From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side

Author(s): Alison King

Source: College Teaching, Vol. 41, No. 1 (Winter, 1993), pp. 30-35
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27558571 .
Accessed: 24/04/2013 15:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to College
Teaching.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 From on the to
Sage Stage
Guide on the Side
Alison King

In most college classrooms, the pro constructed?by each individual knower instead of being the "sage on the stage,"
fessor lectures and the students through the process of trying to make functions as a "guide on the side," facil

listen and take notes. The professor sense of new information in terms of itating learning in less directive ways.
is the central figure, the "sage on the what that individual already knows. In The professor is still responsible for pre
stage," the one who has the knowledge this constructivist view of learning, stu senting the course material, but he or she
and transmits that knowledge to the stu dents use their own existing knowledge presents that material in ways that make
dents, who simply memorize the infor and prior experience to help them under the students do something with the infor
mation and later reproduce it on an stand the new material; in particular, mation?interact with it?manipulate
exam?often without even thinking they generate relationships between and the ideas and relate them to what they al
about it. This model of the teaching among the new ideas and between the ready know. Essentially, the professor's
learning process, called the transmittal new material and information already in role is to facilitate students' interaction
model, assumes that the student's brain memory (see also Brown, Bransford, with the material and with each other in
is like an empty container into which the Ferrara, and Campione 1983; Wittrock their knowledge-producing endeavor. In
professor pours knowledge. In this view 1990). the constructivist model the student is
of teaching and learning, students are When students are engaged in actively like a carpenter (or sculptor) who uses
passive learners rather than active ones. processing information by reconstructing new information and prior knowledge
Such a view is outdated and will not be that information in such new and per and experience, along with previously
effective for the twenty-first century, sonally meaningful ways, they are far learned cognitive tools (such as learning
when individuals will be expected to more likely to remember it and apply it strategies, algorithms, and critical think
think for themselves, pose and solve in new situations. This approach to ing skills) to build new knowledge struc
complex problems, and generally pro learning is consistent with information tures and rearrange existing knowledge.
duce knowledge rather than reproduce it. processing theories (e.g., Mayer 1984), But how do we get from transmission
According to the current constructivist which argue that reformulating given in of information to construction of mean

theory of learning, knowledge does not formation or generating new informa ing? Such a change can entail a consider
come packaged in books, or journals, or tion based on what is provided helps one able shift in roles for the professor, who
computer disks (or professors' and stu build extensive cognitive structures that must move away from being the one who
dents' heads) to be transmitted intact connect the new ideas and link them to has all the answers and does most of the
from one to another. Those vessels con what is already known. According to this talking toward being a facilitator who
tain information, not knowledge. view, creating such elaborated memory orchestrates the context, provides re

Rather, knowledge is a state of under structures aids understanding of the new sources, and poses questions to stimulate

standing and can only exist in the mind material and makes it easier to remember. students to think up their own answers.
of the individual knower; as such, In contrast to the transmittal model il Change is never easy; usually, how

knowledge must be constructed?or re lustrated by the classroom lecture-note ever, changes are easier to bring about by
taking scenario, the constructivist model modifying existing practices than by
places students at the center of the proc starting afresh. So, we will begin by
Alison King is an associate professor of edu ess?actively participating in thinking looking at some practical active-learning
cation in the College of Education at Cali and discussing ideas while making mean activities that can be incorporated into a
fornia State University in San Marcos. ing for themselves. And the professor, typical lecture; then we will move on to

30 COLLEGE TEACHING

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 the more formal approach of coopera cause-effect relationship between two use their own words and experiences?
tive learning, an alternative to the lec ideas, an inference, or an elaboration, not regurgitate the text or lecture.
ture. This sequence will show how the and it always leads to deeper understand An active-learning activity that can

professor can make a gradual transition ing. However, students do not spontane easily be incorporated into a lecture is
from the role of sage to that of guide. ously engage in active learning; they "think-pair-share." Let's look at an ex
must be prompted to do so. Therefore ample of how this works. Dr. Jones is
Active we need to provide opportunities for ac lecturing to his Anthropology 101 class
Promoting Learning
tive learning to take place. A general rule on the role of language in culture. After
Active learning simply means getting of thumb might be as follows: for each several minutes, he poses the question:
involved with the information presented major concept or principle that we pre "What do you think would happen if we
?really thinking about it (analyzing, sent, or that our students read about in had no spoken language? Think about
synthesizing, evaluating) rather than just their text, we structure some activity that that for a minute." After a minute he

passively receiving it and memorizing it. requires students to generate meaning continues, "Now pair up with the person
Active learning usually results in the gen about that concept or principle. For this beside you and share your ideas."
eration of something new, such as a approach to be effective, students must Each of the examples of active learn
ing listed in Table 1 can be similarly in
corporated into a lecture and can be ac

complished during a one- to four-minute

Table 1.?Learning Activities to Incorporate into a Lecture I use
pause in the presentation. When
these tactics during a lecture, I simply
Student activity Explanation or example stop talking for a few minutes and have
students engage in one of the activities.
Then I have selected students share the
Think-pair-share Students individually think for a moment
about a question posed on the lecture, then product of their activity before continu
pair up with a classmate beside them to ing with my presentation. Students either
share/discuss their thoughts work alone or collaborate in pairs.
Generating examples Students individually (or in pairs) think up
a new example of a concept presented Guided Reciprocal
Developing scenarios Students work in pairs to develop a specific Peer Questioning
scenario of how and where a particular con
Now let's look at small group learning
cept or principle could be applied
processes. These are methods that pro
Concept mapping Students draw a
concept map (a graphic mote problem exploration and task com
representation such as a web) depicting the
of a concept or pletion by students working in small
relationshps among aspects
principle groups while also having individual stu
Flowcharting Students sketch a flowchart showing how a dents engage in interactive learning with
procedure or process works their peers. In these small groups the stu
Given certain or concepts, stu dent is simultaneously an active con
Predicting principles
dents write down their own predictions structor of knowledge and a collaborator
about what in a specific situ
might happen with peers in a shared construction of
ation
meaning; the role of the professor is to
Developing rebuttals Students individually develop rebuttals for
guide and facilitate this process.
arguments presented in the lecture and then
pair up with another student to argue for Again, let's begin with an instructional
and against approach that is interactive, can be used
Students a table or draw a graph in conjunction with the familiar lecture
Constructing tables/graphs develop
representing information presented presentation format, and that gets stu
Analogical thinking Students propose a metaphor or analogy
dents actively involved in constructing
for a principle or procedure meaning. This is an approach that I have

Problem posing Individual students make up a real-world developed and that I call "Guided Recip
problem regarding a particular concept or rocal Peer Questioning" (King 1989,
principle, then exchange problems with a
1990, 1992).
classmate for solving Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning is
Students develop a of a common
Developing critiques critique an interactive learning procedure that
practice
can be used by students in any area of
Pair summarizing/checking Students work in pairs?one summarizes
the curriculum to help them actively
what's been presented and the other listens
and checks for errors, correcting errors process material presented in lectures or
when noted other classroom presentations. Students
work in groups of three or four. They

Vol. 41/No. 1 31

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
are provided with a set of generic ques questions are content-free, such as, pies. Such cognitive activities force the
tions to use as a guide for generating "What does . . . mean?" and "What explainer to clarify concepts, elaborate
their own specific questions on the lec conclusions can you draw about ... ?" on them, reorganize thinking, or in some
ture content (see Figure 1).With the help (see Figure 1). Dr. Tax-Fax expects his manner reconceptualize the material.
of the question stems, each student indi students to use these generic questions to Webb's (1989) extensive research on
vidually writes two or three thought-pro guide them in formulating specific ques interaction and learning in peer groups
voking questions based on the lecture. tions on the topic of intangible assets. indicates that giving such explanations
Following this self-questioning step of Within a few minutes, each student in improves understanding for the individ
the procedure, students engage in peer the class (working individually) has ual doing the explaining. For example, in
questioning. They pose their questions to selected appropriate generic questions the sequence of dialogue shown in Figure
their group and then take turns answer and has written down one or two specific 2, Maggie asked her group for the defini
ing each other's questions in a group dis questions. At another signal from Dr. tion of the term intangible assets,
cussion format. Tax-Fax, the small groups begin their and Fred, in the first part of his re
These generic questions are designed questioning and responding (see dialogue sponse, simply parroted Dr. Tax-Fax's
to induce higher-order thinking on the in Figure 2). definition. However, Fred showed that
part of students. For example, simply The students continue asking and an he actually had made some meaning for
formulating specific questions (based on swering each other's questions for sev the term when he later explained why
the generic questions) forces students to eral more minutes until Dr. Tax-Fax in the cookie recipe would be considered
identify the relevant ideas from the lec dicates that their discussion time is over. an intangible asset, thus suggesting that
ture, elaborate on them, and think about He then brings the class together to share he had reorganized his thinking by in
how those ideas relate to each other and and discuss inferences, examples, and ex corporating that concept into his exist
to their own prior knowledge. Respond planations generated by the different ing knowledge. Similarly, Sam's inclu
ing to others' questions further extends small groups and to clarify any misun sion of Mrs. Field's cookie recipes as a
such active learning. derstandings that the students might new example of intangible assets was an
have had regarding the topic of intangi indication of reconceptualization on his
A Classroom Example
ble assets. part. Furthermore, Sam's explanation
Professor lectures to his in
Tax-Fax of how Mrs. Field's recipe (an intangi
troductory principles of accounting class An Analysis of the Example ble asset) could lose value showed con
for twenty minutes on the topic of intan Dr. Tax-Fax's students were engaged cept clarification?he really understood
gible assets. Then he pauses, signals to in several forms of active learning during some of the nuances of the concept. Es
the class, and the students turn to their and re Sam was
their guided peer-questioning sentially, using his prior
neighbors and form groups of three. Dr. sponding activity. First of all, they had knowledge to make sense of the newly
Tax-Fax turns on the overhead projector to think critically about the lecture con presented concept of intangible assets.
to display a list of questions. All of the tent just to be able to formulate their When students think about class ma
specific thought-provoking questions. terial in these ways, they actively proc
To generate those questions, not only did ess the ideas and construct for them
Figure 1. Generic Questions
the students have to identify the main selves extensive cognitive networks that
What is the main idea of ... ?
ideas of the lecture, they also had to con connect the new ideas and link them to
What if ... ?
sider how those ideas relate to one an what they already know (e.g., Mayer
How does . . . affect ... ?
other and to the students' own existing 1984). Developing such cognitive net
What is the meaning of ... ?
knowledge. Second, in order to answer works facilitates understanding and
Why is . . . important? those questions, the students had to be makes it easier to remember the new
What is a new example of ... ? able to analyze and evaluate ideas pre material. In the discussion precipitated
Explain why .... sented, apply the information in new sit by Sam's "What if . . . ?" question, the
how .... uations, generate inferences from the lec three students together explored the
Explain
How does this relate to what I've ture material, and identify relationships relationship between maintaining the
learned before? among the concepts covered. value of unique intangible assets and
What conclusions can I draw about
More specifically, in order to respond dissemination of the information that
? to a student's question, the other stu makes those assets unique. In speculat
What is the difference between . . . dents in a group had to construct expla ing on the effects that the newspaper ad
and ... ? nations and communicate them. Ex vertisement might have for Mrs. Field's
How are . . . and . . . similar? plaining something to someone else often business, they undoubtedly forged new
How would I use ... to ... ? requires the explainer to think about and links among the ideas presented in the
What are the and weak present the material in new ways, such as lecture and between those ideas and their
strengths
nesses of ... ? relating it to the questioner's prior knowl own prior knowledge. For example, Fred
What is the best . . . and
why? edge or experience, translating it into fa integrated the new information about in
miliar terms, or generating new exam tangible assets with marketing/advertis

32 COLLEGE TEACHING

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 He knew that the generic questions
Figure 2. I-1
Sample Guided Reciprocal Peer-Questioning Dialogue would control the quality of the specific
questions students asked and that those
starts her group off by reading her first question, "What does 'intangible
Maggie
questions in turn would influence the
assets' mean?"
quality of student thinking and knowl
FRED: Well, Dr. Tax-Fax said in the lecture that intangible assets are things edge building during discussion. All he
that a company has that have value but aren't concrete?you can't ac had to do was structure the situation to
tually see them like you can machinery or buildings or merchandise. allow that to happen. Therefore, after
like goodwill?and patents and trademarks?stuff like that. But
Things
providing the guiding questions, he ar
you have to count them on the books somehow. You have to come up
with a dollar value for them. And when you sell a company, the intangi
ranged the class in groups of three with
ble assets are sold too. the requirement that they discuss the
SAM: I suppose things like Mrs. Field's cookie recipes would be considered an topic of intangible assets by taking turns
intangible asset too.
asking and answering each others' spe
FRED: I guess so. It fits the definition. They're not concrete, but they're
Yeah, cific questions on the topic. Because this
valuable. People love her cookies! Her cookies wouldn't be unique if
had the recipe. reciprocal questioning-answering proce
every cookie shop and bakery
SAM: that's what I'm wondering about. I read in the paper a few months dure requires each individual to contrib
Well,
ago that someone called up to the headquarters of Mrs. Field's Cookies ute questions and answers, all members
and asked if they could get the recipe for Mrs. Field's chocolate chip of each group were obligated to partiea
cookies. The the phone said that the recipe
who answered
receptionist
pate, but no one individual dominated
could be bought and that the caller could even put the charge on his credit
the discussion.
card. Which he did. Somehow there was a miscommunication because the
caller thought he was being charged two dollars for the recipe but when Professor Tax-Fax had his students
the credit card statement arrived it was for two thousand dollars. The work in small groups because he knew
caller was so angry that he put an ad in the paper Mrs. Field's
offering that learning through peer-group inter
chocolate cookie
chip recipe free to anyone who called his number. And
action results in cognitive benefits for
he put the recipe on his answering machine. He got so many calls that he
each student far beyond those that an
printed the recipe in the newspaper along with an explanation of what had

happened to him. The point of telling this story is that Iwonder: Did Mrs. individual would experience working
Gield's intangible asset drop in value because of that incident? What if alone. He was aware that in small group
in the United States read that paper?
everyone
learning contexts such as Guided Recip
Maggie: Then anyone could make those cookies! There wouldn't be anything
rocal Peer Questioning students are
special about Mrs. Field's cookies any longer.
FRED: Of course the recipe would be less valuable! confronted with each others' conflicting
Maggie: And then Mrs. Field's assets would be smaller and the value of her busi viewpoints on issues as well as differ
ness would be less. ences in each other's prior knowledge
SAM: Also the volume of her business would decline because people
probably and current understanding of the topic,
would make their own "Mrs. Field's cookies" instead of buying them.
and, in attempting to understand each
FRED: But wouldthey? In our marketing class we learned that consumers in to
are pretty at least they prefer the leisure time to do other's views and come to agreement,
day's society lazy?or
ing the work. And they'd rather spend the money to buy things than individual students have to modify their
spend the time to make them. own thinking. Each member of such a
SAM: So maybe who would actually use the recipe,
only people enjoy cooking
group makes important and necessary
and all the others would continue to buy cookies from Mrs. Field.
contributions to the construction of a
maggie: In that case Mrs. Field wouldn't lose much in terms of her business.
SAM: But I don't think the real threat to Mrs. Field's asset would be shared understanding of the topic; how
intangible
the general public. I think other cookie shops would start using her recipe ever, each individual's understanding
to make cookies and then there would be more competition for Mrs. Field and expression of it are idiosyncratic.
and that would hurt her business. could even advertise that they
They Such learning exemplifies the social
used her recipe.
construction of knowledge?a model of
FRED: Yeah, we learned it's legal to say things
in Marketing 101 that like that in
and even mention
your competitor's name. the learning process that is constructiv
advertising actually
maggie: But why do you think Mrs.
Field would offer such a valuable intangible ist in nature but that also emphasizes
asset for sale at all? Especially at such a low price? And does that mean collaboration.
that the actual value of that intangible asset is only $2,000? Tax-Fax ended the
When Professor
activity by calling on each group to
share its ideas, he was extending the so
as consumer charac obtrusive but powerful ways. To begin cial construction of knowledge to a
ing concepts (such
teristics and the deliberate comparison with, he provided the students with ques whole-class context. In doing so, he

with specific competitors) that he had tion starters written at the higher levels made sure that new inferences and un

learned about in a different course. of Bloom's (1956) taxonomy of thinking. derstandings were
disseminated across
Dr. Tax-Fax's role in this activity was He was well aware of the importance of groups and if groups arrived at
that
carefully selecting the generic question those differing
purely facultative. As a guide on the side, conflicting meanings,
he promoted knowledge building in un starters to be used. perspectives would be revealed and

Vol. 41/No. 1 33

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
could be reconciled further but unobtrusively arranges the context ous disciplines, consult Aronson et al.
through
whole-class discussion. and facilitates the process. Jigsaw activ 1978).
ities are designed so that each student in
Constructive Controversy
a group receives only part of the learn
Effects of Guided Reciprocal Another
ing materials and must learn that part cooperative learning strategy
Peer Questioning
and then teach it to the others in the for use with large classes is constructive
In this procedure, students
In using Guided Reciprocal Peer group. Thus, each student's part is like controversy.
with a number of one piece of a jigsaw puzzle; to under work in teams of four; pairs of students
Questioning college
stand the whole picture, students must within teams are assigned to opposing
classes, I have found that teaching stu
dents to ask their own thought-provok have access to all parts of the learning sides of a controversial issue. Each pair
stimulates their critical materials. Because students must com researches its side of the issue and then
ing questions
dis bine their pieces to complete the puzzle, the pairs discuss the issue as a team. The
thinking and promotes high-level
cussion. Because of the na each team member's contribution is purpose of this discussion is to become
reciprocal
all students ac more informed about the issue and to
ture of this procedure, highly valued.
in the discussions. In implementing a jigsaw activity, the engage in collaborative construction of
tively participate
Even those students who are reluctant divides the material to be meaning?not to win a debate about the
professor
to participate in class for fear of asking learned into several parts?usually no issue. After some discussion, pairs
the teacher "stupid" questions are less more than five or six. Each part must be switch sides and argue for the opposite
hesitant about posing such questions to a unique source of information that is side of the issue. Finally, each student
their peers in a small group. comprehensible on its own without ref takes a test on the material individually
I have also found that students who erence to any of the other parts. Stu to determine that student's understand
are taught to ask and answer thoughtful dents are assigned to "home teams" ing of the issue. Constructive contro
with as many members as there are be used in computer
questions perform better on subsequent versy might
to stu
tests of lecture comprehension than do parts to the learning materials, and each courses, for example, encourage

students who use other comprehension team member receives one part of the dents to explore the ethical issues inher
material. Students reassemble into "ex ent in the use of computers, software,
strategies such as unguided group dis
cussion or independent review (King pert groups" by joining all of the other and telecommunications.
1989, 1990). Such an improvement in students who received that particular
Co-op Co-op
learning suggests that the students who part. In their expert groups, students
is a student-centered
engage in this questoning-answering read and discuss their part of the mate Co-op co-op1

rial together to learn it thoroughly. cooperative approach to learning and

process actually reconceptualize the ma
Then they return to their home groups can be used for the study of any unit of
terial. In fact, tape recordings of the
students' discussions have shown that and teach the part they learned to the course material or for any number of
research or projects.
students using Guided Reciprocal Peer other members of their team. problem-solving

In this way, each team member is an Students work together in small teams
Questioning give more explanations and
to investigate a topic and produce a
highly elaborated responses to each expert in one part of the material to be
other than do students who use either learned, and each team member learns group product that they then share with
discussion or unguided material from the other experts on the the whole class. Thus the name "co-op
reciprocal peer
questioning straegies, thus indicating team; thus, jigsaw emphasizes interde co-op": students cooperate within their
some degree of conceptual restructuring each student is tested teams to produce something of benefit
pendence. Finally,
to assess individual un to the class; they are cooperating in or
on the part of those particular students. independently
der to cooperate. There are nine steps in
derstanding of the complete set of mate
co-op co-op. at
Cooperative Learning rial. In this way, jigsaw emphasizes in implementing Again,

dividual accountability. each step the professor guides the proc

The same sociocognitive benefits that
ess from the side, facilitating students'
derive from Guided Reciprocal Peer In a psychology course on theories of
can interaction with learning materials and
Questioning be obtained from other personality, for example, jigsaw might
with each other.
instructional approaches that call for be used to present material such as dif
cooperative learning, such as Jigsaw, fering theories of personality, alterna Step 1. Student-centered class discus
Constructive and Co-op tive to assessing sion. At the of an instruc
Controversy, approaches personality, beginning

Co-op. or specific examples of personality dis tional unit, the professor encourages the
orders. In some cases, a jigsaw teach students to discuss their interests in the
Jigsaw subject to be covered. This discussion
ing-learning approach might be used to
Jigsaw is a cooperative learning pro provide an overview of a particular should lead to an understanding among
cedure commonly used in classroom set topic; in other cases, this approach the professor and all the students about
tings (Aronson et al. 1978). In jigsaw, as might be used following the introduc what the students want to learn and ex

with all cooperative learning ap tion of an area of study. (For develop perience during the unit. The impor
proaches, the professor says very little ing specific uses for the jigsaw in vari tance of this initial discussion cannot be

34 COLLEGE TEACHING

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
underestimated because co-op co-op tent of the material. Non-lecture for 1989). Cooperative and collaborative
will not be successful for any students mats such as debates, displays, team-led learning also have positive effects on
who are not actively interested in a topic class discussions, videotapes, simula self-concept, race relations, acceptance
related to the unit. tions, role-playing episodes, or demon of handicapped students, and enjoy
strations are encouraged (as are the use ment of school (Slavin 1990).
Step 2. Selection of student learning
teams. Students self-select into four- to
of overheads and audiovisual materials). Engaging our students in such active
five-member teams. Step 8. Team presentations. During learning experiences helps them to think
a over
for themselves?to move away from the
its presentation, team takes the
Step 3. Team topic selection. In their of toward the
classroom and is responsible for how reproduction knowledge
teams, students discuss their interests in of knowledge?and helps
the class time, space, and resources are production
the topics and then select a topic for them become critical thinkers and crea
used.
their team. Each team should select a tive problem solvers so that they can
topic with which its members identify. Step 9. Evaluation. Being student
deal effectively with the challenges of
centered, co-op co-op calls for the class
Step 4. Minitopic selection. Just as the twenty-first century.
to have considerable say in how learning
the class as a whole divides the unit into
is evaluated as well as the criteria to be NOTE
sections to create a division of labor
used in that evaluation. Therefore most
among the teams in the class, each team 1. The description of co-op co-op is
evaluation will be self-evaluation or
divides its topic into minitopics to create adapted from S. Kagan, 1989, Cooperative
peer evaluation; however, the class may Resources San Juan
a division of labor within the team. Learning for Teachers,
decide to include instructor evaluation Capistrano, Calif.: Resources for Teachers.
Each team member selects a minitopic.
also. Evaluation can take place on three
Step 5. Minitopic preparation. After levels: (1) team presentations (generally
selecting their minitopics, students work evaluated by the class or by the team it REFERENCES
independently to prepare their mini to the
self), (2) individual contributions Aronson, E., N. Blaney, C. Stephan,
topics. Depending on the nature of the team effort (often evaluated by the team J. Sikes, and M. 1978. The jigsaw
Snapp.
main topic being covered, the prepara or the individual student), or (3) a write classroom. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.
tion of minitopics B. ed. 1956. Taxonomy of educa
may involve library up of the minitopic
Bloom, S.,
(often evaluated by tional objectives: The
research, data gathering through sur classification of
the team). educational
or goals. Handbook 1. Cognitive
veys experimentation, creation of an
domain. New York: McKay.
individual project, or some expressive A. J. D. Bransford, R. A. Fer
Brown, L.,
as writing a or creat
Findings
activity such script rara, andJ. C. Campione. 1983. Learn

ing a video. Studies of group-based learning, con ing, remembering, and understanding. In
ducted over the past twenty years, have Handbook of child psychology, vol. Ill:
Step 6. Minitopic presentations. edited J. H.
shown that such approaches to learning Cognitive development, by
When students complete their mini Flavell and E. M. Markman, 77-166. New
can be effective in increasing student
topics, they present them to their team achievement
York: Wiley.
(Slavin 1990). However, S. 1989. Cooperative re
mates. These presentations should be Kagan, learning
improved achievement seems to result sources teachers, San Juan
for Capis
formal. Presentations and follow-up
primarily when the cooperative ap trano, Calif.: Resources for Teachers.
discussion should allow all team mem A. 1989. Effects of
proach uses some sort of group goal King, self-questioning
bers to gain the knowledge and experi training on college students' comprehen
and stresses individual accountability.
ence acquired by each. Following the sion of lectures. Contemporary Educa
Apparently, when students are individ tional
team members Psychology 14:1-16.
presentations, discuss
ually accountable for their learning-. 1990. Enhancing peer interaction
the team topic like a panel of experts,
(e.g., when each member of the group and learning in the classroom through re
critiquing the presentations and noting
must take a test) and a group goal is es ciprocal questioning. American Educa
points of convergence and divergence. tional Research Journal 27:664-87.
tablished (e.g., when every individual in
The professor should provide time for -. 1992. elaborative learn
Facilitating
the group must understand the material
feedback and additional time for teams ing through guided student-generated
to pass the test), group members have questioning. Educational 27
or team to rework Psychologist
members aspects of
incentive to help each other learn the (1): 111-26.
their reports in light of that feedback. R. E. 1984. Aids to prose
material. Mayer, compre
hension. Educational Psychologist 19:
Step 7. Preparation of team presenta This sets up a condition of interde
30-42.
tions. Students integrate the minitopics pendence. Under these circumstances, R. E. 1990. Cooperative
Slavin, learning:
for the team presentation. (Panel pre group members tend to provide each Theory, research, and practice. Engle
sentations in which each member re other with elaborated explanations of wood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
on his or her are dis and so that Webb, N. M. 1989. Peer interaction and
ports minotopic concepts processes everyone
learning in small groups. International
couraged as they may represent a failure will understand the material and will ex
Journal of Educational Research 13:21-39.
to reach high-level cooperative synthesis cel on the test. As discussed earlier, ex
M. C. 1990. Generative
Wittrock, processes
of the material.) The form of the pre plaining something to others improves of comprehension. Educational Psycholo
sentation should be dictated by the con one's own understanding (see Webb gist 24:345-76.

Vol. 41/No. 1 35

This content downloaded from 205.175.123.23 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:15:07 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions