Chapter 6: Cooperative Learning

Mr. Taylor’s 4th grade social studies class is about to learn about the five geographic regions of Virginia. This unit typically occurs at the beginning of the school year and serves as an introduction to the Virginia Studies course. The fourth grade team has also focused on creating a positive classroom community and learning environment where all students feel affirmed and their voices are valued. Students brainstormed actions that they could take to support one another in achieving their goals. This brainstorm led to the co-construction of community agreements that all students agreed upon. Students agreed to actively listen to one another, to treat others the way they would like to be treated, to do their best work, and to show care for classroom materials and each other. Mr. Taylor decided that a jigsaw lesson would provide a wonderful opportunity for his students to authentically practice their newly created community agreements. He launches his social studies lesson by presenting the following quote to his students, “Two heads are better than one.” The students discuss what this means and how this concept has played out in their courses when working groups with others.

What is Cooperative Learning?

At its essence, cooperative learning consists of students working in groups to accomplish a task or meet a goal. While cooperative learning has been around for decades, it is an increasingly useful instructional model for educators to add to their proverbial toolbox. American society, schools, and classrooms are becoming more racially, ethnically, ideologically, and culturally diverse. As educators it is our responsibility to not only teach students content, but to provide ways for students to develop the skills they need to be successful in an increasingly global society. Those skills, identified by the National Research Council, often referred to as “21st century skills” or “college and career readiness skills” include competencies such as collaboration, effective communication, responsibility, and conflict resolution (National Research Council, 2012). Engaging students in cooperative learning tasks will require them to apply those skills throughout the course of the activity. It is common to hear frustration with cooperative learning–have you ever heard comments like, “but I did all of the work, and my partner got the same grade!” Or “we had to meet as a group, but I could never reach my partner, and now it’s too late to finish this task!” These kinds of experiences can be reduced with some careful planning.

For classroom teachers looking to incorporate cooperative learning, it is important to note that there is more to this structure than simply putting students into groups to work. According to Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec (1994), there are five key elements to structured cooperative learning. Those elements are:

1. Positive interdependence—work should be equally distributed and group members will need to work together in order to succeed.
2. Individual accountability—students are responsible for their own learning.
3. Simultaneous interaction—students must communicate with one another to explain how to solve the problem at hand, share information, and make connections.
4. Social skills–these should be explicitly included, taught, and reflected upon.
5. Group Processing time should be provided for groups to reflect upon the activity and their process of working together.

The purpose of cooperative learning is for students to work together to learn new information, build their interpersonal skills, and complete a task. There are many benefits associated with cooperative learning. In her overview of decades of research on cooperative learning structures, Gillies (2016) notes that several meta-analyses examining the effects of cooperative learning have found the approach to be better than competitive or individualistic learning in the areas of student academic achievement, motivation, peer relationships, and personal self-development skills. Further, cooperative learning is supported by a range of educational theories including motivational theories, and cognitive theories of learning. For example, Vygotsky (1978) stressed the importance of social interaction on learning and notes that when children collaborate with one another their learning is accelerated; he also posited that students who engage in social interactions will learn more and will engage in higher-order thinking.

Lastly, cooperative learning can also support culturally and linguistically diverse students. For example, Lucas and Villegas (2011) note that social interaction fosters English Learners’ (ELs) “development of conversational and academic English” (p. 364). In order to acquire English, ELs need frequent opportunities to interact with more fluent peers. Cooperative learning models offer a structure for teachers to provide ELs with those opportunities. In addition, research on culturally responsive teaching suggests that when educators teach in ways that are culturally congruent to students they have higher academic achievement (Hammond, 2014). For example, many students of color come from cultures that value oracy and oral language. Cooperative learning models also value oral communication and can provide an avenue for teachers to teach in ways that align with and honor the oral traditions of their students. In sum, cooperative learning structures are fertile ground for active learning and meaning-making to occur specifically because they demand simultaneous interaction, positive interdependence, and group processing.

Cooperative Learning Models

The four cooperative learning models reviewed in this section can be utilized at any grade level and for any content area, although some adjustments may be necessary depending on the students and their prior skills and experiences. To ensure that cooperative learning is a success, teachers must consider grouping practices and the arrangement of the physical environment.

