View in EDS HTML Full Text

Student Empowerment through Group Work: A Case Study.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Student Empowerment through Group Work: A Case Study.
Language: English
Authors: Burkill, Sue
Source: Journal of Geography in Higher Education. Mar 1997 21(1):89-94.
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 6
Publication Date: 1997
Intended Audience: Researchers
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Descriptors: Cooperative Learning, Course Content, Educational Assessment, Educational Quality, Geography, Geography Instruction, Higher Education, Instructional Improvement, Learning Strategies, Progressive Education, Role Playing, Self Actualization, Self Directed Groups, Small Group Instruction, Student Improvement, Student Participation, Student Projects, Teaching Methods, Undergraduate Study
ISSN: 0309-8265
Abstract: Attempts to differentiate the characteristics of courses that involve token empowerment from those that involve deeper empowerment. Describes a course where students role-played the part of consultants involved in group work involving global issues. Includes a chart that outlines the components of token and deep empowerment. (MJP)
Journal Code: CIJJAN1998
Entry Date: 1998
Accession Number: EJ549779
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN9704114263;JGH01MAR.97;1997Sep29.13:20;v2.3</anid> <title id="AN9704114263-1">STUDENT EMPOWERMENT THROUGH GROUP WORK: A CASE STUDY </title> <hd id="AN9704114263-2"> ABSTRACT </hd> <p>In this paper the use of group work as one approach to student empowerment is discussed. An attempt is made to differentiate the characteristics of courses which involve token empowerment from those which involve deeper empowerment. An example of a project undertaken by second-year undergraduates is described, and student responses, as evidence of their awareness of learning processes, are explored. </p> <p>KEYWORDS Empowerment, group work. </p> <hd id="AN9704114263-3"> Introduction </hd> <p>Ask students what is meant by empowerment and the responses will vary widely. Some will have no idea what you are talking about; others will refer to reduced staff-student contact time (often with a degree of cynicism). It is to be hoped that there will be some who will be aware that empowerment is about the personal control they can achieve over their learning processes. </p> <p>This range of responses occurs because students experience different approaches towards empowerment in their courses. If the nature of the learning process is not made clear or discussed then students experience it in a piecemeal way. This means they lack confidence about how they are learning and often find it difficult to articulate their achievements and transfer them to new situations. In contrast, on courses where there is commitment to empowering students, they can usually discuss their learning in a critical way and transfer the positive aspects of their experiences to new situations. As Chalkley (1995, p. 27) makes clear: </p> <p>The traditional method of teaching transferable skills has often been to bury and conceal them within a curriculum overtly concerned only with subjectbased information. If taught and practised at all, skills were delivered without the students (and sometimes the staff) being aware of it. </p> <p>This article focuses on how students experience group work; it identifies some of the characteristics of group work which can enhance student empowerment and illustrates the relevance of these in a specific context. </p> <hd id="AN9704114263-4"> What is Meant by Student Empowerment through Group Work? </hd> <p>Group work is an established approach to learning in higher education and has been used in various contexts by geographers. For example, fieldwork has traditionally been based on small groups co-operating to produce results which are shared with a wider audience (Healey, 1992, p. 8); laboratory and computer-based practicals often take place in groups, if only to allow resource sharing. However, the learning processes involved in this group work are often highly structured and staff centred. This means staff define the resource base, identify the study area and designate the time limits of the activity. More importantly, the advantages of learning in groups are often dimly understood by students. </p> <p>In the geography department at the College of St Mark and St John we believe that if students are to be empowered by group work activities then we must spend time on making the processes more transparent. Staff and students need to come jointly to an understanding that the process of exploration should be as important as, if not more important than, the act of discovery! </p> <p>This emphasis on process has involved thinking carefully about what it is in group work that empowers our students. We have found it useful to think in terms of a continuum of experience ranging from token empowerment to deeper, more transparent empowerment (Table I). </p> <p>In order to evaluate the move towards a deeper approach to empowerment this paper presents a case study of one assignment undertaken by second-year geography students. It should be made clear that this case study is taken from a wider programme of transferable skills which span all three years of the undergraduate geography courses at the College of St Mark and St John (Burkill, 1995, pp. 65-75). </p> <hd id="AN9704114263-5"> The Context: group work in a second-year assignment </hd> <p>In the second year at the College of St Mark and St John, between 80 and 100 students take a core module entitled The Geography of Global Issues. Traditionally the module has been used to develop a range of personal transferable skills with an emphasis on cognitive skills (handling information, evaluating evidence, thinking critically, etc.) and IT skills (selecting appropriate sources/packages for particular needs). More recently, it has emphasised social skills (working with others, communicating with others). In order to signal the importance of