I think it is time to change the mind frame that “group work is different from real teaching” (Roskelly vii). Group work does not have to be looked at as an activity that only incites chaotic laziness out of our students. I like to think of it as putting a band together. The singer is nothing without the rest of the band, and just like you wouldn’t expect the singer to play the drums or the drummer to sing, I think we can accept the fact that some students shine in different areas then others. The whole point of group work is to benefit from mutual collaboration. Why not give the shy student the opportunity to have a drum solo by putting that person in a small group? Collaboration in the classroom should be about exploring the ways in which our students can connect with and help each other through the process of shared learning and understanding.
Hephzibah Roskelly explains in her book, Breaking (into) the Circle, that “Group work is supposed to value and use the opinions of the various people who make up the group, and the students in the group… learn to see how the different backgrounds, experiences, skills, and purposes among them account for varying interpretations and opinions…” (20). Not only are students exposed to a variety of people they also get to express themselves within a group and add to the diversity. Collaboration is a unique expression of self in correlation to others. I like how this idea, when used effectively, can foster a sense of community. One the other hand, Roskelly warns against the “dark side” of group work in which domineering personality types can monopolize the entire group’s projects and silence the voices they are supposed to be listening to. I agree that this can be an issue, but it is one that should be addressed rather than avoided altogether. If we were to write group work off as unproductive we would be missing out on the benefits of it. One example of this is how group work can be empowering to students because it gives them an opportunity to view themselves as “actors in their worlds, and the meaning makers in the acts of literacy they engage in” (122). It also gives them the opportunity to get valuable feedback from their peers.
I feel like I have modeled this idea to my students when I was observed by a fellow TA. When Jimmy was in my class he took notes while I lectured and watched as I had my students circle their chairs in the middle of the computer lab so we could have a group discussion. I am a strong believer in teaching by example and I feel that showing that I was open to the idea of being observed demonstrated this to my class. Jimmy mentioned writing up some comments for me and I told him I looked forward to reading them. I’m glad my students were able to witness this exchange. This is what I want from my students. I want them to see the value in working with each other. To accomplish this Roskelly insists that we need to make our classrooms “a place of trust where both teachers and students can cross from the safe boundaries of unquestioned assumptions into the wilderness of new ideas and divergent experience and opinion” (94). How do we create this safe space? Do you think you create a safe space within your classes? How do or don’t you accomplish this?
I think the first step should be to abandon our assumptions that relinquishing our position as center of attention will undermine our authority. Roskelly believes that the real issue should be attributed to the fact that “the teacher worries that his or her expertise might be pushed aside if too many other voices—and many without expertise—counter it” (70). I found this idea humorous because maintaining authority in my class is something I have wondered about. The first time I spelled something wrong on the board I stopped and had a split second loss of authority panic. I realized this worry was unfounded and shook it off. So I spelled something wrong on the board and my handwriting is bad enough for me to have considered a career in medicine, so what? It doesn’t mean my students are going to make a mass exodus for the door. I feel the same way about group work. Averting the focus from myself to my students does not mean that I cannot maintain authority in my class. I agree with Roskelly that the real issue is not authority it is about holding students accountable for completing a specific task as a group (65).
What did you get out of Roskelly’s ideas about group work? Do you agree with her assessment that all groups have the potential to fall apart? I know from my personal experiences that I have seen the “dark side” of group work when I witnessed my students waste the whole time arguing with one another or when they have just sat there with blank stares. But when they cooperate and help one another I feel like I should have them do group work more often. What triumphs have you experienced with student collaborations in your classes?
Your suggestion to think about groups as "bands" really speaks to Roskelly's idea that groups in the classroom be permanent. Just like band members need to know one another's strengths and skills, classroom groups might perform best if allowed to learn to work together over the course of a semester.
ReplyDeleteThe worst group day EVER was the day I had expected my students to (eek!) have done the assigned reading over the weekend. When they got into groups, a couple of groups seriously just kind of stared helplessly at one another, discouraged and disempowered at the same time. I think that this problem could have been avoided had I organized my classroom into permanent groups and, say, told each group to assign someone to be responsible for each reading that we would discuss. I can only imagine how much better the group work would have gone that day... alas...
One might then say that the "dark side" of group work in my class doesn't look so much like students arguing with one another, as Michelle mentions, but more like students mutually reinforcing their lack of responsibility for the end product/task-- a fruitful conversation. Permanent groups might work to foster trust which, as Roskelly mentions, is a key element in group work, as well as a productive sense of mutual responsibility.
In reference to the “dark-side” of groups, I was wondering what you all do to ensure accountability in the small group? In a recent observation, Jenny suggested that I build-in some more group accountability. I’ve been trying to brainstorm some ways to make sure the groups are effective and engaged. Roskelly suggests incorporating a “process folder” in which students store notes, plans and reflections – do you think this could be incorporated into a classroom community so late in the term? What do you all do to combat the slackers and dictators in your groups? Do you agree with Roskelly that “They [students] need to go off task as they work so that the social aim – deeply a part of group interaction both in and out of the classroom – has a chance to work”? (21) How do you establish expectations for roles and responsibilities?
ReplyDeleteThere are a few things I want to touch on here. First, I’m glad Michelle brings up the discussion of safe space in the classroom; bear with me as I try to make a connection between this and the potential dark side of group work. I think that often group work, by its very nature, offers students a safe space in which to participate, especially if they tend to group up with the same classmates. (I agree, then, with Adrianna’s suggestion via Roskelly that permanent groups are a beneficial move in the classroom, although I would advocate for letting this happen organically as in my class it did.) When I monitor my groups, I see my students engaging with each other in genuine and constructive ways and, for the most part, staying on task, perhaps because I always put pressure on them to get a lot done in a little time. But is the group dynamic too safe? Certainly there are plenty of other potential dark sides to group work, including the dominating of one student or the lack of production on part of the group, as we have discussed, but what about the possibility that students may rely on the group in order to participate in the class at all? About 4 weeks into the semester, as I began to get feedback from students on what they thought their participation grades in the class should be, I received a lot of notes saying that this or that student was terrified of speaking in large class discussions, but they hoped I would take into consideration their group work participation. In fact, this was most of my students, and I wasn’t surprised because when we would regroup as a class for a larger discussion following the group activity, the buzzing would die down and about four people would actually speak. I’m glad students feel safe participating in groups, but I don’t want to them to rely on those activities as the only places to express their opinions; large class discussions are equally as important and obviously suffer a great deal when students do not feel that they are also a safe space for expression. I’ve explicitly told my students that our large class discussions should be a safe space where they can practice expressing themselves in a college dynamic – and I think I’ve been successful. Maybe. At any rate, I’ve established group work as large class discussion’s inseparable twin, and I think it keeps my students accountable for what they produce in their groups, as well as getting them used to the idea that there are two different stages in the classroom from which they are expected to speak.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteReading Brooke's article on undeelife last week helped me refine my views of group work--and I couldn't help but recall that article this week. I think a part of the "dark side" of group work that teachers fear--including the substitute who comes into Roskelly's daughter's class--is that students, when grouped, will rebel against all order and wreak havoc in the classroom by going extremely off task and discussing their epic weekend plans, etc. But Moore's article from last week suggested that these actions are a form of undetlife, a natural reaction to the" student" roles that many of our classes may feel reluctant to take on. I think we must accept the reality of the dark sides of group work--particularly this underlife--and recognize that intially our students might rebel in small ways. They may be rescalling unproductive group work from classrooms past (naming groups after second grade reading groups could, after all, dredge up memories of those less-than-focused days) and simply reacting against group work in general. It's our job to combat this dark side--to prevent a ton of underlife behaviors from surfacing by showing our students countless benefits of gtoup work. How can we do this? I think we just need to continue assigning meaninful group work, like the op-ed activity Nick describes in his post.
ReplyDelete...except for The Band whose drummer, Levon Helm, fronted and sang for the group in such hits as "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down" and "Up On Cripple Creek." I suppose this would extend the metaphor to those super-stars in class who seem to excel in their writing and group participation--maybe? Regardless, I agree with you that my favorite part of Roskelly's "Breaking (into) the Circle" was her understanding that groups work because of their diversity. I'm reminded of the group example Roskelly gives of Marian in her group: "Her speech was as much figuring out her reaction as it was expressing it. And her fellow group members seemed to know that, as they probed her reactions with their questions and allowed her space to sort out her responses"(48). This is a great example of how diversity in a group can strengthen the other members. I do agree groups can fall apart, and I often wonder: when I'm not observing any one of the groups in my class, what are their moments of strength, as in Marian's fellow students understanding how she communicates? When do groups in my classroom veer to the edge of "the dark side"? I am interested in Roskelly's idea of the teachers role here, and the pitfalls of being too involved with a group. Though I don't have an exact solution for observing groups, its not a weakness nearly strong enough to override the benefits of group work.
ReplyDeleteI gained a lot of from Roskelly and I was particularly remined of a professor who relies heavily on groupwork. However, it's the kind of groupwork that Roskelly speaks about in "How Learning Happens." Roskelly offeres the example of a group experience where graduate students had to pretend to be first graders for the group experiment. Naturally, the group work fell a part when the graduate students had to take on the role of first grade mindset, behavior and all... I remember in a few methods classes, we were asked to act and respond in small groups according the age level. (Elementary - second grade,) even the professor engaged in this role-playing at times. In my opinon, this is not where learning happens. The small groups I was in would immediately transfer into jokes and silly behavior of the ages we were pretending to be, away from the central learning that the group work was to offer. I also felt by 'pretending' to be this specific age group, we were trivializing the students we would one day be teaching. Soon I grew to despise group work in the class because it came to resemble a game of 'who could play the dumbest high school student', not 'how can this group work engage and influence the lesson'... In short, I think it's so very important to NOT ask students to 'pretend' to be an age group or something, anything they are not already. It's important to offer them group work goals that mirror who they are, that demand engagement and inquiry. This leads to more accountability and perhaps even more interest in the day's lesson, peer relationships and class materail.
ReplyDelete