One of the overarching goals of cooperative learning is to develop students’ social skill development. For students to truly develop the skills necessary to interact with diverse groups they must have practice doing so. Teachers should carefully consider how to group students so that they not only learn the content but how to successfully collaborate with others. In most cases teachers should create heterogeneous groups to ensure that diverse groups of students can interact in supported ways, where their success requires them to depend upon one another. Additionally, keep groups small for numerous reasons. First, the larger the group, the more skilled students must be at listening to one another and providing opportunities for all to share in order to reach consensus. Additionally, the larger the group, the more time it will take for fruitful discussion to occur. In addition to grouping practices, teachers need to consider how they set up their physical classroom environment to maximize student learning opportunities.

How teachers choose to arrange their classroom spaces and furniture can either facilitate or hinder student learning (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1994). When engaging in cooperative learning structures it is important that the classroom design aligns with that of the task. For example, students should not sit in rows if they are engaging in a Structured Academic Controversy – a model that demands two pairs to engage in discussion. Classroom furniture should be arranged so that collaborative groups are facing one another and can easily hear one another. This means that tables or groups of desks need to be far enough apart that groups do not interfere with each other’s discussion and learning. Teachers may even consider labeling groups of desks or areas of the classroom to define boundaries. Lastly, mobility and spatial needs of students and teachers need to be considered while determining how the room and furniture are organized. When grouping and the classroom environment are attended to proactively, management problems are less likely to arise and student engagement and learning are more likely to occur.

This chapter reviews four specific cooperative learning instructional models, including Jigsaw, Graffiti, Student Teams-Achievement Division, and Structured Academic Controversy. Each model will be described and steps for implementation will be shared. Additionally, many educators also frequently utilize instructional strategies with several of the hallmarks of cooperative learning and can be used with many different instructional models. A few of those strategies will be listed and briefly discussed.

The Jigsaw Model

In the jigsaw model students are placed into groups for two rounds of interaction: an expert group and learning group. The students in the expert group all read or interact with the same materials and work together to ensure each member of the group knows all of the relevant and important information about their topic. Oftentimes students teachers will require the expert group members to record their learning on a graphic organizer. By doing this group members and the teacher can all ensure that each person has recorded the critical information about the topic. Once the expert groups are finished with their learning they meet with their learning group. The learning group is composed of at least one member from each expert group. Each expert then shares the information about their topic to the learning group.

When using the jigsaw model, the teacher should determine how to divide up the curricular materials and decide how many students will be in each expert group. Group sizes ranging from three to six students often work well. Because cooperative learning models are intended to support the development of prosocial skills, teachers should usually create heterogeneous groups.

After sharing the learning goals and objectives for the overall task with students, provide an overview of how the jigsaw method works. During the expert group step, small groups of students should work together to learn about a particular portion of content. For example, refer back to Mr. Taylor’s classroom at the beginning of the chapter. Each expert group in his classroom is learning about a particular region of Virginia. Teachers should provide clear assignment expectations for each expert group and this often takes the form of a graphic organizer or guiding questions for the group to answer. Providing clear guidance at this step can support students in recording accurate information to present to their peers. The teacher may also choose to review what the expert groups are planning to present to the rest of their classmates in order to avoid the spread of misinformation.

Learning groups should consist of at least one student from each expert group. The experts then take turns presenting their information to the rest of the learning group. To encourage individual accountability, it is important to provide a way for students to capture their new learning. Students may have completed a graphic organizer during the jigsaw, and circulating during students’ working time and reviewing that and subsequent individual assessments will be important to ensure that students have accurate information. See videos in the appendix for examples of a jigsaw in action. Once students are finished with their learning groups individual students should synthesize their learning in the form of an assignment, presentation, or discussion. By including this step it allows teachers to assess both group processing and individual student learning of content.

The Graffiti Model

The graffiti model is another cooperative learning structure where students provide written responses to questions posed by the teacher. This model can be used for brainstorming, for reviewing information, or as a way to informally check for student progress towards objectives (Estes & Mintz, 2016). In this model the teacher poses a series of questions on a shared writing space such as chart paper or on large whiteboards. Students then collaborate to answer the questions and as they rotate to each chart, whiteboard, or digital space, they can learn from what other groups have written.

