# data[].attributes.headline
3 Steps to insure support is provided to all students during an assignment

# data[].attributes.subject
3 Steps to insure support is provided to all students during an assignment

# data[].attributes.body
1. Make sure each student understands their role in the group and is comfortable with that role.
2. Make sure all students in all groups are aware of the rubric or guidelines and will follow them, sometimes for big projects its best to break the assignment down into smaller assignments and have the final product due at a later date.
3.All students should have an equal amount of work and the work should not be harder or easier for anyone student unless, they have a disability or something hindering their participation in the group.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cite this guide: Brame, C.J. & Biel, R. (2015). Setting up and facilitating group work:
Using cooperative learning groups effectively. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [todaysdate] from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively/.

Many instructors from disciplines across the university use group work to enhance their students' learning. Whether the goal is to increase student understanding of content, to build particular transferable skills, or some combination of the two, instructors often turn to small group work to capitalize on the benefits of peer-to-peer instruction. This type of group work is formally termed cooperative learning, and is defined as the instructional use of small groups to promote students working together to maximize their own and each other's learning (Johnson, et al., 2008).

Cooperative learning is characterized by positive interdependence, where students perceive that better performance by individuals produces better performance by the entire group (Johnson, et al., 2014). It can be formal or informal, but often involves specific instructor intervention to maximize student interaction and learning. It is infinitely adaptable, working in small and large classes and across disciplines, and can be one of the most effective teaching approaches available to college instructors.

What can it look like?

Informal cooperative learning groups
In informal cooperative learning, small, temporary, ad-hoc groups of two to four students work together for brief periods in a class, typically up to one class period, to answer questions or respond to prompts posed by the instructor.

Additional examples of ways to structure informal group work
Think-pair-share
The instructor asks a discussion question. Students are instructed to think or write about an answer to the question before turning to a peer to discuss their responses. Groups then share their responses with the class.
Peer Instruction
This modification of the think-pair-share involves personal responses devices (e.g. clickers). The question posted is typically a conceptually based multiple-choice question. Students think about their answer and vote on a response before turning to a neighbor to discuss. Students can change their answers after discussion, and "sharing" is accomplished by the instructor revealing the graph of student response and using this as a stimulus for large class discussion. This approach is particularly well-adapted for large classes.
Jigsaw
In this approach, groups of students work in a team of four to become experts on one segment of new material, while other "expert teams" in the class work on other segments of new material. The class then rearranges, forming new groups that have one member from each expert team. The members of the new team then take turns teaching each other the material on which they are experts.
Formal cooperative learning groups
In formal cooperative learning students work together for one or more class periods to complete a joint task or assignment (Johnson et al., 2014). There are several features that can help these groups work well:

The instructor defines the learning objectives for the activity and assigns students to groups.

The groups are typically heterogeneous, with particular attention to the skills that are needed for success in the task.

Within the groups, students may be assigned specific roles, with the instructor communicating the criteria for success and the types of social skills that will be needed.

Importantly, the instructor continues to play an active role during the groups' work, monitoring the work and evaluating group and individual performance.

Instructors also encourage groups to reflect on their interactions to identify potential improvements for future group work.

This video shows an example of formal cooperative learning groups in David Matthes' class at the University of Minnesota:

There are many more specific types of group work that fall under the general descriptions given here, including team-based learning, problem-based learning, and process-oriented guided inquiry learning.

What's the theoretical underpinning?

The use of cooperative learning groups in instruction is based on the principle of constructivism, with particular attention to the contribution that social interaction can make. In essence, constructivism rests on the idea that individuals learn through building their own knowledge, connecting new ideas and experiences to existing knowledge and experiences to form new or enhanced understanding (Bransford, et al., 1999). The consideration of the role that groups can play in this process is based in social interdependence theory, which grew out of Kurt Koffka's and Kurt Lewin's identification of groups as dynamic entities that could exhibit varied interdependence among members, with group members motivated to achieve common goals. Morton Deutsch conceptualized varied types of interdependence, with positive correlation among group members' goal achievements promoting cooperation.

