ITiCSE 2005

Team Formation Methods for Increasing Interaction During In-Class Group Work

Katherine DeibelComputer Science & Engineering

University of WashingtonSeattle, Washington, USA

ITiCSE 2005 2

In-class group work

“Break up into groups and discuss this problem for the next 10 minutes.”

Short duration: 5 – 20 minutes Simple, direct way to incorporate

active learning Students typically select their own

groupsAssigning groups can lead to greater student interaction and learning

ITiCSE 2005 3

Outline

Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work

How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning Styles

Conclusions

ITiCSE 2005 4

Collaborative learning

Large body of literature: Handbook of Cooperative Learning Methods

[Clarke, 1994] Cooperation and the use of technology

[Johnson & Johnson, 1996] Effects of Small-Group Learning on

Undergraduates in SMET: A Meta-Analysis[Springer et al., 1999]

Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning[Felder & Brent, 2001]

ITiCSE 2005 5

Why group work is good

Great pedagogical value [Springer et al., 1999] Directly engages the learner with the

material Exposes students to different ideas Promotes peer-teaching Socialization boosts level of information

processing Student-to-student interaction is key!

ITiCSE 2005 6

Interaction and Learning

Interaction is correlated with learning. Tutorial dialogue study [Core et al., 2003] More utterances by a student led to

greater learning gains. Passive listening less effective

ITiCSE 2005 7

The ideal goal of group work

In the time allotted, each and every student should be motivated and

comfortable enough to converse and interact with his or her group.

ITiCSE 2005 8

How to guarantee interaction

The literature suggests assigning groups Gives an instructor better control of student

interactions Certain group designs can promote

interaction. [Haller et al., 2000; Oakley et al., 2004]

However Most literature on assigning groups looks

only at long-term group projects.

ITiCSE 2005 9

Risks of student-selected teams

Teams tend to form around friendships. Less exposure to different ideas Greater chance of undesirable behaviour

Isolation of under-represented minorities Can increase sense of loneliness Non-participation or purely passive roles likely

Regarding long-term group projects: [Haller et al., 2000; Oakley et al., 2004]

These risks apply to in-class group work too!!!

ITiCSE 2005 10

Summary of argument

1. Interaction is key to effective group work.2. Student-selected teams are not guaranteed

to encourage the right forms of interaction.3. Assigning teams allows the instructor to

address threats to interaction.Therefore:

Assigning in-class teams can be beneficial by promoting and guaranteeing student interaction.

ITiCSE 2005 11

Outline

Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work

How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning Styles

Conclusions

ITiCSE 2005 12

Desired Traits for In-Class Teams

Immediate productivity Focus on students discussing the problem Deemphasize the need to learn how to

work together [Barker, 2005]

Uniform participation Create a group atmosphere that

encourages every member to contribute Efficiently use the allotted time

ITiCSE 2005 13

Outline

Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work

How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning Styles

Conclusions

ITiCSE 2005 14

The Original Jigsaw Method

Promotes peer-teaching by making each member in charge of educating the rest of the group

Developed by Eliot Aronson (1971) http://www.jigsaw.org

ITiCSE 2005 15

Original Jigsaw Method – Example

Sebastianism

Fado

Saudade

Desenrascanço

Expert Groups

Learning GroupsA

B

C

D

Portuguese Culture

Time

ITiCSE 2005 16

Jigsaw’s learning groups

Immediate Productivity:Learning group has a set agenda of peer teaching.

Uniform Participation:Each member must teach his or her peers.

Learning GroupsA

B

C

D

ITiCSE 2005 17

The latent jigsaw method

Original jigsaw method is time consuming. Expert group stage requires students to

master the material. Idea of the latent jigsaw method:

Use students’ pre-existing knowledge to determine “expertise”

Avoid requiring mastery of a topic

ITiCSE 2005 18

The latent jigsaw in action

Open-Ended

Question

A CB D

Students Respond Shuffle

Learning Groups

A

B

C

D

A. Quick SortB. Insertion SortC. Merge SortD. Heap Sort

Open-Ended Question:On an embedded device with limited memory, what sorting algorithm would you choose to implement?

ITiCSE 2005 19

Observations from piloting

Students had a personal stake in the peer teaching process.

Contagious enthusiasm Critical thinking evident

Students could discuss pros and cons about all the choices.

Some students admitted changing their opinion of the best answer.

ITiCSE 2005 20

Outline

Argument For Assigning Teams for In-Class Group Work

How to Assign In-Class Teams: Desired Traits for In-Class Teams The Latent Jigsaw Method Forming Teams Through Learning

Styles

Conclusions

ITiCSE 2005 21

Learning styles and Group Work

Learning Style:A set of behaviours preferred by a person for learning.

Using styles for grouping is not a new idea: Business management [Bridges, 2000] Engineering Education [Jensen et al.,

2000]

ITiCSE 2005 22

Learning styles and IGWS

Felder-Silverman Learning Styles Developed for science & engineering students Students completed an online Felder-Silverman

Learning Style Inventory for homework. Reflective / Active axis

Describes one’s approach to problem-solving Reflective learners think silently before offering

a solution or starting an experiment. Active learners brainstorm out loud and try out

new ideas.

ITiCSE 2005 23

Forming teams

Members of a team should have similar Reflective / Active scores

Immediate productivity Members in a group will start the solution

process in a similar way. Uniform participation

Similar thinking styles provide a comfortable, familiar atmosphere to work in.

ITiCSE 2005 24

Observations from piloting

Groups clearly identifiable by their behaviours Reflective groups quiet for first few minutes Active groups immediately started

brainstorming out loud. Evidence of participation by everyone

Students confident in explaining ideas regardless of classroom persona

Students verbally supportive of team members

ITiCSE 2005 25

Conclusions

Assigning teams for in-class group work can be beneficial.

The classroom atmosphere changed Greater student participation and

interaction More enthusiasm More time on task Etc.

The results are preliminary; future study is needed.

ITiCSE 2005 26

A final thought

Student opinions of in-class group workchanged for the positive. Survey at the start of the term:

53% negative about in-class group work Voluntary feedback at the end of the

term: 1 out of 27 negative about in-class group

work Rest of responses positive and detailed

ITiCSE 2005 27

A special thanks to…

The faculty and students involved Steve Wolfman and Ken Yasuhara for

all their advice and insights

For more information, please contact:deibel@cs.washington.eduhttp://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/deibel