group work we have introduced an assignment in which students are required to play the part of consultants in a group-work practical (Figure 1). They work together to prepare and present data and the final product is a jointly written report. </p> <p>This assignment has evolved out of a more traditional activity in which some sharing of ideas occurred early in the process but students completed the assignment independently. This shift in emphasis has involved incorporating many of the features of deeper empowerment identified in Table I. To emphasise the importance of group work, tutors explain what is meant by empowerment, develop the career and employment context, introduce some group psychology (Brown & Pendlebury, 1992; Johnson & Johnson, 1975) and encourage students to address problems which may develop (Vujakovic et al., 1994). From the outset students are required to track group meetings in a log and later they must discuss the group's success by evaluating their own contributions and that of their peers. Groups are asked to set their own goals, choose appropriate approaches and resources, and justify the approaches adopted. Early in the process groups are given the opportunity to choose how their marks will be distributed. Lecturers are involved in introducing the activity and technical staff in providing support when required. Beyond this, the involvement or intervention of staff is at the request of groups. These are some of the 'empowering' features which are built into this assignment. </p> <hd id="AN9704114263-6"> The Responses: how do students react? </hd> <p>For many students this approach represents a fairly radical departure from their normal study patterns. The initial reaction is often interest and even excitement at something new. </p> <p>There is a later stage at which the approach seems to weigh heavily on groups. They find other work pressures cause problems and the different levels of commitment of individuals start to create tensions. In retrospect, most students are pleased with the standard of work they produce and this engenders a positive attitude to the process. More specifically there are a number of issues relating to empowerment through group work which have had to be addressed as a result of student and staff evaluation. </p> <p>How do you introduce the group task effectively? Is it useful to spend time reflecting on the way groups operate and on effective group organisation? Most students respond with initial surprise but become involved and even enthusiastic once the purpose of the activities is made clear. However, there is also this type of response: </p> <p>I feel that the amount of seminar time devoted to how groups work was a little over the top as adults should already know how to conduct themselves efficiently to produce a group project. </p> <p>Despite this, our conclusion is not to be tempted to leave out preparation time on group dynamics and organisation. Initially students may not see the relevance but ultimately they do. </p> <p>How much student freedom should you allow in setting up groups? What should their size and composition be ? Larger groups mean less marking and more negotiating but, as this student makes clear, there are concerns: </p> <p>The idea of group work is very good in theory because it encourages co-operation with others. The main problems encountered in our group were the group size (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref1">6</reflink>) and the availability of individual members. This meant communication was not excellent and attendance at meetings was not very good. </p> <p>After considering a range of responses and watching groups in action, we suggest to students that they keep group sizes small. Four seems to be an optimum number. </p> <p>In relation to group composition there are a number of issues to consider. In particular, we have had to think about how to deploy mature students, especially those with work experience. Should they be distributed through the groups? Could they be asked to run a session on organising group work? </p> <p>A similar issue arises in relation to IT-literate students (IT is central to the assignment set). How should they be distributed? Although it is undesirable to influence group composition too much, we find that groups do want to take this into account when selecting members. </p> <p>How do you decide where to allocate the marks? What sort of criteria should be used? We did a lot of background reading on this and took advice from other colleagues. There is no answer that pleases everyone. It surprises us that most groups do not want more control of marks. For example, in the last two years, despite being offered the opportunity to distribute a single group mark freely between the members, no group took this up. </p> <p>The approach adopted currently is for tutors to set the marking criteria which allocate marks to both the final report and also the group work process. Students discuss the best way to allocate marks in advance and come to a decision. No changes can be made later on -- they must see the decision as final. We accept that different groups will want to handle marks in different ways. This is a good indicator of the confidence individuals have in their group members. </p> <p>How do you keep in touch and provide support during the process? What is the tutor's role? In the past we have required groups to attend a 'touch down' session with a tutor after two or three weeks. Some student feedback indicates that this provided a valued point in time at which rather unfocused data collection gave way to more focused task allocation and deeper analysis. Even if access to staff is handled more freely, it is important to be available at agreed times for meeting with groups and not to allow other commitments to erode this time. </p> <p>Students are aware that the role of tutor as adviser can become confused with the role of tutor as assessor. For situations where this causes concern we have developed a system of providing back-up support from the college