The organisation of collaborative groups

Because of the importance of increasing the frequency and quality of pupil talk, collaborative groups were incorporated into every single Maths lesson following the introduction of the Thinking Skills approach. Various groupings were used during lessons, varying from informal ‘talk partners’, chosen by the pupils themselves on a lesson-by- lesson basis, as well as more formalised trios chosen by myself as teacher-researcher, taking into account not only the ability of the pupils, but also their behaviour and friendship groups in an attempt to maximise the likelihood that all pupils would participate actively within their individual groups. Mixed-attainment groups were used for collaborative

70

to work with ‘peers who would stimulate their thinking’ (Boaler, 2009: p. 33) that such groups can provide for lower-attaining pupils. This also followed the success that McGregor and Gunter (2006) experienced with similar groups when investigating the impact of the C.A.S.E. professional development programme.

Formalising networks for collaboration was initially seen to be important because of the strong message it conveyed to pupils about the ways in which I was now expecting and encouraging them to work, dispelling any possible misunderstandings that pupils may have about ‘copying’ and the need to complete individual work, which they often perceived should be carried out within a quiet, if not silent, classroom environment. By encouraging pupils to talk to one another about their learning, I aimed not only to create a classroom climate which would promote the talk which I believe essential to improving pupils’ reasoning skills, as well as the articulation of this understanding, but also tap the potential of peer influences upon learning. Hattie (2003), for example, has previously written that ‘the influence of peers is minimal’, concluding that this was the result of the ‘under-

utilisation of peers as co-teachers in classrooms, and the dominance of the adult in the room to the diminution of the power of the peer’ (both p. 2). In contrast, I sought to create an atmosphere in which pupils were free to co-construct shared understanding through discussions about learning.

These groups were always chosen by me, as teacher researcher, in conversation with my year group partner and learning support assistant, taking into account the pupils’

friendships, social, emotional and behavioural needs, as well as their current level of attainment. As I have outlined during the previous section, I was explicit about my beliefs regarding the benefits of talk for learning with the focus cohort, and so they were already familiar with my expectations regarding discussions during lessons, and had also come to recognise themselves that ‘2 heads were better than 1, 3 brains are better than 2!’. To remind us all about these groups, we added a Maths Team aspect to our Maths ‘working wall’ display with the names of the different teams. Groups were changed frequently, at least once each half term, to allow pupils opportunities to work with peers with a range of styles of thinking and learning.

71

Again, I found that it took some time for pupils to truly begin to work together effectively. I found that pupils’ habits of producing their own, individual piece of work was ingrained and that, even when asked to work collaboratively, they tended to discuss, in part, the task that they were undertaking, but continued to work largely individually. Interestingly, this resonates with the work of McGregor and Gunter (2006) who report the description of a Science teacher who found that ‘the usual expectation in science lessons of pupils having to write everything to be learned was constraining’ adding that ‘writing limits thinking’ (both McGregor & Gunter, 2006: pp. 41 – 42). To counter this, I began giving groups a single piece of paper and a single pen. This simple strategy forced the pupils to work together collaboratively, sharing their ideas much more freely and discussing strategies and methods as they worked. An example of pupils working in this way can be seen in Plate 2.4.

Plate 2.4 Pupils working together towards a shared task

Just visible in this picture is another key scaffold which was given to pupils at the outset of research to support the development of their collaborative work during the introduction of the Thinking Skills approach. This is the multi-coloured question prompt visible

72

Taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002), which was laminated and attached to pupils’ desks to provide a reference tool during discussions. An example of this prompt can be found in Plate 2.5.

Plate 2.5 Question prompt reference tool

This question prompt was considered particularly important as it provided a means of modelling appropriate questions to pupils, following the advice of Biddulph et al (1986), King (1994), and Chin (2004). This tool was also intended to follow the process of guided cooperative questioning proposed by King (1994) in which children are provided with prompt cards containing a variety of question stems such as before working in small groups or pairs to pose and respond to each other’s questions. In order to ensure that the different types of question – and the distinct responses that these may therefore elicit – were understood by pupils, upon first introducing the focus cohort to this tool, my year group

73

partner and I discussed the different questions with the pupils in order to identify similarities, differences, and to consider situations when each question could be used.

