Cooperative Learning and Latin: Between Theory and Praxis

Andrea Balbo

Cooperative Learning and Latin: between Theory and Praxis

1. A starting point

As everybody knows, after successful results in primary schools, Cooperative Learning[1] method is applied also in secondary school nowadays, especially in subjects as foreign languages, sciences, history and geography. I have not become acquainted with attempts to use this method in the activity of Latin language and literature teaching[2]. This paper aims to give a concrete help to the diffusion of C. L. method in Classical disciplines; here under I bring out materials which have been produced by the author, and partly by the students of the "Scuola di Specializzazione per gli Insegnanti della Secondaria Superiore" (SIS) of Turin (Italy)[3].

2. Theory

I do not intend to examine closely all the theoretical features of the C. L.: bibliography and Internet resources are extremely rich and can be considered exhaustive. So I will only remind some basic points.

C. L. has been defined as “a group of techniques of class leading who permit to the students to work together in small groups in a learning activity; the students will be appraised on the basis of their results” (Comoglio 1996, 24). In the English and American Academic world is also used the following definition: “C. L. is a relationship in a group of students that requires positive interdependence (a sense of sink or swim together), individual accountability (each of us has to contribute and learn), interpersonal skills (communication, trust, leadership, decision making, and conflict resolution), face-to-face promotive interaction, and processing (reflecting on how well the team is functioning and how to function even better)”[4].

As everybody knows, C. L. is widespread in USA, Canada, Israel, Scandinavian countries, Nederland and only just 15 years Italian teachers have started to use this method too. In particular, I wish to remind the studies of Mario Comoglio, Professor of Pedagogy at the Pontificio Ateneo Salesiano in Rome.

I list here under main C. L. organization modalities:

1.  Learning Together (David W. Johnson - Roger Johnson, Cooperative Learning Center - University of Minnesota).

2.  Student Team Learning (Rober Slavin, Johns Hopkins University).

3.  Structural Approach (Spencer Kagan-Miguel Kagan, San Juan Capistrano, USA).

4.  Group Investigation (Yael and Shlomo Sharan, Tel Aviv University, Israele).

The above definitions emphasize the idea that learning work is a process through which it is possible to acquire or to improve knowledge or skills sharing common targets with partners. Therefore C. L.– which requires the help of all the members of a team - is perhaps the learning structure most similar to scientific research, and it is commonly recognized how much contemporary pedagogy studies point out the moment of this link between research and school teaching[5]. C. L. has also other benefits: the work in little group, the exchange of informations, the sharing of the expectations, the creation of solidarity meant to build or to improve the idea of personal and common responsibility towards the targets of the project. Moreover, students learn to complete their work, to make easier others' task, helping other members of the group; this is the “face-to-face interaction”, one of the five most important conditions allowing the birth of a real C. L.: “Each group member's efforts are required and indispensable for group success (i.e., there can be no "free-riders"); Each group member has a unique contribution to make to the joint effort because of his or her resources and/or role and task responsibilities”[6].

So, it is very important that C. L. could help the improvement of the social competences[7]. As Comoglio 2001 observes, in XXI century school the educational targets and the psychological outlook of knowledge and learning activity have changed, the condition of heterogeneity of the classroom members has grown; therefore it is necessary to stress skills like cooperation, thinking on a higher level than normal activities. Consequently, C. L. becomes one of the most suitable methods to answer to these challenges. Through C. L. it is possible to strengthen these competences:

n  Communication.

n  Interpersonal relationship.

n  Shared leadership.

n  Problem solving.

n  Peaceful settlement of disputes.

n  Learning to take decisions.

In C. L. "the resources are students themselves, who share responsibility and engagement, developing social relationships and reaching better levels of learning. The teacher does not play the role of owner or interpreter of knowledges, but he has to make easier the task of students organizing and leading them to create conditions of a apprenticeship of knowledge” (Comoglio 2001, 10)[8].

