Student engagement with course content
seems like a pre-requisite for learning. A knowledgeable and enthusiastic
instructor can make a difference in students’ motivation and willingness to
become actively engaged with the subject matter. However, successful
teaching and learning (reciprocal acts) requires collaboration among
teachers and learners.
As a Communication Studies professor, I
have always attempted to facilitate students’ engagement with course
content, with their learning activities, and most importantly with me and
their peers in reflective and analytical dialogues. My courses are designed
with a constructivist learning philosophy and practices and collaborative
learning methodologies. I designed the debate-discussion project as well as
the course presented in this paper with this philosophy and classroom
practices in mind.
In this course, The Rhetoric of the
Civil Rights Movement, designed and first taught in fall 2008, an important
goal is to understand how the legacy of racial discrimination in the past
impacts self and cultural identity. Although the success of this course can
be credited to a variety of factors, the most distinguishing factor was that
all students (in groups of 3) were challenged to facilitate a reflective
60-minute round-table debate-discussion for their classmates. It was during
these round-table discussions that I observed student engagement through
collaborative learning in its most productive form.
In this essay, I argue that the design
of the course and, in particular the debate-discussion learning project,
purposely created with a collaborative approach squarely in mind,
successfully engaged students in substantive discussions of the events of
the Civil Rights era and its present-day impact. I first briefly review
literature on collaborative learning that facilitates student engagement now
spanning several decades. Then I provide a brief description of the
Rhetoric of the Civil Rights course and a description of the
“Debate-Discussion” approach designed to promote student engagement with the
course materials and each other. Then, I present an analysis of why the
“Debate-Discussion” component worked and what students learned based on my
observations of the discussions and the observations of students from a
class survey at the end of the course. Finally, I offer best practices for
using this Debate-Discussion component across disciplines.
A Brief Review of
There is ample evidence, discussed over
several decades, that successful teaching and learning requires
collaboration among teachers and learners. Collaborative learning is similar
to cooperative learning in which knowledge is constructed and negotiated in
social-cultural contexts with others in a collaborative process. It
emphasizes the interdependence of the learners and the communal nature of
the process as knowledge is negotiated and co-constructed through dialogue
and problem-solving. Collaborative learning is anchored in constructivist
philosophies and learner-centered methodologies; in these learning
environments knowledge is co-constructed through active engagement (sense
making) with ideas and phenomenon. (Bruffee, 1993; Fosnot, 1989; Lebow,
1993; Myers & Jones, 1993; Savery & Duffy, 1996; Slavin, 1991; and,
Cooperative learning approaches to
teaching and learning are based on group theories and communication. To be
successful, cooperative or collaborative learning groups must have an
interdependent goal structure as well as a division of labor and resources,
equal reward system, and individual accountability. Successful
collaboration requires group members to perceive mutual benefit, build
trusting relationships, and accommodate differences in values and cultures (Blumenfeld,
Marx, Soloway & Krajcik, 1996; Chrislip & Larson, 1994; Johnson & Johnson,
1994; O’Donnell & 0’Kelly, 1994; Rothwell, 1998; Smith & MacGregor, 2000,
Continued support for these kinds of
learning environments is evidenced by recent journal articles. They focus
on innovative teaching and reveal that the case for constructivist and
collaborative learning remains strong. What is particularly noteworthy in
these issues is the continued focus on directly engaging students in the
learning process. Kenny and Wirth (2009) rely on theatrical performance and
improvisation strategies to help instructors understand how to involve
students directly in their learning. Bryson and Hand (2007), in their
article about student engagement, not only advocate constructivist teaching
but also claim that for deep learning “multi-faceted engagement is required”
(p 349). An important aspect of the multi-faceted approach means “engaging
the learner’s personal stance in the learning process” (p. 352) and thus the
teacher’s role is to “facilitate the student’s task of constructing her/his
own views about the subject and the world” (p. 351). I would also argue
that part of this multi-faceted engagement should also help students’ locate
their own identity (understanding who they are, where they came from
culturally and what kind of citizens they aspire to be) as they construct
and co-construct knowledge and understandings (see Magolda, 2000 for
examples of incorporating students’ worldviews and identities into the
learning process). This kind of engagement occurs through critical
reflection and analysis and is fostered through collaborative dialogues in
which ideas and different perspectives are “discussed, debated, and
negotiated with peers and instructors” (Johnson & Brescai, 2006, p. 58).
