1. Design and Implementation of Cooperative Learning Karl A. Smith STEM Education Center / Technological Leadership Institute / Civil Engineering – University of Minnesota & Engineering Education – Purdue University ksmith@umn.edu - http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith Grinnell College June 2, 2014

2. 2 Workshop Layout Welcome and Overview Further Reflection on Readings/Discussion Formal Cooperative Learning Rationale and Principles Formal Cooperative Learning Strategies –Cooperative Problem-Based Learning –Cooperative Jigsaw –Cooperative Project-Based Learning Aligning outcomes, assessment, and instruction Design and Implementation

3. Overall Goal Build your repertoire of cooperative learning strategies as well as skills and confidence for implementing them 3

4. 4 Workshop Objectives Participants will be able to : –Describe key features of cooperative learning and effective, interactive strategies for facilitating learning –Build on key elements of Course Design Foundations How People Learn (HPL) Understanding by Design (UbD) process – Content (outcomes) – Assessment – Pedagogy –Explain key features of and rationale for Cooperative Learning –Identify connections between cooperative learning and desired outcomes of courses and programs Participants will begin applying key elements to the design on a course, class session or learning module

5. Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves people working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that involve both positive interdependence (all members must cooperate to complete the task) and individual and group accountability (each member is accountable for the complete final outcome). Key Concepts Positive Interdependence Individual and Group Accountability Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction Teamwork Skills Group Processing http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-CL%20Handout%2008.pdf

6. 6 Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Formal Cooperative Learning Groups Cooperative Base Groups Notes: Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-912.doc) www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/CL%20College-912.doc

7. 7 Book Ends on a Class Session Smith, K.A. 2000. Going deeper: Formal small-group learning in large classes. Energizing large classes: From small groups to learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2000, 81, 25-46. [NDTL81Ch3GoingDeeper.pdf]NDTL81Ch3GoingDeeper.pdf

8. Book Ends on a Class Session 1.Advance Organizer 2.Formulate-Share-Listen-Create (Turn- to-your-neighbor) -- repeated every 10- 12 minutes 3.Session Summary (Minute Paper) 1.What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during this session? 2.What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we end this session? 3.What was the “muddiest” point in this session?

9. Strategies for Energizing Large Classes: From Small Groups to Learning Communities: Jean MacGregor, James Cooper, Karl Smith, Pamela Robinson New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 81, 2000. Jossey- Bass

10. 10

11. January 2, 2009—Science, Vol. 323 – www.sciencemag.org Calls for evidence-based instruction practices Informal Cooperative Learning

12. 12 Informal CL (Book Ends on a Class Session) with Concept Tests Physics Peer Instruction Eric Mazur - Harvard – http://galileo.harvard.edu Peer Instruction – www.prenhall.com Richard Hake – http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/ Chemistry Chemistry ConcepTests - UW Madison www.chem.wisc.edu/~concept Video: Making Lectures Interactive with ConcepTests ModularChem Consortium – http://mc2.cchem.berkeley.edu/ STEMTEC Video: How Change Happens: Breaking the “Teach as You Were Taught” Cycle – Films for the Humanities & Sciences – www.films.com Harvard – Derek Bok Center Thinking Together & From Questions to Concepts: Interactive Teaching in Physics – www.fas.harvard.edu/~bok_cen/

13. 13 http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed/Research/MNModel/Model.html

14. Conceptual Understanding http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed/Research/MNModel/FCI.html

15. 15 Physics (Mechanics) Concepts: The Force Concept Inventory (FCI) A 30 item multiple choice test to probe student's understanding of basic concepts in mechanics. The choice of topics is based on careful thought about what the fundamental issues and concepts are in Newtonian dynamics. Uses common speech rather than cueing specific physics principles. The distractors (wrong answers) are based on students' common inferences.

16. Workshop Biology Traditional passive lecture vs. “Workshop biology” Source: Udovic et al. 2002

17. Biology Source: Knight, J. and Wood, W. (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biol Educ. 4(4): 298–310.

