To: Jennifer Walker, principal SHS
From: Lisa Rose, Spanish teacher, SHS
Dear Mrs. Walker,
One of the weaknesses I perceived in my first year of
teaching at SHS was my inconsistency in creating a positive classroom
environment. I noticed as the year progressed that I had two classes with a
very positive atmosphere and that those two classes also had the highest grades
and the least number of discipline problems. Therefore, this summer I engaged
in an inquiry project studying the factors important to class environment.
One theme that emerged from interviews with teachers, students, and review of
relevant research was the importance of group work in building community, which
enhances achievement. I decided to further my study of how groups can be utilized
to improve classroom environment and achievement, and so read the book Learning Together and Alone by David
Johnson and Roger Johnson (1999). This book focuses on three different types of
cooperative groups: formal, informal, and base groups. It cites a plethora of
studies and coincides with several other works showing the positive impacts of such grouping techniques in education.
At my year-end summative conference regarding my evaluations
over the course of the year, one goal that was set for me in the coming year
was to improve individualized instruction strategies, an area that I believe
many teachers struggle with. Tomlinson & McTighe (2006), in their book Integrating Differentiated Instruction andUnderstanding by Design: Connecting Content and Kids, like Johnson &
Johnson, emphasize the importance of group work in reaching the needs of
diverse learners. When students work in several small groups instead of one
large one, they are able to learn the material on their own terms and more at
their own pace. They are more likely to stay focused on the task and engage in
higher thinking, which is connected to learning, than if they work alone or as
one whole group.
Another weakness of mine on my evaluation was standard IV-f, teacher “organizes student learning teams for the purpose of developing
cooperation, collaboration, and student leadership.” Prior to my research this
summer I really didn’t understand what that meant. I encouraged students to
work in groups in various situations with various instructional goals, and I
didn’t see how that was different from “learning teams.” When I asked what the
difference was, the answers I was given were really too vague to be beneficial
to me in improving on that standard. After my research on this topic, I have a
much better understanding of how cooperative groups or “learning teams” are
different from traditional groups, and how to organize them to be successful.
During the course of last year, at several faculty meetings,
the idea of collaborative instructional methods was encouraged. The administrative
team completed walk-throughs of classes to see which forms of instruction were
being utilized, and similar to the findings in Johnson & Johnson, the
majority of class time was being spent in whole group instruction, or
individuals completing work on their own, with cooperative learning the least
used method (5). The administrative staff made their goal clear (increase
cooperative learning), but the findings in the walk-throughs didn’t change
throughout the year. I believe that this is because teachers at our school
aren’t properly trained in the importance of collaborative grouping techniques,
and how to implement them, and that our staff as individuals and as a whole
would be stronger and promote higher rates of student learning if we were
provided the training we lack regarding cooperative learning.
I believe the administrative team at SHS has always promoted
the value of teacher-student relationships, and training such as the
professional development led by Larry Bell last year inspired teachers to form
strong relationships with their students as a way to improve class environment
and achievement, and I think focusing as a staff on collaborative learning
techniques would help foster stronger student-student relationships, adding to
the family feeling that we strive to maintain at SHS.
Incorporating a study of cooperative grouping strategies
into our PLC sessions would be an ideal way to implement such training, and
would coincide nicely with our work in PLC’s last year, as we studied ways we
as a staff could improve student learning. The benefits of cooperative grouping
are many: it allows for differentiated instruction (54), more frequent and more
personalized checks for accuracy and understanding (55), counteracts common
teenage feelings of isolation and worthlessness (63), improves student
accountability and motivation, as they will do things for a friend that they’d
never do for a teacher (65), decreases drop out rates, as students feel
connected, and not alienated from school (66) for example.
Implementing staff training in this area is important
because teachers need to know the difference between a traditional group and a
cooperative group, as not all groups are effective, and some can even be
counter effective (74). Teachers need to learn how to implement different types
of groups, and to teach students the necessary social skills to participate in
these groups (82-83.) Not only will this increase the amount of higher thinking
going on in a class (as compared to individual or whole group instruction),
which will improve quality and quantity of learning, but it will leave students
with valuable life skills such as problem solving and critical thinking that
employers are looking for.
Johnson & Johnson point out that "Society is cooperative
by definition" (x). As educators, we are charged with the task of preparing the
future citizens of our society, which means we need to provide opportunities to
practice and perfect cooperative behaviors in school. Just as the
administrative staff encouraged teachers to incorporate more small group work
last year, Johnson & Johnson suggest aiming for 60-70% of class time to
cooperative learning, 20% individual learning, and 10-20% competitive learning
(11). The results of the walk-throughs show that our staff isn’t teaching in
this way, meaning we’re losing valuable opportunities to improve student
learning, which is why I’m asking you to please consider collaborative grouping
as a topic of PLC study and a school-wide goal in the coming year.
Thank you for your time, and please contact me if you have
any questions concerning this matter.
Sincerely,
Lisa Rose
References:
Johnson, D. & Johnson, R. (1986). Learning together and learning alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tomlinson, C.A. & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: Connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
