Literature review Collaborative Learning for Developing Students

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING FOR DEVELOPING STUDENTS
1
Collaborative Learning for Developing Students
Benjamin Kahn
Western Oregon University

2
Abstract
As educational models shift from the Industrial age “one-size-fits-all” approach to new
ones centered around students actively constructing knowledge, collaborative group
learning is becoming an increasingly popular strategy in classrooms. (Fawcett & Garton,
2005, p.157, Webb, et al, 2008, p. 361) This literature review focuses on studies of
collaborative peer activity in the learning and cognitive development of primary and
secondary school age children. Students working in collaboration have been linked to
higher achievement when compared with students working individually. (6 Gillies, 2014,
p. 792) The underlying mechanisms of collaborative learning were examined from the
social cognitivist theory perspectives of Vygotsky and Piaget. Studies that synthesize
these approaches and emphasize the role of collaboration in facilitating the active
participation and co-construction of knowledge of students were reviewed. I also
considered studies that analyzed ways in which the composition of collaborative groups
and the approach of the teacher in facilitating collaboration influence outcomes.
This review will present insights from recent studies on peer cooperation and discuss
pedagogical implications to consider when implementing collaborative learning.

3
Introduction
Whether taking the form of cooperative group work, peer or group tutoring, or true
collaborative work with shared responsibility, the pedagogical practice of allowing
children to work together has been widely studied and shown to increase student
performance at a number of age ranges across a variety of tasks. (Gillies, 2014, p. 792)
The works studied in this review support the idea that cooperation benefits short-term
performance in tasks such as building vocabulary (Bilen & Tavil, 2015), spelling
(Madrid, Canas, & Ortega-Medina, 2007), or taking general knowledge quizzes (Leman,
2015), as well as higher-order operations such as problem-solving. (Fawcett & Garton,
2005, Garton & Pratt, 2001) Further, it is suggested that collaboration can be an
especially powerful strategy for lower-ability children when they are grouped with a
higher-ability peer. (Sills, Rowse, & Emerson, 2016, Fawcett & Garton, 2005, Garton &
Pratt, 2001)
Theoretical Perspectives
In exploring how peer collaboration might explain these benefits, the literature is
predominantly grounded in a sociocultural understanding of cognitive development
based on the pioneering works of Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget and Russian
psychologist Lev Vygotsky (for a prime example see The Effect of Peer Collaboration on
Children’s Problem-Solving Ability by Fawcett & Garton, 2005). Piaget’s concept of
disequilibrium illustrates how socio-cognitive conflict can be introduced and resolved
through peer interaction. (Sills, Rowse, & Emerson, 2016, pg. 313) In contrast,
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development suggests that learners can benefit from
cooperation with a “more capable peer.” (Sills, Rowse, & Emerson, 2016, pg. 314)

4
Piaget’s work emphasized the role peer interaction plays in introducing new thoughts or
opinions that conflict with existing understandings. The tension between what is known
and what is presented through collaborative learning with a relatable peer causes a
state of disequilibrium, which students are motivated to resolve through talk and the
construction of new understanding. (Van Meter & Stevens, 2000, p. 121). Children can
be stimulated to learn by exposure to peers who hold different points of view,
experiences, or beliefs.
Vygotsky modeled children’s level of cognitive development as a sphere divided into
three distinct zones. The inner zone represents what the learner can currently do
without assistance. The outer zone represents what cannot be achieved at the learner’s
current level of development. The middle or proximal zone represents what the child
can achieve “under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.”
(Vygotsky, 1978, pg. 86) The Zone of Proximal Development illustrates how peer
collaboration with a more advanced learner can enable children to function at a higher
level than they could alone.
The synthesis of these ideas suggests that the underlying way of learning through
collaboration is “interaction with a peer who has a different perspective, either due to
more knowledge or a different viewpoint.” (Fawcett & Garton, 2005, pg. 160)
Active Learning and Co-construction Of Knowledge
A key point shared by Piaget and Vygotsky’s theories as applied to peer collaboration is
that they both depend on the learner to actively reason and construct knowledge to
learn. From a Vygotskian perspective, learners working with a higher-ability peer apply
their current reasoning abilities to tasks or to work through problems that are too difficult

