# data[].attributes.body
April 16, 2019

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics faculty are increasingly incorporating both formal and informal group work in their courses. Implementing group work can be improved by an understanding of the extensive body of educational research studies on this topic. This essay describes an online, evidence-based teaching guide published by CBE-Life Sciences Education ( LSE). The guide provides a tour of research studies and resources related to group work (including many articles from LSE). Instructors who are new to group work, as well as instructors who have experienced difficulties in implementing group work, may value the condensed summaries of key research findings. These summaries are organized by teaching challenges, and actionable advice is provided in a checklist for instructors. Education researchers may value the inclusion of empirical studies, key reviews, and meta-analyses of group-work studies. In addition to describing key features of the guide, this essay also identifies areas in which further empirical studies are warranted.

INTRODUCTION

Group work is one of the most widely used and deeply researched teaching approaches in the college classroom. Group work that promotes students' collaboration to achieve shared learning goals has been shown to increase student achievement, persistence, and attitudes toward science (e.g., ; ; Johnson and Johnson, 2009 Kagan, 2014 Johnson and Johnson, 2009 ). It also provides students with an avenue to incorporate diverse viewpoints and to develop communication and teamwork skills that are especially important in scientific collaboration and professional fields (e.g., ). ). It offers opportunities for formative assessment and feedback with peers to shape that learning (e.g., ; ). It can provide opportunities for students to explain their reasoning to one another and to themselves, thereby promoting the cognitive restructuring that leads to learning (e.g.,

However, anyone who has worked in a group or used group work in courses has experienced challenges. These challenges, if left unchecked, can prevent effective learning and result in poor-quality products, unequal distribution of workload, and escalating conflict among team members (e.g., Feichtner and Davis, 1984 ). In this article, we describe an evidence-based teaching guide that we have created to condense, summarize, and provide actionable advice from research findings (including many articles from CBE-Life Sciences Education [ LSE]). The guide can be found on the American Society for Cell Biology website ( https://lse.ascb.org/evidence
-based-teaching-guides/group-work), and a link will be listed on the LSE home page to direct users to a complete list of guides as this feature grows. We have included several useful features in the guide: a landing page that indicates starting points for instructors ( Figure 1 ), syntheses of observations from the literature ( Figure 2 ), summaries of and links to selected papers ( Figure 3 ), and an instructor checklist that details recommendations and points to consider. The guide is meant to aid instructors who are new to group work as well as instructors who have tried group work and experienced difficulties or want to improve their students' experiences and outcomes. Researchers interested in exploring this area will also appreciate our efforts to identify empirical studies, informative reviews, and unanswered questions for which additional research is warranted. Some of the questions that we have considered in developing the guide are highlighted in the following sections.

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF FORMING PERMANENT VERSUS TEMPORARY GROUPS?

The guide begins by separating findings, recommendations, and resources for formal, permanent groups from informal, temporary groups. During formal group work, students work in persistent groups for an extended period on a collaborative project, while in informal group work, ad hoc groups work together on an in-class problem or question for periods ranging from a few minutes to a full class session (). Formal group work requires more planning and coordination, but the benefits are that it can help students work together to reach important course objectives. Informal group work, on the other hand, is easy to incorporate into classes of any size and in any space. Informal group work can be an effective supplement to lecture, allowing learners to process information, and is often an essential part of, or used in conjunction with, classic active-learning techniques (e.g., ).

Three elements that are particularly important to consider in structuring formal group work are task interdependence, individual accountability, and reward interdependence ( Johnson and Johnson, 2009 Gillies, 2013 Serrano and Pons, 2007 ). ). Individual accountability, or the understanding that group members will be responsible for the work they specifically contribute, reduces social free-riding in group settings and encourages members to contribute. Reward interdependence can be accomplished through several mechanisms, including shared grades, for which individual students earn a final grade that relies on scores earned by their team members on a test or assignment, or certificates of recognition that students can earn if their average team scores on quizzes or other individual assignments exceed a pre-established criterion ( ). Task interdependence refers to the degree to which group members must work together to complete the assigned task. For optimal group benefit and motivation, tasks should not be able to be completed by just one or two group members, but rather should require contributions from all group members (e.g.,

Notably, the very distinction between the types of group work points to an unanswered research question:

Are there specific types of outcomes that are better met with informal group work rather than formal group work, or vice versa?

