Blog Twenty-Nine - Strategies to Foster Effective Group Communication in Mathematics Classrooms (Group Work Part 5)
The more widespread implementation of group projects and opportunities for students to work together brings with it a myriad of tried and tested methods. Some worked for many teachers and classrooms, while some only worked for a few or none at all. The term “methods,” in this case, can be applied loosely to either small implementations of some sort of change (for example, encouraging students to take on specific roles within their groups) or larger-scale overhauls of the entire classroom structure and norms (changing the seating chart or lesson structure) to foster more effective collaboration between students and their peers.
Both randomized and teacher-selected groups have been included as good group work facilitators. Both, indeed, have their merits. However, the debate between the two options is ongoing. The main argument for visibly randomized groups is that they prevent fixed mindsets or role-based mindsets, where students attempt to figure out what “role” they are supposed to play in that group. With teacher-assigned grouping, students may try to figure out if they were supposed to be the weaker or stronger student in that group, thus fixing a hierarchy within the group and potentially limiting their openness to contribute. Students will naturally try to read into the teachers’ decisions, so randomizing groups in front of students (via the use of things like online sorters or playing cards) can send the message that the teacher is not trying to push them into any sort of role. On the flip side, teacher-assigned groups can allow the instructor to carefully construct groups with mixed abilities, personalities, and backgrounds to provide the most enriching collaborative experience for all students. Randomized groups can have an imbalanced composition or lack diversity in perspectives. The teacher has likely seen students and how they interact, which can help them form the most productive groups that allow for rich and fruitful conversations. However, these will likely be discussed in detail in a future post.
Another critical strategy is to provide clear roles and responsibilities to students within the group. These straightforward roles are meant to leave little question about what students are meant to do in their groups, helping mitigate some common issues that arise in collaborative settings, like unbalanced participation or unclear communication. Also, by assigning specific tasks to each student, students can be held accountable within their groups for contributing. Group members can hold each other responsible for their designated responsibilities, fostering a sense of ownership for students’ work. Clear roles such as timekeeper, facilitator, recorder, and others can help with structure and make students feel valued in the classroom. They have their portion that they are in charge of, and being able to do something and contribute in a way that no one else in the group can is key to building student self-efficacy.
Among other strategies, the two listed and discussed above have been noted to be successful for many classrooms. Arguing that they would work for all is unrealistic, as each classroom's unique needs and dynamics will require careful consideration and customization of strategies.
A link for those who are interested in reading more, check out Peter Liljedahl’s article on Randomized Grouping. This blog, upon suggestion, will begin to include additional reading links.
