ac educator
Practical Tips for Cooperative Learning Thomas J. Wenzel, Bates College
L
ast month in this column, I discussed cooperative learning (1); however, this type of learning, when properly implemented, involves more than just putting students into groups. Cooperation maximizes everyone’s learning, and a student who understands a concept should be expected to explain it to group members who do not. Thus, a successful cooperative learning program creates interdependence among group members who support, assist, and encourage each other (2).
To accomplish these goals, students must have good social skills. Near the beginning of a course, the instructor must specify ground rules for acceptable behavior. A student or group of students should be praised for good behavior. The instructor may need to meet with groups or individuals who do not exhibit appropriate social skills. One important social skill is coping with differing opinions. When constructively handled, controversy encourages students to question their own views and to search for more information (2). The instructor, however, must encourage students to be courteous and listen to the opinions of others.
BOB SOULÉ
Social skills
Fostering interdependence Group-graded activities, if properly administrated, can help foster interdependence. Some instructors award
bonus points on exams to an entire group if every member achieves above a predetermined score. In certain analytical chemistry courses, students are
M A Y 1 , 2 0 0 0 / A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y
359 A
ac educator
given cooperative exams (3, 4) or graded on group lab assignments (4–7). An instructor can create a sense of interdependence by assigning students different roles (2, 5). Thus, each student must fulfill their role for the group to be successful. Nevertheless, under cooperative learning, students must also be held individually accountable for their work (2). This can be accomplished with individual tests or lab reports (8) or by recording how often a student contributes during group work. A student also can be required to explain course concepts to someone else during a structured activity or provide a selfevaluation of his or her contributions and those of others (2, 4, 7 ) . Finally, it is important to allow time at the end of a session for group processing, during which students assess how well they are meeting the course goals and maintaining effective working relationships (2). Group processing must be structured, but it can be as simple as answering two questions: (1) Name something each member did that was helpful for the group; and (2) Describe what you could do to make
cal chemistry courses with large lecture sections and are known to enhance student learning (4, 11). Informal activities interspersed throughout a lecture can help students focus on the material, organize the material in advance of its presentation, understand the material being taught, and provide closure to the session. Lecture breaks give students opportunities to correct misconceptions, fill in gaps in knowledge, and engage more in the learning experience. These activities should last only several minutes. It is best if the groups produce a specific product, such as a short, written response. If a preparatory reading has been assigned, several activities could occur at the beginning of class. Students can be required to bring written questions on the reading, and randomly assigned pairs take turns discussing the questions. Or students can be required to bring a short paper to class that analyzes the reading and then read, edit, and criticize a partner’s paper. Finally, students can be given a short, ungraded quiz on the reading. The quiz would be taken individually, but pairs
The goal is to have each student formulate responses, share them with a partner, and reformulate them. the group function better (2). It is useful to have the groups submit a summary of their processing. Studies show that group processing helps students develop better problem-solving skills and achieve more (9, 10). Therefore, the instructor must have clear expectations about the purpose of processing.
Methods of cooperative learning Informal groups in lecture. One of the easiest ways to start cooperative learning is to establish informal groups during a lecture. These groups have been used successfully in analyti-
360 A
of students would compare and discuss their answers. The instructor also can provide a list of questions before the lecture. Paired-up students can discuss what they already know about the questions and how they might pertain to the new topic(s). The goal is to get students engaged in the material before it is developed and help them make connections between new topics and earlier course material. Assignments should be collected, and a small amount of credit awarded for completion (2). Various collaborative activities can
A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y / M A Y 1 , 2 0 0 0
be interspersed throughout a lecture, such as having pairs of students compare notes. Another is to pose questions on the material just presented and ask each student to formulate answers, which are compared with their partners’. Students might be asked to react to something just presented or integrate new material into existing knowledge or conceptual frameworks. Once again, the goal is to have each student formulate responses, share them with a partner, and reformulate them. These activities have been shown to significantly improve students’ understanding and retention (2, 11). Moreover, students will be more forthcoming with a partner than in a whole-class discussion. A one-on-one discussion also helps. Students can be asked to list the main points or prepare a 1-minute paper (12). These are then reviewed with a partner. Alternatively, students can be asked to write two questions they still have and review them with a partner. With the availability of e-mail, the instructor may want to collect these questions and clarify common points of confusion. Activities with formal groups. Cooperative learning also can be used in place of lecturing (3, 13). For example, material on quantitative (e.g., acid–base calculations) or conceptual (e.g., peak broadening in chromatography) topics can be developed through a series of questions on a work sheet. The information needed to solve a problem may be withheld from students until necessary (14). A concept or procedure (e.g., calculation of the pH of a weak base) might first be explained in a brief lecture, and then further questions could be assigned to each group. Ambitious problems that will require library research can also be assigned (14, 15). Group investigation. Group investigation most often occurs during lab projects. Students with a common interest should work together and have control over the project’s execution (16). The instructor should work