SHOULD INSTRUCTORS FORM GROUPS OR LET STUDENTS SELF-SELECT THEIR OWN GROUPS?

When planning formal group work, the literature suggests that instructors should form small groups (typically three to five students), considering student characteristics that can contribute to effective group processes and performance (e.g., ; and other references within the Group Size section of the guide). Generally, groups that are gender balanced, are ethnically diverse, and have members with different problem-solving approaches have been shown to exhibit enhanced collaboration (see references within the Group Composition section of the guide). Within these generic observations, however, there are a number of unanswered questions for which further research is needed:

What are the different impacts for ethnic majority and minority students in ethnically diverse groups? If so, what are they, and why do they occur?

Does context determine effective gender composition for groups? If so, is it a generalizable context (e.g., physics groups work best with one composition, while biology groups work best with another composition)? Alternatively, does the effectiveness of different group gender compositions depend on the measure being used (e.g., creativity of final product, effectiveness of group communication)? Are there task features or group structures that can mitigate disadvantages of particular gender mixes?

The data on academic performance as a diversity factor also do not point to a single conclusion. What features of group work lead to benefits for high-, mid-, or low-performing students? Will these features be combined to benefit mixed-ability groups? Do homogeneous or heterogeneous groups provide a greater advantage?

What are effective steps to take to support students with different disabilities while they participate in group work?

WHAT CAN INSTRUCTORS DO TO PROMOTE QUALITY GROUP EXPERIENCES?

There are a number of common problems that students and instructors experience when involved in group work. The most commonly reported problem is uneven workload (free-riding or overbearing students). However, groups also experience other types of social conflict and lack of cohesion that can result in production of "Frankenstein products" that are a conglomeration of individual student efforts without integration and synthesis of ideas. There are several practices and resources that can help ensure that groups function more effectively. Students report greater satisfaction with group work if the instructor has implemented methods to monitor and manage groups ( Chapman and Van Auken, 2001 ; and other references within Gillies, 2013 ). Even with these recommendations, there are many unanswered questions. Setting Group Norms). Suggested methods include providing an opportunity for students to discuss their expectations for group work and setting group norms. For group work that spans multiple days or weeks, providing opportunities for identifying individual effort and allowing students to evaluate their peers can allow for ongoing adjustments to group dynamics. Assigning specific roles to students within groups can emphasize interdependence, and prompting students to provide elaborated explanations during discussions can help promote learning gains (

Findings from research studies on peer evaluation have clearly identified several methods to identify dysfunctional groups. What are the potential solutions to address dysfunctional groups and under what conditions are these solutions effective? When is it more effective to disband a dysfunctional group rather than enforce mediation?

What is the best method to deal with persistent free-riders?

WHAT TASKS ARE IDEAL FOR PROMOTING EFFECTIVE GROUP WORK?

We describe a number of formalized group-work pedagogies with defined criteria and tasks that instructors can consider. These include problem-based learning, team-based learning, process-oriented guided inquiry learning, case-based learning, and peer-led team learning, all of which have descriptions and biology-relevant papers linked within the Formalized Pedagogies section of the guide. Instructors considering these approaches should consider forming a team of instructors, administrators, and/or staff to address the attendant time and resource needs. For any group task, it is important to consider why group work is being used in a particular situation and how it meets the instructor's learning goals for students. To help promote student buy-in and student learning, these goals should be shared with students, along with an explanation of how the group work aligns with these goals.

Effective group tasks should challenge groups to solve highly complex or ill-structured problems that require the collaboration of the group to solve (e.g., ; and other references within the Task Features section). In addition, tasks that engage student interest, such as by using contemporary issues relevant to students' lives and generating products for an audience outside the classroom, can increase students' motivation (e.g., ). With this general recommendation in mind, however, there are a number of unanswered questions:

Typically, a task's relevance to students' lives increases task value and thus student motivation. What are the best ways to structure relevant tasks in the biology classroom? Do these features differ by major or level of student?

