EFFECTIVELY ASSESSING THE COOPERATI

EFFECTIVELY ASSESSING THE COOPERATIVE LEARNING ACTIVITY

As we discussed in the previous chapter, the relationship between assessment and classroom management is a powerful nexus that is given a fraction of the attention it warrants. It is especially significant when it comes to cooperative learning. Again, how and what we assess will define for the students “what is important” in the experience and shape the learning environment as much as anything else we do. What we assess tells the students what to care about and what constitutes success. We might begin by asking ourselves a few defining questions. Do we want to assess formally or informally? Do we want our unit of analysis to be the individual student or the group as a whole? Do we want to focus more on the final product or on the process and level of investment the students make along the way? Each of these choices will have a significant effect on the way that students approach the task and what they will infer to be a successful performance. Figure 12.8 outlines the various advantages and disadvantages of each method of assessment.



Figure 12.8: Cooperative Group Assessment Options
Type


Individual Accountability


Group Accountability



No Formal Assessment


Fine, as long as the task is inherently engaging and you want to promote internal LOC. May not provide enough motivation for tasks that are less inherently interesting, or for students who need a little external incentive.



Formal Self- Assessment


Good for having the students reflect on their process effort. Shifts the LOC of assessment to students. Problematic when trying to promote accountability.



Peer Assessment


Can be effective in that those doing the rating are in the best position to judge the quality of the other students’ performance. However, this method often leads to one of the following problems: 1) the reliability of the ratings are usually suspect due to social dynamics; and 2) putting students in the position of rating one another is often perceived as unfair or uncomfortable.

Process Assessment


Helps motivate the student to put forth full effort and be cooperative. Does not penalize students for others’ lack of effort




Helps motivate the group to work through problems, collaborate and use the prescribed process format.



Product Assessment


Rewards students for their personal contribution and does not penalize them for others’ lack of quality. Does not readily promote cooperation skills.


Helps motivate students to create a quality outcome, but may lack the ability to reward effort and desired process along the way.



While all options have their benefits, some options will contribute to more desirable results (Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain, 2003). Using no assessment is clearly less trouble, however, it makes the statement that every effort is the same as every other effort. If this is true, incorporating no formal assessment is a valid option. However, if we are assessing other areas of achievement (e.g., tests of knowledge, homework assignments, etc), but not the cooperative learning activities, we make the statement, in a very real and material way, that the quality of effort during the cooperative learning has little importance, regardless of what we may say. Self-assessment can be an excellent tool for groups who have demonstrated a high level of responsibility and skill at the cooperative learning process. It can also be a useful adjunct assessment system to teacher-based assessment as a way of promoting more self-reflection. However, translating it into a grade is extremely difficult and should be avoided. It can be a valuable process for students to informally self-evaluate the quality of their performance and the performance of those in their group, yet when that evaluation is then translated into a grade, it typically leads to a great deal of damage. Our efforts to promote cohesion and trust within the group will be undermined as a result of students’ feeling vulnerable and resentful of one another’s ratings when including any feature of peer-based assessment. Moreover, it is likely that popular students will be graded more favorably by their peers than students who do not possess the same level of political capital. Typically, many students are honest when there is no cost but much less honest when they recognize that they will be penalized for being self-critical.





Chapter Reflection 12-g: In your experience, would you say that when students fully invest in the process the products usually work out pretty well? Conversely, would you say that a good product assumes that a group of students has invested in the process fully?





When we assess process outcomes, we typically find that it has the effect of promoting a greater level of student investment in the process. Moreover, when students invest fully in the process, the products they produce usually reflect their high quality investment. Chapter 20 outlines a detailed system for assessing the quality of student participation and process. Many of our learning targets during cooperative learning activities will be in the areas of processes, skills and dispositions. If we have learning targets and goals in these areas but do not use an assessment system that supports them, then we have in essence built failure into our instructional design. Many teachers who do not currently incorporate process assessment into their teaching dismiss its potential, yet teachers who do incorporate some process or behavioral level assessment recognize the powerful effect it can have to positively shape the quality of the student performance.



There are many benefits to having the individual as the unit of analysis of process assessment. First, students will feel that it is fairer. They will be less likely to feel that they are in a position to be penalized by the actions of others. Second, because it is possible to define cooperation skills into a high-quality level individual performance, it has the capacity to promote cooperative behavior as well as individual responsibility and effort. Third, it is cleaner and easier to manage. Individual grades produce a more reliable set of data for us to process aggregate daily grades into a unit grade. Whatever system we decide to use, we will need to commit to it. Can you honestly say that you will give the same process or participation grade to a student who has done little and one who has made an exceptional effort as a result of their being in the same group?



That being said, while there are several disadvantages to a group level grade, it does have the power to contribute to the development of interdependence among group members that an individual grade does not. For that reason, it is recommended that one use primarily individual level-assessment systems for process in the formative stages of a group’s development, and transition over time to a balance of group- and individual-level assessments as the situation allows.





Chapter Reflection 12-h: Reflect on your experiences as a student in cooperative groups. How did you feel when you were graded on the performance of the whole group? Do you see the advantages and disadvantages of both individual and group grades for collaborative efforts? How will this affect your decisions as a teacher?





Some readers find competition to be undesirable for any reason. Others find competition raises the level of interest and motivation of students and can turn a cooperative learning activity into a team competition. If you choose to avoid using competition, your students are likely not missing anything. If you have a desire to use it, then be cautious. Strictly avoid mixing competition into your assessment of the process or the product. Take care that the students understand that the competition is a separate variable. Moreover, make sure that the students understand that the purpose of competition is fun, and the outcomes that you value and reward are the quality of effort and learning. This is true for every subject and every grade. In Chapter 18, we will discuss the use of competition in the classroom in detail.





Chapter Reflection 12-i: Reflect on your experiences in situations in which you were part of a group that was competing with other groups. What affect did the competitive element have on the group? How did it change your values and focus?





MANAGING YOUR COOPERATIVE EXERCISE

If we have designed an effective cooperative learning activity, much of our work will be done. The task itself will create much of the energy and define the focus. So how do we manage it? Here are three principles to guide our thinking:



At any time, but especially in the early stages of developing a climate supportive of successful cooperative learning, make the social frames very explicit (recall Chapter 3). It is important to promote in the minds of our students the cause-and-effect relationship related to: “when you (the students) are ready for ...you will be able to...” Cooperative learning is just another teaching strategy; but it is also a privilege. Keep the students mindful that they need to continue to earn this privilege.



Assume that students need a great deal of support and structure until they show that they can succeed with less. To be effective, cooperative learning will require a very deliberate use of technical management and skills development (Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain 2003). One of the benefits of cooperative learning is that if done well, increasingly less management will be necessary over time.



Be ever aware of the presence of social/indirect learning when you make management choices.

T,S,O










When students are working in groups, messages sent to one group will affect the other groups as well. The actions that we take with one group tell the other groups what to expect. When we publicly recognize the successes of one group, the

Results (Vietnamese) 1:

