Unit 2-Collaborative Learning

The recent “Harvard cheating scandal” brings to light some of consequences of not providing students with guidelines of when collaborative learning is acceptable and expected and when it is not. The controversy began a few months ago when students in a government class were given a take-home final exam. According to the university, the instructions clearly stated that students could use notes and outside sources, but collaboration was not allowed. However, many of the implicated students say that the instructions were unclear and they even reviewed some of the questions with the TA’s.

Here are some interesting articles about the scandal:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/01/harvard-cheating-scandal-_n_2600366.html

http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/argolinkroundups/morning-roundup-harvard-cheating-scandal

Here is a John Stewart video. It is not too informative, but very funny. It is worth noting that Stewart is shocked that students can use the internet to do their final exam.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/02/12/jon-stewart-on-harvard-cheating-scandal-in-u-s-government-class/

Students at Harvard are understandably upset about the uproar, since many are being harshly penalized. It is surprising that a class would create a dynamic of collaboration and, then, when it comes down to the assignment (which is most likely represents a significant portion of their grade) the professor would ask students to work alone. As one Harvard student points out in an editorial for the school newspaper:

The definition of collaboration has become increasingly nebulous, and the difference between acceptable and unacceptable collaboration even more so. Take home exams in particular have become uncomfortable gray areas in which both spheres often overlap. It falls on the university to articulate the boundaries of student collaboration; only through greater clarity can we hope to avoid an incident like this in the future. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/9/4/harvard-cheating-scandal/

The author of this article makes a valid point. Collaboration in an academic setting (where grades are the outcome) needs specific guidelines in order for students to know what is expected of them. The syllabus, the exam, and the exact nature and course content of the class have not been released, so it would be unfair to pass judgment on the professor or the student behavior. It has been confirmed that it was a large class (with more than 200 students) and there were several TA’s, and some the class notes can be found on the web.

Undoubtedly, there are professors who still use the traditional lecture/exam approach; however, I believe that this professor probably utilized collaborative learning for certain types of assignments. There is a general consensus that collaborative learning creates a more effective learning environment in the classroom. Most professors would agree that collaboration allows students build on existing skills by providing them with a common goal and that the teacher’s role is to encourage students to take charge of their learning.  However, this problem of the “nebulous nature” of collaboration is often true in college classes. If a class structure encourages collaborative work throughout the semester and then gives a final exam which does not allow students to work together, students may be confused. Professors frequently allow/encourage students to work together for participation grades, but when it comes to designing written assessments they often take the more traditional route. Consequently, most final exams and papers are individual projects.

Since the students were allowed to use outside resources the exam probably had problem-based questions. If the professor was letting them find data from the internet, library and use their notes, why did he/she draw the line at collaboration? Apparently, the incident began when a TA reported seeing a series of similarly phrased responses to the exam questions. The students must have been aware that the TA’s would notice and were not afraid of repercussions because they thought they were completing a project the way that had been instructed.  

Cooperative learning, as defined by Johnson, Johnson, & Smith in “When Cooperative Learning Returns to College: What Evidence Is There That It Works?” brings the idea of collaborative learning one step further because group assessment is an intrinsic part of the program. In a cooperative learning environment, “students must believe they sink or swim together” (5). Thus, in this context, students would be correct when they assumed the exam was collaborative and working together would be the only way to successfully complete the exam in the allotted time. The exam questions would also encourage the kind of discussion, analysis and critical thinking that takes place during class and group work.

My own face-to-face classes always function better when students are given time to become friendly and talk outside of the class because they feel more connected and try to help each other succeed. This idea of connectedness is one of the goals in almost all the articles they we have looked at in this unit. In that Harvard class, students felt connected enough to share information without being afraid of their own grade being lowered, so the professors and the TA’s had created a what Millis would call a “non-threatening context for interaction”(1). This “scandal” could be viewed as natural consequence of promoting dynamic connections that students make in class. Professors and TA’s should consider themselves successful if students feel comfortable enough work on exams together.

Teaching a class online changes the dynamics of the student’s relationship as well. It makes the casual discussion from a chance meeting on campus impossible, but chatrooms, hangouts, and facebook give students a variety of ways to interact and hopefully form a group of learning communities that work together. In an on-line class environment a professor must make an even more concerted effort to create community by using online forums and web-chats (skype).  For brainstorming and communicating with the teacher the students could use a program called PrimaryWall ( sticky note tool  which people to work together in real-time).If a teacher creates community effectively, there will be a “risk” that the students won’t be able to stop collaborating. Of course, if we give them the right kind of tasks, we will not want them to.