Primary Assessment for Learning - Collaborative Learning - Literature review Example

Education Name Institution Date Primary Assessment for Learning - Collaborative Learning Introduction The principles of collaborative learning and motivation have been widely used in education for its positive impacts like facilitation of critical thinking, performance as well as retention abilities (Antil, Jenkins and Watkins, 1998). As indicted in this review, there is amble evidence that cognitive skills can be improved through student’s group interaction and how the pupils assume their socially learning role in a learning environment (Wigfield, Eccles, and Rodrigues, 1998). Apart from small groups, teachers also employ the use of mixed ability tables in the Collaborative strategies which enhances students their morale. The pupils perform their respective tasks/assignments with minimal direct intrusion by their instructors/ teacher. The Students are well motivated and are accomplishing their tasks in the way they think best, with individual accountability as well as positive inter-dependence in their collaborative. A further review of the video segment linked to the Action Research project in Park Lane Primary is presented. Collaboration and motivation Collaborative learning is that method of involving students to work in small groups cooperatively and be able to apply the basic learning strategies (Jafre, Abidin and Riswanto, 2012: 192). It can also be defined as the bringing together and pairing of learners in order to achieve or realize an academic aim through interaction with other students while discussing cooperating on tasks among other things In simple terms, motivation refers to the general interest and enthusiasm which can be generated by topics or sometimes by students themselves as they find out more on the topic, knowledge of or views associated with the topics under study. In addition, motivation can be established following the principle of differentiation in the pupil's learning process and development and is dependent on the students (Wigfield, Eccles and Rodrigues, 1998). The element of motivation in collaborative learning is associated with various benefits including the development of cognitive processes in the process of learning since it is attributed to storing of information the long-term memory, recognition s well s retrieval. In addition, Motivation is believed to impacts significantly on either the nature or type of learning activities number of ways including balancing of the students’ input into appropriate proportion to the level of complexity of the given assignment or tasks. It also affects the use learning methods thus encouraging them to not only learn but also achieve their desired objectives successfully. Overview of the segment The Action Research project in Park Lane Primary is all about examining effectiveness of the different collaborative learning strategies aimed at encouraging self esteem, progress as well as increasing their overall involvement or participation in their learning. An illustration by Teacher Pippa McGeoch in reference to Year 6 class gives encouraging outcome of the various learning styles employed. For instance, learners are well motivated as their work together with their counterparts at different mixed ability tables. Also, in a math class, students are able to apply various choices of success criteria to understand co-ordination and differentiation concepts. Through the various methods, students are accommodated in the planning process hence they feel some sense of ownership of whatever they learn. More learning has been encouraged through the Jigsaw methods where they conduct research on various subjects or topics and teach others. Students writing skills are also enhanced. Critical Review Collaborative learning is positively related to improved quality of the knowledge acquisition (Chen, Gonyea, and Kuh, 2008, para. 2). Other benefits include but not limited to development of autonomous learning skills, assists in the achievement of higher levels of understanding, stimulation of critical thinking , promotion of a deeper learning by retaining information for longer period, shared experiences or understanding ,thus enhancing active knowledge construction (Van der Meijde, 2005). Collaboration can take many forms in the learning setting as discussed below. Grouping The use of group work is one of the collaborative learning styles depicted in the clip. It has been argued that group learning is an important method of assisting students gain experience in both collaboration and development essential skills relevant in critical reflection or thinking as well as co-construction of knowledge. Group work seems to be related to Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s learning theories. Piaget thought teaching lessons was not enough unless pupils re given freedom to be able to discover their own ways of learning hence the need for more emphasis on student interaction and teach (Hurley, 2000). According to his theory, learning occurs through interaction that established multiple perspectives which, in turn, triggers cognitive conflict in the individual student. He argues that learning is an active process where knowledge is built upon prior knowledge and experiences and s such, cognitive development need n opportunities where students can figure-out things on their own, ask questions, formulate answers, and be able to compare their results with their colleagues. This is very essential to transfer of knowledge (Clabaugh, 2010). On the other hand, according to Vygotskyian theory, learning takes place in the course of interaction when students are introduced to a relatively higher level of complexity compared to they what have