| 2 Forming Groups
2.2 Group Composition
2.2.1 Criteria for Forming Groups
A useful starting point in exploring how groups of four might be established is in asking groups of students to select and rank six criteria for forming groups from the possibilities listed below, adding any others they might think of.
ability to write
ability to read
friendship
imagination
ability to listen
general knowledge |
willingness to cooperate
ability in the curricular area
sociability
gender
personality
useful ideas |
Students are then asked to work on their own to read the quotes below related to forming groups. They should then regroup to review their selection and ranking of criteria for forming groups in light of their reading. The suggestion would be that no matter whether children were grouped in attainment groups in, e.g. Mathematics or mixed attainment groups in, e.g. Science, personality is central to decision making when forming groups. Further to this, it is likely that more effective collaboration will be experienced in groups where similar personalities are grouped together. This idea can often take students by surprise as they initially regard mixing personalities as a ‘fairer’ way of organising groups.
Personality
…reluctant or hesitant speakers may feel able to participate when their more confident peers are absent, whereas dominant pupils put together may benefit from learning to cope with the contribution of those with similar traits.
Holderness & Lalljee (1998)
…extrovert personalities are more likely to interact in small groups and introverts are less likely to interact.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
Gender
Tann’s (1991) experimental structuring of collaborative tasks used mixed-gender groups and found boys to be argumentative in discussion, while girls tried to reach agreement in a more consensual manner.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
She (Webb 1991) found that an imbalance in number of boys and girls leads to gender differences similar to those found by Tann, but recommends equal numbers of boys and girls in each group to achieve balance in discussion and successful problem solving.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
Girls will often participate more freely in a technology or science task without the presence of boys.
Holderness & Lalljee (1998)
Friendship
Friendship, thus, may limit achievement in problem-solving tasks and general development of co-operative skills in the classroom.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
…groups of close friends may take so much for granted about each other that they are not able to talk in an exploratory or open way, or to be explicit about their thinking with each other- they may tend to leave much unsaid.
Howe (1997)
Friends tend to agree with one another on principle, and less confident children make no contribution at all, to avoid being held responsible later on.
Grugeon, Hubbard, Smith & Dawes (1998)
Attainment
Groups function best when they are of mixed ability but such groups must include pupils from the highest ability groups within the class.
Galton & Williamson (1992)
Homogeneous high-ability groups do not display high-level elaborative interactions when asked to jointly solve a problem; most pupils want to work as individuals.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
Homogeneous low-ability groups have little stimulus (from more knowledgeable group members) for high-order elaborative interactions and much of their interaction is off task.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
Webb’s evidence concerning heterogeneous/mixed ability groups finds that these groups were more likely to use high elaborative interactions leading to problem solving achievement.
Kutnick & Rogers (1994)
Bilingualism
There may be times when a bilingual group will enable pupils to use a shared home language, providing mutual support, while at other times a mixed language group may provide a necessary stimulus.
Holderness & Lalljee (1998)
 
| 
