Nowadays,
there is a significant shift in pedagogy trends worldwide from teacher centered
method in which instruction is managed and controlled by the teacher who holds
power and responsibility in class, to a more student-centered method which
allows learners to become more active in the learning process. However, many
countries in the world still
practice traditional teaching methods in spite
of the emerging innovative teaching methods. Bhutan is no exception. Traditional
teaching is still a dominant teaching method. Instruction is facilitated in
conventional ways: the use of textbook learning, rote learning, spoon-feeding
technique, rote memorization, and learning is limited to the two covers of the
books and the four walls of the room. The
prevalence of such practice is evident from the results of many recent studies.
For example a study conducted by REC in 2009 to study classroom practice in
schools stated the following findings:
·Teaching
consists of one-way talk by the teacher to convey textbook content without
being able to get the students to comprehend and demonstrate learning.
·Classroom
instruction shows predominance of one-way talk by the teacher and writing on
the chalk board with lesser evidence of student-centric activities.
·There is lesser
evidence of active dialogue between the students and teachers.
Such learning atmosphere has many drawbacks. Students become
passive learners. They do not get
opportunity to engage in active interaction with teacher and among themselves
which keeps them from asking questions and sharing ideas. Their doubts,
opinions and questions remain to themselves. They do not get enough opportunities to engage actively in the learning
process and have less experience in learning themselves. They rely on teachers to decide what, when and how to
learn. They also lack social skills
like communication, leadership and decision making. This generally leads to poor understanding of concepts.. These
drawbacks of teacher centered learning has lead to low test scores. Besides, students develop negative opinion towards learning.
Students also feel that the concepts they learn have no practical value in
their life and have low level of learning satisfaction.
The
existence of such a trend is a setback in the growth of education system. Today
there is public hue and cry over deterioration of the quality of education. One
of the factors attributing to deterioration of the quality would be the
prevalence of teacher-centered learning. Time has changed. Today our children
need different skills and knowledge to be able to live successfully. These
skills are aptly called “twenty first century skills.” The need to provide new skills and knowledge
calls for changes in teaching practice and the onus is on all stakeholders and more
importantly on teachers. Teachers cannot afford to stick to traditional
teaching methods. It is time we come out of the box and be of age. We need to
be seriously innovative and practice innovative teaching techniques.
Over
the past decades cooperative learning method has emerged as a leading new
approach to classroom instruction. Researchers like Roger and David Johnson, Robert Slavin, Spencer Kagan, Cooper, Graves and Graves conducted hundreds of
studies to study the effectiveness of cooperative learning in diverse school
setting and over wide range of content areas and revealed that students
learning through cooperative group tasks have higher academic test scores,
higher self esteem, greater number of positive social skills and greater comprehension
of content and skills they study. Further, Johnson and Johnson (1989) stated
that cooperative learning is an alternative to competitive-individualistic
structures and traditional classroom teaching methods. Since cooperative
learning has its root in learning theories that places learners in the center,
such as Vygotsky’s theory and Piaget’s theory, it is child centered by nature.
Cooperative learning represents a shift in educational paradigm from
teacher-centered learning to more child-centered learning. So, cooperative
learning method would best be an alternative teaching method to traditional
teaching in Bhutan.
What
is cooperative learning? Examining dictionary, to cooperate means to work or
act together for a common purpose. The educational meaning of cooperation is ‘an
approach to teaching and learning in which classrooms are organized so that
students work together in small groups to achieve a common goal.’ Johnson and
Johnson (aka Johnson brothers) proponents of cooperative learning method
defined cooperative learning
as ‘the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to
maximize their own and each other's learning.’ Cooperative learning requires cooperative
interaction and negotiation of meaning among heterogeneous members engaged in
tasks in which each group members have both something to contribute to and
learn from other members. Kagan, also a leading researcher in cooperative learning defined cooperative learning as ‘a teaching
arrangement that refers to small, heterogeneous groups of students working
together to achieve a common goal.’ Artz and Newman (1990) defined cooperative
learning as ‘small groups of learners working together to solve a problem,
complete a task or accomplish a common goal.’
A common feature
in all the definitions is that students work in small groups.
However, cooperative learning is more than
just small group activities. It must be well structured. Simply placing
students in groups and telling them to work together does not produce a
cooperative effect by itself. A cooperative lesson must be well structured and
characterized by the five components or principles (1) positive interdependence
(2) individual accountability (3) face-to-face interaction (4) social skills
and (5) group processing. It must be ensured that lessons include these
five components.
(i)
Positive interdependence: The heart of cooperative learning is positive
interdependence. Students in cooperative
group depend on each other for ideas, resources and moral support for the
success of the group. They work on a common goal and they must think that they
are linked to each other.
(ii)
Face-to-face interaction: It requires children to discuss, share ideas,
views and materials, providing and getting feedbacks, encourage to keep one
another highly motivated to complete that task they are assigned.
(iii) Individual accountability: Students in cooperative learning are
responsible for their own and group’s learning. Having small sized group
enhances group accountability because each member will be accountable for
learning.
(iv)
Interpersonal and small group skills: Students in cooperative groups practice
and develop teamwork skills like leadership, decision making, trust-building,
communication and conflict management.
