Q: How should I group the students?

A: Determining group membership and group size is an issue in an EBD classroom that requires more than a cursory response. In the interest of brevity; however, let me share some thoughts on those aspects of "grouping" you might want to consider early on in your EBD practice.

Q: Do you really need a group?

A: By far the first consideration in addressing the issue of grouping is to determine whether you really need a group to do the task or challenge. Few things undermine the authenticity of EBD more than requiring students to work in small groups when there is no legitimate reason to do so. If you can imagine one capable student meeting the parameters of the task or challenge with reasonable quality, then you need to rethink the design of the challenge. In EBD we place students in groups because the challenge requires the diverse capacities of more than one person to engage it successfully. There must be meaningful work for everyone in the group. If there isn't, do not put students in a group!

Q: How big should groups be?

A: Fit group size to the complexity of the task and the experience level of your students and you. In the beginning of the year, I recommend you keep group size small - pairs or groups of three at most. This size group permits both you and your students to begin your exploration of EBD at a lower level of risk. For you, a challenge designed for two or three should be fairly simple, directed toward reasonably straightforward outcomes, and involve a time frame that is acceptably brief.

For students, a group of two or three gives them the opportunity to develop skill with EBD group process techniques (Task roles, brainstorm and distillation, sweep, etc.) while learning to handle the personality and social issues engendered by a limited number of people. When you are prepared to design challenges of greater complexity, and your students are ready to work productively with more people, then by all means increase the size of your groups.

Q: Okay, now how should I group the students?

A: Choose a grouping mechanism that fits your desired outcomes.

There are really only four or five different ways to arrive at group membership. I have used all of these strategies at various times and will comment on each as I list them.

1. Teacher arranges the groups. This approach gives the teacher some measure of control in balancing student strengths among the groups and perhaps to be proactive regarding the teaming of "difficult" students together. There are many published resources regarding cooperative learning theory that describe methods of forming this kind of group.

I used this approach extensively my first year with EBD and despite early resistance from some students, it worked well provided I kept the students in this configuration long enough (at least through three or four challenges) for them to adjust to each other and "bond". The main disadvantage of this mechanism is that the students do not "own" the choice of group membership and therefore find it convenient to blame the teacher for any group dysfunction. Any teacher using this approach with challenging students must be prepared to "stay the course" with the group assignments and outlast student complaints.

2. Students arrange the groups. As the teacher, this was the most challenging way of choosing groups -- for a time. Obviously less responsible students exploited the opportunity to team with their mates and wasted all sorts of time. Frequently, they would leave some classmates out of the group formation process as well.

Anticipating these difficulties, I learned to design several simple and very brief challenges with groups formed this way. As part of each one, I insisted that ALL students be included in a group. Additionally, I was adamant that all criteria for quality be fulfilled. Finally, in the debriefing of each challenge I always asked the question, "Do you feel the grouping of your team has had any impact on the quality of your work?"

Predictably, some students denied there was any connection. Eventually, however, one student would break the code of silence and admit that sometimes working just with ones friends was not the best strategy for producing quality work. When other students in the class acknowledged the truth of the statement, I knew we had moved to a higher level of honesty and maturity within the class. We could then move on and honestly discuss the reasons for group work and how each challenge was an opportunity for each student to accept responsibility for their own behavior and learning and to demonstrate his/her increasing maturity, knowledge of content, and collaborative skill.

As I became more comfortable with EBD over the years, I deliberately started each year with students choosing their own groups so that we could get at these issues early on. It wasn't an easy strategy, but over time has yielded great dividends.

3. Groups are formed at random. Each year I would tell my students on the first day of class, "One of my expectations for each of you this year is that before our time together is over, you will demonstrate your capacity to work productively with every other student in this class." In schools where EBD has been highly successful over a period of years, this expectation is system wide and random grouping is the norm is all EBD classes.

4. Groups are formed heterogeneously by matching talents with tasks. Specific talents or capacities are identified and listed as necessary to complete the challenge successfully. Perhaps they will draw a chart (matrix) listing theses abilities along a vertical axis as jobs or tasks to be led within each team. Then the students and teacher will recognize those in the class who have these special talents. The names of these students are entered along the horizontal axis of the chart. Finally, teacher and students match the entries on the horizontal and vertical axis to ensure that these talents are distributed fairly among the teams.

In short, grouping is done with the requirements of the task and best interests of each team in mind, rather than the personal preferences of either the students or the teacher. Success with this approach, much like random grouping, is a clear indicator of a healthy community within the classroom. This grouping strategy also highlights the advantages of heterogeneity in an EBD classroom where people of various diverse talents are needed and valued.

5. Groups are formed homogeneously. This has been done for years in the traditional classroom and is highly controversial. In theory it is supposed to allow the more capable students to excel while others get to master the basics. The research tells us that students of all ability levels benefit from homogeneous groups when compared with no grouping at all. However students of low ability generally perform worse when placed in homogeneous groups as opposed to students of low ability placed in heterogeneous groups. The research indicates that homogeneous grouping can have a slightly positive effect on high-ability students. (Classroom Instruction That Works, Marzano et al)

Unfortunately it often (intentionally or otherwise) promotes "labeling" among the students. Kids begin to see each other as having greater or lesser value as a person. They don't understand that group membership is often based on a very narrow range of criteria. They need to know that this is a criteria referencing of a specific capacity (reading complex sentences or reading speed, using fractions in math) rather than a judgment about them as a person.

Keep in mind that homogeneous groups have very different effects on different students. I don't recommend it except in very special circumstances. I remember once as a student on a wilderness course that the final exam for testing our navigational skills was to find our way nearly three miles up to the summit of a trailless peak. Our instructor sorted us homogeneously by perceived map and compass ability. The instructor had to have confidence that each group would have success and would not get lost. In this case the students all succeeded and the group with the "lowest" ability gained tremendous confidence in not needing help from the "higher" ability students.

Q: Why is it important to set standards for product and process?

A:The EBD classroom is a comprehensive approach to teaching and learning. Whereas curricular content may be the primary focus in other classrooms, in an EBD classroom we challenge students to master content while simultaneously achieving progress in two other related areas of learning. In EBD we look to: a. Create a "quality" classroom community environment that is emotionally and physically safe for all students and supportive of learning through collaborative work b. Engage students in complex, relatively open-ended problems-to-solve (challenges) that produce evidence of increasingly sophisticated understanding of curricular content c. Develop in students a range of specific skills we know are "critical" to success in school and life thereafter.

Achieving all of these at once is an ambitious undertaking. Yet, many EBD practitioners realize these ends on a fairly regular basis and are able to verify that they are doing so. How?

Successful EBD practitioners "set criteria for quality" and assess student performance in terms of these criteria as a matter of course in their classrooms. By that I mean that they and their students regularly spend time discussing expectations for the products they create, the group processes they will use, and skills they will develop. And, most importantly, they assess their progress in each area using these criteria.