group work

Here's something I often wrestle with: I'll break a class into smaller groups which have some task or tasks to perform. After a while we'll reconvene and I'll ask each group to report results back to the class at large. The problem is that at ths point one person in the group will have been pre-selected or will emerge as the spokesperson, and the rest of the group will sit there like bumps on a log. If I work at it, I can usually get a couple of more from the group to engage--but then the rest of the class sits there like bumps on a log, observers of the spectacle. How to share group work with a large class in a more participatory fashion?

Comments

[Kendra]

The specific strategy depends on exactly what each group is doing, but here are a couple alternatives I've tried. These often work well instead of turn-by-turn reports from the groups.

1) Have groups report simultaneously by writing something on the chalkboard and/or hanging something on the wall (large sheets of newsprint or post-it flipcharts work well)

2) Redistribute the groups and have one member of the original group report to each of the new groups - this makes each person in the group take some ownership

[KF]

Ah, I've dealt with this one a bunch. I do TONS of small group stuff. And I'm not totally satisfied with my results, but it's getting better.

First off, I tell the group before they go off to work one of two things: either that every member of the group needs to be responsible for reporting the entirety of the group's findings, and that I'll call randomly on someone to represent the group, or that each member of the group needs to be responsible for reporting some aspect of the group's findings, and that they all must present together. Which I choose depends on how things have gone in previous iterations; if they're all pretty much talking, but need some evening-out, I'll go for the latter, but if there are particular folks who aren't talking at all, I'll go for the former.

I also make sure that each group's reportage must end with some kind of question for future discussion. So I have two avenues of developing group cross-talk: one is simply order-of-reportage, in which I ask a group that feels that their response somehow interacts with the previous group to go next; the other is more direct response-to-question oriented.

The other thing I do is take notes on the overhead-projected computer, such that there's a record of the groups' findings as they present them, and particularly a record of their final questions. If there hasn't been much in the way of cross-talk before the reports have finished, I can then refer back to the questions, and ask for responses.

There's also another model I've used -- entirely separate from the above -- in which each individual is expected to show up in class with a prepared question about the reading, and then small groups first spend five to ten minutes selecting from among their questions, which they then hand off to the group to their left, receiving the queation from the group to their right. They then spend time in small groups answering the question that they've been given, and when they report back, the original group is required to respond to the answer, even if only by giving the class at large a sense of why they thought the question was important.

That was long. Enough for now.

[Matt K.]

"The other thing I do is take notes on the overhead-projected computer, such that there's a record of the groups' findings as they present them, and particularly a record of their final questions."

I like that especially. It makes them accountable.

Thanks all--