As my understanding of inquiry-based and project-based learning evolves, I realize that my students and I must develop a better understanding of group process and collaboration. Now that it is recognized that deeper learning occurs when collaboration is privileged, the question that has arisen among my colleagues is how do we provide for individual accountability in this model? How does the teaching of skills fit in? Where does the balance lie?
When observing my grade 7's working in collaborative groups, I see strengths, but these are not yet consistent. There are moments where students are not engaged in a focused way. I also see moments where individual results and the overall quality of work are not where I expect them to be were I following a more teacher-directed model. Refinement of the process is needed as is more careful consideration of how to incorporate traditional teaching of skills within the collaborative model.
Part of this, I think, is because we haven't yet thought deeply as a class about how collaboration actually works. How should a collaborative lesson be structured so that the highest level of engagement occurs?What should learners be doing throughout the process? Where does reflection occur? Can collaboration be explicitly taught? Is it possible to structure inquiry so that students do not ride on each other's coat-tails, nor slide into off-task behaviour? How do I monitor and track this? How should the collaborative process be assessed?
As an educator who thought she knew something about teaching, it is very exciting to have reached this point. I feel that once I have clear understanding of this last but most important piece in the puzzle, I will finally have a handle on how learning actually happens and how I can accurately say a learner has moved to a new level of insight and skill. This moment is coming in my 22nd year of teaching. That is how long it has taken for me to arrive at this point. When I think of places like Florida letting go of experienced educators in exchange for youthful (and cheap) enthusiasm, I shake my head, but that is a discussion for another day.
I have deliberately structured an inquiry with all of those questions in mind. I've decided to use a curriculum based geography topic as the foundation. This is where content comes in. Students will be learning about oil exploration in the Arctic to develop understanding of absolute location. It should be noted that in this activity students are not yet working in the full inquiry model. They should be developing their own topic and questions, but until they've mastered group process, I don't think they're ready to work at that level.
For inquire to work effectively I expect them to be able to do 3 things.
1. Can they articulate what it means to work collaboratively?
2. Can they develop systems for accountability - ones that demonstrate their learning and ones that demonstrate understanding of collaboration?
3. Can they reflect on their processes and insights throughtout the inquiry and can they demonstrate that they are adjusting their thinking?
I think step 2 demonstrates just how different inquiry is. In the past, I would have spent a great of time planning the process for them. Now they have to think through the process and my role is to guide them.
I began the inquiry by gathering resources representing different points of view on oil exploration in the arctic. They include articles, newscasts, and websites.
I then met with the whole class to discuss collaboration: what does it look and sound like? They came up with a detailed list, but my favourite response came from Sam, "It looks messy."
(I will add pictures next week of our charts and tracking sheets).
I assigned students to groups. This, I think, is a where teacher expertise is of value. Certain personalities work better together than others. When allowed to choose groups, students sometimes tend to go with the familiar which prevents them from learning to work with new people.
Before exploration of the topic began, we spent time thinking about group process and what causes groups to break down or get stuck. Anticipating difficulties and planning for them is, I think, a necessary skill. Groups were required to plan for 3 typical problems.
1. How are they going to handle group members who are not participating?
2. How are they going to handle group members who dominate or constantly interrupt?
3. How are they going to handle group members who draw the group off-task?
(Photos are coming)
Once group norms were established students were given an introductory article to read. They were also given a bin with highlighters, post-it notes, markers, lined paper and chart paper. The goal was to read through and tear apart the article to ensure that every group member understood it and could explain its significance.
Four groups did a fantastic job. I was able to wander and observe. One group in particular impressed me. They highlighted all unfamiliar vocabulary and then discussed and clarified meaning. They had insightful questions about the text, and engaged in meaningful discussion. They only sought my assistance when needed, otherwise they relied on each other to resolve meaning. At the end of the period, each student in the group could explain what the article was about and what they had learned. They were also aware that they had more questions that needed answers. They wanted to explore the topic further.
One group did not do a great job. They were silly, unfocused and were working as two groups. At the end of the period when I asked one group member what she had learned, she was unable to explain what the article was about. When I asked one of the boys, however, he was able to summarize the article. Clearly, true collaboration had not occured. This is where the accountability piece comes in. On their tracking sheet, I wrote down what I had observed.
The next day I met with the whole class to review the previous day's work. I held up work samples that indicated highly effective group strategies. The class was able to see how different groups had approached this task and how they had demonstrated learning. (Again, pictures will follow) Other than asking students to mark up their texts, I had given no format for demonstrating learning. Groups devised their own systems for this. This in itself was interesting. Some groups quickly developed an effective system, other groups were not yet at that level of understanding of the process. Groups who had not devised a system for demonstrating learning, had to take time to do this before continuing. Here again, the role of teacher as facilitator becomes obvious. In the past I would have designed a nice planning sheet for the group. I would have thought about process, but none of the students would have!
Four of the groups were allowed to move to the next step. The group that had not worked well could not proceed. They had to go back the beginning, redevelop their process and work through the task again. Until every member of the group could explain the article, no one could move on. This time around they did an exceptional job. High level discussion took place and students demonstrated insight as they discussed the article. From their conversation I could hear that they were engaged in critical thinking. They also were very clever is designing their system to demonstrate learning.
By sending the students back to the original task and not allowing them to move on, they were given the opportunity to learn from failure. (Parent's who wish to know if their child was one of this group's members, are welcome to give me a call :) Providing opportunities to learn from failure is a key element of inquiry.
Groups are now moving through a series of activities that present different points of view on oil exploration in the Arctic. The activities can be found here.
http://heidisiwak.blogspot.com/p/class-72.html
Learners are to read, watch, discuss and then share what they have learned. I have not given them any questions to answer. Instead they are to think and develop their own questions about what they see.
It has been very revealing watching groups move through this process. As they develop understanding of what is expected, they are becoming more confident and more creative in developing their systems. I am also impressed with the level of intelligent discussion. Insights are occurring, points of view are emerging. What is most interesting though is that a few students who tend to disengage are involved with their groups at reasonable levels.
Each group is unique in its approach to the tasks. One group was insistent on using Web 2.0 tools to communicate as they watched the videos and read the websites. They spent an entire period figuring out how to open google accounts for those who did not yet have them and to learn how to use the chat. The students turned to google because our internal communication system, First Class, is unreliable. They are now a period behind the other groups, but that doesn't matter. They are satisfied that they can now proceed.
Another group has spent some time searching the internet to find additional information. They used The Commons to forward a link to a documentary that presents a more thorough picture of point of view on our topic. I have added the link to my blog for the entire class.
Some of the websites are long. Part of the collaborative process is figuring out how to divide up work so that the sites can be moved through quickly, but to also ensure that all group members know the content. Groups must meet frequently to share learning and plan next steps. Some groups have required more support than others to learn how to do this.
Throughout this process, I am on the move. I shift from group to group, listening, observing, checking, asking probing questions and making suggestions. During independent reading time, I quietly call each group to the table to review the previous day's work, clarify expectations and understandings, listen and provide meaningful feedback. The groups explains their plan for the next step and away they go.
