How could collaborative learning potentially impact on Primary Education?

        To begin with, Donaldson (2015, p. 70) strongly believes that good teaching and learning exceedingly encourages collaboration. In ‘Successful Futures’ he writes about how ‘ the ability to function effectively as a member of a team is one of the key skills regularly cited by employers as essential in modern workplace and an important feature of the Review’s proposals.

         Following this, Hattie’s (2009) research is unambiguous in concluding that, ‘… cooperative learning is effective’. Teamwork has grown throughout the years to be a fundamental aspect for the contemporary workplace, valuing the fact that good planning is key, as teachers need to be able and willing to foster an environment for collaboration to occur. 

        Saying this, both pedagogy and psychology have their own views and ‘senses’ upon collaborative learning. They question whether collaborative learning is actually a pedagogical method or in fact a psychological process (Dillenbourg, 1999, p. 4). The pedagogical sense of collaborative learning is one of perspective, therefore, is seen as, an individual asks two or more people if they can work alongside each other since it is expected that they learn effectively and efficiently. In contrast with this idea, psychology interpret collaborative learning as descriptive. Examining that, “one observes that two or more people have learned, and collaboration is viewed as the mechanism which caused learning” (Dillenbourg, 1999, p.4).

        The confusion between perspective and deceptive observations often lead to recurring overstatements concerning the value collaborative learning. Therefore, Dillenbourg (1999, p. 5) argues that this collaborative learning is neither a mechanism nor a method.

        According to Cornell University (2017) the benefits of collaborative learning that they have carefully highlighting are as follows:

Ø  Development of higher – level thinkers

Ø  Oral communication

Ø  Self – management

Ø  Leadership skills

Ø  Reducing student retention

Ø  Self – esteem

Ø  Responsibility

        This is displaying that collaboration is indeed a positive feature in primary education as it involves recurring engagement and interaction between individuals. It should always be seen as a reciprocal task, where by working together is crucial, where diverse ideas are exchanged and common goals are met (Goos, Galbriath, & Renshaw, 2002). Additionally, collaborative learning experiences can be of benefit not only in primary education but also beyond (DCSF, 2009 & Alexander, 2009). 

        Similarly, in Wales, the Foundation Phase already endorses an efficient focus and emphasis on ‘play/ proactive learning’ as well as, ‘active educational play’ for those children aged 3 to 7 (Welsh Assembly Government, 2008, p.7). This is a virtuous example of active collaboration being implemented in primary education as Vygotsky thoroughly considered speech to be the most significant facilitating “device in human behaviour” (Wertsch, 1991, p.32).

        Within his idea of ZPD, he also believed in group brain power, whereby he found that learning and analysing data was done much more efficiently when collaboration as elaborate.  ZPD is seen “as a distance between the actual developmental level determined by individual problem solving and the level of development determined through problem solving under guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p.86), asserting that communication is essential when learning.

        However, there is a difference between collaboration and cooperation. Kozar (2010) argues, “being unaware of these differences impedes teachers from organising group work as effectively as possible”. Cooperative learning is primarily seen as accomplishing a task which is being divided, whereby each individual is responsible for their own portion of the problem solving (Roschelle and Teasley, 1995). On the other hand they see collaborative learning as “the mutual engagement of participants in a coordinated effort to solve the problem together” (Roschelle and Teasley, 1995, p.70).  This is where we need to be able to communicate the differences between these objectives, as active as well as independent collaboration needs to be taught and understood successfully, furthermore, kept consistent, especially when working with students.

Collaboration within Technology

        A fundamental necessity for collaboration is communication (Wertsch, 1991). To help aid this, technology is able to create platforms due to the aid of collaboration, for example, the creation of Skype, Twitter, Google Docs, Blogs, etc. showing us that from now and into the future much more innovative advances in technology will be sure to take place with the support of collaboration (Lord Broers, Chairman of the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee, 2005). Adding to this, Lord Broers (2005) correspondingly starts that “creative ideas can come from individuals however for these products to come to the market place a process of collaboration must take place. These products may include, smart TV’s, iPhones, VR controller sets, even vacuums.

        With reference to collaboration alongside technology, for my  ‘Areas of Learning and Experience’ module seminar, I created a short film about the city I grew up in, Gibraltar, using the programme ‘iMovie’. This film was then shared with a charity school in Nairobi, Kenya through the platform ‘YouTube’. The purpose of this film was for the children to grasp a sense of my culture and upbringing. This is my personal demonstration of collaboration within technology.

        In conclusion to this all, “collaborative learning both with and without the computer will transform the practice of teaching” (Dillenbourg, 2001).  With the support of this objective, developments and goals can be succeeded and met. The roles of teachers are changing and progressing due to the fact that collaboration is heavily relied one. Similarly, the increase of technology in the classroom is helping this idea of change as students as well as teachers do not need to work ‘by route’ but by interaction. “Learning is now something that the learner does as opposed to what is done to the learner” (Johnson and Johnson, 1991).

Reference List:

Alexander, R. (ed.) (2009). ‘Children, their World, their Education’. Final report and recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review. Abingdon: Routledge.

Broers, A. (2005). The Triumph of Technology. {The Reith Lectures} 4th May.

Cornell University (2017) ‘Collaborative Learning: Group Work’. Available at: https://www.cte.cornell.edu/teaching-ideas/engaging-students/collaborative-learning.html (Accessed: 10 November 2017)  

Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) (2009) ‘Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum (Rose Report). Nottingham: DCSF Publications’. Available at: http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/default.aspx?PageFunction=productdetails&Pag eMode=publications&ProductId=DCSF-00499-2009 (Accessed: 10 November 2017)

Donaldson, G. (2015). ‘Successful futures’: Independent review of curriculum and assessment arrangements in Wales. Wales

Dillenbourg, P. (1999) ‘Collaborative learning’: Cognitive and Computational Approaches., Oxford: Elsevier, pp.1-15.

Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). ‘Socially mediated metacognition’: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 193-223.

Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). ‘Visible learning’: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, UK: Routledge.

Kozar, O. (2010). Towards Better Group Work: Seeing the Difference between Cooperation and Collaboration. In English Teaching Forum (Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 16-23). US Department of State. Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Office of English Language Programs, SA-5, 2200 C Street NW 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20037.

Roschelle, J., and Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In Computer supported collaborative learning, ed. C. E. O’Malley, 69–97. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). ‘Mind in Society’. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Welsh Assembly Government. (2008) ‘Play/Active Learning’ - Overview for 3 to 7-year

olds. Available at: http://new.wales.gov.uk/topics/educationandskills/policy_strategy_and_planning/1040

09-wag/foundation_phase/foundationphasepractitioners/playactive/;jsessionid=LGk4LcWSfJprnyxLg2PqHlcT2Vbp1l6T8thwQTGHJSgQvQq4N1yp!686978193?lang=en&ts=1 (Accessed: 11 November 2017)