So we can sum up C. L. advantages:

n  Competences can be learnt[9].

n  Students learn to work in small groups that are more or less permanent and heterogeneous.

n  Activities are planned and realized.

n  Students take on their shoulders individual accountability and personal responsibility to achieve the group’s goals.

n  The member of the group is an active part in learning process; he understands that his notes can improve the results of other members, and he can be improved by them on his turn.

n  It is possible to work without time loss, attention decrease, passiveness.

n  Self-esteem, creativity and acceptance of differences grow up.

n  Teachers and students can unceasingly check real learning results.

Building a group who really wants to learn in a cooperative way involves the creation of the condition that M. Deutsch[10] and others call positive interdependence.

C. L. project must have some characteristics:

a)  All the members must understand that to get group’s goal requires the help of all members ;

b)  All the members must accept and share group’s goal;

c)  group’s goal must be complex and interesting; it has to suggest challenges that only a group can solve.

The highest goal in C. L. is to improve classroom life, creating a positive working atmosphere, that not only teachers but also paedagogists consider very important.

In C. L. teacher’s role is very important. He must ask to himself:

a)  what will the students acquire;

b)  which are the characteristics of the learning work;

c)  how much help must the students receive to bring to end their task;

d)  which materials are necessary for C. L.;

e)  which atmosphere is necessary to get the target of C. L.;

f)  which social competences must be considered basic requisites.

So the teacher must not only create the groups or establish the rules to create them: he must watch the members with a lot of attention, observe the working strategies and appraise the activity in an effective way[11].

His concrete actions are the following:

n  he chooses the goals;

n  he prepares materials;

n  he explains the goals and the working rules;

n  he gives groups material;

n  he explains and assigns the roles in the groups;

n  he organizes groups paying attention to the interpersonal relationships;

n  he aids to create a cooperative atmosphere[12];

n  he explains the appraisal standards.

By the way it is important to remember that “C. L. privileges individual appraise upon group appraise” (Comoglio 1996, 187). It must be a method to get better personal results, not collective ones.

3. What about Latin?

The concrete teaching experience, the witnesses of teachers and the training papers of the SIS students make clear that in Italy, in a lot of institutes of different curriculum, the traditional subjects have lost appeal and the students get worse notes than some years ago, especially in classical subjects (i. e. Latin and in Liceo classico[13] also Greek[14]). In contemporary Italian school the problem of motivation in the field of classical studies is very deep: I think that C. L. method – that gives good results in other subjects – can become a useful resource to strengthen the motivations of the students. Latin is not boring or very difficult: it is necessary that modern teaching methods allow also the students to understand what we all here know, without any trivialization: we have to give appeal to Latin, using all the ways that paedagogical research and ICT can offer. It is obvious that to understand the real advantage of this method in comparison to the traditional ones, we should think to a widespread experiment, measuring the results of parallel and homogeneous classes in which some topics are studied with traditional methods and some others with C. L. Now I can only share some positive feelings of SSIS students, who have seen the C. L. in training activity and who have used it in their normal teaching work.

I wish to sum up the aims of the application of C. L. to Latin:

1. To get better results from students, who are enlivened to work more, to remember better, to develop stronger motivations, thinking critical.

2. To build better relations between students and create not only a good atmosphere, but also a team attitude towards problems.

3. To give psychological benefit and strengthen the self-esteem.

I know the most important objections to the above positions: the lesson time is short and the topics are wide, classrooms are not fit for C. L.; traditional methods are best known and have a background that is a warrant of success, but I want remember that, in a school where the subjects must have a strong mutual relation, Latin must build links not break bridges: C. L. can be a way to help to build these links, particularly in the not classical curriculum where Latin language is taught for a smaller number of hours[15].

4. Praxis

Let we give examples. Here under I present some teaching action projects about Latin language and Literature for the last three years of Latin studies in secondary school (16-19 years). I have used especially Jig Saw II and Controversy, that I briefly sum up[16]. A general basic requisite is that in first two years students have worked with C. L. method.