previously established cognitively. He believed that knowledge is socially constructed and learning can be established through dialogical and dialectical interactions between facilitators (teachers) and students and among students (Lin, Chan and Hsiao 2011:91). Group work also encourages autonomous learning skills since students work together through which they are able to optimize not only their own learning but also of their classmates (Johnson, Johnson, Holubec, 1998). From the segment, it is quite clear how teachers try to implement collaboration learning by way of encouraging students to work small group and sitting at mixed ability tables. This enhances their morale. Students are free to discuss what we want as well as learning what they deem important to both students and teachers alike. In the process, they able to learn a lot more than what teachers would have taught them (Newton, 2011par.4). In the groups-style of collaborative learning, students don’t depend on their teacher most of the time for instructions, correction, support or approval. Again, students depend on and communicate with each other appreciating their respective contributions. In addition, they cooperate, help and learn from each other. In difficult situations, students don’t need to ask their instructors for assistance or advice but only after they have attempted and failed to solve the problem among themselves as seen in the segment when …says ‘It’s confusing’ the teacher immediately comes to their table for support and scaffolds accordingly. The teacher acts as a facilitator helping them manage their activities as well as directing their learning process (Jones, 2007: 2). Unlike the traditional educational approach, this type of learning fit into the constructivist learning strategies where there are new roles and responsibilities for both teachers and students in the teaching or learning processes respectively. Apart from this, students are well motivated. A recent research paper into the differences between collaborative and co-operative group work led the author to the conclusion that through establishing the right classroom environment and effective use of collaborative learning groups, group work in mathematics is an effective pedagogy for maximizing student learning (Dousek, 2007). Teacher’s role in collaborative learning and a motivator Teachers have various roles. They should remain only active as a circulating resource and, if possible, an arbitrator (Antil, Jenkins, & Watkins, 1998). They have facilitative or guiding role in the various study or discussion groups, helping students in developing methods for generating ideas and revision. In addition they re supposed to not only sustain the learner’s motivation but also actively engage them learning oriented tasks or activities (Slavin, 2003:329). From the segment collaborative learning also takes the form of a legitimate cooperation which apart from the group works, teachers in the Park Lane Primary have implemented through the use of mixed- ability classes, JIGSAW techniques as well as allowing the students to participate in the planning process. The use of Group work s already seen in the foregoing sections is associated with a wide range of benefits such s giving students chance to articulate their ideas, questions and conclusions and proving them with the setting associate within social life. There are various types of groups’ and in the context of this review, mixed ability groups has been well depicted. This is a group where students of various abilities are taught together instead of streaming them (Morris, Ross and Kemp, 2004). The use of mixed-ability classes is associated with various advantages for instance, students are able to have mastery of different learning skills like writing, reading, speaking or listening. They also may come with their own personalities, strengths and weaknesses. Several studies on ability grouping revealed that when teaching and materials are tailored to student ability, grouping has a positive impact on students’ performance or achievement than the actual placement itself (Rogers, 1998). Other Researches have also demonstrated how an inclusive classroom together with specified instruction is vital component for success. Planning and students’ autonomy Students are also involved in the planning process which is quite essential for critical thinking, knowledge acquisition, and active knowledge construction. It is also consistent with both Piaget and Vygotskian view of socio-cultural cognitive development. According to Piaget's view, the child's intellectual adaptation is as more of adaptation to the social setting as to the physical thus peer interactions is essential to the intellectual competence. Piaget’s theory relates to spontaneous experimentation particularly in group, where learners can establish their own understanding s results of their trial and errors. Apart from increasing autonomy, this strategy makes students develop self correction, self-instruction, and motivation (Jacobs, Hurley and Unite, 2008). Like Piaget, Vygotskian view is based on the fact that pupils actively construct their knowledge. He emphasizes developmental analysis and the role social relations and language. He argues that cognitive development cannot be separated from child’s social and cultural activities (ibid, 2008). By allowing students to plan and cognitive foundation to learn how to learn, they can discover what else is “out there” in our world (Garner, 2008: 38) thus improving their autonomy in solving problems. Apart from this, allowing pupils to have some level of control over learning also motivate them (Brooks et al., 1998) while also giving them high sense of autonomy From the clip, it is well illustrated