Lev Vygotsky extended this work by examining the relationship between cognitive processes and social activities, developing the sociocultural theory of development. The sociocultural theory of development suggests that learning takes place when students solve problems beyond their current developmental level with the support of their instructor or their peers. Thus both the idea of a zone of proximal development, supported by positive group interdependence, is the basis of cooperative learning (Davidson and Major, 2014; Johnson, et al., 2014).

Cooperative learning follows this idea as groups work together to learn or solve a problem, with each individual responsible for understanding all aspects. The small groups are essential to this process because students are able to both be heard and to hear their peers, while in a traditional classroom setting students may spend more time listening to what the instructor says.

Cooperative learning uses both goal interdependence and resource interdependence to ensure interaction and communication among group members. Changing the role of the instructor from lecturing to facilitating the groups helps foster this social environment for students to learn through interaction.

Is there evidence that it works?

David Johnson, Roger Johnson, and Karl Smith performed a meta-analysis of 168 studies comparing cooperative learning to competitive learning and individualistic learning in college students (Johnson et al., 2006). They found that cooperative learning produced greater academic achievement than both competitive learning and individualistic learning across the studies, exhibiting a mean weighted effect size of 0.54 when comparing cooperation and competition and 0.51 when comparing cooperation and individualistic learning. In essence, these results indicate that cooperative learning increases student academic performance by approximately one-half of a standard deviation when compared to non-cooperative learning models, an effect that is considered moderate. Importantly, the academic achievement measures were defined in each study, and ranged from lower-level cognitive tasks (e.g., knowledge acquisition and retention) to higher level cognitive activity (e.g., creative problem solving), and from verbal tasks to mathematical tasks to procedural tasks. The meta-analysis also showed substantial effects on other metrics, including self-esteem and positive attitudes about learning. George Kuh and colleagues also conclude that cooperative group learning promotes student engagement and academic performance (Kuh et al., 2007).

Springer, Stanne, and Donovan (1999) confirmed these results in their meta-analysis of 39 studies in university STEM classrooms. They found that students who participated in various types of small-group learning, ranging from extended formal interactions to brief informal interactions, had greater academic achievement, exhibited more favorable attitudes towards learning, and had increased persistence through STEM courses than students who did not participate in STEM small-group learning.

The box below summarizes three individual studies examining the effects of cooperative learning groups.

What are approaches that can help make group work effective?
Preparation Articulate your goals for the group work, including both the academic objectives you want the students to achieve and the social skills you want them to develop. Determine the group conformation that will help meet your goals.
In informal group learning, groups often form ad hoc from near neighbors in a class.

In formal group learning, it is helpful for the instructor to form groups that are heterogeneous with regard to particular skills or abilities relevant to group tasks. For example, groups may be heterogeneous with regard to academic skill in the discipline or with regard to other skills related to the group task (e.g., design capabilities, programming skills, writing skills, organizational skills) (Johnson et al, 2006).

Groups from 2-6 are generally recommended, with groups that consist of three members exhibiting the best performance in some problem-solving tasks (Johnson et al., 2006; Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992).

To avoid common problems in group work, such as dominance by a single student or conflict avoidance, it can be useful to assign roles to group members (e.g., manager, skeptic, educator, conciliator) and to rotate them on a regular basis (Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992). Assigning these roles is not necessary in well-functioning groups, but can be useful for students who are unfamiliar with or unskilled at group work.
Choose an assessment method that will promote positive group interdependence as well as individual accountability.
In team-based learning, two approaches promote positive interdependence and individual accountability. First, students take an individual readiness assessment test, and then immediately take the same test again as a group. Their grade is a composite of the two scores. Second, students complete a group project together, and receive a group score on the project. They also, however, distribute points among their group partners, allowing student assessment of members' contributions to contribute to the final score.

Heller and Hollabaugh (1992) describe an approach in which they incorporated group problem-solving into a class. Students regularly solved problems in small groups, turning in a single solution. In addition, tests were structured such that 25% of the points derived from a group problem, where only those individuals who attended the group problem-solving sessions could participate in the group test problem. This approach can help prevent the "free rider" problem that can plague group work.

