Reading Reflection 3 - Groupwork Ch. 1-3

Elizabeth Cohen’s first chapter of Designing Groupwork is titled “Groupwork as a Strategy for Classrooms.” She emphasizes that groupwork is not ability grouping for easier homogeneous instruction, but rather “students working together in a group small enough so that everyone can participate on a task that has been clearly assigned.” Cohen states that a couple of the key characteristics of groupwork are the delegated authority it affords students with and students needing their groupmates to be successful in completing a task. Students need to be prepared adequately in order for groupwork to be worthwhile.

I found it hard to completely delegate authority to student groups during my clinical practice experience. I noticed myself hovering and hoping to correct or guide students around mistakes or pitfalls. I think that a few different things contributed to my difficulties: pacing guide time constraints, discomfort with student confusion, and lack of student preparation (on my part) for effective groupwork. I am eager to improve my groupwork designs and strategies in the classroom and truly do believe that the best way for students to learn is to make discoveries for themselves. I believe that they will make these discoveries if I am patient enough to allow them to do so.

Cohen’s second chapter titled “Why Groupwork?” gives a number of research supported reasons that groupwork is an effective strategy for improving student learning in a variety of areas. She provides evidence for groupwork improving student problem solving skills, higher order thinking skills, oral language proficiency, relationships with classmates, preparation for adult roles and decision making, time on-task, and basic skills. Cohen points out that students must be prepared for how to engage effectively in groupwork tasks, and that tasks must be conceptual in nature, rather than requiring memorization or application of a specific rule.

Reflecting back on my clinical practice experiences last semester, I feel lucky to have had the chance to work within a math department that valued cooperative learning so much. The Algebra 1 teachers almost always designed lessons where students had a chance to work on conceptual tasks in groups, and groups were always heterogeneously composed. Department meetings focused on learning goals that were outside of content standards in addition to the content standards themselves and many of these learning objectives were those that can be accomplished by students through cooperative learning experiences.

Cohen’s third chapter titled “The Dilemma of Groupwork” she describes the various status structures that evolve during groupwork. Students are ranked according to their perceived ability, which is often determined from one characteristic such as reading ability, societal status, and social status. Students with higher ranks in groups talk more, are relied upon more heavily, and are more engaged in the group task. This is problematic because students of lower status levels do not have the same access to learning opportunities.

I definitely encountered these problems during my clinical practice work last semester. As I monitored groupwork, I noticed that some students dominated the conversations, some students were ignored, and some students disengaged completely.

The next thing that I am looking forward to learning about in future chapters of this book is suggestions on how to engage all students in groupwork and eliminate some of the status problems t hat arise. I am interested in finding out more about how to prepare students for effective groupwork and how to prepare optimal tasks for groupwork.