Top 10 reasons students dislike working in small groups … and why i do it anyway
2
Student Centered Education Top 10 reasons students dislike working in small groups ... and why I do it anyway Received for publication, February 24, 2011 Ann Taylor‡ From the Department of Chemistry, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana Last semester, I had a particularly vocal antismall group class. Working in small groups is not new to either them or me; our chemistry curriculum incorporates small group work in almost every course, and I have been using small group techniques for 12 years. In an attempt to understand their discomfort, I had this class generate a list of top 10 reasons they dislike small group exercises: 1) It is hard to focus during small group exercises. 2) We are always rushed. 3) Puts the work on us instead of on you. 4) It is over the same material I didn’t understand in the reading. 5) We can form study groups outside of class on our own; we would rather hear someone who understands the material explain it. 6) We are all confused, so getting in groups merely compounds the confusion. 7) I don’t like the people in my small group. 8) Where is Morgan? Where is Chris? (Names changed to protect the guilty). 9) We would cover more material if you lectured. 10) I cannot sleep during a small group exercise. Some of these reasons are exactly why I use small group work in class—it does put the work on the stu- dents (Complaint 3) and it is hard to sleep during a small group exercise (Complaint 10). Furthermore, their concerns can be categorized into three main areas: group dynamics, learning process, and preparation and participation. And in a way, what they dislike shows that working in small groups is doing exactly what it is supposed to. Working in small groups is hard. For a group to work effectively, they must cooperate, communicate, dele- gate, and trust each other. For introverts or dominating personalities, this is often a challenging task. Conse- quently, group assignment is important, and numerous publications have supported instructor-selected groups, with the goal of forming teams of three to four students that are diverse in both academic skills and demo- graphic properties [1, 2]. As a result, students are often grouped with peers other than their usual cohort, lead- ing to Complaint 7. However, after graduation, they will not necessarily always be working with their best friend or fraternity brother. They can always form out of class study groups with their friends (Complaint 5). To ensure students neither shirk their responsibilities nor dominate the discussion, specific roles such as manager, techni- cian, reporter, and recorder are assigned on a rotating basis [1] and students are given the opportunity to grade their small group members. It is true that it is hard for a group to work well when students are miss- ing (Complaint 8). This can be addressed in course grading by assigning a portion of the course points to group work and peer evaluations [1]. The second challenge in small group work is the learning process itself. As knowledge is constructed, not transferred [3, 4], learning is like any building pro- ject, and it is a messy process that requires work. Lec- tures are much ‘‘neater’’ and can cover more material (Complaints 5 and 9), but do the students learn more? The learning literature says no [5, 6]. By struggling with the material (Complaints 4 and 6), students not only grasp its complexity but also learn how to learn [7]. Biochemistry is a big field; there is no way I can cover all there is to know about the field in a semester (or even two), so it is even more important that they learn to learn for themselves. This process does take time (Complaint 2), and it forces them to come to class pre- pared and ready to work (Complaint 1). ‘‘Sign posting’’ (providing reasons for the mode of learning), acknowl- edging that it is hard work, assisting with time manage- ment and praising both effort and accomplishment are ways that we can help students to cope with the messiness of learning [8]. So, why do I continue to use small groups in my classroom? Because it works. By the end of the se- mester, there are improvements in their performance, teamwork, and ability to solve problems [9, 10]. And this is what education is about: students’ growth and learning. Our role as educators is not as a performer or entertainer, but as a facilitator who guides students through the challenges of the learning process, whether they like it or not. ‡To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 765- 361-6186; Fax: 765-361-6149. E-mail: [email protected]. This paper is available on line at http://www.bambed.org DOI 10.1002/bmb.20511 219 Q 2011 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 219–220, 2011
-
Upload
ann-taylor -
Category
Documents
-
view
230 -
download
9
Transcript of Top 10 reasons students dislike working in small groups … and why i do it anyway
Student Centered Education
Top 10 reasons students dislike working in small groups . . . andwhy I do it anyway
Received for publication, February 24, 2011
Ann Taylor‡
From the Department of Chemistry, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana
Last semester, I had a particularly vocal antismallgroup class. Working in small groups is not new to eitherthem or me; our chemistry curriculum incorporates smallgroup work in almost every course, and I have beenusing small group techniques for 12 years. In an attemptto understand their discomfort, I had this class generatea list of top 10 reasons they dislike small groupexercises:
1) It is hard to focus during small group exercises.2) We are always rushed.3) Puts the work on us instead of on you.4) It is over the same material I didn’t understand in
the reading.5) We can form study groups outside of class on
our own; we would rather hear someone whounderstands the material explain it.
6) We are all confused, so getting in groups merelycompounds the confusion.
7) I don’t like the people in my small group.8) Where is Morgan? Where is Chris? (Names
changed to protect the guilty).9) We would cover more material if you lectured.
