Teaching and Learning Research Programme
Annual Conference Papers
5th Annual Conference, 22-24 November 2004
Cardiff Marriott Hotel
Improving the effectiveness of pupil group work. Report on first results from the TLRP Phase 2 SPRinG project
Peter Blatchford
Institute of Education, University of London
Maurice Galton
HomertonCollege, University of Cambridge
Peter Kutnick
University of Brighton
NB: This paper was presented at an internal TLRP conference; if you wishto quote from it please contact the authors directly for permission. Contact details for each project and thematic initiative can be found on our website (
Improving the effectiveness of pupil group work. Report on first results from the TLRP Phase 2 SPRinG project
Paper to Annual ESRC TLRP Conference, Cardiff, November 2004
Peter Blatchford, Maurice Galton and Peter Kutnick
There are three main contexts for learning in classrooms. Pupils can interact with the teacher. They can work on their own. Or they can be work with each other. This project is based on the view that there is a huge and unrealised potential for this third context.Our view is that debate and policy on grouping is not yet informed by good empirical research. In particular, research to date has shown limited pedagogic value for learning in groups, but not assessed how the effectiveness of group work in normal classroom contexts can be improved.
What is group work?
There is more to group work than sitting students in groups. By group work we mean pupils working together as a group or team.They may be working on a practical task, on a problem that requires one solution, or discussing views on a local issue, about which views are strong, but none actually more right than others. We argue that group work can be used across all curriculum areas, and for many different types of task. The teacher may be involved at various stages but the particular feature of group work is that the balance of ownership and control of the work shifts toward the pupils themselves. Group work involves children as co-learners, not just one student helping another.
The promise of group work
There is now a quite extensive literature on the benefits of group work in schools. We can summarise these into three main benefits. First, group work is likely to be most relevant to conceptual development, thinking, reasoning and problem solving. Group work is probably best suited to learning processes which involve giving up or transcending current levels of understanding to reach a new perspective, rather than learning processes which involve the acquisition of new skills or strategies (which are best furthered in contexts involving more skilful partners). Second, group work can affect pupils’ motivation and attitudes to work.This is consistent with reviews of the effect of group work on areas such as self-esteem, a belief that students can control their own academic success through effort, and positive attitudes toward other students. Third, group work can affect interactive and dialogic features of peer interaction. Consistent with other research we expect group work to affect pupil on-task behaviour in groups, quality of dialogue in groups (for example, more giving and receiving help, more joint construction of ideas) and more sustained interactions in groups. We expect advances in social and communication skills, reflected in positive relations between pupils.
There are two main theories used to explain why group work is beneficial. One view is that children's conceptual development can be facilitated by coming up against the views of others at about the same level of development but whose views may be different. The ‘cognitive conflict’ this causes can force children to adjust and develop their own way of seeing things and hence promote learning and conceptual development. A different view is that when children work together they can arrive at solutions to problems, and understandings of concepts, that would not have been possible if they had worked alone. A review of existing theory suggests that it does not do justice to either the reality or the huge potential of group work. A related problem is that current notions of 'pedagogy' tend to have at their heart the teacher child relation. We argue that the concept of pedagogy needs to be extended to other social relations, in particular that involving co-learners or peers, and to see these social relations as contexts that may promote or inhibit learning.Existing theoretical approaches are not necessarily appropriate to contexts involving co-learning between people at a similar stage of understanding or knowledge. Also, we need an appreciation of group work in authentic classroom contexts - of group work as part of a teacher's general approach to classroom organisation and learning. In so doing, theory in regard to classroom learning will develop and benefit and become more fully a view of social pedagogy that reflects and serves the realities of classrooms.
The current situation: groupwork in schools
A central tenet of the SPRinG project, described below, is that group work does not have the place it deserves in the school curriculum. Moreover, it does not figure very clearly in educational policy and advice, or at most has a very minor role. Recent government legislation and advice, e.g., on literacy and numeracy strategies, and on science at KS3 (11-14 years), rarely mention group work. When it is mentioned, e.g., in the suggested format for the ‘literacy hour’ in primary schools, it is in effect a teacher or adult led context, little different pedagogically from whole class teaching.
Research on the use of groups in classrooms, particularly in the UK, demonstrates that there is little strategic planning of pupil grouping in primary schools, and that it is viewed by many teachers as problematic. In an often quoted finding, Galton showed that within the majority of primary classrooms children sit in groups but rarely interact and work as groups. Instead, pupils work individually or as a whole class. Blatchford, Kutnick and Baines in a programme of research in both primary and secondary schools in Englandfound little sign of a systematic relationship between features of groupings such as group size and learning purposes or tasks. Teachers’ approach to group work was to a large extent an adaptation to the demands of maintaining student attention and classroom control, and to classroom layout.In short, teachers showed little awareness of the social pedagogic potential of various grouping arrangements.Overall, teachers had little faith in student’s ability to work in groups.
A number of other studies also indicate that teachers and pupils have doubts about, and difficulties implementing, group work in classrooms. We have also documented teachers’ worries about group work – which can lead to what we call ‘resistances’ to group work. Teachers’ concerns include: loss of control, increased disruption and off task behaviour, beliefs that children are unable to learn from one another, that group-work is overtly time consuming, that group work will encroach on time needed for curriculum areas, that group-work means that brighter children just end up helping the less able pupils, and that assessing children when working in interactive groups is problematic. Pupils can be assigned to groups with the emphasis on the task outcome rather than on the processes whereby the outcome could be achieved. Low attaining pupils, in particular, can be placed in groupings likely to inhibit their learning. Blatchford, Kutnick and Baines found a sizeable number of pupils and teachers who did not appear to have specific preparation in the use of group work.
Research on groups
We argue that much research is limited in its usefulness for teachers in everyday classroom situations. Experimental research on the effectiveness of within-class groupings has demonstrated positive, albeit modest effects on student achievement, better attitudes (particularly in multi-cultural settings) and improved social climate within classrooms. This research is mainly based on small groups, predominantly explores the effects of a highly structured co-operative framework, experimentally restructures classes into grouped (or non-grouped) situations, and typically provides a specific short-term mandatory training programme for teachers in the management of co-operative groups.Importantly, these imposed structures and methods may not always meet the needs of teachers operating in more ‘authentic’ classroom settings where multiple groups and learning tasks may be undertaken simultaneously.If, therefore, undue consideration is given to these experimental accounts, a far greater social pedagogic understanding of the potential of classroom groupings may be hindered.In addition, much research on grouping has adopted a ‘black box’ approach so that the processes by which these groupings achieve their effects are not fully explored, and teachers can assume that any form of pupil grouping in their classroom will lead to cooperation.
More recent research has extended understanding of specific aspects of working in groups, for example, help seeking and information giving (Webb), Howe and colleagues on consensus in science tasks, and Mercer and colleagues on different categories of pupil talk. From the point of view of this paper, these studies are valuable but do not in themselves provide the basis for teachers to adopt group work across the curriculum and over school year. We need, in other words, an inclusive view of classroom groups that recognises these contributions but seeks to put them together in a more general application.
The SPRinG Project: Improving the effectiveness of pupil group work in classrooms
The main impetus for the SPRinG (Social Pedagogic Research into Group work) project was to address the wide gap between the potential of group work to influence learning, motivation and attitudes to learning and relationships, on the one hand, and the limited use of group work in schools, on the other hand. It was also driven by the concerns of teachers and pupils, that they were not able to get as much out of group work as they would like. The situation suggested to us that a new approach to conceptualising group work in classrooms was needed. The SPRinG approach is designed to raise levels of conceptual understanding, encourage a belief in students that success at school work can come through their own efforts and application, rather than from instruction, and to encourage pupils to engage in higher levels of talk in groups.
Key assumptions behind SPRinG
In line with ESRC TLR Programme, it is designed to have a real effect on achievement and motivation.
- Value of careful research evidence on group-work (evidence based practice).
- Need to research everyday ‘authentic’ classroom settings and curriculum, not artificial contexts as in much research.
- Needs to be something teachers can use and would want to use. Not replace what they do, but extend their repertoire.
- Needs to be applicable and usable in all curriculum areas.
- Needs to be developed WITH teachers and schools and LEAs – all users.
- Results need to be generalisable, sustainable, and widely applicable: three sites emphasising KS1,2 and 3, Years 1,5 and 7
- It should contribute to theory. Need for a social pedagogy of classrooms
The SPRinG project was set up to develop an approach to group work that could be used in primary and secondary schools. Approaches and materials were developed on three sites - KS1 (5-7 years) at the University of Brighton, KS2 (7-11 years) at the Institute of Education in London, and KS3 (11 – 14 years) at the HomertonCollege, University of Cambridge.
