This article should be available to any library that subscribes to SAGE journals online. It stresses that collaboration is something that needs to be taught and practiced in formal courses, and divides up the instructor’s duties into the stages of preparation, practice, and performance review.
Especially helpful are these recommendations for keeping in-class group activities on track:
- Focus attention on the purpose of the project: In small groups, ask students to brainstorm methods of refocusing a group discussion. Ask students to role-play reactions to statements and list the methods in order of effectiveness.
- Encourage participation and positive collaboration: Address active listening, questioning, and restating techniques to ensure that students participate and provide input during group discussions. Encourage students to engage in positive collaboration among team members and
referee any unconstructive feedback or personality conflicts.
- Establish a timeline: Demonstrate how to create a timeline by working backward from a deadline. Discuss delegation and prioritization techniques to ensure a balanced yet productive group experience.
- Keep the project on track: Although individual team members may
work on separate tasks, students should be coached to schedule team meetings throughout the project to discuss progress, encourage group feedback, and share ideas. They should also be coached to accept new ideas and revisions to the plan that enhance the project (rather than perceiving changes as negative aspects that prolong the team endeavor).
- Negotiate conflicts: Ask students to role-play the differences between
affective and cognitive conflict and practice impartial methods to resolve any problems.
Well worth checking out.
[X-posted on Assessment for Learning 101]
One of the most-read posts on this blog is David Mazella’s classic, “Why do students hate groupwork?” The original post prompted a lively discussion, including comments by students themselves telling us why, in fact, they hate groupwork.
I was thinking about this discussion yesterday at my MLA panel, “Academically Adrift,” which featured Josipa Roksa, one of the authors of the book after which the panel took its name. Offering a brief overview of her findings (with co-author Richard Arum), Josipa introduced the section on study groups by saying, “This is the one that always gets me in trouble.” And indeed, part of the discussion that followed concerned this issue.
In short, Arum and Roksa found that students who worked in study groups showed significantly lower learning than those who studied on their own. What does this mean for collaboration?
To me, the most interesting point that came out of the conversation was that the problem might not be group work itself, but the way it is done. Roksa speculated that there is a tendency for the professor to assign group work without enough structure and also without providing any training for students in collaboration itself. We tend to come up with a project, give it to a group of students, and say “go collaborate,” which turns out to be ineffective. She briefly discussed a colleague of hers who teaches a semester-long course specifically on collaboration. So perhaps her answer to the question posed by Dave’s original post might be that students hate it because they don’t know how to do it and as a result they don’t learn much.
What I found particularly interesting was Roksa’s emphasis on collaboration as a skill that needs to be learned. As someone raised on theory that taught me how gender, race, and all kinds of identity formations are constructed, I had never given much thought to collaboration as “constructed” as well. Perhaps for too many of us, it seems like something that students should just know how to do. But apparently they don’t (and in fairness, we often don’t either). I wonder, then, if we should be thinking about ways to get collaboration skills into the curriculum—not just in the form of collaborative assignments but as a learning outcome goal in itself.