In my classroom, after each group activity, students discuss about positive and negative aspects of their activity. They share their ideas in order to learn with each other, and so avoid some problems in their future assignments. With their feedback, they also understand how other groups solved their problems. The case of the time machine presented is very inspiring, even though I think I can never do the same, because of the students’ schedule (my classes take only from 45 to 90 minutes every week).

A good suggested idea is a regular check up on what each menber contributed to the task. I agree on self-evaluation and peer review tools. With self-evaluation students have to reflect on their own work, think on what they have done and understand on how to be better (improve skills). This can encourage some less engaged, focused and motivated students.

I find it important for students to have some kind of feedback by their teachers on how their task in going (during the proces) in order to keep on track if they must do some addicional effort.
About management tools, some of the suggested are very interesting: Edmodo, Scrumy, Google documents, Google calendar and also Microsoft teams. I also read about small questionnaire done in Kahoot and a training test in Quizizz that works as a check list of acquired concepts.

My learning Diary
https://v.gd/m75ibA 

I think collaborative skills can and should be developed, but they are also a personal trait.

I also agree on Professor Butler beliefs that technology can support new pedagogies that focus on leaners as active participants. Pupils feel more involved and more engaged in their learning when technology is used in the classroom in a meaningful way. Students become co-producers instead of passive participants. It’s a way to facilitate and enhance between contributors. 

·         However I find it very difficult how to put together a collaborative learning activity that takes into consideration these 4 major issues. Most of the times I think we know the answer for the first question: Are they working together? But for the rest (Do they have shared responsibility? / Do they have substantive decisions? / Is their work interdependent?), I think it’s very hard to know for sure…

Students respond in groups of 2 to a webquest I give them. They have to find the answers and they try to be first ones to finish (their evaluation depend on it). They have to work in pair and they divide the questions on the webquest. Each one try to respond and who finishes first will help his colleague. Together they choose the definitions and respective description and make the final product with their crossword puzzle. In groups, they also had to respond to each other’s groups’ crossword puzzles.

·         Students work in groups: they divide the questions in 2 and who finishes first will try to help his colleague.

·         Students have not shared responsibility: When the pairs divide the questions each one has to work on, they usually divide it in half, not concerning on the content of each question.

·         Students do not make substantive decisions together.

·         Students work is not interdependent.

According to the rubric, in my opinion, this activity is a level 2.

· Scenario 2 – High level of collaboration

Students do their own crossword puzzle using the definitions that were given in the classroom. Together they choose the definitions and respective description and make the final product with their crossword puzzle. In groups, they also had to respond to each other’s groups’ crossword puzzles.

·         Students work in groups: they choose with whom they want to work with.

·         Students have shared responsibility: first they research individually on the definitions they want to approach and then try to bring their own proposals of the crossword puzzle to the group.

·         Students make substantive decisions together, because they have to agree on what the definitions they will approach, and then make together their crossword puzzle.

·         Students work is not interdependent, since they work together.

According to the rubric, in my opinion, this activity is a level 4.

Now concerning the comment on the posts of at least 3 other participants:
· From Joaquim Almeida, Portugal, I really think he explained very well his activities and that he understood that afterwards, what he was doing was more of group work and that learning activities have to be well planned.

· From Mariana Loureiro, Portugal, I agree with her that you cannot always have a high level on student’s collaboration. But we can always try!

· From Zulmira, Portugal, she also explained very well her 2 activities and that she finnaly understands (as well as I did) that sometimes we evaluate each element on a group in a very superficial way. 

I think collaborative skills can and should be developed, but they are also a personal trait. Sometimes, students that are more competitive, tend to have more difficulties when they know their grades also depend on the team/group process. 

I live in Lisbon, Portugal.

I’m a computer science teacher and I love what I do.