Prior to implementing the graffiti approach, it is important to determine questions and prompts to which students will respond. The prompts should be aligned to pre-determined learning objectives and there should be one question for each group. Open-ended prompts or questions are best for this model. Table 6.1 includes examples and non-examples.

Table 6.1: Examples and Non-Examples of the Graffiti Model

To encourage individual accountability in this model, the teacher could consider requiring students to initial their contributions. Technology in the form of Google Jamboards or a Padlet can also serve as a useful tool for sharing ideas, especially in a hybrid or online course environment. Another benefit of using a digital tool is that saving and sharing the students’ replies to revisit later is simplified–a teacher can also take photos of students’ work on paper for this purpose. Figure 6.1 shows a Jamboard used for a student’s Graffiti lesson on responses to poetry in Janine Davis’s course.

Figure 6.1: Jamboard Example in Graffiti Lesson

After explaining the process that students will use for the brainstorming portion of the lesson, the teacher should describe the task and overall learning objectives to students. Teachers should share what constitutes an appropriate response and describe the types of writing allowed. For example, in this type of writing students may respond via graphics, short phrases, or even pose their own questions. Remind students that they should engage in discussion and support one another at each rotation. Depending on students’ ages and prior experiences, they may need more support for this task.

Most groups can complete each round of the graffiti lesson in 30 seconds to three or four minutes, depending on the group and the task. To support students with time management teachers may consider using a visual timer. This groups will respond to all prompts until they have answered every question or prompt. Each group should return to their original question or prompt and review all of the responses together before sharing a summary and/or synthesis with the group and discussing the process.

The Structured Academic Controversy (SAC) Model

The Structured Academic Controversy model is similar to a debate, with a couple of very important differences. In this model the teacher will identify a controversial but school-appropriate topic which has at least two well-documented positions. These controversies can come from a variety of places from current events to issues in the community or school. Examples of controversies include: Should our school be renamed? Should elementary students have homework? Should schools have soda and candy vending machines?

What differences to a traditional debate do you notice? First, it is not two large groups arguing pro and con, but rather pairs of students in groups of four. Second, students are assigned to one of the positions and work together to learn about the position and any supporting arguments, rather than arguing the side with which they already align. Third, groups will argue both sides of the issue, and then work to come to a collective consensus. The academic and social skills required for this collaborative structure require teachers to be intentional about teaching these prior to a structured academic controversy lesson. For example, students will need to understand how to identify a position and identify supporting evidence from a variety of sources, respectfully deliberate with classmates, and reach consensus, to name a few.

During the model, pairs will work together to review the materials about their position. They identify their position and record supporting evidence to support their viewpoint. Once each pair has identified their position and supporting arguments the two pairs get back together to present their arguments to each other. To ensure individual accountability,  both members of each pair should be responsible for sharing their arguments. While one side presents, the other side needs to actively listen, take notes, and ask clarifying questions as needed. Once both pairs have shared, the entire foursome engages in an open discussion. Students should ask for more data and evidence and identify which arguments they believe are the strongest. Each pair should refute claims made by the opposing pair while also rebutting any attacks on their position. Pairs switch positions, review the content, and then discuss the new viewpoint with their partner. Each pair then presents their new, opposing viewpoint to each other. The teacher should encourage students to find new facts or information if possible. To close this activity, each group should present their final statements. Additionally, to ensure individual accountability the teacher could require each group member to turn in a written paragraph of their final position statement with rationale. Lastly, it is recommended that teachers hold a class discussion so that students can process what the most and least successful components of the group experience were. Teachers can opt to include some moments of self reflection about how well individual students applied interpersonal skills.

Although this model is complicated and requires high-level collaboration from students, it can be used with students from any grade. It simply requires intentionality on the part of the teacher when creating groups and gathering materials. You can imagine that guiding kindergarten or first grade students through this process could be very challenging, but it is not impossible. Younger students may benefit from visual or audio sources with less reading or the help of a classroom volunteer, while older students may be tasked with finding sources that support a particular position. When forming pairs the teacher should ensure that at least one student is a strong reader or researcher based on the cognitive demands. No matter the age of the students, it is important for the steps of the task to be clearly articulated both orally and in writing for students.

As with other models, it can help to provide students with a graphic organizer where they can record supporting evidence for each side as well as space for coming to a consensus, and to support group movement through the use of a timer and frequent reminders. A lesson using this model will often take an hour or more to complete.

The Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) Model

According to Slavin (1995), “STAD is one of the simplest of all cooperative learning methods, and is a good model to begin with for teachers who are new to the cooperative approach” (p. 71). The STAD model consists of team rewards, individual accountability and equal opportunities for success (Slavin, 1995). After presenting material the teacher assigns students to heterogeneous groups based on several factors: academic performance within the subject area, race, gender, ethnicity, language proficiency etc. Teachers may consider giving a pre-assessment in order to accurately gauge student knowledge about the topic and balance levels of prior knowledge across all groups.

In the STAD model, the teacher presents information to students, usually through a brief lecture or video example. The teacher must identify the specific facts and knowledge students need to acquire and create a way to present that information to students. The teacher should then share the objectives with students, explain that students will form study teams to learn the new information prior to being individually tested on the information. Explain that the winning team will be publicly acknowledged and recognized.

Once the content is conveyed, student teams work together to study and learn the information. Teams can co-construct notes, quiz one another, or answer questions on teacher-provided study guides or graphic organizers. Digital tools such as Quizlet can be useful for practice during the study phase of the lesson.

Once students have finished practicing, the teacher should give students an individual assessment on the material. The students must complete the assessment on their own without assistance from their study team. The teacher scores individual assessments. Team scores are also calculated based on a team’s improvement over a past performance such as on a pre-assessment; one way to measure the effect of the team is to average the scores on the pre-assessment and post-assessment for the group, and select the team whose average increased by the greatest percentage.

When recognizing the winning team, the teacher will need to determine what will be motivating for the students. It can be tempting to offer candy, but in many schools this is not allowed, or it can introduce problems related to health and allergies. Some possible options include public recognition, a small gift or time with a class pet, some time for choice tasks, or a “free homework” pass if this is permitted in your school.

Suggested Content for Cooperative Learning Models

Table 6.2 provides suggested content for cooperative learning models.

Table 6.2: Suggested Content for Cooperative Learning Models

Ancillary Collaborative Instructional Strategies

In addition to the four cooperative learning models shared above, educator and researcher Spencer Kagan has developed several strategies focused on student collaboration. Teachers can quickly and easily integrate these strategies into their classroom instruction at any age and in any subject. In each of these strategies students build their prosocial skills, participate equally while simultaneously interacting and processing information. Table 6.3 represents a few of the numerous strategies developed by Kagan (Kagan, 1994, Iglesias, 2022).

Table 6.3: Kagan’s Collaborative Instructional Strategies

Cooperative Learning: Tips for Successful Implementation

As a teacher, you have a lot of power to positively manipulate your environment so that all students can be successful when participating in cooperative learning groups. Below you will find a suggested list of guidelines to help you maximize success when choosing to assign students to complete work in cooperative learning groups.

The teacher should almost always choose the groups.

As the teacher you should almost always be in charge of choosing the groups. You will have the most comprehensive knowledge of all students’ current progressions with the knowledge, understanding, and skills required by the task. Cooperative learning groups are typically the most beneficial when they are heterogeneous, meaning the composition is varied by student interests, social skills, gender, achievement, etc. When left to choose their own groups, students will often migrate towards their friends, which can negate some of the benefits of cooperative learning such as valuing all peers for their strengths. One suggestion is to vary the composition of groups so that all students will have the opportunity to work with one another. This has two (and likely more) benefits. First, students will realize that they will be able to work with their friends at some points on group assignments which could otherwise be a point of contention when you let them know that you will be choosing the groups. Secondly, by ensuring that all students work together, you will have a better classroom community and climate—as long as guidelines are in place to ensure all students respect one another.

Determine ahead of time how you will create groups.

There are multiple cooperative learning models to choose from and each has a slightly different purpose and process. You need to consider not only the composition of students in each group but also the number of students per group, number of groups needed, and whether students have to be thoughtfully assigned or whether random assignment will work for the particular task. For example for a graffiti lesson you will need to think about how many students can actually write on the posters around the room and plan accordingly. Will five students be too many? For a jigsaw you need to be sure that you have enough students per expert group to have at least one expert per learning group.

