C hapter 7

Maximizing the Benefits of Working

Cooperatively with Peers

Kimber L. Wilkerson and Jenna L. Lequia

W alking down the halls of a typical American school, it is not unusual to see
students working together: huddled over an art project; conferring with each other
on drafts of a writing assignment; sitting shoulder to shoulder in front of a computer
screen bantering about which option to choose next. Given the student–­teacher
ratio in typical, traditional schools, a general education teacher would be hard-­
pressed to keep everyone on task without relying on some form of peer-­mediated
instruction throughout the day. Explicitly and consciously arranging students into
small groups with their peers for instruction is commonly referred to as coopera-
tive learning, and the practice is prevalent across grade levels and content areas.
In this chapter we provide a brief overview of the evidence base that sup-
ports the use of cooperative learning across grade levels, highlighting benefits for
students with disabilities who are included in those cooperative learning groups
with peers. We also provide sample cooperative learning lesson elements and an
illustrative lesson plan to hopefully prompt ideas and provide inspiration for ways
that cooperative learning could be put to good use in your own classrooms and
schools. When grouping peers together there are inevitable pitfalls: students chat-
ting about their weekend plans instead of analyzing a poem; classmates growing
short-­tempered with the one student in their group who is chronically off task;
friends deciding that the “smart” student should complete the bulk of certain tasks
so that they all get a good grade, undermining the teacher’s best intentions. These
kinds of pitfalls can be avoided by fine-­tuning lesson plans. In this chapter we also
provide suggestions for ways to tweak lesson plans in order to capitalize on group
interaction in the most instructionally productive ways.
224
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 225

Because it is also common for general educators to be joined in the classroom

by other educational professionals, or even adult volunteers, we also suggest strate-
gies for incorporating paraprofessionals and other educational professionals into
the implementation of small-group work. It is our belief and hope that attention to
all these details will allow teachers to get the most out of the common classroom
practice of having students work together.

What Is “Small‑Group Instruction”?

Small-group instruction is an instructional arrangement wherein students within

a class are divided into groups for the purpose of learning (Lou et al., 1996). Coop-
erative learning is a specific small-group instructional arrangement. In a lesson
that relies on cooperative learning, the teacher typically arranges students into
groups of three to five students, with students intentionally grouped by the teacher.
Important considerations for group composition are provided in a separate section
later in the chapter.
Small-group instruction—­ including cooperative learning specifically—­
contrasts with whole-class instruction, wherein a whole class of students works
toward the same instructional objective. Utilizing small-group instruction enables
teachers to increase instructional time and increase opportunities for students
to respond to and practice new academic skills with their peers, which has been
linked to higher outcomes for students—­including those with disabilities. Con-
versely, excessive reliance on whole-class instruction and individual seatwork sets
the stage for off-task behavior by students who need more hands-on instructional
guidance to be successful.
Another benefit of small-group instruction is that it increases a teacher’s abil-
ity to individualize instruction, a necessary but challenging prospect for teach-
ers in general education settings. With students working in small groups, teach-
ers can choose to give instructions or explanations to the whole class or just to
specific groups of students as needed. Using small-­group arrangements during
instructional time also gives teachers an opportunity to vary assignments (within
or across groups) or to individualize instruction within the larger group by spend-
ing time with selected groups. Using small groups is one way for general educa-
tion teachers to differentiate instruction. (See Regan, Evmenova, Mastropieri, &
Scruggs, Chapter 2, this volume, for more information on differentiated instruc-
tion.)

Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers

Overwhelmingly, the literature has demonstrated that working cooperatively with

peers in small groups has a variety of benefits for students of all grade levels, as
well as teachers of all major content areas (McMaster & Fuchs, 2002). The compo-
226 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

nents of small-group instruction increase the feasibility (Ling, Hawkins, & Weber,
2011), efficiency (Ledford & Wolery, 2013), and quality (Jones & Henriksen, 2013)
of instruction, while also allowing for teachers to meet the needs of learners of
diverse ability levels (Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Zentall, Craig, & Kuester, 2011).
For students, working cooperatively with peers has been shown to enhance aca-
demic achievement in all content areas (Gillies 2003, 2006; Gillies & Ashman, 2000;
Kamps et al., 2008), self-­efficacy as a learner (Gillies, 2003), and social skills (Kue-
ster & Zentall, 2012; Ledford & Wolery, 2013). In the remainder of this section we
outline specific strategies and provide a summary of benefits to both teachers and
students that have been associated with these strategies.

