Q and A

In the spirit of cooperation, we'd like your help and we'd like to help you.

If you have questions for us that we or others can answer here or a different perspective on an answer, we'd be glad to hear from you. Please write us at:

Cooperative Learning Center

60 Peik Hall

University of Minnesota

Minneapolis, MN. 55455

USA

Naturally, we can't promise to answer every question or post every comment but we'll try hard to post things that are interesting to the largest number of people.


Our questioner asks:

I'm professor of educational psychology and work with a colleague who is a professor of science methodology. We have a very particular interest in cooperative learning, giving formation to pre-school teachers and elementary and secondary teachers in this area. Here, there is no tradition of this methodology of education and we are almost pioneering. Your books and articles have been our source of inspiration. At this moment we are implementing a project of cooperative learning in the public schools of our city, using some formal and informal cooperative methods. We intend to evaluate the effects of these methods in self-esteem, motivation, classroom environment and pupils' achievement (grades) of preschool, basic and secondary school. We have been establishing heterogeneous groups with respect to sex and achievement, and have gotten results both good and very weak in the measures behind related (pertaining to achievement, self-esteem, etc). Some time ago we read in the article: "Are heterogeneous or homogeneous groups more beneficial to students?" by Nancy M. Schullery and Stephen E. Schullery, published in the Journal of Management Education, 2006, 30; 4; 542-556, that not always will heterogeneous groups be the most appropriate, depending on the sex and some psychological characteristics of the school pupils. We believe that, in our case, the weak results gotten by some pupils are a result of the heterogeneous groups.

Roger Johnson replies:

The first answer to "How should students be grouped to work cooperatively?" is that it depends. It depends on the task, on the students themselves, the history of the students, and other factors. If the teacher is planning some extending activities for very bright students, then bright students should be put together, or if it is a "re-teach" of a concept for those who did not understand the first time through, the group would be those who did not understand.

The second best answer is heterogeneous groups. The concept of having students with different backgrounds, different questions and points of view, and different talents together is fairly obvious. They challenge each other's thinking and skills. A CEO of a large company once said, "If I have two very talented vice presidents, who have the same talents, I only need one of them." One of the reasons why cooperative learning has some stunning achievement effects is the challenge presented by different thinkers in the group. Another issue is that of social integration. If the classroom is made up of diverse students, the only way that acceptance of differences will take place is to meet and interact with one another in cooperatively structured relationships. If females only work with females in school, when will they learn to work with a mixed male/female group? One of the things that cooperation teaches is that you have to be skillful enough to work with anyone and be successful.

Many teachers do not count off randomly to put together diverse groups. I have a great respect for teacher-made groups where the teachers put together the groups. Perhaps there are two students who should not meet yet, or just the person to be able to draw out a shy student? One thing is clear. The traditional "chose your own groups" usually turns out to have students who are very much like each other with the same strengths and the same weaknesses and they often finish the assignment as quickly as they can with as little thought as possible. They make no new friends and often can't name more than half the class after several weeks in the same classroom. We advocate variety and changing the groups often so that students realize that they will eventually work with everyone in the room. After all, they are all your classmates. We look forward to the time when someone who says they don't want to work with a boy, says, "Put me with anyone!".

Hope this helps. Obviously, you know more about your classrooms than we do so do what is right.


Our questioner asks:

In our physics department, we require all students to do aresearch/design project during the senior year. In the past several years, we have always made sure that if students are working on a related project, they have a well-defined aspect to that project that is "theirs". This is partly because it makes the assessment more clear-cut and partly because it fits with the traditional model of the independent researcher. We are now considering setting it up so that the students can do group research projects. For those students that are heading toward academic-style research careers, we'll have a separate thesis option that is based on an individual project. I'm sure many of the ideas from your group and the PER group at Minnesota can be applied in this setting. Do you know of any resources for managing these projects and for assessment of the individual students that are specific to laboratory/research work?

Roger Johnson replies:

The Division of Labor method of doing a group project works OK but sometimes people concentrate only on their part of the assignment and don't learn the rest. Adding a "Jigsaw" component where they teach each other their parts so that everyone has a good idea what is said in the whole document helps. If a strong group goal (one set of results that everyone can explain) and strong individual accountability (each of us can explain and defend the work) you can get more learning from a mutually done project. We have been part of some Doctorate projects where the research was done cooperatively but defended in orals separately. You can arrange an individual accountability strategy to check participation by checking continually with a randomly selected group member on explanation, progress,issues as the group works; or a written summary page that describes "my participation", "my understanding", "the hardest part", "the best part", etc. that each group member fills out. The key is that the group realizes that each group member needs to participate actively and understand completely the material; and that the group is not successful until that happens. Adults are sometimes reluctant to check each others understanding or request each other to pay more attention so it is sometimes good to introduce the leadership skill of Checking Understanding of all Group Members and assign that role to someone in the group each time they meet (rotating it so everyone learns the role). If a good deal of the work or all of it is done in class, you will be able to monitor the groups and have your own data on participation and understanding. It also allows you to intervene early. Good luck. Keep us informed about what you do.


Our questioner asks:

I am a student in Europe and I am doing an exam for being a teacher in special education. In most of literature I'm familiar with about Cooperative Learning I find quotations about two of your books: "Leading the Cooperative School" and "Cooperation in the Classroom". These books are not available here. To order them from the U.S.A. takes a lot of time and I have only 4 weeks left until the exam has to be ready. So would like to ask you how I could get at least the book "Cooperating in the Classroom" quicker the in 3 weeks or do you know an other way how I can get usable references to quote in my examination work? If there is no way to get these references on a quick way I would be happy if you could answer my questions below.

1. Concerning these 5 basic elements I am very interested in the individual and group accountability. I've read about the 9 elements of positive accountability. I've found in your essay "Overview of Cooperative Learning" just 8 elements: 1 positive goal interdependence, 2. positive reward-celebrate interdependence, 3. positive resource interdependence, 4. positive role interdependence, 5. positive task interdependence, 6. positive identity inerdependece, 7. outside threat interdependence and 8. fantasy interdependence. Could you please tell me what the ninth element is? Or are there not necessarily nine elements?

Roger Johnson replies:

Look for the book, Learning Together and Alone (Prentice Hall/now Allyn Bacon) in your libraries. The web site (www.co-operation.org) is the fastest way to update yourself. The ninth positive interdependence category is ENVIRONMENTAL INTERDEPENDENCE which gives a group a certain space where they meet and work. In Physical Education Courses for Primary age students it is sometimes a circle on the floor for their base group (to start class). In High School classes it is a spot in the room (sometimes against a wall so they can write on a large piece of paper, or put up some identity posters). Adult coop groups often have a place where they routinely meet and it contributes to the positive interdependence.

Individual accountability is another key element as it is not a cooperative group unless all members are contributing (and learning). These two elements go together to set the stage for cooperative learning. The small group skills element then contributes to the groups growing more and more effective. Good luck with your work.


Our questioner asks:

I am teaching 6th and 8th grade science half time. I am looking for recommendations on how to get kids past the "I don't want to work with them" phase. I've been lenient about letting kids work in self-selected groups and I'd like to push myself to push them to cooperate more with those they're not immediately drawn to. It would be great if you could provide me with direct suggestions or suggestions on reading material you feel would be helpful. I clearly remember spending time at the beginning of each class getting to know our group members. I am just wishing I had more written materials from class to consult as a reference on how to structure and facilitate groups.

Roger Johnson replies:

You are getting a common refrain from that age group. Usually it is good to ignore it and more on. I often tell this age student that sooner or later they will be working with everyone so today, this is your group (partner). I also sometimes ask students, "How skillful are you?". If they say I'm skillful, then I ask them to show me their skills today. If students say I'm not very skillful, then I tell them that here is a great chance to increase your skills. I have them either way. Remember to change groups often enough to be able to say that it is only for this day or week.