Additionally, teachers can also form groups in a way that meets individual needs. As we know, people vary in many ways. Teachers can manipulate groups to meet that variety of student needs. For example, if you have students who are ready for more abstract or advanced language you can assign those students to the same expert group when planning for a jigsaw. In doing so those students will have an opportunity to grapple with more advanced content and discuss it in their expert group before teaching that information to a more heterogeneous learning group. Similarly, teachers can also address learning differences by providing different options to students in how they learn about content. The teacher could provide some groups or students with a written passage and others with a video that deals with the content. Again, it is of utmost importance that teachers carefully consider multiple factors when creating groups—especially their knowledge of students.

Set up ground rules for how to be a successful group member.

Cooperative groups will only function if students are prepared to utilize social skills and work together. Teachers will need to discuss and model a range of social skills from the most foundational such as taking turns and staying with the group to those skills that are more closely related to maintaining relationships and the intellectual skills that are required for the group to come to a deeper understanding of the material. One suggestion is to model skills with students and make anchor charts so that they can be referred to with ease during group time. Have discussions so that students can co-construct what successful group work should look like and sound like and use their words to make the anchor charts. This makes reflecting about the task and group easier because students will have their words and expectations accessible.

Make sure the task is group-worthy and has the five key components of cooperative learning.

Group-worthy tasks should be open-ended, require complex thinking, and allow for students to use multiple intellectual abilities, and be based upon important content of a discipline or disciplines. Not all tasks are groupworthy, so before spending precious instructional time be sure to consider whether your task meets the requirements listed above. Further, all cooperative learning tasks should have these five key components: positive interdependence, individual accountability, simultaneous interaction, explicit inclusion of social skill development, and time for group processing (Johnson, Johnson & Holubec, 1994).

Include individual and group assessments.

Two of the biggest challenges are how to ensure students are doing the work required of them and how to assess students in cooperative learning structures. To ensure students are taking responsibility for their own learning, teachers should consider including some sort of individual assessment such as a quiz, exit ticket, or essay to see how individual students are progressing towards learning goals. While students are actively engaged in the task teachers could also use the Numbered Heads strategy referred to earlier in the chapter. All students in a group have a number assigned to them and the teacher can randomly choose a number and that student is required to report on the learning done together. The teacher can then take notes on individual student responses and make adjustments if necessary.

Additionally, social skills should be explicitly included, taught, reflected upon, and assessed. The skills needed for successful completion of the task should be outlined for students and discussed during the task assignment. Teachers can use informal checks to see how students are doing with respect to social skills by having students self-reflect using a “Fist to Five” approach or they could take a more formal approach and have students rate themselves and their group members on their social skill development on a rubric. One of the main benefits of small-group work is that students have the opportunity to learn from diverse groups of voices, providing new funds of knowledge and connections.

Finally, time should be provided for groups to reflect upon the activity and their process of working together. Teachers can have many options in how they have students approach the reflection process. Students can engage in reflection during a whole group discussion (possibly referring to anchor charts created prior to collaborative group work), teachers can assign a written assignment, or have students rate their group processes on a rubric that outlines predetermined criteria for successful group work and final products.

Provide feedback to groups and individuals during collaborative group work time.

Due to the nature of collaborative groupings the teacher has the freedom to observe, listen to, and meet with individual groups during their work time. Teachers should be sure to provide feedback both on how students are making sense of content and also pay attention to how the group is working with regards to social skills. Teachers have a lot of power to increase the efficacy of a group and raise the social capital of students by verbally acknowledging the strengths of students who might be otherwise marginalized in some way.

References

Estes T. H. & Mintz S. L. (2016). Instruction: A models approach (7th ed.). Pearson Education.

Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative Learning: Review of Research and Practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3

Hammond, Z. & Jackson, Y. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin.

Iglesias, G. (2022, October 13). STRATEGIES (101) you can implement with students that don’t speak English [Conference Session]. SETESOL Conference, Richmond, VA, United States.

Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T., & Holubec E. J. (1994). The nuts and bolts of cooperative learning. Interaction Book Company.

Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. Resources for Teachers, Inc.

Lucas, T., Villegas, A. M., & Freedson-Gonzalez, M. (2008). Linguistically responsive teacher education: Preparing classroom teachers to teach English language learners. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 361–373.

National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. National Academies Press.

Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.