18. 18 Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Formal Cooperative Learning Groups Cooperative Base Groups See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-912.doc)

19. Formal Cooperative Learning Task Groups

20. Design team failure is usually due to failed team dynamics (Leifer, Koseff & Lenshow, 1995). It’s the soft stuff that’s hard, the hard stuff is easy (Doug Wilde, quoted in Leifer, 1997) Professional Skills ( Shuman, L., Besterfield-Sacre, M., and McGourty, J., “The ABET Professional Skills-Can They Be Taught? Can They Be Assessed?” Journal of Engineering Education, Vo. 94, No. 1, 2005, pp. 41–55.)

21. 21 http://www.aacu.org/advocacy/leap/documents/Re8097abcombined.pdf

22. 22 Top Three Main Engineering Work Activities Engineering Total Design – 36% Computer applications – 31% Management – 29% Civil/Architectural Management – 45% Design – 39% Computer applications – 20% Burton, L., Parker, L, & LeBold, W. 1998. U.S. engineering career trends. ASEE Prism, 7(9), 18-21.

23. 23 Teamwork

24. 24 Characteristics of Effective Teams? Clear goals Shared goals Clearly defined roles Competency in the roles Similar motivation Respect/mutual respect, trust Respect for diversity Compatible personalities Not too sensitive Striking a balance – yin and yang – creative and quants (nerds) Contributing different elements to the team Joint enterprise Resources and schedule are clear Ability to have a difficult discussion Being flexible, open minded Listening skills Enjoyment of one another Self awareness and willingness to modify Frequency of meetings Know when work independently and jointly ?

25. A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable SMALL NUMBER COMPLEMENTARY SKILLS COMMON PURPOSE & PERFORMANCE GOALS COMMON APPROACH MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY --Katzenbach & Smith (1993) The Wisdom of Teams

26. Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves people working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that involve both positive interdependence (all members must cooperate to complete the task) and individual and group accountability (each member is accountable for the complete final outcome). Key Concepts Positive Interdependence Individual and Group Accountability Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction Teamwork Skills Group Processing http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-CL%20Handout%2008.pdf

27. Teamwork Skills Communication Listening and Persuading Decision Making Conflict Management Leadership Trust and Loyalty

28. 28 Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Formal Cooperative Learning Groups Cooperative Base Groups See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-912.doc)

29. 29 Professor's Role in Formal Cooperative Learning 1.Specifying Objectives 2.Making Decisions 3.Explaining Task, Positive Interdependence, and Individual Accountability 4.Monitoring and Intervening to Teach Skills 5.Evaluating Students' Achievement and Group Effectiveness

30. 30 Decisions,Decisions Group size? Group selection? Group member roles? How long to leave groups together? Arranging the room? Providing materials? Time allocation?

31. Personal Response System Socrative.com (Socrative Student) My room 678635 31

32. Optimal Group Size? 32 A.2 B.3 C.4 D.5 E.6

33. Formal Cooperative Learning Task Groups Perkins, David. 2003. King Arthur's Round Table: How collaborative conversations create smart organizations. NY: Wiley.

34. Group Selection? 34 A.Self selection B.Random selection C.Stratified random D.Instructor assign E.Interest

35. Formal Cooperative Learning – Types of Tasks 1.Jigsaw – Learning new conceptual/procedural material 2.Peer Composition or Editing 3.Reading Comprehension/Interpretation 4.Problem Solving, Project, or Presentation 5.Review/Correct Homework 6.Constructive Controversy 7.Group Tests

36. 36 Cooperative Jigsaw www.jigsaw.org/‎ JIGSAW SCHEDULE COOPERATIVE GROUPS (3-4 members) PREPARATION PAIRS CONSULTING/SHARING PAIRS TEACHING/LEARNING IN COOPERATIVE GROUPS WHOLE CLASS REVIEW

37. Three Ways to Structure Cooperative Learning: Informal-Formal-Base Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota ksmith@umn.edu Cooperative Jigsaw

38. Cooperative Jigsaw Objectives Participants will be able to list and describe features of Informal, Formal and Base Cooperative Groups Participants will be able to elaborate on multiple ways Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability were structured Participants will identify features to implement in their own lesson plans

39. JIGSAW SCHEDULE COOPERATIVE GROUPS PREPARATION PAIRS CONSULTING/SHARING PAIRS TEACHING/LEARNING IN COOPERATIVE GROUPS WHOLE CLASS REVIEW