academic support service. This is very seldom used but has been important when arbitration between students in a group has been necessary. </p> <p>Do you need to run post-assessment tutorials? How much negotiation of marks is feasible at this stage? It is most important to debrief groups after the assignment is marked and to discuss the grades that are allocated. Having run this assignment over two years we have had a small number of cases where we have had to negotiate hard with groups in distributing the marks. This has been a surprisingly enjoyable and rewarding task for both students and tutors. </p> <p>How should you handle and respond to feedback? Approaches which students see as 'new' can raise concerns and feedback is built into the module so that we can respond and so that students feel that they are contributing to the process. However, we have learned to avoid over-sensitivity to student feedback! After all, if students tell us they see no purpose in a written examination do we react by dropping examinations? </p> <p>Correspondence: Sue Burkill, Head of Geography, College of St Mark and St John, Derriford Road, Plymouth PL7 5HA, UK. Email: stasmb@lib.marjon.ac.uk </p> <ct id="AN9704114263-7"> TABLE I. Empowerment through group work. Token empowerment A continuum Students use a range of prescribed Student's role resources probably in a defined order Students are set goals and learning outcomes by tutors Students focus on ideas, issues or problems suggested to them by tutors Group discussion is well focused by the task set; little chance of making mistakes Tutors are involved in guiding; tutor Tutor's role talk is fairly dominant Tutor talk is organising and telling Time constraints are set by tutor who moves groups on to complete the task; work hours are timetabled Students are informed about assessment process and criteria; mark allocation is fixed Assessment focus is on the geography Assessment learnt (techniques and concepts) Difficulties in distinguishing who contributed to the work leads to issues of plagiarism Students sense that the exercise is competitive which, means some reluctance to share results Students are primarily aware of the Summary geographical focus of their tasks Token empowerment Deep empowerment Students use a range of prescribed Students select their resources probably in a defined order own resources and use them as appropriate (often unknown to the tutor Students are set goals and learning Students set up their outcomes by tutors own goals relating them to any learning outcomes which have been specified Students focus on ideas, issues or Students help generate problems suggested to them by tutors the ideas/issues/problems which they are exploring Group discussion is well focused by the Group discussion can task set; little chance of making range over wide areas mistakes allowing clarification of attitudes and values. It challenges individuals in a 'safe' environment; mistakes are made Tutors are involved in guiding; tutor Students are talking talk is fairly dominant more than their tutors; tutors have a code for intervention agreed with students Tutor talk is organising and telling Tutor talk is questioning and challenging Time constraints are set by tutor who Groups are responsible moves groups on to complete the task; for time allocation and work hours are timetabled setting of tasks (maybe using a log); work hours are flexible Students are informed about assessment Students are involved in process and criteria; mark allocation is discussing criteria; fixed mark allocation is negotiable Assessment focus is on the geography Assessment focus is learnt (techniques and concepts) partly on the personal and transferable skills learnt (through peer and self assessment of the group-work process) Difficulties in distinguishing who The need to distinguish contributed to the work leads to the individual issues of plagiarism contributions is reduced Students sense that the exercise is A sense or corporate competitive which, means some responsibility and reluctance to share results sharing of all ideas for a common goal reduces the competitive element Students are primarily aware of the Students are aware of geographical focus of their tasks both the geographical focus and the group-work skills in the task FIGURE 1. Stimulus material for group work practical. Overseas Development Administration, Eland House, Stag Place, London SW1E 5JL For the attention of Marjon Population Consultants ODA Health Aid Review: Priority Countries The ODA is currently reviewing its programmes and projects for health aid in developing countries. In particular we are re-evaluating initiatives to improve life expectancy. The focus is particularly on infant and child mortality which are known to contribute disproportionately to low life expectancy rates. This review is now a top priority as a result of the International Conference on Population and Development held in Cairo last year. One of the 'twenty year goals' which the British government supported at the conference was that: Life expectancy at birth should be more than 75 years for all countries by 2015 (Exceptionally in the highest mortality countries 70 years would be accepted) We are commissioning a report from you which should include: A description and comparative analysis of the current mortality (life expectancy, infant mortality and under-5 mortality) situation in developing countries; An analysis of the changing mortality situation in these countries over the last twenty years or so; A brief assessment of any concerns you have about the reliability of the data used; Advice on how you think we should proceed (what criteria we should use) in selecting countries for our programme to improve life expectancy; Reccmmendations on particular countries you feel most need assistance with child survival programmes. We would like to receive the report by 2 February</ct> <hd id="AN9704114263-8">REFERENCES</hd> <p>BROWN, G. & PENDLEBURY, M. (1992) Assessing Active Learning (Sheffield, CVCP). </p> <p>BURKILL, S. (1995) Incorporating