1. Using a DVD Dance Project to Encourage Bonding in PETE Cohorts
Kevin Shephard, M.A.
Cathrine Himberg, PhD
CSU Chico

2. (Barnett & Caffarella, 1992)
Definition of Cohort
Includes a group of students
Begins a program together
Works together through a series of developmental experiences
Ends the program at approximately the same time
(Barnett & Caffarella, 1992)

3. Definition Extended to Include:
The development of collaborative projects
Self-directed goals
A network of academic and social support
(as cited in McCarthy, Trenga, & Weiner, 2005)

4. (Yerkes, Basom, Norris, & Barnett, 1995)
Three Types of Cohorts
Pure: Students take all coursework together in a prearranged order.
Mixed: Students take a core set of courses together along with additional classes of their choice.
Course-by-Course: Students may enter the cohort at various points.
(Yerkes, Basom, Norris, & Barnett, 1995)

5. Adult Learning Theory
This website has good tips on how to effectively teach to adults:
“The major components of adult learning theory used to understand the needs of cohort learners include the concepts of adults’ needs for acknowledgement and use of their experience, the differing ways they go about learning, their desire to be actively involved in the learning process, and the need for affiliation” (as cited in Barnett & Caffarella, 1992).

6. Cohort Interaction Influenced by:
Size of the group
Smaller groups require more from each group member.
Frequency of the group interaction
Frequent, face to face interactions promote positive interdependence.
Sharing a common purpose
Both individual and group learning opportunities
(as cited in Norris & Barnett, 1994)
(Yerkes, Basom, Norris, & Barnett, 1995)

7. Benefits of cohort model

8. Group projects with high levels of ambiguity and autonomy increased cohesion
“We ate dinner together once a week between classes. These times often became gripe sessions and support sessions for cohort members.
We recognized that we were all in this experience together so there was not the competition…”
(Wesson & Holman, 1996)

9. Increased support and connection between students
“Strong networks formed – more comfortable in sharing ideas and concerns with those who became more like friends and family. Family atmosphere – comfort/risk-free/have phone numbers of all members” (Teitel, 1997). “Some students began to see an increasing value in providing academic support to their peers, even peers who were not part of assigned small groups” (Maher, 2005).
Individuals felt emotionally supported. The group became a nurturing climate exuding an atmosphere of trust which allowed the individual to feel “validated,” “secure,” and “connected,” “and to experience “risk-taking, and a questioning” stance (Norris & Barnett, 1994).
There was one abstract I came across that found higher GPAs in the cohort model.

10. Deeper discussions of sensitive issues
Students felt more comfortable and free from peer criticism, leading to more in-depth discussions (Maher, 2005).
Students also became more proficient in giving and receiving peer feedback (Maher, 2005).
“There was a sense of an open society where people are committed to listening to each other in order to discover shared truths (Wesson & Holman, 1996).”
On several occasions, student discussions were initiated by students instead of the instructor (Maher, 2005).
2. “I like the cohort model because it gave me a chance to get to know the people in my classes. By getting to know the others, I was more comfortable and more willing to participate, share, and even speak my mind, without fear. A big help throughout the program was having people I trust to get feedback from and to commiserate with when I needed support and encouragement” (Teitel, 1997).
5. Cohorts get to know each other better; being able to anticipate how others will act reduces ambiguity and fosters mutual trust among group members (Norris & Barnett, 1994).

11. Other Benefits of Cohort Model
Individuals believed cohort model promoted their personal growth (Norris & Barnett, 1994).
After extended school breaks, class interaction quickly resumed picked up where they left off.
“Engagement in class discussion is almost immediate – even in new classes” (Teitel, 1997).
The emergence of strong emotional ties has been linked to reduced attrition (as cited in Maher, 2005).
4. Many students believed that, because they were in a cohort, they enjoyed a greater sense of latitude than they otherwise would have in a traditional classroom (Maher, 2005).
The collective power of the cohort is more powerful than individuals in a traditional format (McCarthy, Trenga, & Weiner, 2005).

12. Possible Drawbacks
Personality and Intellectual mismatches (Maher, 2005) (Teitel, 1997).
Formation of cliques (Teitel, 1997).
Sense of being forced/locked into a defined role (Teitel, 1997).
1. “The greatest benefit is developing relationships with peers. It is also the greatest pitfall. The quality of the cohort can vary greatly. Weak members will continue to plague classes in future semesters” (Teitel, 1997).

13. History Professor’s Experience Student Experiences
DVD Project
History
Professor’s Experience
Student Experiences

14. Dance class and DVD Project Vs Dance Class
Study Results
Dance class and DVD Project Vs
Dance Class

15. What percentage of people in this class do you know?
DVD Project (n=15)
Dance Only (n=22)
Pre Semester Range
0% - 20%
Post Semester Range
70% - 100%
0% - 95%
Pre Semester Average 8% 7%
Post Semester Average
97%
49%
Increase from Pre to Post Average
89% increase
42% increase

16. On a scale from 1-5 on average how well do you know this % of students?
DVD Project (n=15)
Dance Only (n=22)
Pre Semester Range
1 – 3.5
1 – 5
Post Semester Range
3 – 5
Pre Semester Average
1.97
2.59
Post Semester Average
3.65
3.07
Increase from Pre to Post Average
1.68
0.48

17. Do you socialize with any people in class outside of school
Do you socialize with any people in class outside of school? If so, how often?
Pre to Post
DVD Project (n=15)
Dance Only (n=22)
No to No 3 7
No to Yes 2
% of No changed to Yes
70%
22%

18. On a scale of 1-5 how comfortable would you feel performing/teaching dance in front of this class?
Pre to Post
DVD Project (n=15)
Dance Only (n=22)
Pre Semester Range
1 – 5
1 – 4.5
Post Semester Range
1 – 5 * (4 – 5)
Pre Semester Average
3.23
2.84
Post Semester Average
4.47
3.85
Increase from Pre to Post
1.24
1.01

19. Citation
Teitel, L. (1997). Understanding and harnessing the power of the cohort model in preparing educational leaders. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(2), 66. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Norris, C., & Barnett, B. (1994). Cultivating a New Leadership Paradigm: From Cohorts to Communities. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Barnett, B., & Caffarella, R. (1992). The Use of Cohorts: A Powerful Way for Addressing Issues of Diversity in Preparation Programs. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Maher, M. (2005). The Evolving Meaning and Influence of Cohort Membership. Innovative Higher Education, 30(3), doi: /s
Wesson, L. & Holman, S., (1996). Cohesion or Collusion: Impact of a Cohort Structure on Educational Leadership Doctoral Students. Retrieved from ERIC database.
McCarthy, J., Trenga, M., & Weiner, B. (2005). The Cohort Model with Graduate Student Learners: Faculty-Student Perspectives. Adult Learning, 16(3/4), Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Yerkes, D., Basom, M., Norris, C., & Barnett, B. (1995). Using Cohorts in the Development of Educational Leaders. Retrieved from ERIC database.

20. Questions and Discussion
Similar Experiences?
What other projects can be used?