5
for them to undertake alone, and can then gradually reconstruct and internalize the
resulting understanding. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 56)
From a Piagetian point of view, “peer collaboration has been identified as an
environment in which sociocognitive conflict occurs.” (Van Meter & Stevens, 200, p.121)
The social act of collaborating causes an internal change in the learner as alternate
perspectives challenge previously held beliefs, causing disequilibrium.
With each student contributing, reworking concepts, resolving conflicting ideas, and
reasoning together, learners can “recognize, clarify, and repair inconsistencies in their
own thinking” to collaboratively construct understanding. (17 Webb, et al, 2008, pg 361)
In her review of cooperative learning, Gillies discusses a study in which children were
challenged with cognitively demanding math and science tasks in a social learning
context, with teachers acting in a moderating role to guide and support peer
discussions. (Gillies, 2014) The children had to actively engage in collaborative
problem-solving to resolve conflicting ideas and construct meaning solutions. Rather
than depending on the teacher for answers, they were supported in taking on tasks that
may have been too difficult for individuals. Students who participated in these “cognitive
acceleration” courses showed significant gains in both development and academic
outcomes. Gillies notes that it is the “opportunity to be more active in their own learning
that engages students interest.” (Gillies, 2014, p.794)
Role of Talk
Whether from a Vygotskian perspective of working with a more able individual, or a
Piagetian perspective of resolving cognitive conflict brought on by exposure to different
viewpoints, the central tool that students use to actively participate in learning and

6
knowledge co-construction is talking. (Fawcett & Garton, 2005, p.160, Gillies, 2014, p..
795) Discussion is the medium through which different perspectives or new ideas can
be compared to and ultimately reconciled with what is already known. (Sills, Rowse, &
Emerson, 2016, p. 42) Collaborative learning happens when students share “an active
exchange of ideas, rather than merely working together” (Fawcett & Garton, 2005, pg.
164), and it’s important that students generate their own explanations rather than simply
“learning” by hearing an explanation. ( Webb, et al, 2008, p. 362) In Fawcett and
Garton’s study of mixed-ability children’s collaborative problem-solving ability, half of the
groups were explicitly encouraged to use “explanatory language,” while the remaining
groups were discouraged from explaining their thinking to their partners. Those in the
“talk” condition saw significant benefit in a post-test of problem-solving ability.
Evolving Role of Teachers as Facilitators
The role of the teacher in a collaborative classroom must be carefully considered. In
order to maximize the efficacy of peer learning, students must be actively engaged in
verbal co-reasoning, with the teacher shifting from a “sage-on-the-stage” to a “guide-on-
the-side.” (Gillies, 2014, pg. 794) During peer cooperation, teachers can employ
strategies such as modeling, prompting, scaffolding, seeking clarification, summarizing,
challenging, and debriefing to act as a catalyst for further student-driven discussion and
debate, creating a “snowball of relational thinking.” (Lin, et al, 2015, p. 616) Instead of
telling students the correct answer, it may be more effective in collaborative learning to
pose the right questions, elicit active discussion, and prompt learners to explain and
justify their reasoning. ( Webb, et al, 2008, p. 379)

7
Group Composition
For collaboration to succeed, learners must be able and motivated to actively participate
and to co-construct knowledge with peers. This suggests that the composition and
attitudes of the groups are important, as is the effectiveness of teachers at
implementing cooperative learning strategies.
Mixed-ability Groups
Several studies reviewed conclude that collaboration is especially helpful to lower-ability
children when they work with higher-ability children, while children working alone or with
a similarly abled peer saw no significant change, which is consistent with the Vygotskian
idea of the “more capable peer.” (Sills, Rowse, & Emerson, 2016, Fawcett & Garton,
2005, Garton & Pratt, 2001)
Strategic use of mixed-ability pairing when employing cooperative learning activities
such as peer tutoring can also be an effective intervention for disabled students.
(Bowman-Perrot, et al,, pg. 52)
While the research is not clear on what benefits working together has for the higher
ability learner in a mixed-ability collaboration, it may be that a greater understanding of
the material is often gained because key concepts need to be re-examined, reframed,
and broken down in such a way as can be explained to the lower ability partner. (Gillies,
2014 p. 793) (Gillies, 2006, p. 272) (Fawcett & Garton, 2005, p. 166)
In Fawcett and Garton’s study, low-ability children paired with high-ability children
showed significant gains in cognitive performance, as expected. Interestingly, high-
ability children not only showed no significant benefit, they tended to regress, except
when paired with a lower-ability peer and given explicit instructions to actively

8
communicate with their partner (recall that this study had groups placed into either a
“talk” or “not talk” condition). (Fawcett & Garton, 2005, p. 160)
In her qualitative analysis of a mixed-ability dyad, Roberts provides an alternative
interpretation and suggests that the cognitive stimulation that more advanced learners
get from collaboration may simply be less obvious, and that ability-labeling “can become
problematic when exploring pedagogy that rejects notions of fixed ability.” (Roberts,
2016, p. 44) Rather, she emphasizes the reciprocal gains both children can get from a
collaborative learning relationship, particularly when effective strategies are taught to all
students to support each other's learning. (Roberts, 2016, p. 48) In one intriguing
vignette, both students in the pair struggle during a Philosophy for Children exercise in
which they are asked to collaboratively brainstorm a “deep” question. The higher-ability
peer tended to pose questions that had a definitive answer, while the lower-ability peer
struggled with framing her thoughts as a question, yet made contributions that led the
group to consider, elaborate on, and pose questions based on deeper concepts that
had no clear correct answer. (Roberts, 2016, p. 48)
Overall, it is seems that “low ability children do benefit from interacting with higher-ability
children and children of higher ability are not disadvantaged by working in mixed-ability
groups.” (Gillies, 2006, p. 277)
Gender
Gender does appear to have an effect on the ways in which students engage in
communication in collaboration. (Psaltis, 2011, p. 309) In Sills, Rowse, and Emerson’s
review, a pattern of gender effect was noted. Lower-ability males paired with higher-
ability females saw the most gain when compared with same-gender pairs or males

9
working individually, while lower-ability females paired with higher-ability males saw no
significant improvement compared with working alone. (Sills, Rowse, & Emerson, 2016,
p. 319) Leman’s study on the effects of gender and race on collaborative activity found
that girls are less likely to use assertive language than boys. (Leman, et al, 2010, p.
135) The gender dynamics between students seem to constrain girls’ ability to
contribute to discussion and therefore limit gain from mixed-gender collaboration; in
contrast, lower-ability males are more able to navigate group discussion by offering,
defending, or revising their views regardless of relative ability. On the other hand, high-
ability girls, by using less assertive language, offered more space in conversation for
lower-ability boys’ ideas to be articulated and contrasted with their own. (Psaltis, 2011,
p. 309)
Implications for Teaching Practice
Designed thoughtfully, peer collaboration can be a powerful learning tool for a wide
array of students by engaging them to be active participants and creating opportunities
for the co-construction of knowledge. Teachers can promote effective collaboration by
acting as a guide and using techniques such as scaffolding, modeling, seeking
clarification aimed at coaxing students to actively participate in discourse with peers,
critical reasoning, and examining or interrogating multiple perspectives.
The makeup of groups also has an effect on the efficacy of peer collaboration, and it’s
clear that all children won’t benefit equally from every scenario. Given this, it is
recommended that teachers vary the makeup of groups by ability and gender and
include opportunities for feedback and discussion.

10
Conclusion
In this review, studies and reviews on the effects of peer collaboration on children’s
academic and cognitive development were analyzed. Current understandings of the
nature of peer learning lean strongly toward the Vygotskian perspective, in which
children are able to do more than they would be able to alone by working with a more
capable peer. This perspective is largely borne out in the literature, as lower-ability
learners in mixed-ability groups consistently received more cognitive benefit than the
corresponding higher-ability learners or than individuals working alone. Although the
Vygotskian model is supported by research, an alternate point of view that regards
collaborative learning as the foundation of a reciprocal and supportive relationship
clearly has some merit if the idea of ability is viewed as pliable rather than fixed.
The theory of disequilibrium was also invoked to explain the ways in which children
resolve cognitive conflict through verbal interaction to co-construct understanding with
peers. The importance of children being active participants who engage with new ideas
and use reason to interrogate and verbally justify beliefs was emphasized. In order to
support active participation in collaboration, the role of the teacher must adapt and
become less central and less authoritative (that is, the “guide-on-the-side” rather than
the “sage-on-the-stage”). That said, the role of the teacher in collaboration is critical.
Further research on the impact of collaboration on more cognitively advanced children,
and into how the notion of ability as a fixed attribute affects learner’s efficacy for
contributing in collaborative scenarios, would be helpful.
Group work must be effectively structured to allow students the opportunity to actively
participate and to co-construct understanding through dialogue. Furthermore, the

11
makeup of groups should be varied on account of the many social dynamics that affect
learners’ ability to navigate group situations.
References
Bilen, D. & Tavil, M. (2015). The effects of cooperative learning strategies on
vocabulary skills of 4th grade students. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 3:6, 151-165
Bowman-Perrot, L., Davis, H., Vannest, K., Williams, L., Greenwood, C., &
Parker, R. (2013) Academic benefits of peer tutoring: A meta-analytic review of
single-case research. School Psychology Review, 42:1, 39-55
Fawcett, L.M. & Garton, A.F.. (2005). The effect of peer collaboration on
children’s problem-solving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75,
157–169.
Garton, A.F. & Pratt, C. (2001). Peer assistance in children’s problem solving.
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 307-318
Gillies, R.M. (2006) Teachers and students verbal behaviours during cooperative
and small-group learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 7, 271-287

12
Gillies, R.M.. (2014). Developments in cooperative learning: Review of research.
Anales de Psicologia, 30:3, 792-801
Leman, P.J., Macedo, A.P., Bluschke, L.H., Rawling, C. & Wright, H. (2010) The
influence of gender and ethnicity on children’s peer collaborations. British Journal
of Developmental Psychology, 29, 131-137
Leman, P.J. (2015). How do groups work? Age differences in performance and
the social outcomes of peer collaboration. Cognitive Science, 39, 804-820
Lin, T., Anderson, R.C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Kuo, L., Dong, T., Jadallah, M., … &
Wu, X. (2015). Less is more: Teachers’ influence during peer collaboration.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 107:2, 609-629.
Madrid, L.D., Canas, M., & Ortega-Medina, M. (2007). Effects of team
competition versus team cooperation in classwide peer tutoring. The Journal of
Education Research, 100:3. 155-160
Psaltis, C. (2011) The constructive role of gender asymmetry in social interaction:
Further evidence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 305-312
Roberts, J. (2016) The ‘more capable peer’: Approaches to collaborative learning in a
mixed-ability classroom. Changing English, 23:1, 42-51
Van Meter, P. & Stevens, R.I (2000) The role of theory in the study of peer
collaboration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 69; I, 113-127
Vygotsky, L. S., and Michael Cole. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher
Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1978. Print.
Webb, N.M, Franke, L.F., Ing, M., Chan, A., De, T., Freund, D. & Battey, D.
(2008) The role of teacher instructional practice in student collaboration.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 360-381

Literature review Collaborative Learning for Developing Students

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Literature review Collaborative Learning for Developing Students (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Literature review Collaborative Learning for Developing Students