The development stage of the initiative (Phase 2) was a year long collaboration between the research teams and a group of teachers at each of the three sites. The collaboration involved regular meetings with teachers, activities constructed by the team being tried out and evaluated by teachers and pupils, discussion of emerging principles concerning effective group work, visits to classes to observe and give feedback on groupwork, and continuous feedback on activities and further work to improve them. Though the teams made use of some existing materials and classroom strategies much was developed from scratch. In the course of the year valuable lessons were learned about, for example, group sizes, group composition, what activities worked well and what strategies needed to be adopted to encourage good working habits in groups. The updated SPRinG programme used in Phase 3 consisted of two main parts. The first, the ‘principles and practices’ is structured around four key themes. The second main part is a programme of classroom activities for developing pupils’ group work skills, as well as suggestions about how to bring these skills into the curriculum and what interactions and behaviours to look out for when pupils are doing group-work. These were compiled into a ‘Handbook’ for each site. The programme of activities follow a particular structure which supports pupils’ learning through opportunities for reflection, application, evaluation and adaptation of skills. This is achieved through briefing and debriefing with opportunities for applying skills in group work situations in between.
The four key themes
The SPRinG project is based on the project directors’ earlier research, and is built around a social pedagogical approach which involves a framework with four key themes:1.The classroom context: Preparing the classroom and the groups; 2.Interactions between pupils: Preparing and developing pupil skills; 3.The teacher’s role: Preparing yourself for working with groups; 4.Tasks: Preparing the lessons and group work activities. Every act of group work can be analysed in terms of these four themes, and they are the basis of the principles and activities in the SPRinG programme.The suggested principles and advice for teachers are based where possible on evidence from research, though there are many areas where research is lacking. The advice to teachers was developed on the basis of Phase 2. Key aspects of the themes are as follows.
1.The classroom context: Preparing the classroom and the groups
Class seating arrangements. The seating and working arrangements can have a profound effect on communication and work in groups. Using the physical layout and space in a flexible way to encourage pupil interaction in different working situations is important.
Group Size. An understanding of the role of group size in relation to classroom processes as a whole is needed. The size of groups will also need to be appropriate to the age and experience of pupils, the purpose of group-work and the task at hand. But,in general, the main advice we offer to teachers is that small groups are usually better to begin with and group sizes can be expanded once group working skills are in place.
Group stability.This has not been researched, probably because it reflects an interest in group functioning over time, rather than a focus on short term interventions. Butthe stability of groups has emerged in our work as an aspect of successful group workBy changing group membership there is risk that groups do not overcome insecurities and conflict.
Group composition. Group work necessarily involves a certain amount of ability mixing, though how much will be affected by the ability mix of the whole class. It may be best under many circumstances to put high ability and middle ability pupils together and low ability and middle ability pupils together. One message that has emerged strongly from our work is that it is important not to allow personality types to dictate the success or not of groups. Pupils should be encouraged to work in groups whatever the personality types involved, and interpersonal conflicts reported in previous research appear to be much reduced with development of group work skills.
2. Interactions between pupils: Preparing and developing pupil skills for group work
Perhaps the main conclusion we have drawn is that group work skills have to be developed: we can’t just expect group work to be successful without a lot of hard work and preparation. Pupils need to have the skills to engage with each other while trusting and respecting their colleagues, as well as being able to communicate effectively through listening, explaining and sharing ideas. They also need skills on how to plan and organise their group work with the aim of working more autonomously and engaging actively in learning. So the programme is organised around a developmental sequence, with an emphasis on relational skills, followed by communication skills, leading to more advanced problem solving activities.
3. The teacher’s role: Preparing teachers for working with groups
One way that teachers can seek to make group work productive is to lower the risk for pupils and make it fun (at least some of the time). Another is in terms of creating situations so that the risk is lowered but the challenge remains high and this can be achieved through a process of ‘scaffolding’. It can be helpful to think of the teacher as a‘guide on the side, not a sage on the stage’. Lessons that involve group-work should include briefing and debriefing to enhance reflection and help develop skills.