40. Preparation ~ 20 min Teach & Learn ~ 15 min Informal ~ 5 min Formal ~ 5 min Base ~ 5 min

41. Cooperative Learning Jigsaw: 1.Overview – CL Notes p. 8 – All 2.Informal Cooperative Learning – Notes pp. 9-13 (9-10) – 1 3.Formal Cooperative Learning – Notes pp. 14-20 (14-15) – 2 4.Cooperative Base Groups – Notes pp. 21-22 – 3

42. Jigsaw Procedure (Adapted from Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 1998) When you have information you need to communicate to students, an alternative to lecturing is a procedure for structuring cooperative learning groups called jigsaw (Aronson, 1978). Task: Think of a reading assignment you will give in the near future. Divide the assignment into multiple (2- 4) parts. Plan how you will use the jigsaw procedure. Procedure: Positive Interdependence is structured in the jigsaw method through creating resource interdependence. The steps for structuring a "jigsaw" lesson are: 1. Cooperative Groups: Distribute a set of instructions and materials to each group. The set needs to be divisible into the number of members of the group (2, 3, or 4 parts). Give each member one part of the set of materials. 2. Preparation Pairs: Assign students the cooperative task of meeting with someone else in the class who is a member of another learning group and who has the same section of the material to complete two tasks: a. Learning and becoming an expert on their material. b. Planning how to teach the material to the other members of their group. 3. Practice Pairs: Assign students the cooperative task of meeting with someone else in the class who is a member of another learning group and who has learned the same material and share ideas as to how the material may best be taught. These "practice pairs" review what each plans to teach their group and how. The best ideas of both are incorporated into each presentation. 4. Cooperative Group: Assign students the cooperative tasks of: a. Teaching their area of expertise to the other group members. b. Learning the material being taught by the other members. 5. Evaluation: Assess students' degree of mastery of all the material. Recognize those groups where all members reach the preset criterion of excellence.

43. Preparation Pairs TASKS: a.Master Assigned Material – Skim Chapter b.Plan How to Teach It To Group PREPARE TO TEACH: a.List Major Points You Wish to Teach – 3 – 5 points b.List Practical Advice Related to Major Points c.Prepare Visual Aids/Graphical Organizers d.Prepare Procedure to Make Learners Active, Not Passive COOPERATIVE: One Teaching Plan From The Two Of You, Both Of You Must Be Ready to Teach

44. Processing Please complete the sentence: One thing you did that helped me learn was...

45. Consulting/Practice Pairs TASKS: 1.Find Someone Who Prepared To Teach the Same Section 2.Prepare Your Teaching Plan 3.Listen Carefully To Other’s Teaching Plan 4.Incorporate Other’s Best Ideas Into Your Plan COOPERATIVE: Ensure Both of You Are Ready to Teach

46. Teach and Learn Group TASK: Learn ALL the Material (All three sections) COOPERATIVE: Goal: Ensure All Group Members Understand All Sections of Material Resource: Each Member Has One Part Roles:Teach, Learn EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: Everyone learns and teaches an area of expertise, Everyone learns others' area of expertise, Everyone summarizes and synthesizes INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: Professor Monitors Participation of All Learners Team members check for understanding Individual implementation EXPECTED BEHAVIORS: Good Teaching, Excellent Learning, Summarizing, Synthesizing INTERGROUP COOPERATION: Whenever it is helpful, check procedures, answers, and strategies with another group.

47. Jigsaw -- Role of Listening Members Clarify material by asking questions Suggest creative ways to learn ideas and facts Relate information to other strategies and elaborate Present practical applications of information Keep track of time Appropriate Humor

48. JIGSAW SCHEDULE COOPERATIVE GROUPS PREPARATION PAIRS CONSULTING/SHARING PAIRS TEACHING/LEARNING IN COOPERATIVE GROUPS WHOLE CLASS REVIEW

49. Jigsaw Processing Things We Liked About ItTraps to Watch Out For

50. Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves people working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that involve both positive interdependence (all members must cooperate to complete the task) and individual and group accountability (each member is accountable for the complete final outcome). Key Concepts Positive Interdependence Individual and Group Accountability Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction Teamwork Skills Group Processing

51. 51 http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-CL%20Handout%2008.pdf

