To incorporate an additional source of student reflection, I asked two students if they could provide additional insight after a week returning to the seating in Groups of 4. This interview was conducted in a very informal setting so that I could gain a general understanding of how these two students felt after the experimentation.
In this interview, the two students were asked a few questions in order to elaborate more on their choices and thoughts during the seating changes. The three main questions I asked in hopes of gaining more insight on were:
1. Can you talk a little bit about your favorite arrangement and why you felt that way?
2. Where do you think you sat most often in the classroom? Was there a reason for this?
3. How much did you value having your own voice or your own choice be a part of where you sat?
I asked these two students to be part of this interview based on a few reasons. These two students indicated on their initial seating surveys that they were extremely open to trying new arrangements. From the start, I examined these two students responses closely due to their investment and excitement in my exploration. I gained very informative pieces of information using their feedback surveys, and I wanted to continue to follow their reactions through the course of the inquiry.
One student described how the pairs arrangement allowed her to frequently collaborate and bounce ideas off of the partner sitting next to her; additionally she was able to work with the pairs of students sitting both in front of and behind her. This student felt that she and her partner had very open lines of communication in this arrangement; I perceived that these two students had taken on the role of the “expert” at times within this partnership. This development of roles and perception of the students in a particular seating arrangement was an observation I hoped to see based on the research of Molly Espey. Communication, this student explained, was very easy within the partnership and those around them; however, there was an ease of positive communication. The student went on to explain that another benefit of this arrangement was that it decreased the number of distractions that could affect her learning. In the pairs some social interactions existed, but these interactions occurred on a controlled level.
The second student agreed that the pairs arrangement was her top choice of the three that were tried. To quote this student, “I felt more concentrated with our work. Because not only were we directed towards the board, but again we didn’t have as many distractions, like the other people in the group, and you kind of worked easily with the person sitting next to you.” This piece of insight from the student correlated directly to Weinstein’s description of group settings – social interactions are increased because students are directed towards each other. In the case of the pairs arrangement, students were directed towards the front of the room, but they could easily work together with their classmates surrounding them. According to the two female students, this alleviated many of the potential distractions.
The next question asked the students to discuss how much they valued being able to dictate their seat in any of the arrangements. One of the students shared that she initially selected her seat based on where her friend in the class was sitting; however, she noted that this changed towards the end of the exploration. She spoke to how she liked having this ability to choose. A key insight that I did not expect to hear was that while this student appreciated being able to choose her seat, she would have been open to having an assigned seat: “But I feel like sometimes it’s good when we have assigned seats because then it makes you work with people who you might not necessarily work with.” I was interested to hear that while students enjoy sitting with their peers whom they are comfortable with, students value the different voices that are in their class. Somewhat “forcing” students to work with classmates who might not be their immediate choice might have promoted more collaboration and different social interactions than those I frequently observed.
After conducting this interview, I was curious to know if many other students in the class shared some of the same sentiments that these two students disclosed. While these two students tend to be more quiet when whole group discussions occur in class, over the course of the inquiry they both seemed to feel more comfortable asking questions and responding to their peers. I wondered if students who always shared out had similar opinions in terms of valuing student choice? Would those students who remained uncomfortable sharing out in the large group have a differing opinion?
In this interview, the two students were asked a few questions in order to elaborate more on their choices and thoughts during the seating changes. The three main questions I asked in hopes of gaining more insight on were:
1. Can you talk a little bit about your favorite arrangement and why you felt that way?
2. Where do you think you sat most often in the classroom? Was there a reason for this?
3. How much did you value having your own voice or your own choice be a part of where you sat?
I asked these two students to be part of this interview based on a few reasons. These two students indicated on their initial seating surveys that they were extremely open to trying new arrangements. From the start, I examined these two students responses closely due to their investment and excitement in my exploration. I gained very informative pieces of information using their feedback surveys, and I wanted to continue to follow their reactions through the course of the inquiry.
One student described how the pairs arrangement allowed her to frequently collaborate and bounce ideas off of the partner sitting next to her; additionally she was able to work with the pairs of students sitting both in front of and behind her. This student felt that she and her partner had very open lines of communication in this arrangement; I perceived that these two students had taken on the role of the “expert” at times within this partnership. This development of roles and perception of the students in a particular seating arrangement was an observation I hoped to see based on the research of Molly Espey. Communication, this student explained, was very easy within the partnership and those around them; however, there was an ease of positive communication. The student went on to explain that another benefit of this arrangement was that it decreased the number of distractions that could affect her learning. In the pairs some social interactions existed, but these interactions occurred on a controlled level.
The second student agreed that the pairs arrangement was her top choice of the three that were tried. To quote this student, “I felt more concentrated with our work. Because not only were we directed towards the board, but again we didn’t have as many distractions, like the other people in the group, and you kind of worked easily with the person sitting next to you.” This piece of insight from the student correlated directly to Weinstein’s description of group settings – social interactions are increased because students are directed towards each other. In the case of the pairs arrangement, students were directed towards the front of the room, but they could easily work together with their classmates surrounding them. According to the two female students, this alleviated many of the potential distractions.
The next question asked the students to discuss how much they valued being able to dictate their seat in any of the arrangements. One of the students shared that she initially selected her seat based on where her friend in the class was sitting; however, she noted that this changed towards the end of the exploration. She spoke to how she liked having this ability to choose. A key insight that I did not expect to hear was that while this student appreciated being able to choose her seat, she would have been open to having an assigned seat: “But I feel like sometimes it’s good when we have assigned seats because then it makes you work with people who you might not necessarily work with.” I was interested to hear that while students enjoy sitting with their peers whom they are comfortable with, students value the different voices that are in their class. Somewhat “forcing” students to work with classmates who might not be their immediate choice might have promoted more collaboration and different social interactions than those I frequently observed.
After conducting this interview, I was curious to know if many other students in the class shared some of the same sentiments that these two students disclosed. While these two students tend to be more quiet when whole group discussions occur in class, over the course of the inquiry they both seemed to feel more comfortable asking questions and responding to their peers. I wondered if students who always shared out had similar opinions in terms of valuing student choice? Would those students who remained uncomfortable sharing out in the large group have a differing opinion?