The University of New South Wales describes a variety of ways to assess group work, ranging from shared group grades, to grades that are averages of individual grades, to strictly individual grades, to a combination of these. They also suggest ways to assess not only the product of the group work but also the process. Again, having a portion of a grade that derives from individual contribution helps combat the free rider problem.
Helping groups get started Explain the group's task, including your goals for their academic achievement and social interaction. Explain how the task involves both positive interdependence and individual accountability, and how you will be assessing each.
Assign group roles or give groups prompts to help them articulate effective ways for interaction. The University of New South Wales provides a valuable set of tools to help groups establish good practices when first meeting. The site also provides some exercises for building group dynamics; these may be particularly valuable for groups that will be working on larger projects.

Regularly observe group interactions and progress, either by circulating during group work, collecting in-process documents, or both. When you observe problems, intervene to help students move forward on the task and work together effectively. The University of New South Wales provides handouts that instructors can use to promote effective group interactions, such as a handout to help students listen reflectively or give constructive feedback, or to help groups identify particular problems that they may be encountering.

Assessing and reflecting

In addition to providing feedback on group and individual performance (link to preparation section above), it is also useful to provide a structure for groups to reflect on what worked well in their group and what could be improved. Graham Gibbs (1994) suggests using the checklists shown below.

The University of New South Wales provides other reflective activities that may help students identify effective group practices and avoid ineffective practices in future cooperative learning experiences.

References

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Cabrera, A. F., Crissman, J. L., Bernal, E. M., Nora, A., Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (2002). Collaborative learning: Its impact on college students' development and diversity. Journal of College Student Development, 43(1), 20-34.

Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Boundary crossing: Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and problem-based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25 (3&4), 7-55.

Dees, R. L. (1991). The role of cooperative leaning in increasing problem-solving ability in a college remedial course. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 409-21.

Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1).

Heller, P., and Hollabaugh, M. (1992) Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics 60, 637-644.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2006). Active learning: Cooperation in the university classroom (3 rd edition). Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Holubec, E.J. (2008). Cooperation in the classroom (8 th edition). Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journl on Excellence in College Teaching 25, 85-118.

Jones, D. J., & Brickner, D. (1996). Implementation of cooperative learning in a large-enrollment basic mechanics course. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings.

Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., and Hayek, J.C. (2007). Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations (ASHE Higher Education Report, No. 32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Love, A. G., Dietrich, A., Fitzgerald, J., & Gordon, D. (2014). Integrating collaborative learning inside and outside the classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4), 177-196.

Smith, M. E., Hinckley, C. C., & Volk, G. L. (1991). Cooperative learning in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education 68(5), 413-415.

Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 96(1), 21-51.

Uribe, D., Klein, J. D., & Sullivan, H. (2003). The effect of computer-mediated collaborative learning on solving ill-defined problems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 5-19.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

This teaching guide is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Group work: Using cooperative learning groups effectively

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Cynthia J. Brame and Rachel Biel Print Version Cite this guide: Brame, C.J. & Biel, R. (2015). Setting up and facilitating group work: Using cooperative learning groups effectively. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [todaysdate] from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group-work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively/. Many instructors from disciplines across the university use group work to enhance their students' learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teamwork Theory: Tuckman's Stages of Group Development
Probably the most famous teamwork theory is Bruce Tuckman's "team stages model".
First developed in 1965, Tuckman's model is widely known as a basis for effective team building. Yet how many people really know how to use it?

Below we explain Tuckman's model and offer some fresh insights on how to take it further.

But before reading on why not take the chance to "team-up" with our great range of e-guides . The complete set is now available at half price!

You'll find advice, tips, tools and new models which you won't find anywhere else. You can read about the real benefits of our teams bundle in our article on team building activities. Or why not download your half price offer right now! You're in good company with satisfied customers from over 30 countries around the world. Click the image below to view some of our most popular e-guides:

Tuckman's model is significant because it recognizes the fact that groups do not start off fully-formed and functioning. He suggests that teams grow through clearly defined stages, from their creation as groups of individuals, to cohesive, task-focused teams.

Our e-guide: Build a Better Team, has been specifically designed to help you understand and use a team stages model. It contains a tool for each stage to help you build a high-performing team - as quickly as possible.

Tuckman's Teamwork Theory

Tuckman describes working with a team of social psychologists, on behalf of the U.S. navy. The team studied small group behaviour, from several perspectives. In doing so, Tuckman reviewed 50 articles on group development and noticed that there were two features common to these small groups: the interpersonal or group structure, and the task activity. From this he identified that groups evolved into teams via four common stages.

Firstly an orientation, testing phase which often led to a period characterized by a degree of conflict. This then generally resolved itself, leading to a more socially cohesive phase. Finally, groups settled to a functional phase, during which they focused on role-relatedness. To summarize these four phases, Tuckman coined the oft-quoted terms: "forming", "storming", "norming" and "performing".

Tuckman's teamwork theory is best illustrated on a graph which shows the link between group relationships (the horizontal axis) and task focus (the vertical axis). The optimal or "performing" position is reached when relationships have developed within the group and it has started delivering with a clear focus on the task.

However, Tuckman's ideas clearly indicate that it takes time to reach the "performing" stage, and it's normal for these teams to go through ups and downs as they develop relationships. Particularly in the early period, which is perhaps why Tuckman called it the "storming" phase!

The 4 Phases of Tuckman's Teamwork Theory

Forming:
The initial stage of team development during which individuals have not yet gelled together. Everybody is busy finding their place in the team, sizing each other up, and asking themselves why they are here! Find out more in our articles: Team Building Techniques and Teamwork Tips. The first offers advice on starting a new team while the second will help you take over an existing team (perhaps a far more common situation).

Storming:
People begin to see themselves as part of a team. However at this stage they may challenge each other, and the team leader, about such things as what the team is doing, and how things should be done. As the stage title suggests, conflict and confrontation typify this stage, as differences surface. This may result in some loss of performance or focus on the task, as the diagram illustrates.

Norming:
This is the phase where team members start to come together, developing processes, establishing ground rules, clarifying who does what, and how things will be done. This phase is characterized by a growing sense of "togetherness". Find out more about both the Storming and Norming phases in our article: Team Building Concepts.

Performing:
This is the final stage where increased focus on both the task, and on team relationships, combine to provide synergy. Performance is delivered through people working effectively together. We have written two articles to further develop this stage. Team Building in the Workplace will help you build a performing team. Characteristics of Effective Teamwork will help you and your team sustain that performance.

The value of Tuckman's model is that it helps us understand that teams evolve. It also helps us to consider how they may encounter different problems at different stages of their development.

One limitation of the model may be that it makes team building appear too linear and sequential. Although it's a useful analytical tool, we must remember that some teams may "loop" around in their development.

For example, not all teams evolve smoothly through Tuckman's stages but may yo-yo between norming and storming until they either begin to function, or are disbanded! Regardless of limitations, all well-conceived models can be useful in helping us to understand and better manage our circumstances.

Beyond Tuckman

Read our new book:

Uncommon Leadership: how to build competitive edge by thinking differently
"a tour de force ... all integrated into a fascinating intellectual package"

Professor Dennis J. Garritan, Adjunct Professor, Harvard University

Tuckman's famous phases are part of a teamwork theory based on stages of team development. His theory may have gained popularity partly due to the catchy labels for each of his stages.

However, it also provides a useful and simple way to think about how we humans interact in team situations. Firstly by illustrating that it's normal for teams go through stages as they develop. Secondly, by highlighting the need to manage different aspects of team behaviour at each stage of that development. The beauty and usefulness of Tuckman's model is perhaps in its simplicity.

Team development theories such, as Tuckman's group development stages, recognise that teams develop through different stages, from forming through to performing.

Whilst these theories give a useful understanding of different team requirements at different times, there are a number of questions that aren't particularly well answered by the models. For example:

How should you lead at the different stages of a team's development?

How do you identify when you are progressing through a stage?

How does the team develop in the organisational setting?

How is it affected by other outside influences?

The theory of group stages alone doesn't answer these questions. To do so, and thus to build a more robust teamwork concept, ideas about team leadership and outside factors need to be introduced. We've done just this in our STAR team performance model. You can see how this model applies to group stages in: Stages of Team Development.

This is the first of ten articles in our teamwork series. But for some practical tips on using teamwork theory, look at our great-value guides (below), or at our Team Building Exercises for all team stages.

Team Building Exercises and Team Stages

The exercises in this guide are grouped according to our team stages model. Remember, each team is unique and needs to be led through several developmental stages. These include:
Creating a new team or taking over an existing team

Exercise 1: Being a TEAM together

Exercise 2: True or false

Exercise 3: Who does what in a team?

Exercise 4: Getting the mix right

Exercise 5: Doing something for the first time

Exercise 6: Two years from now

Developing a team

Exercise 7: A clearer vision

Exercise 8: Mad, sad or glad

Exercise 9: Seeing the bigger picture

Exercise 10: Positive feedback

Exercise 11: Conflicting views

Performing and achieving results with a team

Exercise 12: Did you notice?

Exercise 13: Limiting beliefs

Sustaining team performance

Exercise 14: Scarce resources

Exercise 15: Keeping going

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Probably the most famous teamwork theory is Bruce Tuckman's "team stages model". First developed in 1965, Tuckman's model is widely known as a basis for effective team building. Yet how many people really know how to use it? Below we explain Tuckman's model and offer some fresh insights on how to take it further.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lev Vygotsky and Social Learning Theories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Social learning theories help us to understand how people learn in social contexts (learn from each other) and informs us on how we, as teachers, construct active learning communities. Lev Vygotsky (1962), a Russian teacher and psychologist, first stated that we learn through our interactions a…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
People join organizations for one (or more) of several reasons. They may have joined to learn new skills, or make a difference in the community. They may be looking to expand their creative horizons, or meet new people, or maybe they are just hoping to have some fun. Your success as a leader, and your ability to keep your group stimulated and active, will hinge on your ability to recognize people's reasons for joining your group and acting to create opportunities for them to fulfill their goals. During recruitment, you will be most successful in recruiting higher numbers if you advertise in such a way that all of these opportunities are showcased within your group.

Generally, people who seek to join groups end up in one of four categories.

Those with achievement-based goals are focused on completing tasks and making a difference in the group or larger community. They work well alone or with other task-oriented members on challenging but attainable goals. With frequent feedback to let them know they are appreciated and doing well they often end up being powerhouses who get the majority of the work done.

Those whose motivations are recognition-based tend to join groups they believe will notice and reward their hard work. Appreciation of their contributions will go a long way to keeping them positive members of your organization, and they tend to be willing to go the extra mile for a group that recognizes their talents.

Students who have power-based goals often hope to become the next generation of leaders within an organization. They enjoy influencing others and tend to have natural management skills. They can be extremely persuasive members of the group, and will often be excellent recruiters, event planners, and speakers. You will need to take note of members who seek personal power and those who seek institutional power. The latter tend to organize and rally other members for the good of the group, while the former can try to persuade members to do what they want for their own personal gain. Personal power seekers will need extra attention from an organization's president to ensure that their goals are staying in line with the group's.

Affiliation-based members usually join to feel like a part of a larger whole, and because of this and a "go-with-the-flow" mentality, they prefer to work in large groups that allow them to build relationships with other people in the group. They tend to dislike conflict and be great cooperative workers, and are able to find compromise easily.

The following table can help you to understand what your different members need and why they might lose interest.

1. Interesting work

2. Frequent, clear feedback

3. Proof that their contribution makes a difference

1. No personal growth

2. Unclear goals

3. Routine tasks

4. Inability to implement change

Recognition
1. Appreciation of their work

2. Rewards-based: expectation of benefits or perks

1. Lack of praise

2. Lack of prestige/personal benefit

Power
1. Opportunities to take on responsibility/management tasks

2. Chance to influence others

1. No personal growth

2. Lack of responsibility /promotion

3. Unclear goals

Affiliation
1. Sense of belonging to a larger group/purpose

2. Need to stay informed: may stay on the edges of the group.

1. Group tension

2. Lack of support

3. No chance to build relationships

(Chart drawn from McClelland's Theory of Acquired Needs)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People join organizations for one (or more) of several reasons. They may have joined to learn new skills, or make a difference in the community. They may be looking to expand their creative horizons, or meet new people, or maybe they are just hoping to have some fun.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Call it "active learning," or "classroom participation" -- every teacher wants to know how to motivate students to particpate, and how to nurture more involved students and fewer apathetic ones. With a little extra planning, that is possible.

Below are four common reasons students don't participate and techniques to solve those problems and spice up your lessons.

Maybe it needs to be repetitive because the students don't really "get it," or maybe you're reviewing for a test. In any case, they're tuning out.

Solution #1: Assess their prior knowledge.

This could be as simple as asking students, "What do you know about (topic)?" and writing their responses on the board. You could also try a pre-test or a graphic organizer like a K-W-L chart . The goal is to find out what they already know (or think they know). You create buy-in for the students because they feel smart, and you can tailor your lesson to the information they don't know or don't remember correctly.

Solution #2: Try skills grouping.

Divide the class into groups based on what skills they need to practice - not forever, but for a class period or two, so they can focus on what they really need help with. So have a group that works on multiplying fractions, one on dividing fractions, and one on converting fractions to decimals. Make a group of "already got 100% on the test" kids and give them an extra credit activity or let them preview the next lesson. Then take time to move between the other groups and help them review. You'll have more students engaged in the lesson and they'll get specific, focused practice time.

Solution #3: Let them teach each other.

Especially good when reviewing before a test: divide the class into groups and give each group a topic. Set some guidelines and then let them teach each other. Encourage them to do interesting activities - write tests for each other, design review games, etc. - and evaluate each group on the accuracy of their content, the creativity of their approach, and how well they work together as a team. This is also a great way to discover how to motivate students.

This is really half the problem. The other half - especially with older students - is their fear of "looking stupid" by asking questions.

Solution #1: Allow anonymous questions.

Put out a "question box" where students can submit questions any time. Give each student an index card and ask them to write something about the reading assignment they did for homework. If they don't have a question, instruct them to write a comment on the reading. Collect the cards and use them to lead a class discussion. You'll easily recognize what parts of the reading confused a lot of students and they won't feel embarrassed.

Solution #2: Allow them to work together.

We can't do this all the time; individual students need to be assessed. Ask yourself: is the goal of this activity for them to learn the content, or for them to be assessed? If you want them to learn the content, why not let them work together? When they bring in their homework, do a quick survey for completeness, then put them in pairs and let them review the homework together. Encourage them to make changes if their partner's answer looks right. When they've finished, review as a class. Students may be less embarrassed to share a group's answer than their own and you may be able to complete the review more quickly.

Solution #3: Try a jigsaw approach.

No, we're not talking about puzzles or scary movies. If you're introducing new, difficult content, divide the class into groups and ask each group to master only one portion of it at a time. If, for example, you're teaching the American Revolution, have one group focus on the Continental Congress, one on Washington's Army, one on French support for the war, and so on.

Ask them to do a reading on their topic - to become the class "experts" on that subject. Then split up the class into new groups that include one "expert" on each topic. Ask these new groups to work together to write an essay or complete a worksheet that requires information about all the topics. They will teach each other in the process. Learn more about the Jigsaw Approach.

Problem: There's too much information to present in too short a time.

Sometimes there's no way around it: you simply have to get a lot of information out there in a short amount of time. So you opt for a lecture and just want your students to absorb the content. Instead, they fall asleep or stare out the window. What can you do?

