Kagan Cooperative Learning By, Dr. Spencer Kagan and Miguel Chapter 12: PIES Kagan Let’s Take An Up Close Look a Not that kind of PIES Silly… Cooperative learning when properly implemented, is a powerful instructional approach resulting in a spectrum of positive outcomes. Notice the caveat: When properly implemented. Research, theory, and years of implementation have drawn the conclusion that consistent success depends on four basic principles: Positive Interdependence Individual Accountability Equal Participation Simultaneous Interaction Group Work is NOT Cooperative Learning! The PIES principles distinguish cooperative learning from group w principles are not present, we are merely doing group work. The P true learning. Group work produces hit or miss results. True coo produces consistent gains for all learners. Positive interdependence is the most well-established prin cooperation. When positive interdependence is in place, i certain to cooperate. In the absence of positive interdep may not cooperate. Question Positive 1: correlation: Are students on the Question Interdependence: 2: Does the task require wo Question 1: Positive correlation: Are students on the same side? • When there is a positive correlation among outcomes, p almost certainly work together. They cooperate, help encourage each other. In class, if I know your succe benefit me, naturally I hope you will do well and I w and tutor you. • When there is a positive correlation among outcomes, on the same side. Question 2: Interdependence: Does the task require working together? The word interdependence refers to how the task is struc task is structured so no one of us can do it alone, but by working together, then we are interdependent. Strong Interdependence: The contribution of each team member is necessary for the success of the team. The task is impossible without help. Intermediate Interdependence: The contribution of each team member does contribute to the success of the team, but a team member could succeed on his/her own. Week Interdependence: The contribution of each team member may contribute to the success of the team. Degrees of Interdependence The workplace team pools knowledge and brainstorms solutions to come up with a better procedure A husband and wife combine their money to buy a house neither alone could afford. The author gives her paper to the editor, knowing the editor can catch errors the author could not. The basketball player passes the ball so a teammate can shoot a basket, and their team is more likely to Things To Be Careful Wi 1. Negative Interdependence Among Teams: Rewarding top te performance may create positive interdependence within the opposite among teams. All teams achieving a prede be rewarded. 2. Pitfalls of Team Rewards: If not used carefully, extri may erode the intrinsically rewarding teamwork process 3. Group Grades: There are so many problems with group gr should never be used. Chapters 15 and 16 provide better and fair ways to grade and motivate students. T.E.A.M. Structures create positive interdependence. They include shared team goals so students cooperate for mutual benefit. Together Everyone Positive interdependence is created by situations in which teammates pool knowledge or skills for mutual benefit. Achieves More Tasks that call for a range of knowledge or skills that no single individual possesses encourage mutual helping. Tasks • Make the task challenging, so that the sheer volume or difficulty of the task requires the participation and cooperation of all • Division of labor is used to ac difficult tasks. Assign roles student. Teammates then come t to synthesize their combined k into a presentation • Limit each student’s access to s resources to structure for coop Rules and Structures Foster Positive Int Rules too can increase interdependence. For example, to increase helping and encouragement, we might institute a rule that states the team cannot progress to a new learning center or task until all teammates have completed a task or have displayed mastery. Structures Create Interdependence Method Sample Structure Varied Knowledge or Skills Jigsaw Challenging Task Team Projects Division of Labor Co-op Co-op Roles 4S Brainstorming Resource Access Team Projects Rules Talking Chips In the cooperative classroom, there is an “I” in team, and tha Individual Accountability. In the cooperative classroom, stude as a team to create and to learn, but ultimately every individ responsible for his or her own performance. Individual accountability boosts achievement. Question 3: Is individual, public performance re Question 3: Is individual, public performance Three Components of Individual Accountabi Individual accountability is created by putting in plac 1. Individual. The performance is done without help. 2. Public. Someone witnesses the performance. 3. Required. The performance is required. Accountability Accountability To Whom? Students may be accountable to a partner, a team, the class, and/or the teacher. Reports home create accountability to parents. In Numbered Heads Together, before students put their heads together, each student independently writes his or her best answer to share with the team. Thus, each is held accountable to teammates. Further, when a student’s number is called, that student must share the team’s answer, so they are held accountable to the teacher and the class as well. To Whom? Accountability For What? Depending on the structure and the content, students are held accountable for different things. For example, in Paraphrase Passport, the right to speak is earned by paraphrasing the previous speaker. This structure holds students accountable for empathetic listening. Talking Chips hold students accountable for participating. In a Rally Table of prime numbers, learners are held accountable for listing prime numbers. For Me Before We • Students write own responses prior to teaming up • Students create own products to share with classmates • Structures: Showdown, Numbered Heads Together, Placemat Consensus Me During We • Color-code individual contributions • Assign mini topics • Students fill in own worksheets, create own product • Structures: Rally Coach, Team Mind-Mapping, Talking Chips, Jot Thoughts • Students turn in individual worksheets • Students take tests, quizzes after team interaction • Structures: Team-Pair-Solo, Numbered Heads Together Me After We Individual accountability must be coupled with positive interdependence; otherwise it will backfire. A student can be held accountable by calling on them publicly, but without the support, they can fail publicly also and may soon dread class, content and the teacher. Learning and change come about best by a combination of pressure and support. The “E” of PIES is the simplest of the four principles: students participate about equally. Participation is an learning process. Students learn by interacting with the fellow students. For equitable educational outcomes, we to be relatively equal. Question 4: Is participation approximately equal Question 4: Is participation approximately equal Structure for equal participation. It does not occur magi to equalize participation are: 1) turn taking, 2) time a write time, 4) rules, 5) individual accountability, and 6) Six Approaches to Equalizing Participation Approach How Sample Structures Turn Taking Every student receives an equal turn Round Table Time Allocation Every student receives the same amount of time. Timed Pair Share Think Time Students are given the opportunity to formulate own ideas. Think-Pair-Share Rules Rules of engagement establish guidelines for equal participation. Talking Chips Individual Accountability Students are held accountable for participation Showdown Role Assignment Students participate by filling a unique or rotating role. 4S Brainstorming Active engagement increases student learning. If students are are less likely to learn. If students are only occasionally en than when they are regularly engaged. Simultaneous interaction powerful tool we have for increasing active engagement. Question 5: What percent of students are overtly at once? Question 5: What percent of students are overtly interacting at once? A simple look at the mathematics reveals the staggering d of overt active engagement during traditional instruction learning structures… Simultaneous Interaction Increases Engagement and Participation Structure Percent Actively Engaged at Once Student Participation Time per Hour Whole Class Q&A 1 in 30 (3.33%) 2 minutes per student Round Robin 1 in 4 (25%) 15 minutes per student Rally Robin 1 in 2 (50%) 30 minutes per student We can engage more students at a time, and thus get more accomplished more quickly. Time for Three-Minute Student Presentations In a class of 30 students Structure Required Class Time Student Presentation Student presents to class. 90 minutes Timed Round Robin Student presents to teammates 12 minutes Timed Pair Share Student presents to partner 6 minutes Simultaneous Response Modes and S Answer Boards Thumbs Up or Down Choral Practice Greater engagement and accountability are achieved with simultaneous responses vs. calling on one student . OBJECTION: The teacher won’t hear everything and wrong answers will be said Solutions: 1. Team Answer Slates 2. Students check answers with another classroom source 3. Teacher walks around for authentic assessment The probability of a correction opportunity is far greater with simultaneous interaction Cooperative learning consistently produces powerful gains when the research-based and classroom-proven PIES principles are in place. Kagan Structures implement PIES. Any teacher can easily learn some simple structures and be confident he/she is implementing good cooperative learning.