Fostering Natural Differentiation through Cooperative Learning
Karen A. McCay
29 July 2017
While no instructional model works for all teachers, there is one model which seems to work for all students, even if they don’t initially like it, and that model is cooperative group learning. Regardless of the content in question, students master information faster in collaborative teams--almost without exception. Even students, who think they learn faster on their own are generally wrong. Most students are either motivated by cooperation or competition, but rarely by both, and finding a balance between the two is essential for this reason in cooperative grouping because using only one type of grouping without the other will alienate an entire group of learners and negate their experience of learning in the unchanging model (Prensky, 2010, p. 157-158). Cooperative learning, when the grouping is flexible, is the ideal platform for instructors to provide outstanding differentiation for all students in the room, which ensures all students will show growth during their units of instruction.
Some instructors are caught in hold-out schools where students don’t have access to technology of any kind in the classroom, but these technology deserts are now the exception. Through cooperative learning, each group of students in almost every room have a device they can use for online learning (Sprenger, 2010, p. 10). Instructors can plan wisely to provide clear learning objectives to students and enough direction for students to inquire digitally through internet content until they learn via video, images searches, internet text, and creation of their own digital media products as they synthesize information. In this era most students don’t need much more assistance than the goals for the day, effective communication of expectations about how those goals might be documented at different levels of mastery, and affirmation that their ideas are on the right track (Crockett, Jukes, & Churches, 2011, pp. 69-78). Most students find this platform for learning highly engaging, so they work diligently and spend less time off task (Dean, Hubbell, Pitler, & Stone, 2012, p. 19).
The cooperative group model in the 21st century frees instructors of most time wasters, allowing them to differentiate in much more meaningful ways. With the majority of learners working at a high level of engagement and autonomy, instructors can work the room and facilitate for students on both the high end and the low end of the spectrum. Struggling learners can have much more time, allowing for critical questioning, which guides them through a slower process of thinking as they inquire into resources and question those sources to learn (Lemov, 2015, p. 204). They may need facilitation again when they are deciding on a product to document their learning. Instructors can guide them again with probing questions (Burgess, 2012, p. 104). After a few group sessions, they will need less guidance because they’ll be more comfortable with the process of critical questioning and investigation, which they will be internalizing--developing independence and autonomy during each progressive unit of instruction.
Students on the high end may need a different challenge and want to know how they can take their assignment into the real world in order to give their work a deeper meaning. Teachers can use the same process of critical questioning to guide these students to those answers, as well, and provide permission for students needing extensions to find those pathways --they need to document growth beyond mastery (Neihart, Reis, Robinson, & Moon, 2002, p. 276).
If teachers won’t engage their students and allow their students to control their interaction with learning content in teams working toward their goals, however, they will never have time to both teach that content to all learners AS WELL AS differentiate that content for exceptional learners in need (Maker & Schiever, 2005, pp. 298-305). The cooperative learning model allows instructors to oversee the successful completion of both tasks, and research shows the model will also increase learners’ proficiency levels at the same time.
Other Instructional Toolkit Pages:
Instructional Time
Student Engagement
Re-Teaching
Extending Learning Beyond Mastery
Or Return to Instructional Tools Main Page:
Instructional Tools
Reference:
Burgess, D. (2012). Teach like a pirate: Increase student engagement, boost your creativity, and transform your life as an educator. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc.
Crockett, L., Jukes, I., & Churches, A. Literacy is not enough: 21st Century fluencies for the digital age.
Moorabbin, Vic.: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Dean, C. B., Hubbell, E. R., Pitler, H., & Stone, B. J. (2012). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement, 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Goodwin, B., & Hubbell, E. R. (2013). The 12 touchstones of good teaching: A Checklist for staying focused every day. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Lemov, D. (2015). Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Maker, C. J., & Schiever, S. W. (2005). Teaching models in education of the gifted, 3rd edition. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.
Niehart, M., Reis, S. M., Robinson, N. M., & Moon, S., M. (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? Washington, DC: Prufrock.
Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Sprenger, M. (2010). Brain-based teaching in the digital age. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Karen A. McCay
29 July 2017
While no instructional model works for all teachers, there is one model which seems to work for all students, even if they don’t initially like it, and that model is cooperative group learning. Regardless of the content in question, students master information faster in collaborative teams--almost without exception. Even students, who think they learn faster on their own are generally wrong. Most students are either motivated by cooperation or competition, but rarely by both, and finding a balance between the two is essential for this reason in cooperative grouping because using only one type of grouping without the other will alienate an entire group of learners and negate their experience of learning in the unchanging model (Prensky, 2010, p. 157-158). Cooperative learning, when the grouping is flexible, is the ideal platform for instructors to provide outstanding differentiation for all students in the room, which ensures all students will show growth during their units of instruction.
Some instructors are caught in hold-out schools where students don’t have access to technology of any kind in the classroom, but these technology deserts are now the exception. Through cooperative learning, each group of students in almost every room have a device they can use for online learning (Sprenger, 2010, p. 10). Instructors can plan wisely to provide clear learning objectives to students and enough direction for students to inquire digitally through internet content until they learn via video, images searches, internet text, and creation of their own digital media products as they synthesize information. In this era most students don’t need much more assistance than the goals for the day, effective communication of expectations about how those goals might be documented at different levels of mastery, and affirmation that their ideas are on the right track (Crockett, Jukes, & Churches, 2011, pp. 69-78). Most students find this platform for learning highly engaging, so they work diligently and spend less time off task (Dean, Hubbell, Pitler, & Stone, 2012, p. 19).
The cooperative group model in the 21st century frees instructors of most time wasters, allowing them to differentiate in much more meaningful ways. With the majority of learners working at a high level of engagement and autonomy, instructors can work the room and facilitate for students on both the high end and the low end of the spectrum. Struggling learners can have much more time, allowing for critical questioning, which guides them through a slower process of thinking as they inquire into resources and question those sources to learn (Lemov, 2015, p. 204). They may need facilitation again when they are deciding on a product to document their learning. Instructors can guide them again with probing questions (Burgess, 2012, p. 104). After a few group sessions, they will need less guidance because they’ll be more comfortable with the process of critical questioning and investigation, which they will be internalizing--developing independence and autonomy during each progressive unit of instruction.
Students on the high end may need a different challenge and want to know how they can take their assignment into the real world in order to give their work a deeper meaning. Teachers can use the same process of critical questioning to guide these students to those answers, as well, and provide permission for students needing extensions to find those pathways --they need to document growth beyond mastery (Neihart, Reis, Robinson, & Moon, 2002, p. 276).
If teachers won’t engage their students and allow their students to control their interaction with learning content in teams working toward their goals, however, they will never have time to both teach that content to all learners AS WELL AS differentiate that content for exceptional learners in need (Maker & Schiever, 2005, pp. 298-305). The cooperative learning model allows instructors to oversee the successful completion of both tasks, and research shows the model will also increase learners’ proficiency levels at the same time.
Other Instructional Toolkit Pages:
Instructional Time
Student Engagement
Re-Teaching
Extending Learning Beyond Mastery
Or Return to Instructional Tools Main Page:
Instructional Tools
Reference:
Burgess, D. (2012). Teach like a pirate: Increase student engagement, boost your creativity, and transform your life as an educator. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc.
Crockett, L., Jukes, I., & Churches, A. Literacy is not enough: 21st Century fluencies for the digital age.
Moorabbin, Vic.: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Dean, C. B., Hubbell, E. R., Pitler, H., & Stone, B. J. (2012). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement, 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Goodwin, B., & Hubbell, E. R. (2013). The 12 touchstones of good teaching: A Checklist for staying focused every day. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Lemov, D. (2015). Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Maker, C. J., & Schiever, S. W. (2005). Teaching models in education of the gifted, 3rd edition. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.
Niehart, M., Reis, S. M., Robinson, N. M., & Moon, S., M. (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? Washington, DC: Prufrock.
Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Sprenger, M. (2010). Brain-based teaching in the digital age. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.