52. Formal Cooperative Learning – Types of Tasks 1.Jigsaw – Learning new conceptual/procedural material 2.Peer Composition or Editing 3.Reading Comprehension/Interpretation 4.Problem Solving, Project, or Presentation 5.Review/Correct Homework 6.Constructive Controversy 7.Group Tests

53. 53 Challenge-Based Learning Problem-based learning Case-based learning Project-based learning Learning by design Inquiry learning Anchored instruction John Bransford, Nancy Vye and Helen Bateman. Creating High-Quality Learning Environments: Guidelines from Research on How People Learn

54. Challenge-Based Instruction Cycle Legacy Cycle The Challenges Generate Ideas Multiple Perspectives Research & Revise Test Your Mettle Go Public 54 https://repo.vanth.org/portal/public-content/star-legacy-cycle/star-legacy-cycle

55. 55 Problem-Based Learning Problem posed Identify what we need to know Learn it Apply it START

56. 56 Problem-Based Cooperative Learning Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota ksmith@umn.edu http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith Estimation Exercise

57. First Course Design Experience UMN – Institute of Technology Thinking Like an Engineer Problem Identification Problem Formulation Problem Representation Problem Solving Problem-Based Learning

58. *Based on First Year Engineering course – Problem-based cooperative learning How to Model It published in 1990.

59. 59 Problem Based Cooperative Learning Format TASK: Solve the problem(s) or Complete the project. INDIVIDUAL: Estimate answer. Note strategy. COOPERATIVE: One set of answers from the group, strive for agreement, make sure everyone is able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem. EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: Everyone must be able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem. EVALUATION: Best answer within available resources or constraints. INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: One member from your group may be randomly chosen to explain (a) the answer and (b) how to solve each problem. EXPECTED BEHAVIORS: Active participating, checking, encouraging, and elaborating by all members. INTERGROUP COOPERATION: Whenever it is helpful, check procedures, answers, and strategies with another group.

60. Problem-Based Cooperative Learning January 13, 2009—New York Times – http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html?em 60

61. http://web.mit.edu/edtech/casestudies/teal.html#video

62. http://www.ncsu.edu/PER/scaleup.html

63. 63 http://tile.uiowa.edu/

64. http://www1.umn.edu/news/news- releases/2010/UR_CONTENT_248261.html http://mediamill.cla.umn.edu/mediamill/embed/78755 64 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfT_hoiuY8w http://youtu.be/lfT_hoiuY8w

65. Inside an Active Learning Classroom STSS at the University of Minnesota http://vimeo.com/andyub/activeclassroom “I love this space! It makes me feel appreciated as a student, and I feel intellectually invigorated when I work and learn in it.”

66. 66 http://www.udel.edu/inst/

67. 67 Project-Based Cooperative Learning Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota ksmith@umn.edu http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith Design-Build Project

68. 68 Project Based Cooperative Learning Format TASK: Complete the project. INDIVIDUAL: Engage. Pay attention to task and group dynamics. COOPERATIVE: One design from the group. EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: Everyone must be able to explain the strategies used complete the project. EVALUATION: Best design within available resources or constraints. INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: One member from your group may be randomly chosen to explain (a) the design and (b) the team process. EXPECTED BEHAVIORS: Active participating, checking, encouraging, and elaborating by all members. INTERGROUP COOPERATION: Whenever it is helpful, check procedures, answers, and strategies with another group.

69. 69 Design-Build Project The engineering method is design under constraints – Wm. Wulf, Former President, National Academy of Engineering The engineering method (design) is the use of state-of-the-art heuristics to create the best change in an uncertain situation within the available resources – Billy Koen, Mechanical Engineering Professor, UT-Austin, author Discussion of the Method, 2003, 2011

70. 70 Design-Build Project Teams of 3-4 – randomly assigned Experience entire project life cycle in about 30 minutes Goal is for all teams to meet the specification (design requirement) Attend to both the task and the team work

71. 71 Team Member Roles Task Recorder Process Recorder Time Monitor Materials Manager

72. Design objective Design and build a tower at least 25 cm high that can support a stack of textbooks. The tower is built from index cards and office tape. Design rules Materials are 100 index cards and one roll of office tape Cards can be folded but not torn No piece of tape can be longer than 2 inches Tower cannot be taped to the floor Tower must be in one piece, and easily transported in one hand Time to design and build: 15 minutes Height is measured from the ground to the lowest corner of the book placed on top Tower must support books for at least 10 seconds before the measurement is made Room must be cleaned up before measurements are made.