EFFECTIVELY ASSESSING THE COOPERATIVE LEARNING ACTIVITYAs we discussed in the previous chapter, the relationship between assessment and classroom management is a powerful nexus that is given a fraction of the attention it warrants. It is especially significant when it comes to cooperative learning. Again, how and what we assess will define for the students “what is important” in the experience and shape the learning environment as much as anything else we do. What we assess tells the students what to care about and what constitutes success. We might begin by asking ourselves a few defining questions. Do we want to assess formally or informally? Do we want our unit of analysis to be the individual student or the group as a whole? Do we want to focus more on the final product or on the process and level of investment the students make along the way? Each of these choices will have a significant effect on the way that students approach the task and what they will infer to be a successful performance. Figure 12.8 outlines the various advantages and disadvantages of each method of assessment. Figure 12.8: Cooperative Group Assessment OptionsType Individual Accountability Group Accountability No Formal Assessment Fine, as long as the task is inherently engaging and you want to promote internal LOC. May not provide enough motivation for tasks that are less inherently interesting, or for students who need a little external incentive. Formal Self- Assessment Good for having the students reflect on their process effort. Shifts the LOC of assessment to students. Problematic when trying to promote accountability. Peer Assessment Can be effective in that those doing the rating are in the best position to judge the quality of the other students’ performance. However, this method often leads to one of the following problems: 1) the reliability of the ratings are usually suspect due to social dynamics; and 2) putting students in the position of rating one another is often perceived as unfair or uncomfortable.Process Assessment Helps motivate the student to put forth full effort and be cooperative. Does not penalize students for others’ lack of effort Helps motivate the group to work through problems, collaborate and use the prescribed process format. Product Assessment Rewards students for their personal contribution and does not penalize them for others’ lack of quality. Does not readily promote cooperation skills. Helps motivate students to create a quality outcome, but may lack the ability to reward effort and desired process along the way. Trong khi tất cả lựa chọn có lợi ích của họ, một số tùy chọn sẽ đóng góp cho kết quả hơn mong muốn (Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain, 2003). Sử dụng không có đánh giá là rõ ràng ít rắc rối, Tuy nhiên, nó làm cho các tuyên bố rằng mọi nỗ lực là giống như mọi nỗ lực khác. Nếu điều này là đúng, không có đánh giá chính thức kết hợp là một lựa chọn hợp lệ. Tuy nhiên, nếu chúng ta đang đánh giá các khu vực khác của thành tích (ví dụ như, các xét nghiệm của kiến thức, bài tập về nhà, vv), nhưng không hợp tác học tập các hoạt động, chúng tôi làm cho các báo cáo, trong một cách rất thực tế và vật liệu, chất lượng của các nỗ lực trong quá trình học tập hợp tác xã có tầm quan trọng nhỏ, bất kể những gì chúng tôi có thể nói. Tự đánh giá có thể là một công cụ tuyệt vời cho các nhóm người đã chứng minh một mức độ cao của trách nhiệm và kỹ năng ở hợp tác xã quá trình học tập. Nó cũng có thể là một hệ thống đánh giá phụ trợ hữu ích để giáo viên dựa trên đánh giá như một cách để thúc đẩy thêm ngẫm. Tuy nhiên, Dịch nó thành một lớp là vô cùng khó khăn và cần phải được tránh. Nó có thể là một quá trình có giá trị cho sinh viên không chính thức tự đánh giá chất lượng của hiệu suất của chúng và hiệu suất của những người trong nhóm của họ, nhưng khi đánh giá đó sau đó dịch vào lớp một, nó thường dẫn đến rất nhiều thiệt hại. Chúng tôi nỗ lực để thúc đẩy gắn kết và sự tin tưởng trong nhóm sẽ được suy yếu là kết quả của học sinh cảm thấy dễ bị tổn thương và bực bội của xếp hạng lẫn nhau khi bao gồm bất kỳ tính năng nào của ngang dựa trên đánh giá. Hơn nữa, nó có khả năng phổ biến học sinh sẽ được chấm điểm hơn thuận lợi bởi các đồng nghiệp của họ hơn sinh viên không có mức độ tương tự của thủ đô chính trị. Thông thường, nhiều sinh viên được trung thực khi không có không có chi phí nhưng ít hơn nhiều trung thực khi họ nhận ra rằng họ sẽ bị phạt vì tự phê bình. Chapter Reflection 12-g: In your experience, would you say that when students fully invest in the process the products usually work out pretty well? Conversely, would you say that a good product assumes that a group of students has invested in the process fully? When we assess process outcomes, we typically find that it has the effect of promoting a greater level of student investment in the process. Moreover, when students invest fully in the process, the products they produce usually reflect their high quality investment. Chapter 20 outlines a detailed system for assessing the quality of student participation and process. Many of our learning targets during cooperative learning activities will be in the areas of processes, skills and dispositions. If we have learning targets and goals in these areas but do not use an assessment system that supports them, then we have in essence built failure into our instructional design. Many teachers who do not currently incorporate process assessment into their teaching dismiss its potential, yet teachers who do incorporate some process or behavioral level assessment recognize the powerful effect it can have to positively shape the quality of the student performance. There are many benefits to having the individual as the unit of analysis of process assessment. First, students will feel that it is fairer. They will be less likely to feel that they are in a position to be penalized by the actions of others. Second, because it is possible to define cooperation skills into a high-quality level individual performance, it has the capacity to promote cooperative behavior as well as individual responsibility and effort. Third, it is cleaner and easier to manage. Individual grades produce a more reliable set of data for us to process aggregate daily grades into a unit grade. Whatever system we decide to use, we will need to commit to it. Can you honestly say that you will give the same process or participation grade to a student who has done little and one who has made an exceptional effort as a result of their being in the same group? That being said, while there are several disadvantages to a group level grade, it does have the power to contribute to the development of interdependence among group members that an individual grade does not. For that reason, it is recommended that one use primarily individual level-assessment systems for process in the formative stages of a group’s development, and transition over time to a balance of group- and individual-level assessments as the situation allows. Chapter Reflection 12-h: Reflect on your experiences as a student in cooperative groups. How did you feel when you were graded on the performance of the whole group? Do you see the advantages and disadvantages of both individual and group grades for collaborative efforts? How will this affect your decisions as a teacher? Some readers find competition to be undesirable for any reason. Others find competition raises the level of interest and motivation of students and can turn a cooperative learning activity into a team competition. If you choose to avoid using competition, your students are likely not missing anything. If you have a desire to use it, then be cautious. Strictly avoid mixing competition into your assessment of the process or the product. Take care that the students understand that the competition is a separate variable. Moreover, make sure that the students understand that the purpose of competition is fun, and the outcomes that you value and reward are the quality of effort and learning. This is true for every subject and every grade. In Chapter 18, we will discuss the use of competition in the classroom in detail. Chapter Reflection 12-i: Reflect on your experiences in situations in which you were part of a group that was competing with other groups. What affect did the competitive element have on the group? How did it change your values and focus? MANAGING YOUR COOPERATIVE EXERCISE
If we have designed an effective cooperative learning activity, much of our work will be done. The task itself will create much of the energy and define the focus. So how do we manage it? Here are three principles to guide our thinking:



At any time, but especially in the early stages of developing a climate supportive of successful cooperative learning, make the social frames very explicit (recall Chapter 3). It is important to promote in the minds of our students the cause-and-effect relationship related to: “when you (the students) are ready for ...you will be able to...” Cooperative learning is just another teaching strategy; but it is also a privilege. Keep the students mindful that they need to continue to earn this privilege.



Assume that students need a great deal of support and structure until they show that they can succeed with less. To be effective, cooperative learning will require a very deliberate use of technical management and skills development (Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain 2003). One of the benefits of cooperative learning is that if done well, increasingly less management will be necessary over time.



Be ever aware of the presence of social/indirect learning when you make management choices.

T,S,O










When students are working in groups, messages sent to one group will affect the other groups as well. The actions that we take with one group tell the other groups what to expect. When we publicly recognize the successes of one group, the