Furthermore, as Ash & Clayton (2009) explain “a critical reflection process
that generates, deepens, and documents learning does not occur
automatically—rather, it must be carefully and intentionally designed” (p.
While I claim that the course, Rhetoric
of the Civil Rights Movement, is designed to engage students with the
subject matter and with each other, it is my carefully and intentionally
designed Debate-Discussion Learning Project which most successfully achieves
The debate-discussion project described
and analyzed in this essay can be adapted in any discipline for somewhere in
every discipline there are topics that benefit from students and instructors
wrestling with the subject matter in reflective and analytical dialogues.
While many instructors use teacher-led classroom discussions rather than
lectures as a way of teaching, it is less common for students to prepare and
conduct classroom discussions. This essay delineates why and how
student-led discussions enhance students’ learning and are rewarding for
students and instructors.
Course: Rhetoric of Civil Rights Movement
The major focus of this course is to
examine the persuasive strategies employed by the leaders, organizations and
ordinary citizens of the Civil Rights Movement during the time period
captured in the PBS Documentary series Eyes on the Prize (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eyesontheprize/about/index.html).
Using historical footage along with contemporary interviews, the series
covers the major events of the civil rights movement from 1954-1985. The
actual footage of the non-violent strategies employed by college students in
the lunch-counter sit-ins along with the rhetoric of Martin Luther King, Jr.
(MLK) in contrast to the rhetoric of Malcolm X and Stokley Carmichael and
the images of the Black Panther Party members are just a few ways that
students in this course become directly engaged with the subject material.
The accompanying book (Carson, et al, 1991) and internet website (http://www.facinghistory.org/resources/publications/eyes-prize)
that compliment the documentary series cover the same time-period and events
and extend the documentary coverage. For example, the first video
documentary presents the Montgomery Bus Boycott and introduces young MLK’s
entrance into the movement through a snippet of his speech at the Holt
Baptist Church. In the accompanying book, MLK’s complete speech on December
5, 1955 is provided. The internet website serves as a study guide as it
presents a link to each of the video episodes which contain a description of
that particular episode’s historical events plus additional text of the
interviews seen in the video episode; it also has questions to stimulate
connections and discussion.
The PBS Documentary has fourteen
60-minute episodes and the first eight are covered fully in this course so
that students can examine the movement’s major events of the non-violent
strategies and the rhetoric of “Freedom Now” espoused by MLK in contrast to
the call for forceful-violent resistance and the rhetoric of “Black Power”
which was advocated by Malcolm X, Stokley Carmichael, and the Black Panthers
Party. With each video episode (and the accompanying book and internet
guide), I have selected a specific academic article that analyzes the event,
a speech or a particular individual in the movement. Thus students have
ample resources at their fingertips; all course assignments, readings and
resources are posted on our Blackboard site for the course. Furthermore,
they receive a reading list of specific academic articles that they can
refer to for further study. These assigned readings and resources are
designed to assist students in their two major course assessments: a
mid-term and final analytical research paper (for a copy of the syllabus,
lists of readings, and these analysis-paper assignments, see
Before students are exposed to the
footage and actual events beginning in 1954, we examine the events of a
recent CNN Documentary of a modern-day protest and fight for Civil Rights
which occurred in Jena, LA in 2006. This video documentary is used along
with Barack Obama’s speech on race relations (A More Perfect Union
delivered March 18, 2008) to provide students with the understanding of the
existence and complexity of race-related issues in today’s world and to
provide them with two different artifacts to use to conduct a rhetorical
analysis first in small groups and then individually (see
http://www.uncw.edu/com/RCR.html for a copy of the group
assignment titled “Judgment in Jena” and the response analysis paper).
Since this 2006 CNN documentary examines the controversy surrounding the
events of “three nooses hung on a tree in a local high school,” the charges
brought against six (under-aged) black students of attempted second-degree
murder and conspiracy, and the subsequent media attention and protest which
brought over 15,000 people to the small southern town (population: 3000), it
provides an excellent opportunity for students to engage in a
debate-discussion of a modern-day civil rights protest movement and the
issues of race surrounding it. As a result, students experience their first
round-table, face-to-face discussion in which they are engaged with the
subject matter and with each other. As the facilitator of this first
debate-discussion, I encourage students to express their different
perspectives and viewpoints surrounding these controversial issues of hate
crimes and civil rights. I make an effort to create a comfortable trusting
environment in which differences of opinion are tolerated and even
encouraged. Therefore, the groundwork is laid for their Debate-Discussion
Learning Project which fosters student engagement and occupies the vast
majority of the course.