Some teachers have found that random assignment works better for this age group (i.e. Drawing names from a hat, counting off, etc.). If you can get the high status students modeling "working with anyone" it helps. Some teachers have gotten a preferred list (4 or 5) from each student and tried to get one preferred in a group of 3, or a random partner one week and a preferred partner the next. Other teachers have taken 10 minutes to have students in their present groups deal with the issue of people not wanting to work with others (Shouldn't we be able to work with everybody? How does it make the student feel? How would you feel? Etc.). It is a great discussion, no matter how it turns out. It may be better to frame it as a problem solving issue where you ask them to solve the problem of wanting everyone to work with everyone else sometime and having students complain or be reluctant. What are some solutions?

It should go away as they get to know each other as classmates and are successful in a number of different groups. There is a book called, The Nuts and Bolts of Coop Lng that has some of these suggestions for grouping and other strategies for other issues.


Our questioner asks:

I have been doing some reseach in London, UK on the competitive vs cooperation question within classroom environments.

It seems apparent from all of the research that is available that competitive activities within pedagogy are now seen as inferior to alterative collaberative techniques. My problem, however, is that we may be leading our pupils down a false path.

Life in a Western economic environment seems to work within a competitive framework (with the exception of the public sector). Are we not doing our pupils a disservice by not exposing them to the harsh realities of life by creating a 'toy-world' where noone is ever a loser and those who achieve are not to be respected and promoted for their abilities.

Is it such an untenable position that children are taught in school that in life people are generally self-interested economic agents who are struggling within a capitalist framework? I accept that in a more socialist environment cooperative techniques would be appropriate - but that is surely a debate for elsewhere. I am personally inclined toward a more caring sharing world - but that is not the one in which we live and one in which our pupils are destined to grow up.

A final point of note. I recently took my children to see the movie 'The Incredibles' - I guess this put the points I am making above more eloquently: some people have talents we ought to celebrate and recognise - even if this generates 'winners and losers'. When we educate - perhaps it is more vaild to teach pupils to cope with their future reality rather than our prefered ideology?

I am not here suggesting competition is better than cooperation within theclassroom, I am only raising my concerns in order for them to be answered.

Roger Johnson replies:

Actually, our work has focused on all three goal structures, coop, comp andindiv. Our first book, Learning Together and Alone (Allyn Bacon) has a chapter on how to set up appropriate competitive experiences and appropriate individualistic experiences as well as appropriate cooperative ones. However, if you just look at the research it is clear that while it is valuable to learn how to act in all three goal structures, they are not equally powerful. If you care primarily for student achievement, academic self esteem, psychological health, and positive attitudes you would chose to have cooperation as your primary goal structure. David (with his background in Social Psychology) also reminds me often that life is predominantly a cooperative enterprise in a family, neighborhood, society and especially the work place. It is not the other people you work with that you want to compete with in a free enterprise setting but the other companies. Within the company (as within a team) you want as much cooperation among colleagues as possible. Interpersonal competition does arise sometimes (two people being considered for the one promotion) but it is handled very differently in a cooperative context and different results. Interpersonal competition can get very nasty in a competitive context and one "rule" is to try not to win too often or you have to "watch your back" for years. The book describes appropriate competition as being low-key, homogeneous group (everyone seeing a chance to win), following cooperative rules of how to proceed, and carefully processed to make sure there are no lingering effects (from anyone who perhaps took it too seriously). What we may need to be teaching students is to recognize when it is not a good idea to compete so they can learn to switch to cooperative or individualistic instead. Maybe the reason we don't have a more caring, sharing world is that people are prepared to make it more that way?


Our questioner asks:

I am enrolled in a middle school endorsement class where we are researching various educational topics. One of our assignments is to present the positives and negatives connected with our case study. While I have found more than enough research supporting cooperative learning, I have been unable to locate any negative associations with this topic. I love using cooperative learning in my classroom, however I need research for the opposing side. Any suggestions?

Roger Johnson replies:

It is difficult to find negative research on cooperative learning, especially when comparing it with individualistic and competitive. The negatives seem to come from abuse of cooperative learning such as people who are just putting students into groups and calling it cooperative learning; or people who are making the groups too large (5&6 people) and expecting it to work; or not monitoring the groups to make sure they understand what the task is and are skillful with one another; or use it for everything even when individualistic would be more efficient or competitive would be more fun. I would concentrate on the abuse as the counter argument. Good luck with your work.


Our questioner asks:

I am fascinated by cooperative learning and trying to learn a bit more. I have found different names and theories. My question is if your model differs much from those of Slavin and Kagan? What are the differences and similarities?

Roger Johnson replies:

We share the same goals of helping teachers and administrators make their classrooms/schools more cooperative places, but we have a different approach. We start with social interdependence theory and try to build a conceptual understanding of what cooperative learning is and what it is not. We model and teach some of the same structures (i.e. jigsaw, comprehension triads, pair reading, etc.) but they grow from the theory. We also place a strong emphasis on teaching cooperative skills once the groups are structured (i.e. small group leadership, trust building, communication, etc.). It is our expectation that teachers who go through a foundation training will be able to translate their curriculum to make it cooperative and teach the cooperative skills needed to make cooperative learning groups work. We then have an Advanced training, a training on Assessment in the Coop Classroom, a Teaching Students to be Peacemakers training which emphasizes conflict resolution, and a Leading the Cooperative School for Administrators and Key teachers. Check the web site, www.co-operation.org for a description of the different trainings and the research support. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

I am a graduate student in education. The reason for this e-mail is that I am doing a presentation in my theorist class on you and your brother David. I know a lot about cooperative learning and have used it throughout my teaching career. I would love it if you could give my classmates and me any piece of advice for our future use in our teaching careers. Some of us are teachers, others are conselors, and still a few more are just beginning to get into the field of teaching. You and your brother are pioneers in the teaching profession and I would like to thank you two for doing what you are doing.

Roger Johson replies:

You have probably already looked at the material on the web site, www.co-operation.org. If I were to give you and your classmates one piece of advice, I would remind you that educators (except the very best ones) have grossly underestimated the power that relationships have in teaching; student and teacher, student and student, teacher and parents. Obviously, the research indicates the enormous effects of cooperative relationships on students outcomes (achievement, acceptance of differences, self esteem, and social skills). It is also clear that students work harder for teachers they like even up through the college level. (I know you are being told to "not smile before December" but that tough approach is not the best way to teach.) One of the bonuses of cooperative learning is that all the students are concerned about each other and work for appropriate behavior and each others' achievement. This allows the teacher to step out of the role of "expert on all" and "enforcer" to be more of an arranger of learning settings (including direct teaching when it is needed, individual work when it is most appropriate, and lots of cooperative work to keep the classroom active and friendly.)


Our questioner asks:

I have just finished reading your 1991 version of "Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom". While I am enthused by the ideas expressed in your book, I wonder how feasible these ideas are in a "mega-class". I teach Marketing Research to six hundred (yes, 600!) undergraduate students. The course is a 7-week introductory module that is compulsory for most students taking management-related degrees. The 600 students are grouped into two groups based on language preference. I see each group for 3 X 50 minute contact sessions per week. At this point, my course is primarily lecture-based (although I am experimenting with informal cooperative/active learning approaches in class). I can fully associate with your description of the limitations of a lecture-based approach: glazed eyes, short attention spans, poor class attendance, a reluctance to respond to questions, underdeveloped higher-level thinking skills, etc. The reason why I decided to read your book in the first place is because I am desperately looking for a new, more effective and more enjoyable teaching approach. Traditional lecturing is not the answer! But what are feasible alternatives? Unfortunately, it seems as though most educational innovations are designed for smaller classes. Also, what others regard as a large class (100-200 students) seems minute compared to my class groups. Could you please offer me some advice on making cooperative learning work in the context of a mega-class? Also, how should one start to rethink/redesign a course syllabus to support cooperative learning?

