CL1 - More Information: Homogeneous or Heterogeneous?


 
 
 


 
 
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 


 
 


Homogeneous or heterogeneous groups?

Much of the literature emphasizes that groups should be heterogeneous when possible (Cooper, 1990; Johnson, et al., 1998; Nurrenbern, 1995; Slavin, 1995). The rationalization for this is to create a more diverse environment of backgrounds, ideas, ethnicity, and gender. Though this appears to be reasonable on the surface and a generally accepted practice, some research is beginning to contradict it (Felder, et al., 1995; Rosser, 1997; Sandler 1996).

This research suggests that isolating students of color from other students of color, or women from other women can in fact be detrimental to the academic success of these individuals because they can become isolated, marginalized, or placed in stereotypical roles and not permitted to flourish. They caution that even though small "collaborative" learning groups are formed, basic issues of power and dominance within these groups may still exist. For instance, given the roles of recorder and presenter in a group, will women tend to be "driven" into the less demanding role of recorder? Likewise, would an African-American student in a group with four Caucasian students have felt more comfortable had he or she been placed in a group with two other African-American students and two Caucasian students? In so doing, does this now create wholly Caucasian groups with minimal diversity? These are difficult questions to confront when grouping students. Instructors may feel uncomfortable if they "isolate" ethnic groups even though these groups may flourish more because they have a common component: ethnicity. Evidence from Treisman (Treisman, 1992) has shown how academically powerful study groups comprised of predominantly African-American and Hispanic students in mathematics can be.

There is no clear way to maximize group diversity and prevent individual isolation. A common-sense compromise would be to cluster at least two women or two students of common ethnicity in each group. Though this does not maximize diversity, it still permits some diversity while attempting to prevent the spotlighting of these individuals in the groups.

Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., and Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. California State University Foundation, Long Beach, CA.


Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., and Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. California State University Foundation, Long Beach, CA.

Felder, R. M., Felder, G. N., Mauney, M., Hamrin, Jr., C. E., and Dietz, E. J (1995). "A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. III. Gender Differences in Student Performance and Attitudes." Journal of Engineering Education, 84 (2), 151.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Nurrenbern, S. (1995). Experiences in cooperative learning: A collection for chemistry teachers. Institute for Chemical Education, University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, Madison, WI.

Rosser, S. V. (1997). Re-Engineering female friendly science. Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Sandler, B. R., Silverberg, L. A., and Hall, R. M. (1996). The chilly classroom climate: A gide to improve the education of women. National Association for Women in Education (NAWE).

Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Treisman, P. U. (1992). "Studying students studying calculus: A look at the lives of minority mathematics students in college". The College Mathematics Journal, 23(5), 362.



Stories
Doing CL
Resources
More Info
FAQs