10) I cannot sleep during a small group exercise.
Some of these reasons are exactly why I use smallgroup work in class—it does put the work on the stu-dents (Complaint 3) and it is hard to sleep during asmall group exercise (Complaint 10). Furthermore, theirconcerns can be categorized into three main areas:group dynamics, learning process, and preparation andparticipation. And in a way, what they dislike showsthat working in small groups is doing exactly what it issupposed to.
Working in small groups is hard. For a group to workeffectively, they must cooperate, communicate, dele-gate, and trust each other. For introverts or dominatingpersonalities, this is often a challenging task. Conse-quently, group assignment is important, and numerouspublications have supported instructor-selected groups,with the goal of forming teams of three to four students
that are diverse in both academic skills and demo-graphic properties [1, 2]. As a result, students are oftengrouped with peers other than their usual cohort, lead-ing to Complaint 7. However, after graduation, they willnot necessarily always be working with their best friendor fraternity brother. They can always form out of classstudy groups with their friends (Complaint 5). To ensurestudents neither shirk their responsibilities nor dominatethe discussion, specific roles such as manager, techni-cian, reporter, and recorder are assigned on a rotatingbasis [1] and students are given the opportunity tograde their small group members. It is true that it ishard for a group to work well when students are miss-ing (Complaint 8). This can be addressed in coursegrading by assigning a portion of the course points togroup work and peer evaluations [1].
The second challenge in small group work is thelearning process itself. As knowledge is constructed,not transferred [3, 4], learning is like any building pro-ject, and it is a messy process that requires work. Lec-tures are much ‘‘neater’’ and can cover more material(Complaints 5 and 9), but do the students learn more?The learning literature says no [5, 6]. By struggling withthe material (Complaints 4 and 6), students not onlygrasp its complexity but also learn how to learn [7].Biochemistry is a big field; there is no way I can coverall there is to know about the field in a semester (oreven two), so it is even more important that they learnto learn for themselves. This process does take time(Complaint 2), and it forces them to come to class pre-pared and ready to work (Complaint 1). ‘‘Sign posting’’(providing reasons for the mode of learning), acknowl-edging that it is hard work, assisting with time manage-ment and praising both effort and accomplishment areways that we can help students to cope with themessiness of learning [8].
So, why do I continue to use small groups in myclassroom? Because it works. By the end of the se-mester, there are improvements in their performance,teamwork, and ability to solve problems [9, 10]. Andthis is what education is about: students’ growth andlearning. Our role as educators is not as a performer orentertainer, but as a facilitator who guides studentsthrough the challenges of the learning process, whetherthey like it or not.
‡ To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 765-361-6186; Fax: 765-361-6149. E-mail: [email protected].
This paper is available on line at http://www.bambed.org DOI 10.1002/bmb.20511219
Q 2011 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION
Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 219–220, 2011
REFERENCES
[1] D. M. Hanson (2006) Instructor’s Guide to Process-OrientedGuided-Inquiry Learning, Pacific Crest, Lisle, IL.
[2] R. M. Felder, R. Brent (1996) Navigating the bumpy road to stu-dent-centered instruction, Coll. Teach. 44, 43–47.
[3] G. Bodner, M. Klobuchar, D. Geelan (2001) The many forms of con-structivism, J. Chem. Educ. 78, 1107.
[4] S. C. Nurrenbern (2001) Piaget’s theory of intellectual developmentrevisited, J. Chem. Educ. 78, 1107–1110.
[5] S. E. Lewis, J. E. Lewis (2005) Departing from lectures: An evaluationof peer-led guided inquiry alternative, J. Chem. Educ. 82, 135–139.
[6] L. Springer, M. E. Stanne, S. S. Donovan (1999) Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engi-neering and technology: A meta analysis, Rev. Ed. Res. 69, 21–51.
[7] V. Minderhout, J. Loertscher (2007) Lecture-free biochemistry: Aprocess oriented guided inquiry approach, Biochem. Mol. Biol.Educ. 35, 172–180.
[8] P. Smith (2005) Overview of facilitation, in D. K. Apple, S. W.Beyerlein, Eds., Faculty Guidebook: A Comprehensive Tool forImproving Faculty Performance, 2nd ed., Pacific Crest, Lisle, IL,pp. 133–136.
[9] B. J. Rybarczyk, A. T. Baines, M. McVey, J. T. Thompson, H. Wil-kins (2007) A case-based approach increases student learning out-comes and comprehension of cellular respiration concepts, Bio-chem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 35, 181–186.
[10] W. L. Anderson, S. M. Mitchell, M. P. Osgood (2005) Comparison ofstudent performance in cooperative learning and traditional lecture-based biochemistry classes, Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 33, 387–393.
220 BAMBED, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 219–220, 2011