Roger Johnson replies:

You have to be a master to get formal cooperative learning going in a class of 600. Don't try it until you (and they) are very well versed in informal coop lng. Limiting your lecture to 12 minute or so and then having students deal with a specific question or problem for a couple of minutes; then moving on to another 12 minute episode works out well. If they are not taking the conversations seriously, have them write down their conclusions/questions/results each time they converse and leave it on the chair with their names on it. You will know how serious they are when you monitor the conversations during the two minutes. Karl Smith (our colleague in Engineering who teaches large classes) likes to have students do a 2 minute paper at the end of class dealing with the content, or something like, "What are the 3 most important things from class today?". This adds some accountability too. The questions have to be relevant and thought provoking for the conversations to be meaningful. When you are feeling really confident and the class is broken-in, you can try a longer, more carefully structured task that might need half or more of the period. Review the structure for Formal Cooperative Learning for this kind of task (case-based or problem based works well). Letting the students know that they have access to each other and that you value their interactions with each other is important to building an effective learning environment.


Our questioner asks:

After reading your excellent Q&A section of the site, I was wondering if you could please possibly answer a few questions for me.

Are the terms "collaborative studies" and "cooperative learning" mutually execlusive or do they differ greatly?

In terms of a child's background, have you found some students apprehensive to participate in this learning method? My hypothesis would be that a student from a very disciplined background might feel "weird" to not have a class devoted to the teacher, but rather to the interdepence of the classmates. Is this viable?

Roger Johnson replies:

Yes, I think the most interesting thing on the web site is the Q&A. Much more so that the research papers, although the research is very clear that students who truly work together cooperatively achieve much higher and like the subject, teacher, school better.

The terms collaborative and cooperative are used interchangeably much of the time. Some like to think of collaborative as a broader term including all kinds of "group work" some of which is not structured cooperatively. Cooperative implies that students have a group goal, are individually accountable to contribute and learn, are working as skillfully with each other as they can, are working Knee to Knee (usually in a group of two or three), and take time to process how well they functioned as a team and what they can do to be even better. Much different than some unstructured "group work".

Most students at the High School level are uneasy with cooperative groups in the beginning because they have been convinced that school is a place where you are passive rather than active, compete with each other rather than cooperate, and the teacher is the focus rather than each other. The top students are uneasy until they find that they learn more in a group (talking through the material increases the depth of learning) and that their grades won't be pulled down by the group (usually, graded quizzes and exams are given individually after the groups prepare each other to do well). Shy students who would never raise their hands in class will talk in a pair or threesome. Unmotivated students are uneasy until they begin to be successful because their peers are holding them accountable and not letting them slough off in the group. Low status students are uneasy as they aren't sure they will be accepted in the groups, but the norms for the groups are to include everyone, give support and encouragement (no put downs), and listen and consider everyone's ideas. If cooperative behaviors are missing, they need to be taught.


Our questioner asks:

I am an Ethiopian, currently teaching at Addis Ababa University at the rank of Assistant professor. Actually I got this title since I tried to produce a small teaching material for the third year students of information systems. It was not because of I did a lot of research in my area.

I am working in the area of Intelligent Tutoring Systems particularly to extend the capabilities of student modelling so as the information will be further expanded and will be used for group formation and instruction instead of individualized learning. I am experimenting so that the computer does the recommending of which members to keep together. Of course, the computer has to learn how to do it before it does itself. That will take me to the area of Artificial Intelligence.

The topic of the research is "Recommending learning group assignments based on Bayesian student model".

For the purpose of assigning the learning groups we need to know
Students' personality
Students' subject knowledge

But I have to explore which personal characteristics to consider for group formation and I was wondering if you could help me in the area.

I have to confess that I have to read and read a lot since I am totally new to student modelling except that I have some experience of assigning students to groups to do term papers or assignments. But to reach to the main and concrete practical work of my research, I need to have some major important characteristics of students that need to be considered when forming groups.

Because of the shortage of literature here, I could not find any material related to characteristics to consider when forming groups and since I have come to see your name in so many references, I decided to search your address and send you this mail.

I tried to discuss the matter with educational experts here and some colleagues and came out with a list which I gave to some people for their opinion. I have attached for you some of the characteristics that I have considered. I would appreciate very much if you could help me to find the necessary literature on group formation and how successful and failures can groups be. At the moment I am trying to devise a mechanism where I group students based on intuition and some characteristics, give some questions to solve and see how successful they can be and to analyze the characteristic of each individual in the group if successful in answering the question. I desperately need help since I do not know whether I am in the right track or not or whether there is an already done work on characteristics to consider when forming groups.

Roger Johnson replies:

The web-site, www.co-operation.org has some good papers on cooperative learning including a paper called, AN OVERVIEW... Which would be helpful to read. I like the idea of matchmaking through the computer but it is complex. The most crucial variable is group size not membership. Work groups need to be small (2 or 3 and on rare occasions 4). The error that teachers often make is to have students chose their own groups. This ends up with homogeneous groups by looks and status rather than on variables relevant to doing the work (more of a popularity/familiarity choice). For complex tasks, heterogeneity is often desirable (different interests, talents, skills, maybe even ability level, background). It is the differences (what you have that I don't) that make a cooperative relationship powerful. For skill review, vocabulary, and simpler tasks there may be a reason to put same ability people together but try to vary the perspective and talents. If you want to get quick bonding, a common interest is good if it is revealed right away and discussed (i.e. Interest in stamp collecting, etc.). There is a more global reason for putting differences together as you may want to build a larger learning community in a classroom in order to build an umbrella over the whole class where the students say (after working in several different groups), "put me with anybody in here". A computer program that kept track of "who worked with whom" and made new groups for the teacher each week would be of value here.

Sometimes you need a certain skill in each group (i.e. a good reader, an energizer, someone who always does the homework, etc.). I can see a short questionnaire filled out by the students and entered into the program that would allow teachers to do several different kinds of groups depending on the job to be done and the purpose of the activity. Flexible grouping is the key. You might seek out the book Nuts and Bolts of Coop Lng (listed on the web-site).


Our questioner asks:

I am an Education student in Ontario. I am currently involved in a group researching your work on cooperative learning. We are curious to know what planted the seed of this work. How did you start thinking about cooperative learning?

Also, I am personally curious to know the relationship between the two of you, although it's really none of my business.

Roger Johnson replies:

David and I are brothers (about a year and a half apart). We grew up in a family of seven children on a farm in Indiana. Probably growing up in a large and very close family started the concept of cooperation with us. David did his graduate work at Columbia in Social Psychology so he was very interested in how people meet in groups and group dynamics. I did my graduate work a Berkeley and was very interested in how people learn and consequently how should we teach. When we got back together at the University of Minnesota, we thought it would be interesting to look at how students should interact with each other as they learn. The research was extensive when we looked strongly favoring cooperative work. We started there and will continue to do research and training until most schools realize the power of putting students into cooperative relationships. Good luck with your work.


Our questioner asks:

How do I use conflict resolution skills?

