Posts
Here's another reason not to use group work in instructional settings. Instructional groups by definition contain no experts. In real life groups (at work, for example) each person brings a specialty to the table. That's what makes group work preferable to individual work in selected circumstances. But when the object is to supply the students with a body of background knowledge and a framework within which to analyze newly acquired knowledge, there is nothing more efficient than good lecture by an expert in the subject. Oh, and let's not lose sight of the fact that the information delivered will be correct.Thank you.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
enough with the hands-on collaborative 21st century group learning
Vicky S on group learning:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I give you a choice. Say you are going in for bypass surgery; which team do you want in the operating room?
1) the group learners that help each other figure out what to do next through trial and error and consideration of each others' feelings?
2) the team of experts that may have never met before, but each (the anesthesiologist, the surgery, the nurse) is knowledgeable and competent in their particular aspect of the procedure.
Having integrated separate people's works before, LynnG, I'd say that's a really hard option, if your option 1 group has worked together a lot before. (If both groups are entirely new at being groups, I'd of course go with group 2).
One of the things about effective group work is that it isn't easy, even if everyone can competently do their bits by themselves. This strikes me as an argument against group work as an instructional technique, unless the teacher start the whole thing off by extensive training in how to work effectively in groups and is willing to keep an eye on it all to keep the groups on track.
Post a Comment