reviews eight studies and finds that CL benefits both low and high achievers in terms of academic and social variables. Participants in the studies included students from the fifth to the eleventh grades. Involving students in assessment when CL is used fits well with the student-centered paradigm of which CL is a part. In Chapter 8, John Ross and Carol Rolheiser discuss relevant issues and offer research-based advice. The focus of Chapter 9, by David and Roger Johnson, lies in the issue of motivation in CL groups. The authors use social interdependence theory to explore many facets of this issue. Most of the work on CL looks at the contexts in which people are learning standard academic content. In contrast, Chapter 10, by Hugh Foot, Andrew Tolmie, James Thomson, Kirstie Whelan, Sheila Morrison, and Pepi Sarvary, reports on research into CL in a less formal context in which students were using a computer-based training package to learn pedestrian skills, such as how to safely cross a street. Chapter 11, by Robyn Gillies and Adrian Ashman, offers an overview of the many formal and informal setting in which CL can be beneficially employed. The role of culture and society receives particular attention. Teaching large classes confronts teachers with a difficult challenge whether or not CL is used. In Chapter 12, entitled “Large classes, small groups”, Shlomo Sharan uses a social systems approach to explore this issue, including a section on variables which have been largely ignored in the research on class size. The book’s final chapter, Chapter 13, by the editors, provides an overview of key factors that must be accounted for when implementing CL. These factors include the learners, the setting, the curriculum, and the facilitator. Those involved in CL will find much of interest in these chapters because of the book’s broad and up-to-date coverage of matters of theory, research, and practice. At least one of the book’s editors, Robyn Gillies, plans to attend the IASCE conference, June 21-25 2004, in Singapore. The conference organizers are attempting to have presenters’ books for sale. Thus, the conference could be an opportunity to meet Robyn and other authors on CL and discuss their books with them. 3. Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (Eds.). (2001). Peer learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page. The structure of this book is that the three editors, David Boud, Ruth Cohen, and Jane Sampson, of University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), wrote the first five chapters introducing peer learning including such matters as design, implementation, management, and assessment. The next six chapters are examples of peer learning in practice in a wide variety of tertiary courses, mostly at UTS. The final chapter, by Boud, concludes the book with a discussion of challenges and new directions. What is peer learning and how does it differ from various other types of student-student interaction? In Chapter 1, Boud attempt to explain this. Peer learning is more reciprocal than peer teaching or tutoring, in which a more advanced/senior student helps a less advanced/junior student, and perhaps peer learning is less structured and more open-ended than CL, although Boud acknowledges “considerable overlap” (p. 7). He defines peer learning as “students learning from and with each other in both formal and informal ways” (p. 4). Indeed, we seem to have another example of great minds thinking alike in seeing a need for teacher-facilitated peer interaction. The book is based on the premise that peer learning – that is, learning with and from each other – is a necessary and important aspect of all courses. The role it plays varies widely and the forms it takes are very diverse, but without it students gain an impoverished education (p. 2). Furthermore, while not wanting to impose too much structure, Boud notes with dismay that When such [peer learning] practices are used unsystematically, students unfamiliar with this approach become confused about what they are supposed to be doing, they miss opportunities for learning altogether, and fail to develop the skills expected of them. Much peer learning occurs informally without staff involvement, and student who are already effective learners tend to benefit disproportionately when it is left to chance (p. 3). Reasons are given for why peer learning benefits from teacher input. Part of the rationale lies in the changing nature of tertiary level students who are no longer predominantly 18-22-yr-old full-time students living on campus. Thus: a. Students have less time to meet informally after class. b. Individual students tend to design their own program rather than belonging to one large cohort all taking the same courses. c. Tutorials/lab sections have become larger. Other reasons why teachers need to encourage peer learning include: a. Students may not appreciate the valuable skills they can develop when learning with others. b. The often competitive nature of academic life and the work world makes students averse to cooperating with each other. c. Students may not recognize that they actually can learn from each other. d. Peer learning is unlikely to occur outside of class or to be inclusive of all students. e. Devoting time to preparing for and debriefing the peer learning process helps student understand and implement it better. f. Peer learning during a course – in or out of class – promotes a culture of cooperation that can be sustained in future courses and beyond. Chapters 2-5 provide many useful nuts-and-bolts suggestions for organizing peer learning, e.g., “A timetable listing only periods of staff-student contact can be very misleading. It is sometimes useful to formally schedule peer learning periods and list them on timetables to acknowledge them as part of normal student workload” (p. 33). It is unfortunate that the authors of the various chapters provided few examples of the instruments, guides, and other materials that were used by teachers and given to and/or developed by students. What impressed me about the case study chapters was that while the authors are optimistic and enthusiastic about peer learning, they freely display the warts that developed and festered as they implemented the approach. For instance, in Chapter 6, Ray Gordon and Robert Connor describe peer learning in an MBA course on organizational behavior. Their rationale for adapting the approach was to promote learner autonomy, which would serve students well after graduation. However, differences among students in terms of work experience, age, proficiency in English, national