Roger Johnson replies:

Just knowing how conflict works and what the skills are helps right away. To learn any new skill you go through an evolution from awkward, to "Phony", to mechanical, to integrated. It takes lots of practice and time. When we are teaching students conflict skills we make sure they see a need for the skill first and want to learn it; we define it with care (usually with specific phrases to use and behaviors); we set up times to practice; provide feedback; and process in a reflective way. Most of this material is found in the book "Circles of Learning" which describes cooperative learning in detail (a chapter on teaching skills is included). This is a good place to start as conflict resolution requires a cooperative context (people in competition don't want to resolve conflicts, they want to "win" them; something entirely different). Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

I am developing a doctoral (pedagogical) research project on using CL methods in upper division (heavy technical content) undergraduate science coursework. After reviewing a substantial amount of literature, I am left with a number of partially answered questions. I would appreciate some insight and opinions on this subject. Has the effectiveness of CL methods in undergraduate upper division, content-intensive biological science been quantitatively evaluated against a well-defined baseline? Having taught using CL methods, I KNOW it works better, but how can I prove it quantitatively? How can CL methods best be marketed in a community of the "hard science old guard" who adhere to the passive lecture/cookbook laboratory paradigm? In your opinions, what is the most compelling topic of research in this area that needs to be addressed?

Roger Johnson replies:

I don't know of anyone who has read the research who questions studentgrowth in achievement in Coop Groups. The extension of that research is that the students also seem to go deeper into the content and remember it longer if they have a coop group to talk it though and even argue their points with. One of the meta-analyses was done just with College Science and Math Students (Effects of Small Group learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology; Springer et.al.RER, Spring1999, vol 69, No 1, pp21-51).

Other outcomes that may be just as interesting or more so are student satisfaction with the classes and perception of gain. Astin at UCLA has surveyed students from over 300 colleges and found that student satisfaction and success in their education depends on a number of factors with positive student/student relationships being the top factor and positive student/faculty relationships being the second. It does no good to teach science to students if they learn to hate it at the same time (no matter how they do in achievement). Student academic self-esteem has always been important in the sciences, especially with females and minority populations.

What are you most interested in? What would you like all of your students to walk away from your class with? Maybe that's where you should start.

Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

When I was first introduced to using cooperative learning in my classroom, the ideal number of group members was four. Later, I heard people saying that usually three students did most of the contributing and the fourth was able to sit quietly and do nothing. So "three" became the magic number of students in a group. Now, I'm hearing teachers say that working in pairs is better. Is there a better number?

If so, what is it and how come?

Roger Johnson replies:

There is no magic number. A good rule of thumb is "the smaller the better". Some of the achievement gains of students working cooperatively is due to verbalizing what you are thinking. There is something significant that happens when people have to put their thoughts into words (this is one of the ways that coop lng enhances the learning of the most able students). If students are working in a pair, they each get 50% of the explaining time. If they are in a group of four (and you divide the time equally) they get 25% of the explaining time; half as much. So why use anything larger than a pair? It seems that the third person adds reflection to the work of the group and the groups become more creative in their thinking. The catch is that while it is hard to be left out of a pair, you can be left out of threesome. The students need to be skillful enough to make a threesome work. Some math teachers like to use fours, but have the students work the problem in pairs and then check with the other pair to see if they are on the right track. You get double explanation! and some confirmation or better yet a good argument.Yea! Maybe teachers should start with pairs and try a three when the problems are complex and the students are skillful working together. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

I am currently in a Masters of Education Program in Massachusetts. One of the classes that I am taking this term is Research in Education and I am doing a research project on cooperative learning and I was wondering if you could please send me some information on the following questions:

1. When did Cooperative Learning first begin in the classroom and who invented it?

2. Some results/evidance on the positive effect in the classroom

3. How many techniques/methods can you use with cooperative learning?

Roger Johnson replies:

If you want more information than I can give you here, check the web-site at www.co-operation.org. Look at the article called "Overview" and the meta-analysis first.

Coop learning is an old idea. We have research (more than a thousand studies) comparing coop lng to competition and individualistic learning going back to the late 1800's. It was in Francis Parkers' New England Schools much earlier than that and the Lancaster schools in England before that. The Talmud was studied in pairs of scholars a thousand years B.C. It is the way people learn when they aren't forced to sit in rows and not talk to each other.

Perhaps if there is an "inventor" who defined cooperative learning and put it into a theory, it would be Morton Deutsch at Teachers College, Columbia who developed the Social Interdependence Theory from his 1949 Dissertation Study. (He would say that much of it came from his advisor, Kurt Lewin at MIT, perhaps.) David, my brother was a student of Deutsch's at Columbia in the late 50's and when we both ended up at the Univ of MN in the late 60's we picked up on the theory and focused it on classrooms and schools. We still are.

The results are extensive. From the over 1000 studies over 100 years there are more than 50 different kinds of outcomes which have been examined. Certainly, achievement has been the focus on hundreds of these studies and it is clear that achievement goes up considerably when students are concerned about each others' learning. The other outcomes range from self-esteem and mental health (also more positive in a coop setting) to more positive attitudes toward school, the teacher, the principal, and the subject matter (check the meta-analysis). We are currently updating our 1989 meta analysis (over 500 studies) with an updated meta analysis with over 700 studies included. We also recently did an update of the research on motivation which was once again impressive. Though the results are dramatic, I just had a parent on the phone who said, "Of course, why would people be surprised that human beings do better when they are together than when they are apart!". That makes sense to the biologist part of me as human beings are described as a gregarious species that is at its best when people are connected, (in families, villages, communities, societies); and at our worst when we are disconnected for long periods of time and are isolated, lonely, and alienated.

There are probably many strategies and techniques. Perhaps every teacher has their own version? Social Interdependence Theory would define cooperative learning with five basic elements: Positive Interdependence (a recognition and acceptance that the group is in a "sing or swim Together" relationship; individual accountability, each person contributes to the work and benefits from the learning; the development of social skills such as communication, trust building, leadership, decision making, and conflict resolution; face to face promotive interaction; and many chances to process feedback on how well the group is doing and how they can be even better. We would suggest that there are four different types of cooperative learning if you want to break it down from Informal (short focused conversations); Formal with all the basic elements included; Base Groups that stay together throughout a semester, year, or several years that offers personal support as well as academic support; and Controversy groups that are structured to engage in intellectual argument in a cooperative setting.

Good luck with you study. Check the web site for more.

Roger T. Johnson


Our questioner asks:

What is available on cooperative learning in the math classroom?

Roger Johnson replies:

On our website, you will find in the bibliography a book, COOPERATION AND COMPETITION: THEORY AND RESEARCH, that is a series of meta-analyses on cooperative learning and a variety of outcomes. It is not up to date yet (1989) but we are working on it. There are a couple of books out that we contributed to:

Learning mathematics and cooperative learning: Lesson plans for teachers. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company, 1991 (with D. Johnson)

Cooperative learning and the achievement and socialization crises in science and mathematics classrooms. In A. Champagne and L. Hornig (Eds.), This year is school science 1987: Students and science learning, 67-94. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1987 (with D. W. Johnson).

Cooperative learning in mathematics education. In P. Trafton and A. Shutte (Eds.), New directions for elementary school math, 234-245. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989 (with D. W. Johnson).

Cooperative learning in mathematics education. In P. Trafton and A. Shutte (Eds.), New directions for elementary school math, 234-245. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989 (with D. W. Johnson).

I would expect our chapters to be somewhat the same, but other chapters may be of interest to you especially in the Neil Davidson book. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

I am a strong supporter of cooperative learning. But how do I assure that students achieve their maximum potential, and do no 'ride on the shoulders' of other students. Is there a way in which I can maximise cooperative learning as well as maximising individual achievment? Just a few suggestions would be very helpful.

Roger Johnson replies:

In our definitions of cooperation, you will find that one basic element is "individual accountability" (each student contributing to the learning of the group). This starts with the teacher clearly saying that all group members must sign off on the answers indicating that they agree and can explain each answer. Other strategies include:

If there are several people hitchhiking, follow up the project with an
individual test.

