What research says
Some arguments in favor of group learning are:
- Social. By learning in a group, kids also train their social ability.
- Naturalist. Kids naturally learn about others, themselves, society, the world, languages and many other practical matters.
- Pedagogic. Group learning favors confronting ideas, training argumentation, playing games, peer training and helping.
We, humans, learn best by borrowing knowledge from one another. Knowledge is
an endless good, borrowing from it removes nothing whereas it alters and
reorganizes our own knowledge[1]. Meta-analysis
shows that for a task, learning is better when conducted in a group, it favors
collaboration, confronting ideas and point of view, helping each
other[2].
Therefore, group learning seems a powerful idea however it is cognitively
expensive. For example, if a task is better conducted by one person, executing
the task in group induces an additional cost[3]. Moreover, to
optimize learning, the group composition should be adapted to the task. For
example, a group of two is very suited for peer learning, one will learn from
the help of the second, and the second will perfect his/her
knowledge[4].
One way to overcome the additional cognitive expense of working in group is
to propose a sub-task script. Given a task, the teacher proposes a script with
a list of sub-tasks to conduct and its assignment to each member of the group.
The learner directly concentrates on his sub-task. The downside of this
approach is to remove the co-construction level of the group organization.
Dynabook implication
To help the teacher in work group organization, the Dynabook could come with
a dedicated tool to write a script to organize the group tasks. Each member of
the group will receive the script on his own Dynabook, with additional
information as a relevant sub-task. Each member would report back his progress
to the other members and teacher's Dynabooks.
Any opinion on the topic? If so leave a comment for further reflection.
Thanks to Michael Davis for his editing.
Notes
[1] J. Sweller, In academe, what is learned, and how it is learned? Current directions in psychological science, 24, 2015[2] M.T. Chi, R. Wylie, The ICAP framework: linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes, Educational psychologist, 2014
[3] F. Kirschner, United brains for complex training. A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning efficiency (Phd thesis), 2009
[4] A. Tricot, L'innovation pédagogique, Retz, 2017
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire