Problem-Centered Learning to Integrate Diverse Perspectives

Educational research confirms the academic and social benefits of cooperative learning approaches to instruction for students of diverse abilities, backgrounds, gender and race (Gurin et al. 2002; Sharan 1980; Slavin 1990). There are academic and social benefits of working in diverse groups for more advantaged students as well as for students who are low-achieving, disadvantaged, or from a minority group (Slavin 1990; Springer 1999). This may be because of the opportunities that cooperative learning provides for interactions among students. When reciprocity dominates group learning, as it does in communities of practice, groups quickly develop sufficient coherence to support shared sensemaking (Boland et al. 1995; Brown et al. 2000). But the ability to participate fully and on an equal basis in group problem-solving is often determined by locally-defined perceptions of legitimate knowledge and expertise. What is valued in one context may not be deemed so in another (Lave 1988; Lave 1991; Lave et al. 1991). Our understanding of what constitutes legitimate knowledge is largely formed by normative practice in local workgroups, through which we acquire our understanding of how to be competent in a particular profession (Lave et al. 1991; Rosenbrock 1981).

Students from minority groups and women may not participate fully in shared sensemaking because their contribution is not valued – often because of language difficulties, gender perceptions or other dissimilarities from the “majority” perspective. I have observed that our women students prefer to work together, as do our international students, because their perspectives are more likely to be accepted by their collaborators and because they share the same genres and conventions of communication. But for deep learning to take place, group members must "break frame" (Goffman, 1974). For this to happen, cooperative learning must encourage frequent interactions between a diverse population of group members (Slavin 1990; Trytten 2001). Active engagement in learning cannot be assumed, even with collaborative work: much apparently reflective action is automatic (Bargh 2000; Sharan 1980). So we need to encourage students to engage in group investigation of problems to set tasks which cannot easily be completed by a stratified approach. People engage in mindful, or reflective, action when they encounter a situation for which they have no script or when the environment demands more than their current scripts provide (Langer 1978; Markus et al. 1985).

Thus, we need to place students in situations that are discrepant with their past experience. The role of “breakdowns” (Heidegger 1962; Winograd et al. 1986) may be significant in driving discrepancies that cause students to break frame. This approach has formed the basis of prior coursework experiments which will be developed and disseminated further through integration with cooperative, problem-based learning exercises. Problem-based learning derives from experiential learning theory (Dewey 1933; Lewin 1951; Schön 1983). Learning is self-directed, so when it is employed in student groups, it needs to be managed carefully to preclude the effort-reduction strategies discussed above. This plan will develop approaches that combine problem-based learning with occasions for cognitive breakdown that require social cooperation. Students will be formed into groups that reflect the diversity of the student population and that mix genders as equally as is feasible.

Studies performed so far focus on the use of breakdowns to effect the inclusion of perspectives from non-dominant group members (especially those who are members of traditionally disadvantaged groups). Initial findings are reported in (Gasson 2007; Gasson and Agosto 2008).

References:
Bargh, J.A. "Beyond behaviorism: On the automaticity of higher mental processes," Psychological Bulletin (126:6) 2000, pp 925-945.
Boland, R., J, and Tenkasi, R., V, "Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing," Organization Science (6:4) 1995, pp 350-372.
Brown, J.S., and Duguid, P. "Practice Makes Process," CIO Magazine (March 1, 2000) 2000.
Dewey, J. How We Think. A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process, (Revised ed.) D. C. Heath, Boston, 1933.
Gasson, S. (2007) ‘ Progress And Breakdowns In Early Requirements Definition For Boundary-Spanning Information Systems’ in S. Rivard & J. Webster (Eds.) Proc. ICIS ’07, Montréal, Québec, Canada Dec.9-12 2007.
Gasson, S., and Agosto, D.E. (2008) ‘Millennial Students & Technology Use: Implications for Undergraduate Education,’ in: Education in HCI; HCI in Education - The HCIC 2008 Winter Workshop, Jan. 30 - Feb. 3., 2008. Fraser, CO. http://www.hcic.org/uploads/Gasson1178.pdf
Goffman, E. Frame Analysis Harper and Row, New York, NY, 1974.
Gurin, P., Dey, E.L., Hurtado, H., and Gurin, G. "Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes," Harvard Educational Review (72:3) 2002, pp 330-366.
Heidegger, M. Being and Time Harper & Row New York, New York NY., 1962.
Langer, E.J. "Rethinking the role of thought in social interaction," in: New directions in attribution research, J.I. Harvey, W.Kiss, R. (ed.), Erlbaum., Hillsdale, NJ, 1978, pp. 35-38.
Lave, J. Cognition In Practice: Mind Mathematics And Culture In Everyday Life Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1988.
Lave, J. "Situating Learning In Communities of Practice," in: Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine and S.D. Teasley (eds.), American Psychological Association, Washington DC, 1991.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1991.
Lewin, K. Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers; D. Cartwright [Ed.] Harper & Row, New York NY, 1951.
Markus, H., and Zajonc, R.B. "The Cognitive Perspective in Social Psychology," in: The Handbook Of Social Psychology, G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), Vol. 1, 1985, p. 3rd. Ed.
Rosenbrock, H.H. "Engineers And The Work That People Do," IEEE Control Systems Magazine (1:3) 1981, pp 4-8.
Schön, D.A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action Basic Books, New York NY, 1983.
Sharan, S. "Cooperative Learning in Small Groups: Recent Methods and Effects on Achievement, Attitudes, and Ethnic Relations," Review Of Educational Research (50) 1980, pp 241-271.
Slavin, R.E. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1990.
Springer, L. "Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis," Review of Educational Research (69:1) 1999, pp 21-51.
Trytten, D.A. "Progressing from small group work to cooperative learning: A case study from computer science," Journal of Engineering Education (90:1) 2001, pp 85-91.
Winograd, T., and Flores, F. Understanding Computers And Cognition Ablex Corporation, Norwood New Jersey, 1986.