Announce that you will move from group to group and put one person on the spot to represent the group and explain any part of the assignment already completed.

At or near the end of the assignment, have each group member leave their group and pair up with a person from another group and compare answers and rationale.

Give groups a number and have group members letter off. Pull "answerers" out of a hat (i.e. 3B).

There are others as well. The main thing that needs to be done is to impress all group members that they are not being a good group member if they let someone not learn. Good luck. Check the paper "Overview of Coop Lng" on the web-site, www.co-operation.org.


Our questioner asks:

I'm an EFL teacher.I've been teaching for over twenty years in Language Schools. I've been learning a lot about Cooperative Learning and its principles through your web site. The educational system here values competition more than anything else. Since early ages, children have to take tests to be admitted to good private schools which will prepare them in the long run for the University Entrance Examination. Both students and most teachers are not trained to experience Cooperative Learning. Working in groups in classrooms means sitting together to complete a task.

My question is basically what would be the starting point to introduce cooperative learning activities in our classrooms.How can the spirit of interdependence be built? I realize that there are many factors involved but can you suggest any awareness activities which would lead to the implementation of Cooperative Learning?

Roger Johnson replies:

Two things I would emphasize in the setting you described:

Cooperation doesn't replace competition, it gives students more flexibility in the way they work. There is room for both in school and individualistic as well.

The best way to prepare students to achieve more individually is to learn it
together. The questions should not be who will do well from this class on the exams, but how many of us can be prepared to do well on the exams if we work together. If only the top 10% of the class makes it, it isn't enough. We should be able to get 40 or 50% in that category. This shifts the emphasis away from who are the smartest students in this class to how many of us will rank as smartest nationally. Does that make sense?

Most of our training books (i.e. Cooperation in the Classroom) have specific models and ideas for how to use cooperative learning and get started. We are great believers in evolution rather than revolution. A well thought out cooperative lesson each week is better than something sloppy every day. It grows on you. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

I am 15 and attend grammar school in England. Over the past year and a half another 15 students and I have built up a peer mediation project in our school from scratch. We under went training, along with several meetings, and now we have successfully achieved our aim of providing a lunch-time drop-in service in our school where the younger years can come with problems of any size or kind. This has been working well, but now we're looking to expand the project. We have come to the decision to create a 'buddy' system where 2 or 3 peer listeners partner up with each year 7 form where we can go into their form assemblies to casually chat to them and become more involved in their lives, so they can build up our trust. Have you got any other ideas on expansion, or how we can improve this 'buddy' system? Any suggestions? Thankyou for your time.

Roger Johnson replies:

Take a look at the web site, www.co-operation.org. Building a cooperative (team) learning environment in the classroom promotes many of the things you are working on. Cooperation is the context where conflicts can be resolved. One of the cooperative groups that I have seen work well in schools (especially in one of our Dept of Defense schools in Panama) was the idea of mixed age Base Groups that meet once a month or so and include a first year, second year, third year, etc. student in a small group that has a task (i.e. Mothers' day cards or solve a puzzle or school clean up, etc.) and in the process gets to know each other well and be able to meet and greet in the hallways and playground. It was called a Family Group. A similar activity but easier is to pair classes of older and younger students one a week for a specific task (read a story, write a poem, etc.) The more it covers the regular subject matter, the better. There are many other ideas. You are on the right track. If you can get people to know each other better and feel part of a larger cooperative group, the conflicts are less and easier to resolve. You want to stamp out loneliness and isolation. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

How do you do meaningful assessment in group work that reflects individual accountability? Do you have a rubric that is useful?

Roger Johnson replies:

The strength of meaningful and manageable assessment in the cooperative classroom is that much of the assessing is self assessment and peer assessment. When students get into the habit of assessing their own work and sharing in with peers in a small group where it often gets adjusted slightly, the concept of continuous, performance assessment really begins to happen at an individual and group level. If the teacher is worried about wide spread "hitch-hiking" in groups, an individual test can be given to all students with the results processed in the groups (How well did each of do? What could we do to perform better?).

Besides the individual test, many teachers will single out one person in a group while they are working and ask them (informally) to explain an answer. If anyone has difficulty explaining, the group is charged with reviewing that material so that all group members know the material. It is also helpful to train students into the role of checker who has to validate that all the group members have learned the material before the group is finished or a product is turned in. For more ideas, see Cooperation in the Classroom or Circles of Learning, or Nuts and Bolts of Cooperative Learning.

Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

Can you suggest some signals to get the class to refocus that would be useful for high school teachers?

Roger Johnson replies:

The first thing you need to do if you are having difficulty getting students back to you is to celebrate how well the cooperation is going. We call this
a "problem of success"! You don't want to use your voice, but sometimes a different sound works. Edye our sister who taught H.S. English used a tone-bar that she would hit with a little wooden hammer and it made a sound different enough to get through. I like a visual signal and will use the phrase, "Raise your hand if you are listening!". As students begin to see others raising their hands, they look around and listen so say it again. You can say that it is used with large classes of engineers sometimes at the University of Minnesota if they think it is beneath them.


Our questioner asks:

My question for you is what has been found to be the best length of time before changing triad groups for a math cooperative learning group in a 4th or 5th grade classroom.

Roger Johnson replies:

There is no magic number of days or minutes but there is a good reason to change groups fairly often. It generalizes the cooperative spirit through the classroom as students meet and work successfully with more and more people. It is exciting to hear the student who didn't work with anybody, say, "Put me with anybody" after a few months.

The rule we use is to feel free to change groups after they have experienced success. If the groups are not successful, they need to process why they are not successful and work through it. If you change groups for unsuccessful students they take a negative attitude and lack of confidence with them to the next group and that one doesn't work either.

Often the curriculum gives you good changing points (i.e. end of a chapter, end of a unit, end of the week). Keep in mind that a worthy goal is to have every student working cooperatively with every other student in the classroom eventually. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

Hi,
My question is what is best practice for how often and justifications for changing cooperative groups within your classromom at the1-4 grade levels. I realize there will be many factors involved so if you could send along the most commonly used reasons for changing groups I would appreciate it.

Roger Johnson replies:

The longer you leave groups together, the better they should become if they are working under a cooperative structure. However, the more often you change the groups, the sooner a cooperative umbrella spreads over the entire classroom so that students are concerned about everyone's progress. The rule of thumb is to leave groups together long enough to be successful and then you can change them. Groups that are unsuccessful need intervention and time. Many primary teachers will change groups weekly; some do it daily (depending on the assignment); many use different groups for different subjects to give students more exposure to new partners. The main thing is to keep the groups small and to change them often enough to have your most reluctant students say, "Put me with anybody".


Our questioner asks:

How do you feel about cooperative learning and distance learning? I am to do a research paper on the two topics. I can find lots of info on coop. learning, but not both topics.

Roger Johnson replies:

There is not much in the way of research on the topic. The University of Monterey, Mexico, is doing some courses that way but not as a research study. The little bit of research on distance learning indicates that rather than less time consuming for instructors, it is more. It is easier to answer questions and build relationships face to face. In the business sector, companies tend to bring people together (face to face) every six months so they can meet again and have a notion of who the people are on the other end of the line. How well people can build relationships through email is still an open question. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

Hi, I am a student at a university in Texas. I was wondering what you think the common advantages and disadvantages to using cooperative learning groups in the elementary classroom are. If you have time, I would greatly appreciate a response. Thank you.

Roger Johnson replies:

As you have read before, the major advantage is the increased learning and retention when students have to be concerned about each others' learning and talk through the material verbally. There are numerous other positive outcomes demonstrated in the research as well including increased self-esteem, acceptance of differences in a diverse classroom, positive attitudes toward school, subject matter and teacher, etc.