ac educator
with the students to identify subtopics. The students work together to plan the investigation, identify the needed resources, and allocate responsibilities. Upon completion, the students evaluate their conclusions and present them to the class (4–8, 17 ) . Jigsaw. In the jigsaw procedure, each group member is assigned a topic related to the analytical problem or project. This approach can be used in the classroom, but it is especially suited to lab projects (18). It could involve the correct procedures for sampling, separating the desired material from the matrix, performing the measurement, using glassware or equipment, preparing standards, or analyzing the data. Members of different groups with similar responsibilities, such as sampling, are paired to study the topic and communicate the information to others. Different pairs of students with the same responsibilities refine the presentation. The students then teach the material to the other group members. Cooperative practice testing. Instructors who give practice test questions can ask students to individually answer the questions, pair them with other students to agree on one answer, and pair them a second time to again agree on an answer. Such a procedure helps students to understand the material and eliminate misunderstandings. A similar procedure involves drillreview pairs. Problems are assigned, and one person describes how to solve it while the other checks the results. The roles are reversed for the next problem. This pair now checks with another pair, working on the problems until a consensus is achieved. Structured academic controversy. Each group is divided into two subsets—one develops a “pro” position and the other a “con” position (2). For example, one subset summarizes the strengths of a particular analytical method, whereas the other subset
The purpose of cooperative methods is to actively engage students in learning and provide students with more resources and support. itemizes the limitations. The two subsets then present the different sides, differentiate the positions, and assess the degree of evidence and logic to support each case. The subsets then reverse the perspective and argue the opposite side, after which the students drop their advocacy positions, clarify their rationale, and collaborate on a single group report. Group competition. Certain types of group competitions can be established that offer bonus points (19). These competitions include group exam scores in which the individual gets a bonus if the combined group score exceeds a certain level. Some instructors also set up tournamentstyle games in which groups or selected group members compete to answer questions. This list of methods is not intended to be exhaustive. As with any teaching method, no single cooperative learning approach is right for all situations or instructors. Individual instructors will develop their own modifications or new procedures. The purpose of cooperative methods is to actively engage students in learning and provide students with more resources and support. When compared with lecture methods, studies show that cooperative learning not only improves student achievement but also helps students develop better problem-solving, critical-thinking, social, communication, and collaboration skills.
References (1) (2)
Wenzel, T. Anal. Chem. 2000,72, 293 A–296 A. Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T.; Smith, K. A. Cooperative Learning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity; ASHEERIC Higher Education Report No. 4.; The George Washington University, Graduate
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)
(13) (14)
(15) (16) (17) (18)
(19)
School of Education and Human Development: Washington, DC, 1991. Ross, M. R.; Fulton, R. B. J. Chem. Educ. 1994,71, 141–143. Wright, J. C. J. Chem. Educ. 1996,73, 827–832. Walters, J. P. Anal. Chem. 1991,63, 977 A– 985 A. Fitch, A.; Wang, Y.; Mellican, S.; Macha, S. Anal. Chem. 1996,68, 727 A–731 A. Wilson, G. S.; Anderson, M. R.; Lunte, C. E. Anal. Chem. 1999,71, 677 A–681 A. Wenzel, T. J. Anal. Chem. 1995,67, 470 A– 475 A. Yager, S.; Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T. J. Educ. Psych. 1985,77, 60–66. Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T.; Stanne, M.; Garibaldi, A. J. Soc. Psych. 1990,130, 507–516. Wenzel, T. J. Anal. Chem. 1999,71, 817 A– 819 A. Light, R. J. The Harvard Assessment Seminars; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1990. Wenzel, T. J. Anal. Chem. 1998,70, 790 A– 795 A. Allen, D. E.; Duch, B. J.; Groh, S. E. New Directions for Teaching and Learning; JosseyBass: San Francisco, CA, 1996, 43–52. Duch, B. J. J. College Sci. Teaching 1996, 25, 326–329. Sharan, Y.; Sharan, S. Educ. Leadership 1990,47, 17–19. Hughes, K. D. Anal. Chem. 1993,65, 883 A– 889 A. Aronson, E.; Blaney, N.; Stephan, C.; Sikes, J.; Snapp, M. The Jigsaw Classroom; Sage Publications: Beverly Hills, CA, 1978. Slavin, R. E. Student Team Learning: An Overview and Practical Guide; National Education Association: Washington, DC, 1988.
Thomas J. Wenzel is a professor of chemistry at Bates College. Address correspondence to Wenzel at the Dept. of Chemistry, Bates College, Lewiston, ME 04240 (twenzel@ bates.edu).
M A Y 1 , 2 0 0 0 / A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y
361 A