Questions of this nature were also added to the Maths ‘working wall’ display and, again, West Side School’s existing merit system was used to reward groups who used a range of these questions effectively during their collaborative work. Encouraging pupils to use a range of questions of this type was intended to help pupils develop their interactions because, upon beginning to work in collaborative groups, it quickly became apparent that pupils were unsure about how to discuss their learning with their peers. Conversations were rather superficial, asking for answers or perhaps inquiring what a group member was doing, but rarely exploring the reasons behind this. The questions contained in this prompt were particularly useful as they encouraged pupils to vary their discussions, engaging with their learning at different levels of thinking. It was also invaluable in helping children to develop their own questioning skills, and, indeed, pupils became so much more confident in asking a variety of questions that the prompt was no longer needed during the second year of research.

In a further attempt to increase the success of pupils’ collaboration, upon the introduction of these groups, one lesson in its entirety was given over to discussion of group work. As a year group, we discussed rules for successful working, creating a shared list for display upon our Maths ‘working wall’ display. Whilst we did not go as far as following the structure used by McGregor and Gunter (2006), under which each participant describes, in turn, their views, which are then evaluated in order to reach a group consensus, the

importance of ensuring that the views of all group members was frequently emphasised. Children were encouraged to consider the ‘fairness’ of unequal participation in tasks, and agreed on questions that could be used within the group to encourage other members to share their views and participate more actively. These resources remained on display throughout the academic year, and were referred to when necessary. Subsequent

discussions surrounding successful group work were also held sporadically throughout the year in response to issues arising during lessons, usually as part of the discussions during mini-plenaries.

74

One discussion focused on strategies which could be used when the groups were ‘stuck’ to avoid relying upon adult intervention. Whilst some of the suggestions offered by pupils were firmly rooted in the context of Maths lessons, such as try “Trial and error” or “Use R.U.C.S.A.C.”6,others were indicative of more general reflections such as “Ignore any distractions” or “Try again!”7. These suggestions were recorded in one shared list and were added to the Maths ‘working wall’ display as a prompt for the groups. In addition to this, I also introduced a ‘C3B4Me’ (‘See three before me’) mnemonic to encourage pupils to first try to resolve their own difficulties before appealing to an adult. This was particularly important because of the challenging nature of the tasks used by the children; in order to ensure that pupils were working in the Zone of Proximal Development proposed by Vygotsky (1978), pupils were provided with challenges that required them to work at a higher level of understanding than they were accustomed to. As a result, many children were tempted to seek help or to give up in the belief that they were incapable of

successfully completing the task, and it was therefore important to encourage pupils to persevere within their groups to develop their understanding.

Pupils within each group were also loosely assigned roles to fulfil. This technique was based upon a strategy for developing effective group work in which pupils are each given a card8 which requires them to act as ‘leader’, ‘questioner’, ‘scribe’, or ‘summariser’,

amongst other defined roles. To help scaffold interactions, lower-attaining pupils were initially asked to act as the group’s ‘scribe’, requiring them to pay close attention to any discussions. This also ensured that these pupils completed any necessary calculations, with the support and guidance of the other members of their group, providing them with

additional opportunities to practise the mechanics of Maths whilst simultaneously using these in context or problem-solving activities. However, as time went on, particularly as the second cycle of research progressed, I found that pupils became more familiar with

6

A mnemonic for remembering the steps in solving word problems: Read, Understand, Choose a calculation,

Solve, Answer, Check.

7 _{The full list of these suggestions can be found in Appendix B.}

8 _{This is a technique commonly included in Thinking Skills training. It can also be found in resources created}

and shared by teachers on forums such as the Times Educational Supplement (T.E.S.) website, such as the cards produced by makesensetraining, which can be accessed at www.tes.co.uk/teaching-resource/group-

75

collaborating successfully as a group, and interacted more freely with each other, without requiring the allocation of specific roles within the group.