ITiCSE 2005
Team Formation Methods for Increasing Interaction During In-Class Group Work
Katherine DeibelComputer Science & Engineering
University of WashingtonSeattle, Washington, USA
ITiCSE 2005 2
In-class group work
“Break up into groups and discuss this problem for the next 10 minutes.”
Short duration: 5 – 20 minutes Simple, direct way to incorporate
active learning Students typically select their own
groupsAssigning groups can lead to greater student interaction and learning
ITiCSE 2005 3
Outline
Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work
How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning Styles
Conclusions
ITiCSE 2005 4
Collaborative learning
Large body of literature: Handbook of Cooperative Learning Methods
[Clarke, 1994] Cooperation and the use of technology
[Johnson & Johnson, 1996] Effects of Small-Group Learning on
Undergraduates in SMET: A Meta-Analysis[Springer et al., 1999]
Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning[Felder & Brent, 2001]
ITiCSE 2005 5
Why group work is good
Great pedagogical value [Springer et al., 1999] Directly engages the learner with the
material Exposes students to different ideas Promotes peer-teaching Socialization boosts level of information
processing Student-to-student interaction is key!
ITiCSE 2005 6
Interaction and Learning
Interaction is correlated with learning. Tutorial dialogue study [Core et al., 2003] More utterances by a student led to
greater learning gains. Passive listening less effective
ITiCSE 2005 7
The ideal goal of group work
In the time allotted, each and every student should be motivated and
comfortable enough to converse and interact with his or her group.
ITiCSE 2005 8
How to guarantee interaction
The literature suggests assigning groups Gives an instructor better control of student
interactions Certain group designs can promote
interaction. [Haller et al., 2000; Oakley et al., 2004]
However Most literature on assigning groups looks
only at long-term group projects.
ITiCSE 2005 9
Risks of student-selected teams
Teams tend to form around friendships. Less exposure to different ideas Greater chance of undesirable behaviour
Isolation of under-represented minorities Can increase sense of loneliness Non-participation or purely passive roles likely
Regarding long-term group projects: [Haller et al., 2000; Oakley et al., 2004]
These risks apply to in-class group work too!!!
ITiCSE 2005 10
Summary of argument
1. Interaction is key to effective group work.2. Student-selected teams are not guaranteed
to encourage the right forms of interaction.3. Assigning teams allows the instructor to
address threats to interaction.Therefore:
Assigning in-class teams can be beneficial by promoting and guaranteeing student interaction.
ITiCSE 2005 11
Outline
Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work
How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning Styles
Conclusions
ITiCSE 2005 12
Desired Traits for In-Class Teams
Immediate productivity Focus on students discussing the problem Deemphasize the need to learn how to
work together [Barker, 2005]
Uniform participation Create a group atmosphere that
encourages every member to contribute Efficiently use the allotted time
ITiCSE 2005 13
Outline
Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work
How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning Styles
Conclusions
ITiCSE 2005 14
The Original Jigsaw Method
Promotes peer-teaching by making each member in charge of educating the rest of the group
Developed by Eliot Aronson (1971) http://www.jigsaw.org
ITiCSE 2005 15
Original Jigsaw Method – Example
Sebastianism
Fado
Saudade
Desenrascanço
Expert Groups
Learning GroupsA
B
C
D
Portuguese Culture
Time
ITiCSE 2005 16
Jigsaw’s learning groups
Immediate Productivity:Learning group has a set agenda of peer teaching.
Uniform Participation:Each member must teach his or her peers.
Learning GroupsA
B
C
D
ITiCSE 2005 17
The latent jigsaw method
Original jigsaw method is time consuming. Expert group stage requires students to
master the material. Idea of the latent jigsaw method:
Use students’ pre-existing knowledge to determine “expertise”
Avoid requiring mastery of a topic
ITiCSE 2005 18
The latent jigsaw in action
Open-Ended
Question
A CB D
Students Respond Shuffle
Learning Groups
A
B
C
D
A. Quick SortB. Insertion SortC. Merge SortD. Heap Sort
Open-Ended Question:On an embedded device with limited memory, what sorting algorithm would you choose to implement?
ITiCSE 2005 19
Observations from piloting
Students had a personal stake in the peer teaching process.
Contagious enthusiasm Critical thinking evident
Students could discuss pros and cons about all the choices.
Some students admitted changing their opinion of the best answer.
ITiCSE 2005 20
Outline
Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work
How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning
Styles
Conclusions
ITiCSE 2005 21
Learning styles and Group Work
Learning Style:A set of behaviours preferred by a person for learning.
Using styles for grouping is not a new idea: Business management [Bridges, 2000] Engineering Education [Jensen et al.,
2000]
ITiCSE 2005 22
Learning styles and IGWS
Felder-Silverman Learning Styles Developed for science & engineering students Students completed an online Felder-Silverman
Learning Style Inventory for homework. Reflective / Active axis
Describes one’s approach to problem-solving Reflective learners think silently before offering
a solution or starting an experiment. Active learners brainstorm out loud and try out
new ideas.
ITiCSE 2005 23
Forming teams
Members of a team should have similar Reflective / Active scores
Immediate productivity Members in a group will start the solution
process in a similar way. Uniform participation
Similar thinking styles provide a comfortable, familiar atmosphere to work in.
ITiCSE 2005 24
Observations from piloting
Groups clearly identifiable by their behaviours Reflective groups quiet for first few minutes Active groups immediately started
brainstorming out loud. Evidence of participation by everyone
Students confident in explaining ideas regardless of classroom persona
Students verbally supportive of team members
ITiCSE 2005 25
Conclusions
Assigning teams for in-class group work can be beneficial.
The classroom atmosphere changed Greater student participation and
interaction More enthusiasm More time on task Etc.
The results are preliminary; future study is needed.
ITiCSE 2005 26
A final thought
Student opinions of in-class group workchanged for the positive. Survey at the start of the term:
53% negative about in-class group work Voluntary feedback at the end of the
term: 1 out of 27 negative about in-class group
work Rest of responses positive and detailed
ITiCSE 2005 27
A special thanks to…
The faculty and students involved Steve Wolfman and Ken Yasuhara for
all their advice and insights
For more information, please contact:[email protected]://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/deibel
Top Related