Kagan Cooperative
Learning
By, Dr. Spencer Kagan and Miguel
Chapter 12: PIES
Kagan
Let’s Take An Up Close Look a
Not that
kind of
PIES
Silly…
Cooperative learning when properly
implemented, is a powerful instructional approach
resulting in a spectrum of positive outcomes. Notice
the caveat: When properly implemented. Research,
theory, and years of implementation have drawn the
conclusion that consistent success depends on four
basic principles:
Positive Interdependence
Individual Accountability
Equal Participation
Simultaneous Interaction
Group Work is NOT
Cooperative Learning!
The PIES principles distinguish cooperative learning from group w
principles are not present, we are merely doing group work. The P
true learning. Group work produces hit or miss results. True coo
produces consistent gains for all learners.
Positive interdependence is the most well-established prin
cooperation. When positive interdependence is in place, i
certain to cooperate. In the absence of positive interdep
may not cooperate.
Question Positive
1:
correlation: Are students on the
Question Interdependence:
2:
Does the task require wo
Question 1:
Positive correlation: Are students on
the same side?
•
When there is a positive correlation among outcomes, p
almost certainly work together. They cooperate, help
encourage each other. In class, if I know your succe
benefit me, naturally I hope you will do well and I w
and tutor you.
•
When there is a positive correlation among outcomes,
on the same side.
Question 2:
Interdependence: Does the task require
working together?
The word interdependence refers to how the task is struc
task is structured so no one of us can do it alone, but
by working together, then we are interdependent.
Strong Interdependence:
The contribution of each
team member is necessary
for the success of the
team. The task is
impossible without help.
Intermediate
Interdependence:
The contribution of each
team member does contribute
to the success of the team,
but a team member could
succeed on his/her own.
Week Interdependence:
The contribution of each
team member may
contribute to the
success of the team.
Degrees of Interdependence
The
workplace
team pools
knowledge
and
brainstorms
solutions
to come up
with a
better
procedure
A husband
and wife
combine
their money
to buy a
house
neither
alone could
afford.
The author
gives her
paper to the
editor,
knowing the
editor can
catch errors
the author
could not.
The
basketball
player
passes the
ball so a
teammate
can shoot a
basket, and
their team
is more
likely to
Things To Be Careful Wi
1. Negative Interdependence Among Teams: Rewarding top te
performance may create positive interdependence within
the opposite among teams. All teams achieving a prede
be rewarded.
2. Pitfalls of Team Rewards: If not used carefully, extri
may erode the intrinsically rewarding teamwork process
3. Group Grades: There are so many problems with group gr
should never be used. Chapters 15 and 16
provide better and fair ways to grade
and motivate students.
T.E.A.M.
Structures create positive
interdependence. They include shared
team goals so students cooperate for
mutual benefit.
Together
Everyone
Positive interdependence is created
by situations in which teammates
pool knowledge or skills for mutual
benefit.
Achieves
More
Tasks that call for a range of
knowledge or skills that no single
individual possesses encourage
mutual helping.
Tasks
•
Make the task challenging, so
that the
sheer volume or difficulty of
the task
requires the participation
and cooperation
of
all
•
Division
of labor is used to ac
difficult tasks. Assign roles
student. Teammates then come t
to synthesize their combined k
into a presentation
•
Limit each student’s access to s
resources to structure for coop
Rules and Structures Foster Positive Int
Rules too can increase interdependence. For
example, to increase helping and encouragement,
we might institute a rule that states the team
cannot progress to a new learning center or
task until all teammates have completed a task
or have displayed mastery.
Structures Create Interdependence
Method
Sample Structure
Varied Knowledge or Skills
Jigsaw
Challenging Task
Team Projects
Division of Labor
Co-op Co-op
Roles
4S Brainstorming
Resource Access
Team Projects
Rules
Talking Chips
In the cooperative classroom, there is an “I” in team, and tha
Individual Accountability. In the cooperative classroom, stude
as a team to create and to learn, but ultimately every individ
responsible for his or her own performance.
Individual accountability boosts achievement.
Question 3:
Is individual, public performance re
Question
3:
Is individual, public performance
Three Components of Individual Accountabi
Individual accountability is created by putting in plac
1. Individual. The performance is done without help.
2. Public. Someone witnesses the performance.
3. Required. The performance is required.
Accountability
Accountability To
Whom?