how Students are also actively involved in the planning process giving them ownership of what they learn. This is in consistent with the teaching or learning where knowledge acquisition, teaching and evaluation or assessment are designed to accommodate the various ways in which students progress in their learning as they are engaged in the planning (The Scottish Government, 2009). By planning their own learning, students enlarge their skills in identifying, discussing and reflecting on their own evidence of learning. In addition, they are also able to take responsibility for managing their own learning or make informed choices and decisions about their future learning. The above methods of implementing collaborative learning are associated with creating thinking on various instances or instance, by grouping students together or allowing them to be expert in a particular task, students’ creativity is significantly enhanced as there are able to think of their own solution to the problems. They also have the freedom to generate their own discussion questions and are able to appreciate their own intellect (Newton, 2011par.4-5). Task structure and types of goal Task-oriented approaches can effectively direct the learning process based on systems for that specific problems by clearly representing its task structure simply defined representation of assignments or tasks in terms of the methods or strategies applicable for it as well as the necessary conditions under which every method is applicable (Chandrsekran, 1989). Task based methods are closely linked to motivation. task involvement/engagement can enhance students motivation for instance by breaking Varying task structure from difficult and challenging task-suit mixed ability to easy to or a series of smaller goals. This can motivate students allowing them not to be overwhelmed and discouraged by complex or lengthy tasks. Motivation can also be achieved through appropriate goal planning, goal orientation or problem solving between teacher and student. Peer interaction and assessment Peer interaction and collaborative learning tends to promote self worth; self efficacy s students give help and los seek for assistance from each other. From the video segment, various peer evaluation and students communication as well as inter-dependency s they appreciate each other’s contributions is clearly demonstrated. The use of jigsaw as a collaborative technique On the other hand, in the JIGSAW technique as demonstrated by the clip, students are put in different groups and allowed to research on different topics and spreading whatever they have leant across the whole class. The method is a well-known form of a collaborative learning where different groups are given a particular aspect of the subject under consideration for instance the different elements of a work of literature or those relating to the various methods for solving a particular problem or challenge where individual member of the group is expected teach other or become an ‘expert’ on a given aspect. The groups are eventually reshuffled in order to consider of one member from each of the previous groups in one new group, and each students is responsible for ‘teaching’ their specific area of expertise to the rest of the group (Hughes and Townley 1994, 13). One unique feature of the jigsaw method is that the teachers/ facilitators are not required to be in immediate contact with the group members, even as they are available in the classroom in the entire period. In this method, group members freely discuss their given tasks without having the teacher around to monitor them, listening and giving respective feedback. Consequently, the method makes learning in the class setting more enjoyable, enlightening and enriching (Norintan, 2008:75). This is also closely related to its six stages which include establishment of cooperative groups, preparation pairs, practice pairs, cooperative/action groups monitoring and evaluation all aimed at the achievement of a common goal. Mixed - ability grouping can result in significant gap in terms of achievement between students. Sometimes those of lower-level groups may be stigmatized, especially given the fact that the movement to higher-level groups can be a great challenge or rare (Deborah, 2008:par.1). Weaker students may not be able to cope, and stronger students may get bored. In addition, the self-selection of groups can lead to students feeling isolated or awkward (Rosser and Tuitt, 2009) and reduced motivation for learning. Some students may not be in the right pace with others and may not just get along. The use of JIGSAW techniques in the collaborative learning has been criticized for its Problem-based tendencies as it focus more on improving higher order thinking and problem-solving skills while compromising the lower level knowledge achievement . In some cases, the content may be inadequately covered despite its thorough understanding (Dods, 1997) compared to the performance in the traditional approach of learning and those students unable to articulate a clear aim for learning seldom learn meaningfully (Lieux, 2001). Evaluating Student Performance and Promoting Group Processing can go along way is promoting effective collaborating learning where individual students’ and group performance are assessed while also giving appropriate feedback that can facilitate further improvement. As a teacher, it is also necessary to equip students with appropriate skills to facilitate their learning especially for the first timers in the collaborative groups. There is also the need to be coconscious of the composition and sizes of groups as these tends to impact on the overall performance. Reference Antil, L., Jenkins, J., & Watkins, S. (1998). Cooperative