Some advantages not talked about as much are the way the role of the teacher changes from direct teaching (center of attention) to monitor, intervenor, processor. Many teachers have reported that they know the students much better because they are watching them learn, listening to them talk, and interacting with them directly in the small groups. One secondary teacher described this change in relationship with students by saying that she used to teach five periods of "blur" (knowing that students were out there, but not knowing them as individuals), and now she teaches 133 real people that she knows personally.

Most of the disadvantages come from not implementing the cooperative structure carefully. If you just put students into groups to learn and don't structure the positive interdependence and individual accountability, you find groups where one person does most (or all) of the work and the others sign off as if they learned it too; or you have a "bossy" student who doesn't allow the others to take part; or other group dynamic problems that come from not setting the ground rules for behavior and carefully crafting the group dynamics. Even when the structure is done well, there are still students who need help learning cooperative skills (communication, leadership, trust building, decision making and conflict resolution). Just as their parents get executive training or team training on the job, students need instruction on cooperative skills in order to increase the learning in the groups and build stronger positive attitudes. We think executive training should start about age 5.

It is also evident from the research that cooperative groups are at their best when the school work is difficult and/or complex. Easy tasks can sometimes be done as well alone (although learning spelling words is more fun and effective in a pair). If the classroom deals with only low level learning tasks, increased achievement results from cooperative learning may be harder to find. In our work with physics classes, problems that challenge even the top student in the group work well because everyone is glad to have a group to help out (and no one is saying, "I could do this faster on my own!").

It is also thought that it takes more time to teach material in a cooperative way (although more students learn more of the material). This is probably true, especially in the beginning when cooperative learning is new to the teacher and to the students. Cooperative learning does not necessarily replace good teaching, it usually follows it so you have two stages to teaching: the teaching of the material and the "taking ownership" in the cooperative groups. (In an inquiry lesson that sequence might be reversed.) However, when the teacher gets more precise in the teaching and realizes that she only has to teach it well enough for at least one person in each group to understand, things speed up. The students also get more comfortable and skillful as they succeed together. Even then it might take more time to get better learning.

It is good to look at cooperative learning as a process to increase learning outcomes but it has inherent value in itself. Helping students learn how to build and maintain relationships is a priceless gift for friendships, family, future jobs and in a democracy. The values that are inherent in the cooperative structure (i.e. appreciation of differences, teamwork, integrity, building strong individuals cooperatively, etc.) are the key to a democratic way of life.

There is also positive things about teaching students to work well individually and to compete appropriately (learning and enjoying the experience whether you win or lose). See the book, LEARNING TOGETHER AND ALONE (Prentice Hall) for how to use all three goal structures appropriately.

Good luck with your work.

Roger T. Johnson


Our questioner asks:

What do you do about a High school that professes cooperative learning and has intense competition between students to be in the top 10% of their class? (rewards and evaluation are
focused in this direction)

Roger Johnson replies:

If you concentrate on Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability as two of the Basic Elements of a cooperative learning relationship, you will find what you are looking for. One of the things we are working with in this country is to switch our High Schools from concentrating on the top 10% of the students in the school to how many students can we get into the top 10% of the region or state. If you rephrase it that way, you can see that it is in our best interests to support each other, share ideas, call each other to task, and promote each others' scholarship so that we can have 30% or 40% of our students in the top 10% of the state. It is certainly short sited to allow the competition to be interpersonal within the school as it fosters behaviors that work against each others' success rather than for. When you realize that cooperative work fosters higher achievement, it doesn't make sense to encourage serious competition between students. Check the website for The Cooperative School. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

Upon reading your books, "Learning Together and Alone" and The New Circles of Learning", two questions come to mind. Before I ask them, however, please let me explain why I am calling on you for help. I am a graduate student in the Adult and Organizational Learning Program at Suffolk University in Boston, Massachusetts. As part of my studies I am designing a course for in-service secondary school teachers to help them incorporate cooperative
learning in their classrooms.

My questions:
What do you see, as the key competencies required for a teacher to be an effective facilitator of cooperative learning?

What particular learning strategy have you found to be the most effective in the secondary school environment?

Roger Johnson replies:

The key teacher competencies are part of the training program on how to structure cooperative learning in the classroom. Because it is complex and a change of the norms in the classroom it probably takes about two years of effort to put it into your repertoire.

If I were to look beyond the strategies taught in the coop lng training I would include the following competencies:

A moderate level of classroom management needs to be in the teachers "pocket" before really launching cooperative learning. Perhaps this is why many first year teachers usually don't make a serious run at coop learning until their second year. However, once you have a moderate level of confidence, coop learning can improve classroom management as students take on more of the responsibility for each other.

The teacher has to develop a knack for translating curriculum which is written for students to work alone to a cooperative format. Not only that but it often has to be done quickly with some insight. This is part of a good training, but takes practice.

Use the monitoring time wisely. Because the students are active during the learning time rather than passive, the teacher is free to monitor what students are saying to each other and what they are doing to accomplish the assignment. What is even more exciting is that the learning is taking place out loud and you can hear it as it happens. All monitoring should be purposeful (and often isn't) and should lead to insight on how students deal with the content, how they interact with each other and who each one of them is as a person. The teacher must "learn" the students.

Teachers must trust the peer interaction to do many of the things they have felt responsible for themselves. Trusting positive peer interaction is mastered over time. The teacher often thinks they could "say it better" than a peer, but must realize that they are not "listened to" in the same way. Sometimes it is good to time how long it takes you to get to the student active part of the lesson and wear tape on your mouth as you monitor.

Probably the biggest competency is more of a trait. Teachers must be persistent. It takes about two years to develop cooperative competencies after training or reading and unless you stay with it, reflect, and grow, you won't get there.

We have found that the material we designed for College and University Teachers also works well at the high school level. It starts with "Informal" coop lng (often incorporated into direct teaching) and then grows to "Formal" coop lng with carefully structured groups; then to "Base Groups" which meet regularly and stay together for a long period of time; to "Controversy Groups" who learn to argue intellectually with each other and enjoy it. It is an evolution more than a revolution and should be under the control of the individual teacher (as long as someone is nagging them to keep growing). Anyone who tells you that it is easy has not really experienced the change from a classroom where students are primarily concerned with their own work and work individualistically to a classroom where students are concerned about each others' work as well as their own and connected academically and personally.

Good luck with your efforts!

Roger T. Johnson


Our questioner asks:

What are some of the myths about cooperative learning?

Roger Johnson replies:

Here are a few, for more see Learning Together and Alone (Allyn & Bacon):

Students only learn as much as the average of their group. (Untrue,
Coop Lng groups tend to learn more than the brightest member of the group would do alone.)

I'm already doing it, I put students into groups to learn. (Big difference between just putting students into groups and structuring those groups to care about each others' learning and work cooperatively.).

Students learn the cooperative skills at home. (Almost always when
you are structuring cooperative learning groups, you will need to teach cooperative skills as well.)

A group grade isn't fair. (As one group of students told us, it is the only fair way to grade a group effort. The evaluator can't measure the many different ways they contributed to the group effort. Most students feel it is unfair until they experience cooperative work. When it is not a group product, it is better to get individual grades as the group is supposed to prepare each group member to do well, individually (group to individual transfer).

You have to assign roles. (Not true. Letting roles develop is appropriate at times and short tasks don't need to time taken to assign and teach different roles. The major reason for roles is to make sure a missing behavior is present in the group; settle an argument over who has to do the recording; or "level the playing field" in a group with unequal status by distributing key responsibilities.)