origin, and gender caused imbalances in power and other problems. The authors discuss how they sought to address the situation but, with a touch of understatement, they acknowledge that “our invitation to students to use peer learning to develop and practise group facilitation skills was not always taken up the way we intended” (p. 97). Joyce Toynbee Wilson and her colleague in teaching Design had a more practical reason for using peer learning: the staff-student ratio suddenly ballooned from 1:30 to 1:45, and there was no way the two of them could provide students the individual feedback needed. The only ones who could step into the breech were the students’ peers. However, Toynbee Wilson and her colleague’s reasons were not only practical; they also believe in self-directed learning. She quotes Malcolm Knowles (1975) as stating that “creative leaders make a different set of assumptions (essentially positive) about human nature from the assumptions (essentially negative) made by controlling leaders” (p. 101). In line with this thinking, students self-selected their groups, but many problems existed, as exemplified by the student who is quoted as saying “As far as I’m concerned. . . working with a group just sucks!” In his concluding chapter, Boud notes some of the difficulties faced in promoting peer learning but stresses the progress embodied in the mere fact that the issue is now receiving a great deal of attention at the tertiary level. He concludes by stating, “Learning with and from each other is not easy; learning how to do this is a central outcome of higher education” (p. 177). References Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York: Associated Press. 4. Mandel, S. M. (2003). Cooperative work groups: Preparing students for the real world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Reviewed by Seah-Tay Hui Yong, Nanyang Girls’ High School, Singapore In the introduction, the Scott Mandel makes a convincing case that there exists an urgent need to prepare our young for the challenges of “the real world” where increasingly, people need to work with other individuals on long-term projects. To meet this need, teachers should to create opportunities for pupils to be involved in such collaborative activities. Happily, this message is not unfamiliar to teachers here in Singapore, with the institution of Project Work throughout all schools, including primary schools. Nonetheless, most readers in Singapore and elsewhere will find the first part of the book a useful instructional manual with very practical “Dos and Don’ts” on basics such as group formation, group functioning, materials, teacher’s role, critical thinking, assessment and classroom management. I find the last item refreshing as it addresses one of the biggest fears of teachers trying out Cooperative Learning for the first time. If only he had also addressed the other major grouse of our teachers in a system under the pressure of high-stakes testing: time. I also like the way the writer finishes each chapter with a description of theory being actualized in Mr. Washington’s American History class. Whether he is just a fictional character to give coherence to the book is irrelevant. The story narrative helps readers visualize how the theories flesh out in practical classroom situations. The writer’s concept of Cooperative Work Group incorporates Multiple Intelligences and the use of the Internet with Cooperative Learning. So, in Part II of the book, he explains the concept of MI. I particularly like the MI Self-Assessment provided at the back of the book under Resources which provides a quick test to help both students and teachers identify students’ intelligences. But while I agree that we should give pupils more opportunities to work at their stronger intelligences, I can also see a case for helping pupils get away from their preferred modes and working on improving their weaker ones. After all, sadly, a pen-paper examination system places a high premium on the verbal-linguistic intelligence. I found the Internet part of the book slightly disappointing. I was looking forward to seeing how the writer resolves the apparent conflicting demands of working with others (in a group) with working alone (in front of the computer). However, Mandel basically sees the Internet as a provider of online curricular material and goes on at length about how various Internet sites can be used. While this may be useful for those who have just begun exploring the Internet as a resource, I would have preferred him to have described how the resource material can be organized for Cooperative Learning group work, for example, using Webquests where different students investigate assigned sites listed or take on different roles investigating the same sites. Then, they get together as a group to pool information and insights into the problem. In fact, ultimately, the biggest flaw of the book is that it fails in its claim of integrating the three concepts: Cooperative Learning, Multiple Intelligences and the Internet. The lesson plans provided in the last part of the book do not show clearly how the three come together. While it is mentioned that the cooperative work groups will take on roles to solve a problem or perform a task, I would argue that these tasks could also have been performed by one individual without much loss. There is not enough focus on how group interaction and dynamics can be harnessed to produce something that is beyond the capacity of an individual (not in terms of scale but of depth). In addition, though the units are listed as for grade ranges 4-10, 5-12, etc, I find the tasks too simple for the higher grades. Perhaps, the higher grades should have more challenging authentic tasks based on real-life problems. Instead of trawling the internet for information about some distant rainforest, the students, for example, here in Singapore can be set the task of designing a walking trail based on some part of our actual forest reserves, with the aim of promoting nature walks as a more wholesome weekend activity for teenagers instead of hanging around shopping malls. Such open-ended activities also minimize the problem of “cut-and-paste” products, a common complaint regarding internet-related projects. In all, the book is a helpful introduction to the three individual aspects of Cooperative Learning, Multiple Intelligences and the Internet. It can serve as a useful starting point for teachers new to these areas. Furthermore, by calling our attention to the interface of these three key aspects of education, the author reminds us that often innovations are best implemented in combination rather than alone. 5. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2004). Assessing students in groups: Promoting group responsibility and individual accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Those educators new to cooperative learning have an experience somewhat akin to the joy felt by those people new to rock and roll music: a whole library of golden oldies exists waiting to be discovered, for example, the music of the Beatles. However, those new to CL are more fortunate because while many rock groups, such as the Beatles, are no longer together, many of the founding names in CL are still pumping out the hits. A case in point is the dynamic group of educators formed by brothers David W. and Roger T. Johnson and other family members and colleagues who continue to produce valuable work in the areas of theory, research, and practice. Their present volume on assessment belongs to a larger series – The Experts in Assessment – edited by Thomas Guskey and Robert Marzano. Assessment, for better and for worse, is receiving increased attention these days. While CL is seen mostly as what goes on before the test, everyone realizes that instruction and assessment cannot be separated. Indeed, new methods of assessment, sometimes known as alternative assessment, encourage a blurring of distinctions between instruction and assessment. The book’s first chapter provides a rationale for combining CL and assessment. The Johnsons explain that traditionally teaching has focused on individuals: an individual (the teacher) teaching to a class of individuals (each student), with the “assumption that individual assessment requires individual instruction” (p. 3). However, CL research has highlighted the potential of group-to-individual instruction. The Johnsons state, “The purpose of cooperative learning is to ensure that all members learn and are, therefore, better able to perform on subsequent individual assessment measures as a result of their group experience” (p. 3). The authors argue that students should collaborate not only prior to assessment, but they list eight reasons why assessment should also involve student-student collaboration. Here are some of them.
Chapter 2 discusses how to structure groups according to CL principles. This will be familiar, although nonetheless valuable, ground for those who have read other of the authors’ books. Chapter 3 offers a general overview of assessment. Chapters 4-7 held the most interest for me. Chapter 4 deals with the role of groups in individual assessment. In other words, “learn it in a group, perform it alone” (p. 53). The authors reiterate an important aspect of their perspective on the use of groups in education: “The basic purpose of a cooperative group is to make each member a stronger individual in his or her own right” (p. 52). Not all practitioners of group activities share this perspective. The chapter presents many practical ideas as to how groups can be involved in the assessment of their individual members. These include: 1. conferences (goal-setting, progress, and post-evaluation) and contracts 2. group-individual-group testing, weekly group tests followed by individual final exams, group discussion tests, and academic tournaments 3. observation of student behaviors 4. questionnaires done by students 5. interviews of students, either individually or in groups. Chapter 5 turns to the assessment of groups as a whole. Student collaboration on a single product has become increasingly popular. However, promoting effective teamwork among groupmates and conducting assessment that is seen as fair and useful has proven very difficult. The authors offer many practical suggestions including:
One point that surprised me in this chapter was the authors’ suggestion that students form groups based on random assignment, whereas most of what I’ve read in the CL literature advises teacher-selected groups. The Johnsons state that random grouping increases the heterogeneity of groups. However, it seems to me that teacher selection offers the surest path to heterogeneous groups. Another controversial point is the authors’ advocacy of group grades. While acknowledging objections to this arrangement, they argue that when groups are organized according to CL principles, group grades are accepted by students and can lead to higher achievement. Chapter 6 looks at peer assessment when group activities are used and opens by stating an often overlooked prerequisite for successful peer assessment: “peer assessments need to take place in cooperative (not competitive or individualistic) learning activities” (p. 121). The authors offer a persuasive rationale for the use of peer assessment in CL, including this point: “One of the paradoxes of assessment is that students typically learn more from conducting assessments than they do from receiving them” (p. 123). The chapter supplies a number of instruments for peer assessment and discusses its use with academic assignments, such as writing assignments and presentations, as well as assessment of peers’ collaborative skills. Chapter 7, on self-assessment in CL groups, begins with a general, non-education discussion of self-awareness and self-assessment, including benefits and dangers, as well as a look at the role of comparison in self-assessment. Moving back to education, the authors offer suggestions for promoting student self-assessment. Among them are learning logs and reflective journals. Numerous instruments for facilitating self-assessment are included. Also, ideas are provided as to how interaction with peers can enhance self-assessment. For instance, self-assessment can be part of the processing students do of the quality of their group’s interaction, and students can provide each other feedback on the entries in their learning logs and reflective journals. The book’s final two chapters are titled Designing Group Experiences for Assessment and Putting It All Together. The first deals with role plays and simulations. The latter discusses misperceptions about group assessment and offer guidelines for harnessing the power of groups for assessment. Among the eight misperceptions discussed are:
Thanks to what I’ve learned from the Johnsons and others (those who’ve written books and those who share in other ways), CL has done a lot to improve the way I do instruction. However, it’s my self-assessment of my own teaching that assessment is my weakest area. I hope that the book reviewed here, as well as my daily classroom experiences and especially my often painful end-of-term assessment experiences, spur me to improve this area of weakness.
|