Students may be accountable to a
partner, a team, the class, and/or
the teacher. Reports home create
accountability to parents. In
Numbered Heads Together, before
students put their heads together,
each student independently writes
his or her best answer to share
with the team. Thus, each is held
accountable to teammates. Further,
when a student’s number is called,
that student must share the team’s
answer, so they are held
accountable to the teacher and the
class as well.
To Whom?
Accountability For
What?
Depending on the structure and
the content, students are held
accountable for different things.
For example, in Paraphrase
Passport, the right to speak is
earned by paraphrasing the
previous speaker. This structure
holds students accountable for
empathetic listening. Talking Chips
hold students accountable for
participating. In a Rally Table of
prime numbers, learners are held
accountable for listing prime
numbers.
For
Me Before We
• Students write own
responses prior to
teaming up
• Students create own
products to share with
classmates
• Structures: Showdown,
Numbered Heads
Together, Placemat
Consensus
Me During We
• Color-code individual
contributions
• Assign mini topics
• Students fill in own worksheets,
create own product
• Structures: Rally Coach, Team
Mind-Mapping, Talking Chips, Jot
Thoughts
• Students turn in individual
worksheets
• Students take tests, quizzes after
team interaction
• Structures: Team-Pair-Solo,
Numbered Heads Together
Me After We
Individual accountability must be coupled with positive interdependence;
otherwise it will backfire.
A student can be held accountable by calling on
them publicly, but without the support, they
can fail publicly also and may soon dread class,
content and the teacher.
Learning and change come about best by a
combination of pressure and support.
The “E” of PIES is the simplest of the four principles:
students participate about equally. Participation is an
learning process. Students learn by interacting with the
fellow students. For equitable educational outcomes, we
to be relatively equal.
Question 4:
Is participation approximately equal
Question 4:
Is participation approximately equal
Structure for equal participation. It does not occur magi
to equalize participation are: 1) turn taking, 2) time a
write time, 4) rules, 5) individual accountability, and 6)
Six Approaches to Equalizing Participation
Approach
How
Sample
Structures
Turn Taking
Every student receives an equal turn
Round Table
Time Allocation
Every student receives the same amount
of time.
Timed Pair Share
Think Time
Students are given the opportunity to
formulate own ideas.
Think-Pair-Share
Rules
Rules of engagement establish guidelines
for equal participation.
Talking Chips
Individual Accountability
Students are held accountable for
participation
Showdown
Role Assignment
Students participate by filling a unique or
rotating role.
4S Brainstorming
Active engagement increases student learning. If students are
are less likely to learn. If students are only occasionally en
than when they are regularly engaged. Simultaneous interaction
powerful tool we have for increasing active engagement.
Question 5:
What percent of students are overtly
at once?
Question 5:
What percent of students are overtly
interacting at once?
A simple look at the mathematics reveals the staggering d
of overt active engagement during traditional instruction
learning structures…
Simultaneous Interaction Increases
Engagement and Participation
Structure
Percent
Actively
Engaged at
Once
Student
Participation
Time per Hour
Whole Class Q&A
1 in 30 (3.33%)
2 minutes per student
Round Robin
1 in 4 (25%)
15 minutes per student
Rally Robin
1 in 2 (50%)
30 minutes per student
We can engage more students at a time, and thus get more
accomplished more quickly.
Time for Three-Minute Student Presentations
In a class of 30 students
Structure
Required Class Time
Student Presentation
Student presents to class.
90 minutes
Timed Round Robin
Student presents to teammates
12 minutes
Timed Pair Share
Student presents to partner
6 minutes
Simultaneous Response Modes and S
Answer Boards
Thumbs Up or Down
Choral Practice
Greater engagement and accountability are achieved with
simultaneous responses vs. calling on one student .
OBJECTION: The teacher won’t hear
everything and wrong answers will be said
Solutions:
1. Team Answer Slates
2. Students check answers with another
classroom source
3. Teacher walks around for authentic
assessment
The probability of a correction opportunity is far greater with
simultaneous interaction
Cooperative learning consistently produces powerful gains
when the research-based and classroom-proven PIES
principles are in place. Kagan Structures implement PIES.
Any teacher can easily learn some simple structures and
be confident he/she is implementing good cooperative learning.