There are more, but this gives you the idea. The assertion that it takes longer to do the task than direct teaching is often true (but not always, especially if you consider reteaching time.) Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

Dear Dr. Johnson and Dr.Johnson

I am student pursuing a Master of Education degree at the University of Botswana. I am currently working on a project on cooperative small groups in mathematics. I would like to know your views about interaction between high ability and low ability students in cooperative small groups. I would appreciate it if this can also be addressed in terms of gender.

Hoping to hear from you.

Roger Johnson replies:

One of the good things about cooperative learning groups is their flexibility. If an instructor wants heterogeneity, they can get it or if an instructor wants a re-teach group they can get it, and if an instructor wants just the highest ability students together for an enrichment assignment, they can do that also. However, in each of these groups, I would like to encourage differences of perspective and point of view by including different ages, gender, and background. The weakest group that you can put together is one where everyone thinks the same. They finish in a few minutes what should be a much richer and more lengthy process. For many math problem solving situations you could mix ability, gender, ethnic background, socio-economic levels, etc. and provide a rich context for discussion, argument, different points of view, etc. and therefore enrich the experience for all. There is benefit for a student who is quick in math to be challenged with another who says, "I don't get it." The process of explaining how to do the problem to someone else is probably more beneficial than getting the quick answer in the first place.

We are almost always mixing gender in math classes, as cooperative groups when properly structured force students to go beyond their stereotypes and treat each other as just "other math students". This appears to be very important in math and science where 9 year old females have already labeled these subjects as "boy" subjects. We have to get past our initial impressions of each other as male and female to find out who our classmates really are, as people. It doesn't negate gender, disability, ability or ethnic background, it adds other more important and more personal information to it.

Well structured cooperative learning has proven to be very powerful in building acceptance of differences, indeed more than that, appreciation of differences. See the social integration chapter in COOPERATION AND COMPTITION: THEORY AND RESERARCH. Good luck.


Our questioner asks:

Dear Dr. Johnson and Dr. Johnson,
I read your Q & A page and, in particular, your list of criticisms of cooperative learning. There was a story in the news recently involving the application of cooperative learning. As I recall it, one child was "forced" to accept the conclusion of the majority. (I don't remember the compelling force used, but the teacher applied it). Is there room for minority opinions, or must group members reach one conclusion? If it is the latter, isn't it then the unreconciled group that has come up short, rather an individual? And how do you assess a group that does not reach consensus?

Roger Johnson replies:

One key to working cooperatively is to "work toward" a concensus: What is the most appropriate answer at this time that each of us can agree to and can explain? However, we are fond of saying that if the supreme court can file a minority opinion, then students can too if a concensus is not reached. The alternative to a concensus is a vote which again gives each person a chance to agree or not, but is a less effective way to deal with answers (maybe decisions?).

It is actually better for a group to have different perspectives and some disagreement than to have quick agreement. If each member immediately says, "I agree", how much thinking is required and what is learned? The other trap for cognitive interaction is to say that everyone has their own opinion and no discussion is needed. The process of working toward a concensus is a good one, but you don't always get there.


Our questioner asks:

Should group members be able to kick a person out ot the group?

Roger Johnson replies:

I have heard a couple of people talking about group members being eliminated from the group by vote or concensus of other members, but I'm not a fan of the process. I have learned to be patient, give groups many chances to process with each other (sometimes sit in myself), suggest possible solutions, counsel as a teacher with the reluctant group member privately, change groups often so that the misfit gets passed around, and only as a last resort -- I will remove the student from the group (rather than placing that responsibility on the group as I want them to keep trying to the bitter end). Keep in mind that working alone is often what the reluctant group member is seeking and often is the worst thing for them. It is the unskillful, alienated people who needs cooperative groups the most. We often increase the positive interedependence and/or the individual accountability first, teach group skills second, and give the impression that you should never "give up" on a group member. It is also good to not let a reluctant group member affect the grade of the group in negative way. Good luck, talk with your troubled group, and if you eliminate someone from a group, you do it with very specific rationale.

The questioner follows up:

Your comments are a good reminder that one shouldn't assume that older (30 y.o.+) students know how to work in groups (i.e., responsibilities and expectations/standards). Your point is well taken. Thank you.


A Master's student writes:

I am a student in a Master of Arts in Teaching program in Oregon. I am working on my masters project in the area of cooperative learning and would appreciate your input into the question: How can teachers incorporate cooperative learning activities into their curriculum so that students learn the skills of successful group problem solving?

The information on your web site has been very helpful. Any insight you can give to me concerning my question will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Roger Johnson replies:

In our model of cooperative learning we emphasize teaching cooperative skills as you use the groups; communication, leadership, trust, and conflict resolution behaviors. We also will teach cognitive skills to the groups as well, especially in coop controversy where students learn to argue intellectually with each other. Problem-solving skills are a part of what we teach in two ways: directly (i.e. list 3 or more possible right answers and then chose the one which makes the most sense) and indirectly by having groups process their answers and how they got them. Processing the strategies used has been a real eye-opener for us since students in a cooperative group, if they listen to each other, will come up with different ways to attack the same problem. If you process that afterwards, students will have multiple ways to solve that kind of problem. Good luck with your report.

Roger T. Johnson


A teacher writes:

I have been teaching (and using co-operative learning) for 10 years. I have always used group marks as part of the process. I recently read an article from Spencer Kagan saying group marks should not be used. What are the benefits and the downside of using group marks from your perspective.

Roger Johnson replies:

The question of grades and cooperative learning always comes up and there are several variables to consider:

Group grades follow group goals and give a strong message of Positive Interdependence. Students who are veterans of cooperative learning prefer group grades as they insist that everyone contributes in a different way and there is no way to sort it out except to share the mark.

Teachers new to cooperative learning sometimes are challenged before they are ready to defend the use of cooperative learning if they give group grades so we usually advise rookies to not give group marks on serious material instead to prepare each other on the test and project and take the test or defend the project alone. This is not a bad procedure as individual accountability is part of the cooperative learning group (learn it in the group and be able to demonstrate it alone). On the other hand our veterans (and you would fit that category by the sound of it) use group grades whenever it is more appropriate to do so and have no difficulties explaining it to questioners.

Perhaps the best system is a mixture of group project and individual test grades. It doesn't change the top people much but it increases the number at level two and three and leaves almost no one at the bottom levels.

For a more detailed account see MEANINGFUL AND MANAGAEABLE ASSESSMENT IN THE COOPERATIVE CLASSROOM, or LEARNING TOGETHER AND ALONE

Good luck.
Roger


A student asks:

I'm enrolled in a graduate program. I was asked to find an article on the disadvantages of cooperative learning. Could you help direct me personally. I know that you promote cooperative learning. However, there's got to be somewhere I can look for the disadvantages. If possible, would you email me direct. I need the article as soon as possible. Thanks. I enjoyed reading your research.

Roger Johnson replies:

It is difficult to find data based information that points to disadvantages of coop lng when compared to working alone. There are some problems if it is not implemented properly (just putting students into groups) and some teachers misuse it, but when it is structured properly, it is almost always better than learning by yourself. Here are some things we hear (but there is really not any data):

Takes longer that Individual work so you don't cover as much. (Probably true in beginning when it is new to teacher and students but maybe not as much in the long run.)

Curriculum is set up for individual work so you have to translate it.

Administrators don't understand active learning so underrate it.

Can't tell who is doing most of the work? (A competitive perception but may be a problem if there is not purposeful monitoring of groups by the teacher and some individual tests along the way.)

Students lack skills to work together productively. (May be true but half the reason to use coop lng is to teach students the coop skills to work with others successfully.)

Bright students are held back. (However, the research doesn't support this idea.)