Learning Project: How it Works
I intentionally and carefully selected
the name of the Debate-Discussion Learning Project avoiding the use of the
word “presentation.” Specifically my role is to teach students how to take
on the role of facilitators of learning as they prepare and implement a
focused debate-discussion on selected issues and questions from an episode
of Eyes on the Prize and the related reading(s). By using the words
“debate” and “discussion” students understand that their role is to expect
and encourage different viewpoints on the topics and issues from the
assigned course materials. Furthermore, by calling it a learning project
they also understand that these discussions must be designed so that their
classmates actively participate and contribute to their learning. Students
receive detailed instructions about the product and the process for the
debate-discussion and understand that they will be graded on their
individual preparation and implementation as well as on the instructional
design and execution of the whole project (see
http://www.uncw.edu/com/RCR.html for this
assignment and detailed instructions).
In the fourth week of classes, we begin
with the viewing of the episodes from the PBS series “Eyes on the Prize”
during a Thursday class followed by the accompanying student-led
debate-discussion on the next Tuesday. This allows time for the student
facilitators (groups of 3) to prepare their debate-discussion design and for
the participants (the rest of the class) to be prepared for the discussion.
Thus all students (in groups of 3) have the opportunity to prepare and lead
a debate-discussion for a full class period while the rest of the class
members (along with the instructor) become participants in the discussions.
The success of this project relies on the diligent preparation of both
facilitators and participants. Student facilitators must be guided as they
construct the prompts and questions for discussion and student participants
must be required to be prepared to participate in that discussion.
The student facilitators are instructed
to prepare a two-page handout with prompts and questions for discussion that
covers the essential events in the episode as well as the assigned reading.
To assure success, students are presented with ample resources about how to
prepare open-ended discussion questions and how to design and conduct a
learning discussion (see
http://www.uncw.edu/com/RCR.html for these resources). Once the facilitators have
completed their final draft of the handout for discussion, they meet with me
so that I can review it and make final changes. In addition, I review the
essential aspects of facilitating discussions:
Call participants by their names as they volunteer a response
(students have desk name tags);
Call on participants who have not “volunteered” to encourage
participation from all students;
Be comfortable with “think-time” or silence after posing a
question for discussion;
Make connections between responses from participants; and,
Provide summaries between discussion topics.
I select questions from the
facilitators’ handout that address the assigned academic article for the
corresponding episode from the Eyes on the Prize documentary. I,
then, send these questions to the class as an assignment “Required Written
Response” due the day of the discussion and part of their class grades.
On the days of the discussion, the
three student facilitators are responsible for arranging the participants’
chairs (22) in a semi-circle leaving a gap at the top of the circle for
their three chairs. During these discussions, I became a participant and let
students respond to the different topics before I add anything. At each
chair they place a copy of their handout which has the discussion purpose as
well as the prompts and questions (see
http://www.uncw.edu/com/RCR.html for examples
of these handouts—The Awakening and Mississippi: Is this America?—created
by student facilitators and for the corresponding “Required Preparation and
Written Response” for the participants). Although these discussions are
scheduled for 60 minutes, they frequently last 65 to 70 minutes especially
when students are actively engaged in discussing controversial topics.
Learning Project: Why it Works
It is essential to provide an open
trusting classroom environment so students can feel comfortable expressing
their opinions and different viewpoints. On the first day of classes I talk
about why I designed and elected to teach this course which focuses on the
rhetoric and the persuasive strategies of the Civil Rights (CR) activists
and events. I also talk frankly about growing up in south Louisiana in the
50’s and 60’s and my memories and experiences as a white middle-class
teenager; I disclose to students my “unawareness” of the real struggles of
black citizens. I talk about my grandmother’s (born in 1895) fear of blacks
and my mother’s (born 1921) memories as a young girl seeing water fountains
with “whites only” and “colored only” signs. Since the Montgomery Bus
Boycott and the Freedom Rides are events that we examine in detail, I reveal
that I had never ridden a bus until I was in graduate school in my late 20’s
as my parents did not allow it. I am convinced that this self-disclosure of
my own identity and history sets the stage for a trusting and comfortable
environment and helps students feel more comfortable to discuss sensitive
and complex issues about race.
Second, a face-to face, round-table
format is essential for this kind of discussion. As Graetz & Goliber (2002)
recognize, the importance of “face-to- face interaction” remains strong
especially for collaborative learning environments and “successful
universities will provide student and instructors with environments that
facilitate collaborative learning” (p. 20). Clearly, a physical environment
which allows students to turn their desks and chairs towards one another to
engage in face-to-face interaction personalizes and enhances collaborative
learning. Furthermore, face-to-face interaction helps students feel more
accountable to and, eventually, more comfortable with each other.
Third, engaging students, through
documentaries (and interviews) in the events and lives of the CR activists
from the 50’s and 60’s is central to the success of this course. As part of
their own reflection process and for my edification, students have an
opportunity to respond to open-ended questions at the end of the course One
of the questions asks students to describe what they learned about the Civil
Rights Movement that surprised them. Several students commented that it was
the actual visuals, the ability to see and experience what had happened and
to listen to the testimonies of the blacks and whites on both sides of the
fence that made their learning and discussions more meaningful and
memorable. The following three accounts from students reveal the value of
To see the brutality that blacks were
exposed to on a daily basis was horrifyingly surprising. Of all the other
content of the class, this stuck out the most. Sure, I was educated on
several issues and several important figures and organizations, but nothing
truly surprised me except the visual images of whites attacking and
harassing blacks for no other reason than their skin color (White male, fall
I have been reading about slavery and
the Civil Rights Movement since I was a little girl. I don’t think that I
was particularly surprised by the content, but it was an entirely new
experience to learn by watching the videos. It was amazing to see actual
footage from that time, and to listen to people talk about their personal
accounts with the movement. (Black female, fall 2008).
Utilizing documentaries was a great way
to capture the heart beat of the civil rights movement. It gave me such a
unique vantage point; it was as if I was watching the events of the civil
rights movement from an observation deck. What a fantastic way to view
history and understand the severity and the historical significance of the
events that took place (White male, spring 2010).
The documentaries and interviews of the
CR activists sparked round-table discussions as students recalled the images
and debated, for example, whether the CR activists were justified in using
children in the marches. Two students argued about the “morality of using
children in the marches.” The white student asserted that young children
should not participate in marches and be protected while the black student
claimed that it is impossible to protect black children from discrimination
and disclosed her experiences at age five when she first felt the stigma of
not being white. This was a particularly instructive discussion as students
explored the role of history and its impact on self and cultural identity.
That discussion and others similar to
it inspired me to ask the following question: “How did the study of the
Civil Rights Movement impact your view of yourself as an American?” The
following two responses speak to the value of educating the whole person by
incorporating students’ world views as well as self-identities and
reflective knowledge of history into their education (Magolda, 2000):
At times I felt almost ashamed by still
calling myself a southerner because of the horrible things that occurred in
the South. I also feel that, not only did I become more aware about the
Civil Rights Movement, I found a new respect and admiration for those who
fought for their freedom. It made me proud to be an American because it
shows our Nation can change (White male, fall 2008).
I felt proud to be a biracial American,
in that my ancestors fought for me to be able to have the rights that I do
today. Furthermore, I would argue that they fought for my existence as a
biracial American; it may have been harder for my parents to be together had
these changes not occurred. I also felt hopeful because history proves that
with the right inspiration we can create change. (Biracial female, fall
Finally, the debate-discussion project
worked, I believe, in part because my practice was to routinely intervene in
the process of learning by helping the student facilitators succeed. I made
sure that their handouts for the discussion covered the essential aspects of
their assigned Eyes on the Prize episode as well as addressed the
important points of the assigned readings.
Discussion as a collaborative learning
tool cannot be successful without a focused purpose and well designed
prompts and questions to help carry out that purpose. Each handout
constructed by the student facilitators needed to be fine-tuned to assure
the kind of open-ended and challenging questions that can spark discussion
and debate. For that reason, I required all student facilitators to meet
with me as their final preparation to get feedback on the handout and to be
reminded of the essentials of facilitating a discussion.
Furthermore, without the diligent
preparation of the participants the discussion was doomed to fail. Students
had to watch the Eyes on the Prize episode (copies are on library
reserve) and had to do the assigned readings; thus, attendance was required
and points awarded (or lost) for their written responses to these readings.
I have learned through experience that many students fail to do assigned
readings without extrinsic motivation. The loss of grade points was only
partial motivation; the value of saving-face in front of classmates was an
important motivator for students to be prepared. Several students
acknowledged this in their end-of-course questionnaire. The following three
student responses speak to the value of required and graded readings
. . . I must say that the required
responses that we had to give to you may have played a part in this. I
definitely took extra time to respond thoroughly and even take notes on the
reading so that I could be well prepared for the round table discussions
In a “round table discussion” style
classroom, students know that they will have to discuss an issue or topic
during almost every class meeting. This ensures that the assigned material
will be read by students because they are expected to participate. The
writing that followed the reading seemed like such a pain to me in the
beginning of the class, but I found out that it was a great way to organize
my thoughts in order to share them with the class (fall, 2008).
These discussions also helped to
demonstrate the relevance of doing the outside class readings and
responses. I would have found some of the readings to be very tedious if I
knew I was just going to sit in class and listen to a lecture the next day.
But since we needed to do the readings in order to participate actively in
the discussions, I found reading them to be very interesting (spring 2010).
It was reassuring to read that students
realized the value of the required responses and found their individual
written responses to be helpful for the round-table discussions. Even though
these responses were only worth five points each, students diligently
submitted them throughout the semester. Students were clearly motivated to
complete these weekly responses because of potential points to be earned as
well as accountability to their fellow students during these face-to-face
It would seem neglectful and a lost
learning opportunity for students to view these documentaries and not spend
time sharing their responses and engaging in critical reflection and
analysis of what it means as part of their history and in their present
lives. As one student explained (spring, 2010), “it [debate-discussion]
encourages all parties involved to prepare, get involved, and take charge of
their own learning and thinking.” The following three student responses
from the end-of-course questionnaire corroborate my observations of the
value the debate-discussion:
As a participant, I was able to learn
from other students who would then spark my contribution. Participants were
able to feed off the energy and responses of others, and this truly made the
process dynamic. I thought about aspects of the Civil Rights Movement that
I would not have thought about without the inclusion of my peer participants
There were different opinions that led
to branching out and critically thinking about different aspects of the
movement, including the reasons why events happened and the leadership
skills used by MLK, Carmichael, and Malcom X (spring, 2010).
Anytime I have the opportunity and the
responsibility to offer my feelings, observations and reflective thoughts
through substantive discussion and debate, it increases my understanding of
an issue and, at times, changes my view of an issue. Discussion is a great
way to share, challenge, refine, defend, and even process what you believe.
Processing through audible discussion helps individuals develop concrete,
quotable answers to difficult questions (spring, 2010).
Students readily acknowledged the value
of a well-planned and focused discussion in their ability to understand
course materials and different perspectives. Collaboration and discussion
among students is widely advocated in teaching/learning scholarship. In a
joint report, titled Powerful Partnerships: A Shared Responsibility for
Learning, a task force made up of members of three educational
associations (American Association of Higher Education, et al, 1998)
outlined ten “Learning Principles and Collaborative Action.” While it seems
that the design of this course and the Debate-Discussion Learning Project
encompasses all ten principles to some degree, the following principle (#5)
was most clearly evident: “Learning is done by individuals who are
intrinsically tied to others as social beings, interacting as
competitors or collaborators, constraining or supporting the learning
process, and able to enhance learning through cooperation and sharing”
The debate-discussion worked best when
all participants were prepared to engage and were in an environment
conducive to engagement and collaborative learning. It enhanced students’
learning and understanding of the roles of self, history and cultural
Conclusion and Best
for using the Debate-Discussion
Project across Disciplines
There is ample evidence that successful
teaching and learning requires collaboration among teachers and learners.
Although this collaboration can take many forms, I have found classroom
discussions prompted by open-ended and increasingly challenging questions to
be most rewarding. While classroom discussions work best with smaller
classes (under 25 students) they are possible with larger classes.
Discussion in large classes can be organized by dividing students in small
groups to discuss issues and then gathering responses from the groups to
bring back to the class as a whole. However, the key to engaging students
in their learning is to have them think through the issues individually
before they discuss it with their classmates. For discussions to be
successful, participants must be prepared as well as willing to think out
loud and take risks as they explore issues and co-construct meanings.
The debate-discussion project can be
adapted in any discipline for somewhere in every discipline there are topics
that benefit from students and instructors wrestling with the subject matter
in reflective and analytical dialogues. I suggest the following as best
practices for these dialogues to be productive and successful:
Regard students as partners in the learning process and trust them to
be credible and competent; that is, have high expectations for them to
Create a trusting and comfortable learning environment;
Make certain that all participants are prepared to participate in a
Intervene in the learning process to assure that the discussion will
be productive and successful; and,
Have students engage in face-to-face interactions and become a
participant in the discussion.
It is important to note that
facilitating substantive discussions as a way of teaching can be more
challenging than using lectures; however, they are infinitely more rewarding
for students and instructors.
I am convinced that the
Debate-Discussion Learning Project worked to enhance students’ learning and
experience of the Civil Rights Movement. It was, in my opinion, student
engagement through collaborative learning in its most productive form. It
engaged the whole student, his/her world view, identity of self and
reflective knowledge of history.
American Association for Higher
Education, American College Personnel Association, & National Association of
student Personnel Administrators. (1998).
Partnerships: A Shared Responsibility for Learning. Retrieved May 10,
Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2009).
Generating, deepening and documenting learning: The power of critical
reflection in applied learning.
Applied Learning in Higher Education, 1 (Fall) 35-48.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Soloway,
E. & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers: From small group cooperation
to collaborative communities.
Researcher, 25 (8), 37-40.
Bruffee, K. A. (1993).
Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority
of knowledge. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Brysen, C., & Hand, L. (2007). The role
of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 44 (4,
Carson, C., Garrow, D. J., Gill, G.,
Harding, V., & Hine, D.C. (1991). The Eyes on the Prize Civil Right
Reader: Documents, Speeches and Firsthand
Accounts from the Black Freedom
Struggle, 1954-1990. New York: Penguin Books.
Chrislip, D. D., & Larson, C. E.
(1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can
make a difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Fosnot, C. (1989). Enquiring
teachers, enquiring learners: A constructivist approach for teaching.
NY: Teachers College Press.
Graetz, K. A., & Goliber, M. J. (2002).
Designing collaborative learning places: Psychological foundations and new
Directions for Teaching and Learning, # 82 (Summer), pp. 13-22.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Johnson, C., & Brescia, W. (2006).
Connecting, making meaning, and learning in the electronic classroom:
Reflections on facilitating learning at distance. Journal of
Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning. 6 (1, August), 56-74.
Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1994).
An overview of cooperative learning. In Thousand, J.S, Villa, R. A. & Nevin,
A. I. (Eds),
and collaborative learning: A practical guide to empowering students and
teachers, (pp. 31-44). Baltimore: P.H. Brookes Pub. Co.
Kenny, R.F., & Wirth, J. (2009).
Implementing participatory, constructivist learning experiences through best
practices in live interactive performance.
of Effective Teaching 9 (1), 34-47.
Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist
values for instructional systems design: Five principles toward a new
mindset. Educational Technology
and Development, 41 (3), 4-16.
Magolda, M. B (Ed) (2000). Teaching to
promote intellectual and personal maturity: Incorporating students’
worldviews and identities into the learning process.
Directions for Teaching and Learning, # 82 (Summer), San Francisco:
Myers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993).
Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom. San
O’Donnell, A. M. & O’Kelly, J. (1994).
Learning from peers: Beyond the rhetoric of positive results.
Educational Psychology Review, 6 (4), 321-349.
Rothwell, J. D. (1998). In mixed
company: Small-group communication. Toronto, Ontario: Harcourt-Brace.
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1996).
Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist
framework. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.),
Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design
(pp.135-148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of
research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48, 71-82.
Smith, K. A., & MacGregor, J. (2000).
Making small-group leaning and learning communities a widespread reality.
New directions for teaching and learning.
pp. 77-88. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
vonGlasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition,
construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80, 121-140.
Webb, N. M. (1982). Student
interaction and learning in small groups. Review of Educational
Research, 52 (3), 421-445.