(v) Group processing: Students in cooperative groups discuss how
well they have achieved the goal, describe what member actions are helpful and
unhelpful and make decision about how to continue or change.
When
using cooperative learning, it wouldn’t be interesting to have students sit and
work in cooperative groups over and over. To make lessons using cooperative
learning interesting teachers should use variety of cooperative learning structures. Dr. Spencer Kagan designed
some 250+ cooperative learning structures. The following are few:
Team Jigsaw, Roundrobin, STAD (Student Team Achievement Division), Team-Pair-Solo, Circle the Saint.....
The choice of these structures depends on the learning objectives, nature of learners, learning situation, nature of subject in question.
Assessment is an
integral aspect of teaching-learning process. Many teachers in Bhutan overlook
or skip this essential aspect. What do
we assess in cooperative learning? Well! In cooperative learning we basically assess
three things; Individual success, group success
and cooperative skills. The
assessment could be done by instructor, individual/self evaluation and peers.
Individual success: Individual
success can be evaluated by asking students to fill out answers to a worksheet
as they progress through an activity; by having them record, analyze, and
submit data; or by having them take a quiz. Some activities are structured so
that each student turns in a product, such as a report or a poster that can be
individually graded
Group success: Group success can be
evaluated according to how well the group accomplished its assigned task. Was
the task completed? Were the results accurate? If not, were errors explained
and accounted for? Criteria such as these provide a framework for group
evaluation.
Cooperative skills: Cooperative skills
are evaluated based on teacher’s observations of students’ behavior in their
group. Evaluating students’ use of cooperative skills will motivate students to
use them. Teachers should use a formal observation checklist as he/she monitors
students at work and log the frequency with which group members exhibit
cooperative skills or disruptive behavior.
It is my hope that this exposition will give teachers
an insight into cooperative learning so that they could use it or try it out.
And I must mention at the outset that cooperative learning, when tried for first
time, may not seem to work as smoothly. Teachers and students may find awkward
to be in cooperative learning atmosphere. But that’s obvious because anything
new comes in with some uneasiness. Moreover, teachers and students have deep
rooted believe in teacher centered learning which would make them perceive CL as
alien. But the effect of it would come only with consistent usage. It would
need sometime for teachers and students to get acquainted to it.
When
asked if cooperative learning method would really work in Bhutanese classrooms,
many fellow teachers were skeptical. They said that an alien teaching method wouldn’t
work in Bhutanese classrooms. Even if it did, they said, would be time
consuming and would not facilitate the coverage of syllabus. Some speculated
that CL would only be suitable in LSS and PSS. They also opined that
cooperative learning would bring chaos and disharmony in the classroom.
Well!
Let me make few things clear. Cooperative learning has been used in diverse
cultural and social setting around the world. It has been used in places
affected by war, racism, segregation, religion conflict, etc. It has also been
used in diverse socio-economic settings, in underdeveloped, developing and
developed countries. It’s been used for teaching children of diverse age level,
ranging from as young as kindergarten to adulthood. In any case, CL has been
found to be an effective teaching method. It has been found to increase test
scores, learning satisfaction, and understanding. Students were also found to
be enjoying positive learning experiences.
In Bhutan, cooperative learning has
already been pilot tested in many schools. The Singaporean Govt. in
collaboration with REC piloted cooperative learning in many schools called
‘Beacon schools’ and in many grade levels. The project found positive results.
It was found to be effective in raising students’ test scores, learning
satisfaction and level of understanding. Even one of my researches, a personal
undertaking, revealed similar results. As for syllabus coverage, cooperative
learning has also been found to be effective in covering wide range of content
while not compromising the level of understanding. Certain cooperative learning
structures like team Jigsaw, STAD, etc has been found to be effective in
covering a wide range of content in a short timeframe.
Thus, I request teachers in Bhutan to use cooperative learning and start to be an agent of bringing a shift in teaching trend form teacher
centered learning to child centered learning. Let us not be hidebound in our
practice. Modern era calls for new approaches to teaching and learning and we
must tune our actions to the tide of the modern wind.
References
Humphreys, B., Johnson, R.T., and Johnson, D.W. “Effects of
Cooperative,
Competitive,
and Individualistic Learning on Students' Achievement in Science Class.” Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 1982: 351-356.
Johnson,
D., and Johnson, R. Learning Together and Alone, Cooperative,
Competitive and
Individualistic Learning, Needham
Heights, MA:
Prentice-Hall, 1994.
Learning:Lesson Plans for
Teachers. Edina, MN: Interaction Book,
1987.
Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R.T. Leading the Cooperative
School. Edina, MN:
Interaction, 1989.
Johnson,
D.W., and Johnson, R.T. “Social Skills for Successful Group Work.” Educational Leadership, 47(4),
1990: 29-33.
Kagan, S. Cooperative Learning Resources for Teachers.
San Juan Capistrano,
CA:Resources for Teacher, 1989.
Royal Education
Council and iDiscoveri Educaion, (2009). The Quality of
School Education in Bhutan: Reality and
Opportunities. Bhutan.
Sherab,
K. Bhutanese Teachers’ Pedagogical Orientation in the Primary
Classes (PP-VI):
A Factor on Quality of Education. 11-30, 2009.
Vygotsky,
L. S. Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.
