Group discussion and the importance of a shared perspective: learning from collaborative research

Abstract

Student-led discussion during small group work is now a familiar feature in many schools. However, simply organising students in small groups does not mean they will automatically participate in collaborative discussion. In this article I report on a small-scale research project in the UK which examined the discourse patterns of Year 8 (13-14 year old students) as they worked in discussion groups during English lessons.Using a multi-case study approach, video recordings were made in four high schools over a one-year period and qualitative analysis was undertaken. For illustrative purposes I focus on two transcripts which are representative of discussions from a full range of 40 video recordings and illustrate common and recurrent patterns of discourse. The findings suggest that students' interpretations of tasks are influenced by an orthodox perception of teaching and learning which emphasises independent and individualised working practices in schools. The importance of explicit and unambiguous teacher guidance is highlighted, and the apparent paradox of encouraging critical and open discussion of texts within a structured framework is examined.

A step further in Peer Instruction: Using the Stepladder technique to improve learning

“…While collaborative learning based on Peer Instruction may yield better performance than individual work, the way the social interactions are structured in collaborating groups is also important. Organizing students in groups does not automatically mean that they will participate effectively in group discussions, and teacher guidance is often required to improve collaborative learning (e.g., Corden, 2001;Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). This guidance may be 'instrumental', i.e.…”

Tracing ideologies of learning in group talk and their impediments to collaboration

“…An oft-cited barrier includes the normative expectations and habits learners bring with them to the classroom (e.g., Connolly & Smith, 2002;Corden, 2001;Westgate & Corden, 1993). Others have commented on the need for the rules, roles, and shared sense of 'what counts' to be established between students and teachers (e.g., Barnes & Todd, 1978;Mercer, 1996).…”

“…Many studies of group talk have developed analytic coding schemes to explore the features, uses, or connections of group talk to learning, including: typologies (Mercer, 1996), functions (Corden, 2001), linguistic features (Storch, 2001), and patterns of interaction (Dale, 1994). Another subset of studies explicates the features of talk that render it collaborative and thus more productive in terms of learning and equity.…”

“…Another subset of studies explicates the features of talk that render it collaborative and thus more productive in terms of learning and equity. These studies often refer to 'exploratory talk', a particularly productive subtype of group talk marked by: 1) co-construction of ideas (e.g., Howe, 2009;Rafal, 1996;Storch, 2001); 2) constructive disagreement (e.g., Barnes, 1976;Connolly & Smith, 2002;Cook-Gumperz & Szymanski, 2001;Corden, 2001); and 3) negotiation of ideas (e.g., Brice, 2002;Long & Porter, 1985;Mercer, 1996). A related thread of research has focused on teachers' role in shaping group talk via scaffolding (Gillies & Kahn, 2009;Kramer-Dahl, Teo, & Chia, 2007;Sharpe, 2008;Webb et al, 2009), explicit instruction (Christie, Tolmie, Thurston, Howe, & Topping, 2009;Gillies, 2010;Mercer, Dawes, Wegerif, & Sams, 2004;Szymanski, 2003), and fostering social support amongst peers (Blatchford, Kutnick, Baines, & Galton, 2003;Dale, 1994;Edwards, 2005).…”

“…Early research focused on whether and how group work was more effective than individual work, often examining connections between talk, task, and/or outcome in order to ground such claims. Since then, a subset of related studies have broadened their foci to include factors, contexts, and interactional details of group talk as they relate to learning from multiple theoretical perspectives (see Corden, 2001 for a dated but thorough review). Many studies in the last decade have indicated that group work is not inherently useful for learning; rather, its success depends on how learners are socialized into it as a practice-i.e.…”