Does a students-as-producers approach, wherein students generate new knowledge for an external audience, impact motivation for all students or only some? Does the relative size of the product/student contribution matter (e.g., one figure on a poster vs. entire infographic for congressional representative)?

How do different group tasks or task instructions affect cognitive development of knowledge structures and their use? What tasks support development of declarative knowledge (what), procedural knowledge (how), and conceptual knowledge (when/why)?

Students lie at various places along the novice-expert continuum. How do we match scaffolding to student needs?

WHEN NOT TO USE GROUP WORK

We finish this summary to our guide by cautioning that group work is not a panacea for learning. A great deal of research has defined the type of tasks for which group work is more effective than individual learning. Groups of students show greater gains than individual students for tasks that are complex and ill-defined with multiple possible correct answers (), but for simpler tasks that require recall, definitions, or looking up information, students exhibit greater gains when they work on their own. Thus, maximizing the benefits of group work requires that instructors attend to the learning goals they want their students to attain and, if applicable, the group-work structures that they put in place to help the students reach those goals.

Acknowledgments

We thank William Pierce and Thea Clarke for their efforts in producing the Evidence-Based Teaching Guides website and the American Society for Cell Biology for hosting the site.

REFERENCES

Kagan S. (2014). Kagan structures, processing, and excellence in college teaching. [Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, (3-4), 119-138. Google Scholar]

Kirschner F., Paas F., Kirschner P. A. (2011). Task complexity as a driver for collaborative learning efficiency: The collective working-memory effect. [Applied Cognitive Psychology, (4), 615-624. Google Scholar]

Scager K., Boonstra J., Peeters T., Vulperhorst J., Wiegant F. (Collaborative learning in higher education: Evoking positive interdependence 2016). (4),. ar69 [[PubMed] PMC free article] [Google Scholar]

Schmidt H. G., Rotgans J. I., Yew E. H. J. (2011). The process of problem-based learning: What works and why. [Medical Education, , 792-806. [PubMed] Google Scholar]

Serrano J. M., Pons R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: We can also do it without task structure. [Intercultural Education, (3), 215-230. Google Scholar]

Tanner K., Chatman L. S., Allen D. (2003). Approaches to cell biology teaching: Cooperative learning in the science classroom-beyond students working in groups. [[Cell Biology Education, , 1-5. PMC free article] [PubMed] Google Scholar]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics faculty are increasingly incorporating both formal and informal group work in their courses. Implementing group work can be improved by an understanding of the extensive body of educational research studies on this topic. This essay describes an online, evidence-based teaching guide published by CBE-Life Sciences Education ( LSE).

# data[].attributes.headline
Please add a column and add your notes. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Please add a column and add your notes. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
These videos of exemplary teacher practice are aligned to:
Danielson's Framework for Teaching

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment
Component 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures
Element: Management of instructional groups

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Danielson Rubric: Teacher Manages Instructional Groups

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These videos of exemplary teacher practice are aligned to: Danielson's Framework for Teaching Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Component 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures Element: Management of instructional groups

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The New York State Education Department provides videos of effective teacher practice aligned to Danielson's Framework for Teaching Rubric. Click on a Video Album link below to view examples of effective teacher practice.
Domain 2: The Classroom Environment

Component 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport

Component 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning

Component 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures

Component 2d: Managing Student Behavior

Component 2e: Organizing Physical Space

Element: Arrangement of furniture and use of physical resources

Domain 3: Instruction

Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Danielson's Framework for Teaching Rubric Videos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The New York State Education Department provides videos of effective teacher practice aligned to Danielson's Framework for Teaching Rubric. Click on a Video Album link below to view examples of effective teacher practice.

# data[].attributes.headline
What do Hattie and Marzano say about group work?

# data[].attributes.subject
What do Hattie and Marzano say about group work?

# data[].attributes.body
How can we justify using the Learning Focused Lesson design and delivery?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Faculty Focus | Higher Ed Teaching & Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The idea for sharing this post came from a session I recently conducted at the annual teaching conference organized by my university. A pedagogical conundrum was raised by a colleague whose enthusiasm and question stayed with me and inspired me to write this post. The question posed by this colleague is relevant to all instructors who have ever used group work to assess their students: How should one deal with the issues that arise when members of a group are not picking up their share of the responsibilities during a group work project?

