The Story of My Question
Coming from a very traditional school experience, my ideas of how teachers should teach and students should learn felt pretty set in stone. Before attending college, I naively believed that the majority of schools were modeled identically to those I attended for the past twelve years: teachers predominantly standing at the front of the room imparting all knowledge to the students, with all students at their desks in rows facing them. Not that this style of teaching is necessarily a bad one, but I was unaware of the other innovative styles that exist today. It felt like a large change of pace if I walked into a classroom to find desks arranged in pairs, let alone in tables of four or five, after I had surpassed the fourth or fifth grade. However as I spoke with my peers about their differing experiences, I had come to realize just how little I knew about the intentionality behind teacher’s classroom choices.
Over the past year, I student taught in a school that emphasizes student collaboration in all classrooms, and this model was quite different from my memories of high school. The school models its classes around five core values: Inquiry, Research, Collaboration, Presentation, and Reflection. On a daily basis, students are exposed to inquiry-based explorations as the center of their learning with instruction serving as reinforcement. Students were encouraged to not only work together in a project-based environment for final term assignments, but also in day-to-day activities and learning. I student taught in an Algebra I classroom with ninth grade students as well as an Algebra II classroom with tenth and eleventh grade students. In the beginning of the school year, the emphasis on constant collaboration proved to be a major challenge to navigate as a new teacher who was completely unfamiliar to this setting and style of learning. Students were seated in desk arrangements of four, so those students seated together could easily collaborate as a small group. I noticed that these groups were purely student selected on the first day of school; however, as arrangements changed at the beginning of each new month, my classroom mentor had more input on which students were seated together.
In this arrangement, I noticed that students could easily collaborate with the other three members of their table. I frequently heard questioning and conversations that promoted a deeper comprehension of the concepts explored as a whole class. These conversations were very rich within a single group; however, I hardly observed much cross-group collaboration. Whole group discussions occurred mainly between teacher and student, with some sporadic instances of students posing questions to the class or responding to other students in a discussion-like manner. In regards to these whole group contributions (volunteering answers, sharing work to warm-up or practice problems, asking questions in whole group), I observed that the same handful of students consistently participated. In the Algebra I class of seventeen students, I noted that four students frequently offered insight, and around six students lead the conversation in an Algebra II class of twenty three students; while this amount of voluntary participation was not a stagnant number, it led me to some questions about a classroom style centered on cooperative learning.
Over the past year, I student taught in a school that emphasizes student collaboration in all classrooms, and this model was quite different from my memories of high school. The school models its classes around five core values: Inquiry, Research, Collaboration, Presentation, and Reflection. On a daily basis, students are exposed to inquiry-based explorations as the center of their learning with instruction serving as reinforcement. Students were encouraged to not only work together in a project-based environment for final term assignments, but also in day-to-day activities and learning. I student taught in an Algebra I classroom with ninth grade students as well as an Algebra II classroom with tenth and eleventh grade students. In the beginning of the school year, the emphasis on constant collaboration proved to be a major challenge to navigate as a new teacher who was completely unfamiliar to this setting and style of learning. Students were seated in desk arrangements of four, so those students seated together could easily collaborate as a small group. I noticed that these groups were purely student selected on the first day of school; however, as arrangements changed at the beginning of each new month, my classroom mentor had more input on which students were seated together.
In this arrangement, I noticed that students could easily collaborate with the other three members of their table. I frequently heard questioning and conversations that promoted a deeper comprehension of the concepts explored as a whole class. These conversations were very rich within a single group; however, I hardly observed much cross-group collaboration. Whole group discussions occurred mainly between teacher and student, with some sporadic instances of students posing questions to the class or responding to other students in a discussion-like manner. In regards to these whole group contributions (volunteering answers, sharing work to warm-up or practice problems, asking questions in whole group), I observed that the same handful of students consistently participated. In the Algebra I class of seventeen students, I noted that four students frequently offered insight, and around six students lead the conversation in an Algebra II class of twenty three students; while this amount of voluntary participation was not a stagnant number, it led me to some questions about a classroom style centered on cooperative learning.
In a school where collaboration was highly valued, I wondered whether the existing collaboration, amongst mainly four students per month due to the table seating arrangements, was sufficient for student learning. If groupings were changed more frequently or altered in the way they were chosen, would students be exposed to more ideas from their peers? My initial thought was yes, but this would be dependent on how the seating was determined, whether by the students or the teacher. I intended to explore the impact that student voice had on the participation and collaboration that took place – if students chose who they worked with or where they worked in the classroom, would they be more willing to volunteer their ideas and thought processes? Does a “social network” exist in the classroom, and if it does, what is the impact of seating to interactions amongst classmates?
|
What happens to student collaboration and participation in a social learning environment when the classroom seating arrangement is altered? |
I observed the “extremes” of the classroom either continuously engage with each other and their learning, or at times disengage. If students altered their position or grouping in the classroom, would that middle set of students become more active in the whole group and with their peers? This question and my observations led me to inquiry question that I would explore with two classes of students: What happens to student collaboration and participation in a social learning environment when the classroom seating arrangement is altered?
This portfolio tracks my research and understanding of seating arrangements and their impact in a social learning environment. I was fortunate to work with a group of students who were very receptive to my ideas and explorations for their classroom, and their input was truly the anchor for this inquiry. Before exploring my inquiry question in my classroom, it was important to ground myself in existing research in this area of study.
This portfolio tracks my research and understanding of seating arrangements and their impact in a social learning environment. I was fortunate to work with a group of students who were very receptive to my ideas and explorations for their classroom, and their input was truly the anchor for this inquiry. Before exploring my inquiry question in my classroom, it was important to ground myself in existing research in this area of study.