learning: Prevalence, conceptualizations, and the relation between research and practice. American Educational Research Journal, 35(3), 419–454. Barbara Blake and Tambra Pope (2008) Developmental Psychology: Incorporating Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s Theories in Classrooms Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education Vol. 1, No. 1 (May 2008) 59 – 67 Chandrekaran (1989).Task-structure, Knowledge Acquisition and learning, Marine Learning Vol4: 339-345 Chih-Cheng Lin, Hsin-Jung Chan, Hsien-Sheng Hsiao (2011):EFL Students’ Perceptions Of Learning Vocabulary In A Computer-Supported Collaborative Environment, The Turkish Online Journal Of Educational Technology – April 2011, Volume 10 Issue2:91-99 Deborah, P, (2008). Interactional differentiation in the mixed-ability group: a situated view of two struggling readers.(Report)Reading Research Quarterly, July 1, 2008 retrieved from http://business.highbeam.com/137985/article-1G1-208890648/interactional- differentiation-mixedability-group-situated 28th April, 2012. 02.41pm Dods, R. F. (1997). An action research study of the effectiveness of problem-based learning in promoting the acquisition and retention of knowledge. J. Educ. Gifted, 20, 423–437. Dousek, M (2007)Teaching with collaborative groups Vinculum, v.44, no.1, Term 1, 2007, p.14- 16 (ISSN: 0157-759X) Dunn, R., and Griggs, S. A., (eds.) (2000) Practical Approaches to Using Learning Styles in Higher Education, Westport, Connecticut: Bergin & Garvey Gamoran, A., & Weinstein, M. (1998). Differentiation and opportunity in restructured schools. American Journal of Education, Vol.106 (3): 385-415. Garner, B.K. (2008). When students seem stalled: The missing link for too many kids who don’t “get it?” cognitive structures. Educational Leadership 65(6), 32-38 Gary K. Clabaugh, (2010).The Educational Theory of Jean Piaget:a multidimensional analysis, New Foundations Hausfather, Samuel J., (1996) Vygotsky and Schooling: Creating a Social Contest for learning. Action in Teacher Education. (18) 1-10. Hughes, H. and Townley, A. 1994, ‘Cooperative Learning in Graduate Education: A Study of Its Effectiveness in Administrator Training in Two California Universities’, ERIC document ED 375517. Hurley, M. (2000). Video-based Supplemental Instruction (VSI): An Interactive Delivery System that Facilitates Student Learning. Doctoral dissertation, School of Education, University of Missouri-Kansas City Jafre, M., Abidin, Z., and Riswanto (2012) Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) within Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies perspectives International Journal of Humanities and Social Science February 2012 , Vol. 2(3):192-198 Johnson, D., Johnson, R. Y Holubec, E. (1998) Cooperation in the classroom. 7th ed., Interaction Book Company McLachlan, S., and Hagger, M.S., (2010).Effects of an autonomy-supportive intervention on tutor behaviors in a higher education context Teaching and Teacher Education Vol.26, Mohamed, A.A., and Helal, H.E., (2012) Learning Styles of Community Health Nursing Students’ at Faculty of Nursing and Technical Institute of Nursing - In Alexandria New York Science Journal, 2012;5(4):28-37 Issue 5, July 2010, Pages 1204–1210 Monica, M., Lickson, M., and Abel .F.S., (2012) Homogenous Grouping and Mixed Ability: A Comparative Approach on Two Rural Secondary Schools in Muzarabani District, Zimbabwe. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 4 [Special Issue – February 2012] 279-286 Morrison, GR., Ross, SM., Kemp, J.E., (2004). Designing effective instruction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York Newton, C., (2011) Teacher Testimonials (online) 27th April, 2012 at 02:06AM retrieved from.http://sites.google.com/site/edu203project6caminewton/classroom- news/howcollaborativelearningcanbeusedintheclassroom Norintan. A. M. (2008) Learning through teaching and sharing in the jigsaw classroom Annal. Dent Univ. Malaya Vol. 15(2): 71-76. Prince, M., (2004) Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research, J. Engir.education, vol.93 (3):223-231 Rogers, K.B. (1998). Using current research to make “good” decisions about grouping. NASSP Bulletin, Vol.82 (595): 38-46. Rosser, S., and Tuitt, F., (2009) Cornell University Faculty Institute for Diversity workshop led June 2009, Cornell University Slavin, R.E. (2003). Educational psychology: theory and practice. Pearson Education, Inc. Stepanek, J., (1999). The Inclusive Classroom Meeting the Needs of Gifted Students: Differentiating Mathematics and Science Instruction: It’s Just Good Teaching, US: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory The Scottish Government, (2009). Curriculum for excellence building the curriculum 4 skills for learning, skills for life and skills for work. The Scottish Government, Edinburgh. Van der M.H., (2005). Knowledge construction through CSCL: Student elaborations in synchronous, asynchronous and 3-D learning environments. Drukkerij Tamminga, Duiven, The Netherlands. Vass, E., & Littleton, K. (2010). Peer collaboration and learning in the classroom. In K. Littleton, C. Wood & J. Kleine Staarman (Eds.), International handbook of psychology in education (pp. 105-135). Bingley, UK: Emerald. Wiedmann, M., Leah, R.C., Rummel, N., and Wiley, J., (2012). Does group composition affect learning by invention? Instructional Science (online) DOI: 10.1007/s11251-012-9204-y. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., & Rodriguez, D. (1998). The development of children's motivation in school context. Review of Research in Education, 23, 73-118. Wintergersta, A. C., DeCapuab, A., and Itzenc, R. C. (2001) The construct validity of one learning styles instrument, System, 29: 385–403 Read More