Teams Improve Learning

The new issue of the NEA Higher Education publication, The Advocate, has a very good and comprehensive article about the use of "team-based learning" in collegiate settings. (The online site is here.)

Readers should be aware, I am very big on the importance of what I have always called "cooperative groups", but which, I will now call "team-based learning", for which I offer an apology to the brothers Johnson at the University of Minnesota, who have done so much to foster cooperative learning over the decades.

You know, you take the same basic concepts and dress them up with a new name and, in America, you can really make some things happen!

In any case, the article makes clear that Team-Based Learning (TBL) works at getting students to class having read and made preparations specifically for that lesson--not because they fear the wrath of the professor, but because their team (read: peers) is depending on them.

And, of course, this makes sense on several levels. We all know that when students feel like they have a stake in learning, they are more likely to extend themselves.

Often, one's own learning or future is not enough to create that interest and drive. But, when there are other people in the equation, or the student feels like there is a genuine exchange taking place, or they view the classroom experience as analogous to what they are likely to encounter in the world beyond, then, suddenly, they have some skin in the game and the level of engagement increases.

Of course, I believe that "relevance" is key as well. If you can't make the learning fit into the lives of students, they are going to chafe at extending themselves and even pull back from the course.

Okay, so, let's assume that we agree, and we should because the studies confirm it, that TBL can and does work, if and when it is properly structured. The real issue is: how do you structure TBL so that it does work?

Here are the defining characteristics:

1. Using permanent and purposefully heterogeneous work groups.
2. Beginning each instructional unit with a Readiness Assurance Process (RAP) to ensure content coverage and promote team development.
3. Using peer evaluations to facilitate interpersonal skill development and ensure equity in grading.
4. Devoting the vas majority of the class time to small group activities, necessitating a shift in the role of the instructor from dispenser of information to the manager of the learning process.

Now, when I wrote about cooperative learning at this site, I talked about the five principles of cooperative learning as being:

The essential components of cooperation are positive interdependence, face-to-face promotive interaction, individual and group accountability, interpersonal and small group skills, and group processing (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1993). Systematically structuring those basic elements into group learning situations helps ensure cooperative efforts and enables the disciplined implementation of cooperative learning for long-term success.

You've got some overlap here between the two ways of looking at how to structure team learning. But, essentially, these are the same basic processes. Let's examine them.

1. Strategically form permanent student teams.

Now, I've always been intrigued about forming more permanent teams, or what I used to call "home groups"--the one place students could always return and share what has happened to them as a result of the material in the course.

In high school though, just because kids meet every day, and because I wanted them to have diverse experiences with all other students in the class, I regularly rotated groups, every two weeks or so. That promoted a kind of overall learning community and generally kept kids from getting bored, too content, or coasting on the coattails of stronger students.

Here, in permanent groups, you have a kind of analogy to the workplace: you are stuck with what you've got, for better or worse, and, you have to strive to make it for the better. Kind of like being under one of Donald Trump's microscopes and seeing what you can accomplish in terms of harnessing the potential of the whole.

But, the key is to structure "strategically", so there is a mix of abilities, gender, ethnicities and learning styles. And, also, to help each team, to coach them, if you will, rather than standing back and saying: "Good luck, people."

You really have to emphasize this point when you talk to students about why you are using TBL:

"Your ability to work with people and get the best out of them and with them is an absolutely essential skill if you are going to be successful in the modern workplace. So, yes, at times, things will be hard, challenging, conflicts will arise. But, this is exactly what you can expect beyond the classroom as well. Get used to it!"

So, here are "positive interdependence" and "face to face promotive interaction" under the cooperative learning terms used above.

2. Readiness Assurance Program (RAP)

This is kind of a biggie, because, underlying the whole program here is the idea that, rather than presenting information in class, the teacher's job is to manage the interactions of students who have already encountered the material. But, for that to work well, you need a solid majority of students, in every group, who have, in fact, come to class prepared and ready to go.

So, what they propose here is kind of interesting: a quick, short multiple choice test administered to every student at the very beginning of class. These are turned in. Then, the group takes the same instrument, working together to find the correct answer in each case. These are scored immediately, and the group get immediate feedback as to how prepared they are at a fairly basic level.

What this does is to give students some motivation to come to class prepared. They know they will be tested, and that their peers will be able to witness their level of preparedness. Eventually, both tests count toward the individual student's grade, though only the group test is graded immediately.

As this process moves forward, teams invariably learn to perform better, to come to class prepared, and to strategize about how best to improve their performance as a whole.

So, here are "individual and group accountability" and "group processing" under the cooperative learning terms used above.

3. Peer evaluations

The article does not go into peer evaluations very much, but I have used them for over a decade and I really think they're effective. I usually require students to just evaluate themselves in certain described categories, like "Preparation for class" or "Interpersonal performance" or "On task behavior". Really, every teacher should figure their core objectives out for themselves. I always put these categories on an index card for easy record-keeping and so that students could see how they were progressing in each area.

But, I would think it would not be that difficult to also work up a peer evaluation card. That is, every student in a group would get to add their evaluation in each discreet area for their peers. So, for example, in "Preparation for class", the card would circulate to each peer, and they would get to give a number that they think appropriate, based on what they had seen in that student's performance. In a perfect world, these numbers would tend to be similar.

The real value here is not necessarily the accuracy of the scores. And, certainly, in my grading system, these scores play only a minor role in the overall grade. No, the real value is the feedback each student gets from their peers. It's like a giant mirror has been held up to each student's performance and they are given rich data on how they are doing. They then have the choice of how or what to adjust if they want different results.

So, here are "interpersonal and small-group skills" and "individual and group accountability" (among others) under the cooperative learning terms used above.

4. Managing learning, not dispensing information

And, really, this is the key for teachers. I am not a lecturer; I never have been. And, even if I were, I just wouldn't do it, because, fundamentally, it's not how students learn. Students learn by doing. And there is no better way to "do" learning than by being in a group and thrashing out the issues face-to-face, mano-a-mano. The learning in these situations is tremendous, and it occurs on multiple levels: personal, interpersonal, subject-specific, thematic, psycho-social, etc.

And, teachers too, have a tremendous opportunity here for learning. You will not do this perfectly the first time. But, you will get better at picking groups. You will get the hang of building a team ethos and encouraging discouraged groups. You will refine the grading of individuals and groups so that it makes more sense and becomes fairer.

In short, using TBL or cooperative learning or whatever you call this strategy, involves continuous learning on the part of the teacher. You figure out how to do each step better, how to incorporate it into each unit, how to twist and tweak each element until the whole is pretty damn tight.

And, let me tell you as strongly as I can: TBL does work. And, it works really well.

It revolutionized my life as a teacher, gave me a meaningful focus and took me from being an average instructor to one who was exceptional in the eyes of students.

Please leave comments and feedback, or for more information, read the other posts under Discussion Group Around Cooperative Learning.