Definition of Cooperative Learning........
Students’ learning goals may be structured to
promote cooperative, competitive, or individualistic efforts. In every
classroom, instructional activities are aimed at accomplishing goals and are
conducted under a goal structure. A learning goal is a desired future
state of demonstrating competence or mastery in the subject area being
studied. The goal structure specifies the ways in which students will
interact with each other and the teacher during the instructional
session. Each goal structure has its place (Johnson & Johnson, 1989,
1999). In the ideal classroom, all students would learn how to work
cooperatively with others, compete for fun and enjoyment, and work autonomously
on their own. The teacher decides which goal structure to implement
within each lesson. The most important goal structure, and the one that
should be used the majority of the time in learning situations, is cooperation.
Cooperation is working together to accomplish
shared goals. Within cooperative situations, individuals seek outcomes
that are beneficial to themselves and beneficial to all other group
members. Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so
that students work together to maximize their own and each other’s
learning. It may be contrasted with competitive (students work against
each other to achieve an academic goal such as a grade of “A” that only one or
a few students can attain) andindividualistic (students work by themselves to
accomplish learning goals unrelated to those of the other students)
learning. In cooperative and individualistic learning, you evaluate
student efforts on a criteria-referenced basis while in competitive learning
you grade students on a norm-referenced basis. While there are
limitations on when and where you may use competitive and individualistic
learning appropriately, you may structure any learning task in any subject area
with any curriculum cooperatively.
Theorizing on social interdependence began in
the early 1900s, when one of the founders of the Gestalt School of Psychology,
Kurt Koffka, proposed that groups were dynamic wholes in which the
interdependence among members could vary. One of his colleagues, Kurt
Lewin refined Koffka’s notions in the 1920s and 1930s while stating that (a)
the essence of a group is the interdependence among members (created by common
goals) which results in the group being a “dynamic whole” so that a change in
the state of any member or subgroup changes the state of any other member or
subgroup, and (b) an intrinsic state of tension within group members motivates
movement toward the accomplishment of the desired common goals. For
interdependence to exist, there must be more than one person or entity
involved, and the persons or entities must have impact on each other in that a
change in the state of one causes a change in the state of the others.
From the work of Lewin’s students and colleagues, such as Ovisankian, Lissner,
Mahler, and Lewis, it may be concluded that it is the drive for goal
accomplishment that motivates cooperative and competitive behavior.
In the late 1940s, one of Lewin’s graduate
students, Morton Deutsch, extended Lewin’s reasoning about social
interdependence and formulated a theory of cooperation and competition
(Deutsch, 1949, 1962). Deutsch conceptualized three types of social
interdependence–positive, negative, and none. Deutsch’s basic premise was
that the type of interdependence structured in a situation determines how
individuals interact with each other which, in turn, largely determines
outcomes. Positive interdependence tends to result in promotive
interaction, negative interdependence tends to result in oppositional or
contrient interaction, and no interdependence results in an absence of
interaction. Depending on whether individuals promote or obstruct each
other’s goal accomplishments, there is substitutability, cathexis, and
inducibility. The relationships between the type of social
interdependence and the interaction pattern it elicits is assumed to be
bidirectional. Each may cause the other. Deutsch’s theory has
served as a major conceptual structure for this area of inquiry since 1949.
Types Of Cooperative Learning
Formal
Cooperative Learning
Formal cooperative learning consists of
students working together, for one class period to several weeks, to achieve
shared learning goals and complete jointly specific tasks and assignments
(Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 2008). In formal cooperative learning
groups the teachers’ role includes (see Figure 4):
1. Making preinstructional
decisions. Teachers (a) formulate both academic and social skills
objectives, (b) decide on the size of groups, (c) choose a method for assigning
students to groups, (d) decide which roles to assign group members, (e) arrange
the room, and (f) arrange the materials students need to complete the
assignment. In these preinstructional decisions, the social skills
objectives specify the interpersonal and small group skills students are to
learn. By assigning students roles, role interdependence is established.