·  Jigsaw II[17] The lesson must be divided into segments; the materials about the topic of the lesson can be found in a book or in other written sources that the students can read. The teacher divides students into jigsaw groups (4-6 persons). Every student receives a segment of the lesson and an expert worksheet that explains “how” the materials will be used. Students have time to read over their segment at least twice, becoming familiar with it. Afterwards, the teacher forms "expert groups" consisting in one student from each jigsaw group, who joins other students assigned to the same segment. New groups discuss the topic; after that, they return to jigsaw group to explain their segment to the other members. The teacher controls the quality of work in the groups, giving a note to it. When the session is finished the teacher gives an individual exercise (for example a quiz) to students.

·  Controversy[18]. Controversy promotes problem solving, decision making, critical thinking, reasoning, interpersonal relationships, psychological health and well-being. The controversy procedure consists of five steps[19].

1.  Students research a position, learn the relevant information, and prepare a persuasive "best case possible" for the position.

2.  Students present in a persuasive and convincing way the "best case possible" for their position.

3.  Students engage in an open discussion, where they strongly argue for their position, refuting the opposed position, and rebuting attacks to their position.

4.  Students reverse perspectives and present the opposing position the most accurately, completely, persuasively, and strongly as they can.

5.  Students drop all advocacy, create a synthesis or integration of opposing positions, and reach a consensus on the best reasoned judgment that could be given about the issue.

6.  The teacher evaluates the group’s work, giving an individual exercise to control the comprehension of the topic.

The following examples are based on the Italian system. As everybody can see, there is no uniformity in the teaching methods. I think that it can be useful to present different didactic solutions for different classrooms.

Example 1: PLAUTUS, Aulularia[20]

Goals:

a)  To help the building of identity of the students through self-knowledge and self-control.

b)  To help the students to solve problems and share difficulties.

c)  To strengthen a clearly perceived positive interdependence.

d)  To promote the face-to-face interaction, the individual accountability and personal responsibility to achieve the group’s goals.

e)  To widen Plautus’ knowledge.

f)  To strengthen textual comprehension and analysis skills.

Method: JigSaw II (basic and expert groups).

Class: III year of secondary school[21] (= 16-17 years old). The ideal class consists of 20-24 students with a sufficient knowledge of Latin language. The word “sufficient” means that the heavy lack of progress concerns only a limited number of class members, no more than 20 %.

Basic Requisites:

1.  Basic knowledge of Plautus’ times

2.  Basic knowledge of Plautus’comedies.

3.  Complete even if not deep knowledge of Latin morphology.

4.  Complete even if not deep knowledge of Latin syntax.

5.  Reading of Aulularia in Italian translation

Time: 4 hours

Learning plan

First step:

Form 4 groups of max. 6 students; every group analyses a comedy act in Italian translation, finding it on the text book. In addition, they study one or two scenes, given as a copy, in Latin language. In this paper, I present only Latin parts[22]. The jigsaw groups will use the following Questions for the Analysis, that obviously concern also the part read in Italian. Time: 1,5 hour.

1

Group I

Prologue + Act I

SCENE I (vv. 40-78)

Evclio

Exi, inquam. Age exi. Exeundum hercle tibi hinc est foras 40

circumspectatrix cum oculis emissiciis .

Staphyla

Nam cur me miseram verberas?

Evcl.

Vt misera sis

atque ut te dignam mala malam aetatem exigas.

Staph.

Nam qua me nunc causa extrusisti ex aedibus?

Evcl.

Tibi ego rationem reddam, stimulorum seges? 45

illuc regredere ab ostio. Illuc sis vide,

ut incedit. At scin quo modo tibi res se habet?

Si hercle hodie fustem cepero aut stimulum in manum,

testudineum istum tibi ego grandibo gradum.

Staph.

Vtinam me divi adaxint ad suspendium 50

potius quidem quam hoc pacto apud te serviam.

Evcl.

At ut scelesta sola secum murmurat.