KU Chee Onn1,2, *, LOW Yi Lian1, and LIEU Zi Zhao1,2
1Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science
2Special Programme in Science
Ku, C.O., Low, Y.L., & Lieu, Z.Z. (2024). Balancing Voices in Cooperative Learning Through an Equitable Practice [Lightning Talk]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-ku-et-al/
SUB-THEME
Opportunities from Wellbeing
KEYWORDS
Cooperative learning, team-based learning, equitable participation, team dynamics, student perceptions
CATEGORY
Lightning Talk
INTRODUCTION
Cooperative learning is an active learning strategy where students work on open-ended activities in a team-based setting, driving student engagement, and providing opportunities for peer learning (Johnson & Johnson, 2018). Effective cooperation requires students to participate and interact equitably with each other (Herrmann, 2013). However, inequitable participation is often observed (Chang & Brickman, 2018; Channon et al., 2017; Herrmann, 2013; Theobald et al., 2017; Wilson et al., 2018). Examples include students dominating discussions, social loafing, and free-riding. This can lead to negative experiences and poor learning outcomes (Channon et al., 2017; Theobald et al., 2017).
To address this, we propose using equitable teaching strategies suggested by Tanner (2013). Equitable teaching strategies refer to instructional methods that aim to maximise fairness and ensure that every student in the classroom is engaged (Tanner, 2013). Two such strategies were integrated into our current practice of cooperative learning, referred to as equitable practice, and employed in the course HSI2004 (Academic Year 2023/2024, Semester 2). We aim to implement equitable practice in the classroom and assess its effectiveness by analysing student perceptions of their team.
INTEGRATING EQUITABLE TEACHING STRATEGIES INTO CURRENT PRACTICE
In the course, students were required to work in teams and solve open-ended questions in the classroom. The equitable practice was used to conduct the learning task and consisted of two changes inspired by Tanner (2013) (Figure 1). To ensure students can think and engage with the task, the learning activity segment was divided into individual and group phases with an approximate 1:2-time ratio. To facilitate participation from all members, a leader of the day was also randomly assigned during the group phase to lead discussion and present answers.
Figure 1. Comparison of lesson plans between the current and equitable practices.
COLLECTING STUDENT PERCEPTIONS THROUGH SURVEYS
At the start of the semester, students formed teams of five to six members, with most self-assigned while a minority was assigned randomly. Anonymous surveys were administered via Google Forms at the start and the end of the semester (Figure A1, Appendix). Survey questions were adapted from the Assessing Student Perspective of Engagement in Class Tool (ASPECT) survey by Wiggins et al. (2017), which was developed and validated to measure student perceptions of engagement in active learning. Comparisons of student perceptions and survey questions were performed using Fisher’s exact test in the Python SciPy library.
STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR TEAM WITH THE EQUITABLE PRACTICE
Among the 33 students, 24 (72.7%) and 27 (81.8%) students responded at the start and the end of the semester, respectively. Participation indicates the level of satisfaction with contributions made by oneself and team members. Fewer students perceived high participation at the end of the semester (Figure 2). To ascertain the source of this decline, the individual survey questions were compared. Fewer students were satisfied (score ≥5) with their own contributions (91.7% vs 63.0%, p = 0.022) at the end of the semester. These suggest a decline in the balance of voices and engagement among students during the learning activity segment. Thus, we may need to modify the tasks and ensure they align more closely with students’ interests (Wilson et al., 2018).
Value of activity indicates whether students perceived a broader purpose to the learning activity beyond mere completion. Findings were similar at the start and the end of the semester with most students perceiving high value of activity (Figure 2). Likewise, students felt comfortable (100.0% vs 96.3%) and enjoyed (95.8% vs 96.3%) working with their teams. These suggest that students found value in learning through the equitable practice that may have resulted in positive experiences and learning outcomes.
Figure 2. Student perceptions of participation and value of activity at the start and the end of the semester. P-value was based on Fisher’s exact test.
CONCLUSION
Integrating equitable teaching strategies into cooperative learning facilitates hearing from a greater diversity of voices, enabling students to engage effectively with the learning activity and their peers, thereby enhancing learning outcomes. It may be beneficial to conduct a survey to gain insights into students’ interests for consideration when designing learning tasks. In conclusion, the equitable practice is effective at balancing student voices and showed positive outcomes as perceived by students. We recommend fellow educators to consider equity when employing cooperative learning.
APPENDIX
Figure A1. Survey to assess student perceptions of their team. Survey questions were adapted from the ASPECT survey by Wiggins et al. (2017). Perceptions of participation and value of activity were calculated by summing the scores of the corresponding questions and classified into low, medium, and high.
REFERENCES
Chang, Y., & Brickman, P. (2018). When group work doesn’t work: Insights from students. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-09-0199
Channon, S. B., Davis, R. C., Goode, N. T., & May, S. A. (2017). What makes a ‘good group’? Exploring the characteristics and performance of undergraduate student groups. Adv Health Sciences Education, 22, 17-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-016-9680-y
Herrmann, K. J. (2013). The impact of cooperative learning on student engagement: Results from an intervention. Active learning in higher education, 14(3), 175-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787413498
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2018). Cooperative learning: The foundation for active learning. Active learning—Beyond the future, 59-71. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.81086
Tanner, K. D. (2013). Structure matters: Twenty-one teaching strategies to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 322-331. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-06-0115
Theobald, E. J., Eddy, S. L., Grunspan, D. Z., Wiggins, B. L., & Crowe, A. J. (2017). Student perception of group dynamics predicts individual performance: Comfort and equity matter. PLoS One, 12(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181336
Wiggins, B. L., Eddy, S. L., Wener-Fligner, L., Freisem, K., Grunspan, D. Z., Theobald, E. J., Timbrook, J., & Crowe, A. J. (2017). ASPECT: A survey to assess student perspective of engagement in an active-learning classroom. CBE Life Sciences Education, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-08-0244
Wilson, K. J., Brickman, P., & Brame, C. J. (2018). Group work. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-12-0258