73. Group Processing Plus/Delta Format Plus (+) Things That Group Did Well Delta ( ∆) Things Group Could Improve

74. 74 Teamwork & Project Management Heuristics-- Examples Identify the weak link and Allocate resources to the weak link Freeze the design--at some stage in the project (when about 75% of the time or resources are used up) the design must be frozen Discuss the process and ask meta-level questions, e.g., What are we doing? Why are we doing it? How does it help?

75. 75 Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Formal Cooperative Learning Groups Cooperative Base Groups See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-912.doc)

76. 76 Cooperative Base Groups Are Heterogeneous Are Long Term (at least one quarter or semester) Are Small (3-5 members) Are for support May meet at the beginning of each session or may meet between sessions Review for quizzes, tests, etc. together Share resources, references, etc. for individual projects Provide a means for covering for absentees

77. Edmonson-Competitive_Advantage_of_Learning-HBR-2008.pdf

79. Designing and Implementing Cooperative Learning Think like a designer Ground practice in robust theoretical framework Start small, start early and iterate Celebrate the successes; problem-solve the failures

80. 80

81. 81

82. 82 Resources Design Framework – How People Learn (HPL) & Understanding by Design (UdB) Process – Ambrose, S., et.al. 2010. How learning works: 7 research based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass – Bransford, John, Vye, Nancy, and Bateman, Helen. 2002. Creating High-Quality Learning Environments: Guidelines from Research on How People Learn. The Knowledge Economy and Postsecondary Education: Report of a Workshop. National Research Council. Committee on the Impact of the Changing Economy of the Education System. P.A. Graham and N.G. Stacey (Eds.). Center for Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309082927/html/ http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309082927/html/ – Pellegrino, J. 2006. Rethinking and redesigning curriculum, instruction and assessment: What contemporary research and theory suggests. http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htmhttp://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm – Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M. 2009. Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, 19-32. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117 – Streveler, R.A., Smith, K.A. and Pilotte, M. 2012. Content, Assessment and Pedagogy (CAP): An Integrated Engineering Design Approach. In Dr. Khairiyah Mohd Yusof, Dr. Shahrin Mohammad, Dr. Naziha Ahmad Azli, Dr. Mohamed Noor Hassan, Dr. Azlina Kosnin and Dr. Sharifah Kamilah Syed Yusof (Eds.). Outcome-Based Education and Engineering Curriculum: Evaluation, Assessment and Accreditation, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia [Streveler-Smith-Pilotte_OBE_Chapter-CAP-v11.pdf]Streveler-Smith-Pilotte_OBE_Chapter-CAP-v11.pdf – Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. 2005. Understanding by Design: Expanded Second Edition. Prentice Hall. Content Resources – Donald, Janet. 2002. Learning to think: Disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. – Middendorf, Joan and Pace, David. 2004. Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98. Cooperative Learning – Cooperative Learning (Johnson, Johnson & Smith) - Smith web site – www.ce.umn.edu/~smithwww.ce.umn.edu/~smith – Smith (2010) Social nature of learning: From small groups to learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2010, 123, 11-22 [NDTL-123-2-Smith-Social_Basis_of_Learning-.pdf]NDTL-123-2-Smith-Social_Basis_of_Learning-.pdf – Smith, Sheppard, Johnson & Johnson (2005) Pedagogies of Engagement [Smith- Pedagogies_of_Engagement.pdf]Smith- Pedagogies_of_Engagement.pdf – Johnson, Johnson & Smith. 1998. Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 1998, 30 (4), 26-35. [CLReturnstoCollege.pdf]CLReturnstoCollege.pdf Other Resources – University of Delaware PBL web site – www.udel.edu/pblwww.udel.edu/pbl – PKAL – Pedagogies of Engagement – http://www.pkal.org/activities/PedagogiesOfEngagementSummit.cfm http://www.pkal.org/activities/PedagogiesOfEngagementSummit.cfm – Fairweather (2008) Linking Evidence and Promising Practices in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Undergraduate Education - http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdfhttp://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdf