Grouping was a large idea in this chapter. The pros and cons of within-class and between-class ability grouping was mentioned. For both grouping, high achievers and gifted students benefit academically more than students in lower groups. Also, students from impoverished backgrounds and minority students are placed into lower groups more by assumption and they do not necessarily belong in that group. Tracking is a method that leads to beneficial academic outcomes like greater engagement in school, better grades, and positive attitudes. Tracking shows teachers where their students stand academically and ultimately shows what type of group to place them. Within-class ability grouping usually does not affect self-esteem, but tracking demonstrates a smaller self-esteem benefit for lower achieving students because they are aware they are in the lower level. Also, cross-grade grouping and nongraded plans tend to have positive effects for lower-achieving students. These flexible methods are effective because the heterogeneity of skills is reduced and allows teachers to use instructional materials and methods that meet the needs of individual students. Another effective method is cooperative learning because it allows students to have positive interdependence, group and independent accountability, interpersonal skills, interaction and group processing. Cooperative learning helps enhance self-esteem and motivation too. Effective practices for teaching involve all types of ability grouping, heterogeneity and homogeneity. Constantly switching up methods of teaching can be the most beneficial for students.
One question would be how do we implement cooperative learning if a classroom is already very diverse and the students do not enjoy group work or working with their peers in the class? How can we show that cooperative learning will be beneficial in the long run for these students?
Grouping connects to Vygotsky and his ideas because he believed that learning is not independent. Vygotsky claims that no learning is individual. People, tools, culture, language, etc is internalized and we learn in this way with our surroundings. People, culture, tools and language scaffold/mediate our learning, which then drives development. Vygotsky might recommend any type of grouping as long as students are learning with a positive and rich environment.
Vygtosky believes that learning drives development, whereas Piaget believes that development is moving from one stage of thought to another, which can be biological as well. Piaget also believes that learning is moving within a stage through exploration and experience, changing your schema and constructing knowledge based on experience, accommodation and assimilation. Vygotsky, on the other hand thinks that learning is never individual and knowledge is constructed while information moves externally to internally and from this learning drives development to happen.
My actions right now of writing this blog post are being influenced by my surroundings. I am listening to music, I have a blog, my book and notes open so my answers are being scaffolded by these tools as well.
I personally wasn't always a fan of group work in the classroom, I preferred doing the work on my own and not worrying about others. I believe that group work is essential for learning though. Students may not enjoy always working in groups, but collaborating together and building off of each other helps them establish social interactions and abilities for jobs and other collaborative activities later in life. When students hold each other accountable for their work their are higher rates of improvements, also students who may be lower-achieving can greatly benefit from the ways the high-achieving students work.
ReplyDelete