Solution #1: Keep it "bite-sized."

Remember: research shows the average student's attention span is as long as her age. So even high school kids can only handle about 15 minutes. If you have a lot of information to convey, re-arrange your lesson plans so you never lecture for more than 10-15 minutes.

Break up large concepts into smaller sections - give a brief lecture, then do an activity to help it "sink in." Repeat this process over several days. You'll increase participation - and improve comprehension, too.

Solution #2: Keep them busy.

Don't allow students to stare into space while you talk. Give them something to stay connected. Try "fill in the blank" lecture notes. Delete key words and phrases in your lecture notes to create a "fill in the blank" worksheet. Then ask students to fill in the worksheet while you lecture. Another fun variation - lecture bingo .

Solution #3: Look into the future.

Before a lecture, give students a prediction activity. For example, tell them you will be lecturing on Shakespeare and ask them to predict what you will say, or give them a set of true/false statements and ask them to take their best guess.

As you lecture, instruct students to compare their guesses with what you actually say.

When the lecture is over, have a class discussion and evaluate how accurate student predictions were.

Problem: The lesson emphasizes the teacher, not the students.

Solution #1: Keep them busier than you are.

The traditional classroom of yesteryear had the teacher at the front of the room, droning on while students doze. Re-imagine your classroom as a place where students are busier than you are.

Keep the "sit still and let me talk to you" moments as brief as possible; get those kids working! Give them worksheets, activities, discussions, and projects. That doesn't mean you get to sit around -- you will still be busy, moving from student to student or group to group, correcting, evaluating, or providing feedback. But now everyone is busy and involved.

Homogeneous grouping? Heterogeneous grouping? Tracking? Forget the buzz words: having students work in groups is one of the best ways to increase student participation. Don't keep them in the same groups all the time -give them a chance to be the "smart kid" who can help someone one day and the kid who needs help the next.

Take a traditional worksheet or activity and give it to students in groups. Offer a reward to the group who finishes first with the most answers correct and watch them go! Note: it helps to have additional prizes available to keep groups motivated after the first group "wins." Even high school students enjoy these competitions.

Solution #3: Give them a voice and a choice.

Do students ever get a "say" in your classroom? Of course you need to make most decisions, but there must be some things you could leave up to them - whether it's what color chalk you use today or how long they practice a specific activity.

Kids tune out because they feel like their ideas don't matter. Show them their opinions are important and they'll pay better attention and speak up more in class.

There will always be some unreachable student who won't respond, even with these efforts. But if you give these a try, you may be presently surprised at the previously unreachable students who just might join in!

How do you encourage participation in your class? In what ways did you discover how to motivate students? Share in the comments section!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
top 12 ways to increase student participation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 12 Ways to Increase Student Participation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Call it "active learning," or "classroom participation" -- every teacher wants to know how to motivate students to particpate, and how to nurture more involved students and fewer apathetic ones. With a little extra planning, that is possible. Below are four common reasons students don't participate and techniques to solve those problems and spice up your lessons.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this video, Merium Aftab from Pakistan shares teachers' ideas about managing mixed-level classes and passive students who do not contribute to group work.

To ensure each individual contributes, she recommends grouping students according to their level of proficiency and assigning each student a task. Making group work count for final assessment can also encourage active involvement in a grade-oriented system such as hers, so she suggests careful monitoring and evaluation of students using notes and observation charts.

Discipline during group work is also a problem, but involving students in the rule-making process and getting group leaders to enforce them is one way of dealing with this. For group work to succeed, every student needs a part to play and every student needs to play their part.
Reflection and discussion
One of the purposes of these resources is to help you with your own teacher development in related contexts. The questions in task 1 and task 2 are designed for you to think about and discuss with colleagues, either informally or as part of your formal professional development.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to encourage and manage active involvement in group work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this video, Merium Aftab from Pakistan shares teachers' ideas about managing mixed-level classes and passive students who do not contribute to group work. To ensure each individual contributes, she recommends grouping students according to their level of proficiency and assigning each student a task.