Not much help I'm afraid and I don't believe any of them except maybe taking more time to learn. However, that may be a good idea as all the major curr areas are saying to teachers to teach less and teach it better.


The Most Difficult Students
Roger T. Johnson & David W. Johnson
Cooperative Learning Center

One of the most common, if not the most common question asked about cooperative learning always begins with, "What about the kid who...?". Obviously some of the people asking this question are looking for a magic wand which cooperative learning certainly is not. It does not make a hyper-active student calm when they are put into a cooperative relationship with other students. What you have is a cooperative group with a hyper-active student in it. However, we have noticed that students often do better at handling difficult students than adults do and they often have more influence.

There are many different kinds of "difficult kids". Some are described an unmotivated, others as bossy, or silent, or resistant. The most difficult seem to be those with behavior problems, especially abusive behavior toward other students. Actually, there are no two difficult kids who are the same and to develop strategies for refocusing a student on appropriate behavior and academic success, you would need to observe the student in action and brainstorm with the teacher who sees them each day.

However, over the years, teachers who are using cooperative learning have met many different difficult students and shared their frustrations, strategies and successes with us. There is a particular pleasure for a teacher in being able to reach a very difficult student and see them turned around and headed in a direction of being included in their peer group rather than isolated and successful in their academic efforts rather than failing. Out of this experience comes some general insight and a few strategies that might work for a number of different students. However, you cannot really generalize about difficult students and to really go to work on the problem we would need to be there, observing, interviewing and brainstorming to devise strategies for each "difficult student".

Never-the-less, here are a few things to consider:

1). First you need to celebrate all the students who are successfully working in their groups. Start with this positive feeling and hold on to it as you focus on a problem with a difficult student or group.

2). Sometimes students are damaging the work of the group enough that they require a "Time Out" from the group. They should be separated, informed that they were holding the group back from their work more than helping it (preferably with specific examples of their negative behavior), and asked to do the assignment on their own. Keep in mind that a "Time Out" carries the message that they will be returned to the group in due time (usually the next class period) and they should be ready to be a productive member. Isolating a student completely from cooperative work is the same as giving up on them developing the skills needed to be a part of a productive cooperative relationship in the future and it doesn't give there classmates a chance to "capture" them eventually. The "Time Out" process may need to be repeated several times and some students may be more than a one semester or one year project.

3). Change groups often and announce the change schedule so that other students realize they are not "stuck" with the difficult student forever. Everybody will get their turn. Sometimes a particular group or student will find a way to focus the difficult student enough to be part of the group and join in on the successful completion of an assignment. That is quite a celebration by the group and is remembered.

4). Many difficult problems can be addressed anonymously and in a problem solving manner by the class. Some teachers devote the first 5-10 minutes of a class period periodically for a brainstorming session around, "What would you doif a member of your group ....?". Have the groups come up with strategies, chose the two they like best, then list them on the board and process them with the class so they have something to try. Feel free to add your own strategies too. Actually the best ideas often come from the students who own the negative behavior. The bossy students have the best ideas on how to handle themselves.

5). A personal contract with the student is sometimes effective. Sitting down with the student privately processing the problem. It is good to have specific data to share, but you should turn the conversation quickly to problem solving. One of my favorite questions is, "Under what conditions would you agree to try hard to work in a group?". Sometimes the student suggests something that could be easily done (i.e. if I could work with ...). In that case you can make a secret contract with the student. Sometimes it is a contract that can be shared with the cooperative group the student is working in so that they can help the student keep the contract.

6). One of the problems with difficult students is the initial reception of thestudent by the other group members. Obvious dismay or derision by other students starts the group badly for all. One of our teachers had success integrating a difficult student by attaching "bonus points" to the student so that the group already had five points on the project or test before they even started. This procedure may have worked because it identifies the student's problem openly and honestly to the group and it certainly made the welcome more positive. Actually when word got out, other students were asking if they could have the difficult student next time. If it makes you uneasy to address a student problem publicly, you should think about what the message from the teacher that they will help you hide the problem suggests.

7). In extreme cases, you will need to get other professionals to observe and diagnose strategies for the student. We are getting a growing number of students with rather severe problems that need more than one opinion. Special Education Teachers have training in this area and School Psychologists are glad to have a real student to concentrate on rather than paper work. Perhaps the student is going to need an adult (or older student) to sit behind them in the group to remind them of appropriate behavior. Even if it is only for one period a day, we need to keep trying to integrate the most difficult students into the group as productive members.

The results of isolation are never learning interpersonal skills, remaining isolated for long periods of time or finding other isolates to form a counter culture. Generally they will mean that you will pay taxes to take care of those students later rather then having them work in an organization and paying into your social security. The most important advice then for difficult students is for us to keep trying. Trust your appropriately behaving students, they are smarter about each other than you think.


Dear Johnsons,
I am an aspiring student teacher researching the history of the coop learning concept. Where or who first used the idea and/or wrote about it? I suspect that it may have been tried in private industry prior to its applications in the teaching field. Do you know of any truth to this idea? Can you aim me at some early writings on the subject so I might be able to develop a historical perspective on its development? I study at West Liberty State College in West Virginia. Any help you might have would be greatly appreciated since I've been researching this angle for months without much success. How do other authors like Robert Slavin and John Dewey fit into the development of coop learning history? Thank you.

Jeffrey D. Hughes

 

Jeff,
The earliest recorded cooperative learning groups were about 3000 years ago when scholars studied the Talmud by pairs (taking up opposite positions on each issue). The Greeks and Romans wrote about it and the Lancaster Schools movement of the 1700's urged democratic, cooperative classrooms. In the US a man by the name of Colonel Francis Parker was the first famous advocate in the late 1800s followed by John Dewey and his cooperative project groups. The best of the one room schools has always been cooperative and only in the 1940s when schools became large and the business setting was going off into their high competitive stage did classrooms become competitive places. If you look at one of our books (i.e. CIRCLES OF LEARNING) there is a more detailed history. The main point is that it is an old, well established idea (first researched in the late 1800s) and only recently has gone out of style. Hopefully, it is coming back stronger than before. Check your library for CIRCLES OF LEARNING or COOPERATION IN THE CLASSROOM.

Roger T. Johnson


To inaugurate our Q and A page, here's an answer to a question that we hear from time to time.

Cooperative Learning and the Brightest Group Member

One of the continuing concerns we get is: "What happens to the Bright Students in Cooperative Learning Groups?" There is an implicit feeling behind the question that bright students are better off on their own or are being taken advantage of by their less able group members. Actually, when bright students are working in heterogeneous groups two things occur which are to their benefit. When they explain their idea to others, especially if it needs to be done carefully, they learn the material they are explaining in more depth and remember it longer. This phenomena, called "cognitive rehearsal", is often noted by teachers when they discover that they don't really understand something until they have to teach it. The other positive outcome is the way bright students are perceived by their group members. When students are in competition with bright students, they tend to denigrate them and stereotype them as "brains" or "nerds". It is another matter when they are part of your cooperative group. They are seen as resources and are valued as teammates. The social integration and appreciation of our brightest students by their peers is a much more appropriate attitude than the social isolation of the competitive setting.

Keep in mind that not all time is spent in cooperative learning groups (students also work individually), and that sometimes it is good to put the brightest students in a cooperative group with each other to extend their thinking. Flexible classrooms where students are in many different kinds of groups and often work alone as well are ideal.


Navigation

Home

Cooperative Learning Q&A

Essays (on home page)

About the center (on home page)

Newsletters (on home page)

Books and supplies

Contacting us (by email and otherwise)

The U of M College of Education and Human Development

The University of Minnesota

Etc.

Except as noted, the contents of this site are copyright © David and Roger Johnson. About reproduction.