Student Perceptions of Small-Group Learning

Abstract

Background/Context

Elementary school teachers regularly arrange students in small groups for learning activities. A rich literature discusses various types of small-group learning formats and how those formats affect achievement. Few studies, however, have examined students’ perceptions of small-group learning experiences. Our work extends the small-group literature by studying stories written in response to a picture of children in a small group by students who attend Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) schools about learning in small groups.

Research Question

We examined students’ responses to pictures of small-group situations. Story analysis was guided by the following questions: How do student stories portray small-group experiences? Specifically, do students’ representations focus on achievement or affiliation? Are their representations positive and optimistic, or negative and pessimistic? What motivational systems are attributed to story characters? What are their challenges, behaviors, and goals? What do story characters feel, and how do they manage emotions?

Population

Students (N = 183) in Grades 3–5 who attended three CSR schools.

Research Design

Data collection consisted of student stories in response to a picture of three children working in a group in a classroom. Project instruments and procedures are an adaptation of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT).

Conclusions

Results suggest that students in these CSR schools held positive beliefs about their small-group learning experiences. The stories portrayed students as active, compliant participants who supported one another's learning, sometimes found their experiences personally meaningful, and were concerned with both achievement and affiliation. Students rarely represented competitive themes and never described rejection, being ignored, or giving up. Students told stories about small-group learning in school that sound like a typical day in most schools: They portray students who work together, support one another, and get the job done.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ames

(1984). Competitive, cooperative, and individualistic goal structures: A cognitive motivational analysis. In Ames

, and Ames

(Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Student motivation (Vol. 1, pp. 177—208). New York: Academic Press.

Bodrova

, and Leong

D. L.

(1996). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Blumenfeld

, Krajcik

, Marx

, and Soloway

(1994). Lesson learned: How collaboration helped middle-grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. Elementary School Journal, 94, 539—551.

Bossert

S. T.

(1988). Cooperative activities in the classroom. Review of Research in Education, 15, 225—250.

Butler

, and Kedar

(2004). Effects of intergroup competition and school philosophy on student perceptions, group processes, and performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15, 301—318.

Cohen

E. G.

(1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1—35.

Curti

(2002). The motivation of the passive learner in the cooperative setting. Unpublished thesis, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Deutsch

(1949). A theory of co-operation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 129—152.

Dolan

A. L.

, and McCaslin

(2008). Student perceptions of teacher support. Teachers College Record, 110(11).

10.

Dweck

, and Molden

(2005). Self-theories: Their impact on competence motivation and acquisition. In Elliot

A.J.

, and Dweck

C.S.

(Eds.), Handbook of competence motivation (pp. 122—140). New York: Guilford Press.

11.

Elias

, and Schwab

(2006). From compliance to responsibility: Social and emotional learning and classroom management. In Evertson

, and Weinstein

(Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 309—342). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

12.

Emmer

E. T.

, and Gerwels

M. C.

(2002). Cooperative learning in elementary classrooms: Teaching practices and lesson characteristics. Elementary School Journal, 103, 75—91.

13.

Fuchs

L. S.

, Fuchs

, Kazdan

, Karns

, Calhoon

M. B.

, and Hamlett

C. L.

. (2000). Effects of workgroup structure and size on student productivity during collaborative work on complex tasks. Elementary School Journal, 100, 183—212.

14.

Good

T. L.

(1981). Teacher expectations and student perceptions: A decade of research. Educational Leadership, 38, 415—423.

15.

Good

T. L.

(2008). In the midst of comprehensive school reform: Principals’ perspectives. Teachers College Record, 110(11).

16.

Good

T. L.

, and Brophy

(2008). Looking in classrooms (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

17.

Hannikainen

, and van Oers

(1999, September). Signs and problems of togetherness in a community of learners. Paper presented at the annual European Early Childhood Education Research Association conference, Helsinki, Finland.

18.

McCaslin

, and Burross

H. L.

(2008). Student motivational dynamics. Teachers College Record, 110(11).

19.

McCaslin

, and Good

T. L.

(1996a). The informal curriculum. In Berliner

, and Calfee

(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 622—670). New York: Macmillan.

20.

McCaslin

, and Good

T. L.

(1996b). Listening in classrooms. New York: HarperCollins.

21.

McCaslin

, and Hickey

(2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A Vygotskian view. In Zimmerman

, and Schunk

(Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 227—252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

22.

McCaslin

, Tuck

, Waird

, Brown

, LaPage

, and Pyle

(1994). Gender composition and small-group learning in fourth-grade mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 94, 467—482.

23.

Mulryan

C. M.

(1994). Perceptions of intermediate students’ cooperative small-group work in mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 87, 280—291.

24.

Noddings

(1989). Theoretical and practical concerns about small groups in mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 89, 607—624.

25.

Schwarz

B. B.

, Neuman

, Gil

, and Merav

(2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 219—256.

26.

Slavin

(1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

27.

Stipek

(1986). Children's motivation to learn. In Tomlinson

, and Walberg

(Eds.), Academic work and educational excellence (pp. 197—221). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

28.

Summers

J. J.

(2006). Effects of collaborative learning in math on sixth graders’ individual goal orientations from a socioconstructivist perspective. Elementary School Journal, 106, 273—290.

29.

Tan

I. G.

, Sharan

, and Lee

C. K.

(2005). Students’ perceptions of learning geography through group investigation in Singapore. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 14, 261—276.

30.

Webb

N. M.

(in press). Learning in small groups. In and and Good

T.L.

(Ed.), 21st century education: A reference handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

31.

Webb

N. M.

(1995). Group collaboration in assessment: Multiple objectives, processes, and outcomes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17, 239—261.

32.

Webb

N. M.

, Nemer

K. M.

, and Ing

(2006). Small-group reflections: Parallels between teacher discourse and student behavior in peer-directed groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 63—119.

33.

Webb

N. M.

, and Palincsar

A. S.

(1996). Group processes in the classroom. In Berliner

, and Calfee

(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841—873). New York: Macmillan.

34.

Weiner

(2005). Motivation from an attributional perspective and the social psychology of perceived competence. In Elliot

A.J.

, and Dweck

C.S.

(Eds.), Handbook of competence motivation (pp. 73—84). New York: Guilford Press.

35.

Wiley

C. R. H.

, Good

T. L.

, and McCaslin

(2008). Comprehensive School Reform instructional practices throughout a school year: The role of subject matter, grade level, and time of year. Teachers College Record, 110(11).