The benefits of group work are well recognized (e.g., http://goo.gl/N8kqhy), as are the reasons students don't like working in groups (Taylor, 2011). We have all had groups that operated magically, when group members brought out each other's strengths and helped each member shine; but we have also had groups that failed miserably when members did not get along or did not pull equal weight in completing a group project.

Although much has been written about group work and its benefits and challenges, as well as variables, features, or components that can contribute to positive learning outcomes (Tomcho, & Foels, 2012), issues of implementation seem to pop up every time instructors get together to talk about their teaching challenges. In this post I focus on the persistent challenge of imbalance when not all group members contribute equally. What follows are a few simple ideas you might wish to consider that have worked well for me during years of trial and error in my teaching, as well as insights from my research.

1. Design a group project in which the students work in phases.

For instance, starting with a project idea, then moving to project development, followed by preliminary project outcomes - and requiring students to "check-in" at each phase before delivering the final project. Not only does this help ensure that the groups won't wait until the final deadline is upon them to work on their project, but it also enables the instructor to touch base with every group and to offer guidance, support, or mediation, if needed, during the process.

2. Develop an element of the project that allows group members to make their own choices.

In my teaching, I usually give students the freedom to choose a topic area that interests them within the scope of the course or that is the most relevant or meaningful to the team members. This decision helps create a sense of ownership and enhances the students' level of engagement, both of which are crucial for working on large group projects, and especially for those requiring students to carry out the work in phases throughout the term (see, for example, Enghag & Niedder, 2007, on the theoretical basis for student ownership of learning).

3. Within a group project, include a component requiring individual students to submit non-onerous individual work.

For example, the project could include a personal reflection piece (e.g., e.g., Huang, 2011a), in which each member individually reflects on the process and product of his or her own portion of the group work. Apart from the pedagogical benefits of learners engaging in individual reflection (Pavlovich, Collins, & Jones, 2009), this task or component will inevitably provide insights about the division-of-labor issue commonly raised by instructors and students alike. Both learners and the instructor can glean a great many insights from those individual reflection pieces, which instructors can take into account when assigning either project or final grades, depending on their individual approach to assessment. This process also enables students to gain greater understanding about what worked well and what could be improved.

One important matter to keep in mind when implementing the reflection component is the need to ensure that we, as instructors, clarify what we mean by "reflection" in order to minimize a potential mismatch between our expectations about reflective learning and our students' understanding of what it entails. What we'd like our students to do is to engage in critical reflection - that is, thinking that involves different levels of reflection, rather than simply restating or describing what they did, or what I have called "non-transformative" reflection.

The goal is to encourage students to move beyond simply recalling what they did either individually or together within the group and instead to reflect on their personal discoveries about their own learning and the process of working collaboratively (i.e., understanding, analyzing, and evaluating the process and the product of their group efforts), and, importantly, to "verbalize" what they would do differently the next time around (i.e., pointing to the future).

This component is an example of what is called "writing/speaking to learn" (Manchón, 2011). For this task, it's important that students not be required to follow any formatting or style guidelines. The reflection should be an informal piece of writing, much like a diary entry, and can be in any modality (e.g., writing, audio recording, video clip) that suits the characteristics or preferences of individual students to allow for their individual expression. For some additional simple guidelines about implementing learner reflection, refer to Huang (2011b).

4. Devote a segment (30 minutes or so) during class before all group projects begin to implement two important steps.

Step 1: Get to know each other. The first 10 minutes can be a period for all students to find and meet with the group members they have either been assigned or have self-selected. They should then spend some time exploring each other's communication styles, which may arise from personal or culture-related differences (Lewis, 2006), to help them better anticipate different communication preferences and approaches to group work. This time can be spent sharing responses to guiding questions or statements, such as "I would describe my communication style/personality as ...," "I tend/prefer to deal with conflict by ...," and "I would appreciate my team members doing/not doing ...." (Huang, 2014). Guiding questions are especially helpful for groups that are culturally and linguistically diverse.

Step 2: Establish group norms. During the next 20 minutes, encourage each group to negotiate its own group norms (derived from Step 1) and ground rules. During this time, members of each team should elucidate, negotiate, and establish roles, responsibilities, and expectations. This process makes explicit the specific contributions and ownership of responsibilities that each team member negotiates and agrees to.

Below is a sample checklist that instructors can modify and use to facilitate this process and help prepare each group project to succeed (Huang, 2014). You can revise the items to suit a project or provide the list as an example for each group to use in creating its own list. The list can also be revisited during each check-point mentioned earlier and adjustments made as needed. Upon completion of the project, instructors can request the checklist(s) to be submitted (but not graded), along with other deliverables that are due.

5. Prepare students to expect the unexpected.

Rather than directing their every concern to you, students should be encouraged to become problem solvers not only by identifying problems, but also by developing solutions and choosing and evaluating the best ones so as to balance personal learning with the group's project goals. At the same time, you'll want to create and maintain a culture of openness that lets your students know you are readily available to provide guidance when groups reach an impasse.

In any group work situation, it is always possible that compatibility issues will arise between or among team members, as well as conflicts or problems with unequal distribution of work. The pre-group-project considerations described above, however, can easily be implemented to help minimize the likelihood that conflicts will develop that could negatively affect learning and outcomes. They may also help instructors and students in dealing with the specific common challenge of students who are not pulling their own weight in group collaborations, while maximizing the benefits of a group project not only in terms of content, but more, if not most, importantly, in learning how to work with others - a valuable life lesson that's best learned through experience.

References:
Enghag, M., & Niedderer, H. (2008). Two dimensions of student ownership of learning during small-group work in physics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(4), 629-653.

Huang, L.-S. (2011a). Language learners as language researchers: The acquisition of English grammar through a corpus-aided discovery learning approach mediated by intra and interpersonal dialogues. In J. Newman, S. Rice, & H. Baayen (Eds.), Corpus-based studies in language documentation, use, and learning (pp. 91-122). Amsterdam: Rodopi Press.

Huang, L.-S. (2011b, Fall). Key concepts and theories in TESL: Learner reflection. TEAL News: The Association of B.C. Teachers of English as an Additional Language, pp. 9-13.

Huang, L.-S. (2014). Lessons learned from team-facilitation in ELT: Strategies for navigating the challenges and making it work. IATEFL ES(O)L Newsletter, pp. 13-17.

Lewis, R. D. (2006). When cultures collide: Leading across cultures (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Manchón, R. M. (Ed.). (2011). Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Pavlovich, K., Collins, E., Jones, G. (2009). Developing students' skills in reflective practice: Design and assessment. Journal of Management Education, 33(1), 37-58.

Taylor, A. (2011). Top 10 reasons students dislike working in groups...and why I do it anyway. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 39(2), 219-220.

Tomcho, T. J., & Foels, R. (2012). Meta-analysis of group learning activities: Empirically based teaching recommendations. Teaching of Psychology, 39(3), 159-169.
Dr. Li-Shih Huang, Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Learning and Teaching Scholar-in-Residence, Learning and Teaching Centre, University of Victoria, BC, Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Group Work Strategies to Ensure Students Pull Their Weight

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The idea for sharing this post came from a session I recently conducted at the annual teaching conference organized by my university. A pedagogical conundrum was raised by a colleague whose enthusiasm and question stayed with me and inspired me to write this post.

# data[].attributes.body
3c. Engaging Students in learning

Grouping of students:: Instructional groups are productive and fully appropriate to the students or to the instructional purposes of the lesson. Students take the initiative to influence the formation or adjustment of instructional groups.

2b. Establishing a Culture for Learning

Student pride in work:: Students demonstrate attention to detail and take obvious pride in their work, initiating improvements in it by, for example, revising drafts on their own or helping peers.

1e:: Instructional Groups; Instructional groups are varied as appropriate to the students and the different instructional outcomes. There is evidence of student choice in selecting the different patterns of instructional groups.

# data[].attributes.body
#1 2c Management of Instructional Groups - Students need to be productive and working at all times. They are responsible for their work!

#2 2a Teacher Interaction with Students -It is important for teachers and students to have mutual respect and understand what the group work is trying to achieve.

#3 1e Learning Activities - Activity is suitable for all the students and the students are engaged in the material.

# data[].attributes.body
1e Designing Coherent Instruction
Learning activities are highly suitable to diverse learners and support the instructional outcomes. They are all designed to engage students in high-level cognitive activity and are differentiated, as appropriate, for individual learners
3b Questioning and Discussion
Students assume considerable responsibility for the success of the discussion, initiating topics and making unsolicited contributions.

2C Management of Instructional Groups
Small-group work is well organized, and students are productively engaged at all times, with students assuming responsibility for productivity.

# data[].attributes.body
1e: Designing coherent instruction- Instructional Groups

Instructional groups are varied as appropriate to the students and the different instructional outcomes. There is evidence of student choice in selecting the different patterns of instructional groups.

2c: Managing Classroom Procedures-Management of instructional groups

Small-group work is well organized, and students are productively engaged at all times, with students assuming responsibility for productivity.

3c: Engaging students in learning- grouping of students

Instructional groups are productive and fully appropriate to the students or to the instructional purposes of the lesson. Students take the initiative to influence the formation or adjustment of instructional groups.

# data[].attributes.body
Management of instructional groups | Students not working with the teacher are not productively engaged in learning.  | Students in only some groups are productively engaged in learning while unsupervised by the teacher.  | Small-group work is well organized, and most students are productively engaged in learning while unsupervised by the teacher.  | Small-group work is well organized, and students are productively engaged at all times, with students assuming responsibility for productivity.

# data[].attributes.body
#1 2a -teacher interaction with students

#2 2c - management of instructional groups

#3 1e - learning activities

# data[].attributes.body
1. management of instructional groups
2. learning activities
3.teacher interaction with students

# data[].attributes.body
3c- engaging students in learning
2C - managing classroom procedures
2a - creating environment of respect and rapport
1e - use of technology

# data[].attributes.body
2C: Small-group work is well organized, and students are productively engaged at all times, with students assuming responsibility for productivity.

1e:  All of the materials and resources are suitable to students, support the instructional outcomes, and are designed to engage students in meaningful learning. There is evidence of appropriate use of technology and of student adapting materials.

2a: Teacher interactions with students reflect genuine respect and caring for individuals as well as groups of students. Students appear to trust the teacher with sensitive information.

# data[].attributes.body
1) 3c Instructional groups are productive and fully appropriate to the students or to the instructional purposes of the lesson. Students take the initiative to influence the formation or adjustment of instructional groups.
2) 1a Teacher’s plans and practice reflect familiarity with a wide range of effective pedagogical approaches in the discipline, anticipating student misconceptions.
3) 1e Instructional groups are varied as appropriate to the students and the different instructional outcomes. There is evidence of student choice in selecting the different patterns of instructional groups.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Students are engaged and understand expectations
2.  Teacher demonstrates an understanding of student med., cultural, academic, and social/emotional needs.(differentiated instruction)
3.  Time Management

# data[].attributes.body
Instructional groups are varied as appropriate to the students and the different instructional outcomes. There is evidence of student choice in selecting the different patterns of instructional groups.

Small-group work is well organized, and students are productively engaged at all times, with students assuming responsibility for productivity.

Instructional groups are productive and fully appropriate to the students or to the instructional purposes of the lesson. Students take the initiative to influence the formation or adjustment of instructional groups.

:-)

# data[].attributes.body
1. (3B) Students assume considerable responsibility for, the success of the discussion, initiating topics, and making unsolicited contributions.
2. (3C) Structure and pacing of group work, grouping of students
3. (2B) Students demonstrate through their active participation, curiosity, and taking initiative that they value.

# data[].attributes.body
Meg, Sue, Rachel, Stephen

# data[].attributes.body
1) productively engaged at all times

2) Small Groups

3) students assuming responsibility for productivity

# data[].attributes.body
1e learning activities (designing coherent instruction)

2a interactions with teachers and students (environment of respect and rapport)

2c management of instructional groups (managing classroom procedures)

# data[].attributes.body
1.) 3c. Engaging Students in learning- Grouping of students
2.) 2a. Creating Environment of Respect and Rapport- Students interactions with other students
3.) 2c. Management of classroom procedures- management of instructional groups

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
Group Work Presentation