transferable skills into an undergraduate geography assignment, in: A. JENKINS & A. WARD (Eds) Developing Skills Based Curricula through the Disciplines: case studies of good practice in geography, pp. 65-75, SEDA Paper 89 (Birmingham, SEDA) </p> <p>CHALKEY, B. (1995) Compulsory modules in transferable skills: the Plymouth approach, in: A. JENKINS & A. WARD (Eds) Developing Skills Based Curricula through the Disciplines: case studies of good practice in geography, p. 27, SEDA Paper 89 (Birmingham, SEDA). </p> <p>HEALEY, M. (1992) Curriculum development and 'Enterprise': group work, resource based learning and the incorporation of transferable skills into a first year practical course, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 16(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref2">1</reflink>), pp. 7-19. </p> <p>JENKINS, A. & PEPPER, D. (1988) Enhancing students' employability and self expression: how to teach oral and group work skills in geography, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 12(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref3">1</reflink>), pp. 67-83. </p> <p>JOHNSON, D.W. & JOHNSON, P.F. (1975) Joining Together (New York, Prentice Hall). </p> <p>VUJAKOVIC, P., LIVINGSTONE, I. & MILLS, C. (1994) Why work in groups? Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 18(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref4">1</reflink>), pp. 124-127. </p> <aug> <p>By SUE BURKILL, College of St Mark and St John, Plymouth, UK </p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib6" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib1" firstref="ref2"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ549779
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Student Empowerment through Group Work: A Case Study.
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burkill%2C+Sue%22">Burkill, Sue</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Geography+in+Higher+Education%22"><i>Journal of Geography in Higher Education</i></searchLink>. Mar 1997 21(1):89-94.
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 6
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 1997
– Name: Audience
  Label: Intended Audience
  Group: Audnce
  Data: Researchers
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cooperative+Learning%22">Cooperative Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Course+Content%22">Course Content</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Assessment%22">Educational Assessment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Quality%22">Educational Quality</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Geography%22">Geography</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Geography+Instruction%22">Geography Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Improvement%22">Instructional Improvement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Strategies%22">Learning Strategies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Progressive+Education%22">Progressive Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Role+Playing%22">Role Playing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Actualization%22">Self Actualization</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Directed+Groups%22">Self Directed Groups</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Small+Group+Instruction%22">Small Group Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Improvement%22">Student Improvement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Participation%22">Student Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Projects%22">Student Projects</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Study%22">Undergraduate Study</searchLink>
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0309-8265
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Attempts to differentiate the characteristics of courses that involve token empowerment from those that involve deeper empowerment. Describes a course where students role-played the part of consultants involved in group work involving global issues. Includes a chart that outlines the components of token and deep empowerment. (MJP)
– Name: CodeSource
  Label: Journal Code
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JC" term="%22CIJJAN1998%22">CIJJAN1998</searchLink>
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 1998
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ549779
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ549779
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 6
        StartPage: 89
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Cooperative Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Course Content
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Quality
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Geography
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Geography Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Instructional Improvement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learning Strategies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Progressive Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Role Playing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Actualization
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Directed Groups
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Small Group Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Improvement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Projects
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Study
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Student Empowerment through Group Work: A Case Study.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burkill, Sue
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 1997
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0309-8265
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 21
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Geography in Higher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1