The way in which materials are distributed can create resource
interdependence. The arrangement of the room can create environmental
interdependence and provide the teacher with easy access to observe each group,
which increases individual accountability and provides data for group
processing.
2. Explaining the instructional
task and cooperative structure.Teachers (a) explain the academic assignment to
students, (b) explain the criteria for success, (c) structure positive
interdependence, (d) structure individual accountability, (e) explain the
behaviors (i.e., social skills) students are expected to use, and (f) emphasize
intergroup cooperation (this eliminates the possibility of competition among
students and extends positive goal interdependence to the class as a whole).
Teachers may also teach the concepts and strategies required to complete the
assignment. By explaining the social skills emphasized in the lesson,
teachers operationalize (a) the social skill objectives of the lesson and (b)
the interaction patterns (such as oral rehearsal and jointly building
conceptual frameworks) teachers wish to create.
3. Monitoring students’ learning
and intervening to provide assistance in (a) completing the task successfully
or (b) using the targeted interpersonal and group skills effectively.While
conducting the lesson, teachers monitor each learning group and intervene when
needed to improve taskwork and teamwork. Monitoring the learning groups
creates individual accountability; whenever a teacher observes a group, members
tend to feel accountable to be constructive members. In addition,
teachers collect specific data on promotive interaction, the use of targeted
social skills, and the engagement in the desired interaction patterns.
This data is used to intervene in groups and to guide group processing.
4. Assessing students’ learning
and helping students process how well their groups functioned. Teachers
(a) bring closure to the lesson, (b) assess and evaluate the quality and
quantity of student achievement, (c) ensure students carefully discuss how
effectively they worked together (i.e., process the effectiveness of their
learning groups), (d) have students make a plan for improvement, and (e) have
students celebrate the hard work of group members. The assessment of student
achievement highlights individual and group accountability (i.e., how well each
student performed) and indicates whether the group achieved its goals (i.e.,
focusing on positive goal interdependence). The group celebration is a
form of reward interdependence. The feedback received during group
processing is aimed at improving the use of social skills and is a form of
individual accountability. Discussing the processes the group used to
function, furthermore, emphasizes the continuous improvement of promotive
interaction and the patterns of interaction need to maximize student learning
and retention.
Informal
Cooperative Learning
Informal cooperative learning consists of
having students work together to achieve a joint learning goal in temporary,
ad-hoc groups that last from a few minutes to one class period (Johnson,
Johnson, & Holubec, 2008). During a lecture, demonstration, or film,
informal cooperative learning can be used to focus student attention on the
material to be learned, set a mood conducive to learning, help set expectations
as to what will be covered in a class session, ensure that students cognitively
process and rehearse the material being taught, summarize what was learned and
precue the next session, and provide closure to an instructional session.
The teacher’s role for using informal cooperative learning to keep students
more actively engaged intellectually entails having focused discussions before
and after the lesson (i.e., bookends) and interspersing pair discussions throughout
the lesson. Two important aspects of using informal cooperative learning
groups are to (a) make the task and the instructions explicit and precise and
(b) require the groups to produce a specific product (such as a written
answer). The procedure is as follows.
1. Introductory Focused
Discussion: Teachers assign students to pairs or triads and explain (a)
the task of answering the questions in a four to five minute time period and
(b) the positive goal interdependence of reaching consensus. The discussion
task is aimed at promoting advance organizing of what the students know about
the topic to be presented and establishing expectations about what the lecture
will cover. Individual accountability is ensured by the small size of the
group. A basic interaction pattern of eliciting oral rehearsal,
higher-level reasoning, and consensus building is required.
2. Intermittent Focused
Discussions: Teachers divide the lecture into 10 to 15 minute
segments. This is about the length of time a motivated adult can
concentrate on information being presented. After each segment, students
are asked to turn to the person next to them and work cooperatively in
answering a question (specific enough so that students can answer it in about
three minutes) that requires students to cognitively process the material just
presented. The procedure is:
a. Each student formulates his or her
answer.
b. Students share their answer with
their partner.
c. Students listen carefully to their
partner’s answer.
d. The pairs create a new answer that
is superior to each member’s initial formulation by integrating the two
answers, building on each other’s thoughts, and synthesizing.
The question may require students to:
a. Summarize the material just
presented.
b. Give a reaction to the theory,
concepts, or information presented.
c. Predict what is going to be
presented next; hypothesize.
d. Solve a problem.
e. Relate material to past learning and
integrate it into conceptual frameworks.
f. Resolve conceptual conflict created
by presentation.
Teachers should ensure that students are
seeking to reach an agreement on the answers to the questions (i.e., ensure
positive goal interdependence is established), not just share their ideas with
each other. Randomly choose two or three students to give 30 second
summaries of their discussions. Such individual accountabilityensures
that the pairs take the tasks seriously and check each other to ensure that
both are prepared to answer. Periodically, the teacher should structure a
discussion of how effectively the pairs are working together (i.e., group
processing). Group celebrations add reward interdependence to the pairs.
3. Closure Focused
Discussion: Teachers give students an ending discussion task lasting four
to five minutes. The task requires students to summarize what they have
learned from the lecture and integrate it into existing conceptual
frameworks. The task may also point students toward what the homework
will cover or what will be presented in the next class session. This
provides closure to the lecture.
Informal cooperative learning ensures
students are actively involved in understanding what is being presented.
It also provides time for teachers to move around the class listening to what
students are saying. Listening to student discussions can give
instructors direction and insight into how well students understand the
concepts and material being as well as increase the individual accountability
of participating in the discussions.
Cooperative
Base Groups
Cooperative base groups are long-term,
heterogeneous cooperative learning groups with stable membership (Johnson,
Johnson, & Holubec, 2008). Members’ primary responsibilities are to
(a) ensure all members are making good academic progress (i.e., positive goal
interdependence) (b) hold each other accountable for striving to learn (i.e.,
individual accountability), and (c) provide each other with support,
encouragement, and assistance in completing assignments (i.e., promotive
interaction). In order to ensure the base groups function effectively,
periodically teachers should teach needed social skills and have the groups
process how effectively they are functioning. Typically, cooperative base
groups are heterogeneous in membership (especially in terms of achievement
motivation and task orientation), meet regularly (for example, daily or
biweekly), and last for the duration of the class (a semester or year) or
preferably for several years. The agenda of the base group can include
academic support tasks (such as ensuring all members have completed their
homework and understand it or editing each other’s essays), personal support
tasks (such as getting to know each other and helping each other solve
nonacademic problems), routine tasks (such as taking attendance), and
assessment tasks (such as checking each other’s understanding of the answers to
test questions when the test is first taken individually and then retaken in
the base group).
The teacher’s role in using cooperative base
groups is to (a) form heterogeneous groups of four (or three), (b) schedule a
time when they will regularly meet (such as beginning and end of each class
session or the beginning and end of each week), (c) create specific agendas
with concrete tasks that provide a routine for base groups to follow when they
meet, (d) ensure the five basic elements of effective cooperative groups are
implemented, and (e) have students periodically process the effectiveness of
their base groups.
The longer a cooperative group exists, the
more caring their relationships will tend to be, the greater the social support
they will provide for each other, the more committed they will be to each
other’s success, and the more influence members will have over each
other. Permanent cooperative base groups provide the arena in which
caring and committed relationships can be created that provide the social
support needed to improve attendance, personalize the educational experience,
increase achievement, and improve the quality of school life.
Integrated Use
Of All Three Types Of Cooperative Learning
These three types of cooperative learning may
be used together (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 2008). A typical class
session may begin with a base group meeting, which is followed by a short
lecture in which informal cooperative learning is used. The lecture is
followed by a formal cooperative learning lesson. Near the end of the
class session another short lecture may be delivered with the use of informal
cooperative learning. The class ends with a base group meeting.