Benefits for Teachers
Perhaps one of the most important benefits that the use of small-group arrange-
ments affords teachers is the ability to accommodate diverse learning needs (John-
son & Johnson, 1999; Zentall et al., 2011), ultimately increasing the efficiency of
instruction (Ledford & Wolery, 2013) and promoting the inclusion of students with
disabilities—­even those students with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities
(Piercy, Wilton, & Townsend, 2002)—in the general education classroom (Gillies
& Ashman, 2000; Stevens & Slavin, 1995). See Strain and Bovey (Chapter 9, this
volume) for more information on peer-­mediated interventions for students with
severe disabilities.
Consider the use of cooperative learning groups with elementary students
who have attention-­ deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a population that
has been shown to encounter social failure (Zentall et al., 2011). Teachers who
have a student with ADHD in their classroom may want to address that student’s
social skills needs as part of everyday instruction. The use of cooperative learn-
ing groups allows teachers to target both social and academic goals for all mem-
bers of a group while they collaborate to achieve a common goal. For example,
one requirement of a cooperative learning group can be the display of a specified
number of predefined social skills (e.g., listening to peers, discussing the assign-
ment with group mates, taking turns sharing ideas), while simultaneously dem-
onstrating understanding of the academic content. Integrating instruction and
practice of social skills into academic group work allows a teacher to address the
social and behavioral needs of a student with ADHD in authentic and inclusive
education tasks.
In addition to improving the efficiency of instruction, research has shown
that having students work cooperatively with their peers enhances the quality
of instruction provided by teachers (Jones & Henriksen, 2013). Upon evaluating
teacher and student behaviors during cooperative and small-group learning in a
variety of subject areas in eighth-­grade classrooms, it was found that the use of
cooperative learning groups increased the amount of feedback provided to students
in the form of speculative and/or challenging questions (Gillies, 2006). Working
cooperatively with peers also fosters the active involvement of all students in each
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 227

step of the learning process (Gillies & Ashman, 2000; Johnson & Johnson, 1999).
Further, such arrangements allow for explicit instruction on behavioral or social
expectations through prompts directed to the entire class or one group. Small-
group instructional arrangements, especially those with interdependent contin-
gencies, allow teachers to bring attention to appropriate social behaviors rather
than resorting to reactive disciplinary actions or comments (Gillies, 2006; Ling et
al., 2011).
The incorporation of various interdependent contingencies to small-group
instructional arrangements provides additional benefit to teachers. Due to the
interdependent nature of these reward contingencies, it is possible to implement
them in ways that require fairly low effort on the part of teachers, thus increas-
ing the feasibility of implementation (Ling et al., 2011). Finally, the use of small-
group instructional arrangements decreases dependency on teachers to provide
all learning opportunities. When having students work cooperatively with their
peers, teachers are able to capitalize on other students modeling behaviors or skills
that are being targeted during a small-group instructional session (Ledford & Wol-
ery, 2013). This arrangement increases the number of learning opportunities that
students with disabilities are exposed to through observing their peers.

Benefits for Students
Small-group instructional strategies have also been shown to be beneficial to stu-
dents in the areas of motivation, self-­efficacy as a learner, academic achievement,
social development and social acceptance. Positive outcomes in the aforemen-
tioned areas have been demonstrated across grade-­levels and core content areas
(McMaster & Fuchs, 2002). When students work cooperatively with their peers,
there are positive effects on learners of diverse ability levels: students without dis-
abilities (Hawkins, Musti-Rao, Hughes, Berry, & McGuire, 2009; Gillies, 2006; Song
& Grabowski, 2006), students at risk for a disability (Kamps et al., 2008; Kuester &
Zentall, 2012; Ling et al., 2011), and students with disabilities (Gillies & Ashman,
2000; Ledford & Wolery, 2013).

Academic Achievement
When selecting teaching methods and approaches, perhaps one of the most impor-
tant things to consider is the effect of a strategy on student academic outcomes.
Often times, new methods or strategies are pursued in an attempt to improve
student learning. The literature on the use of small-group instruction has dem-
onstrated positive gains in various content areas for students of all grade levels
(McMaster & Fuchs, 2002). Even targeting social skills has been suggested to con-
tribute to the academic achievement of students with disabilities working coopera-
tively with their peers (Gillies & Ashman, 2000). In an evaluation of cooperative
learning groups that incorporate individual accountability as well as group goals,
Stevens and Slavin (1995) attribute academic achievement gains to the explana-
228 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

tions of concepts and skills provided when students work in groups with their
peers. The researchers noted a direct relationship wherein the more elaborate the
explanations provided in the group, the better the group members’ performance
on achievement tests. (See Scornavacco et al., Chapter 4, this volume, for more
information on promoting peer discourse.)

Motivation
An essential element of teaching students with and without disabilities is motiva-
tion. One way that teachers can address or increase student motivation is hav-
ing students work in groups with their peers (Kuester & Zentall, 2012; Song &
Grabowski, 2006). Whether a teacher is looking to increase intrinsic motivation for
the process of learning or plans to explicitly address motivation by incorporating
an interdependent reward contingency, such strategies offer ample opportunities
to increase student motivation. The literature suggests that cooperative learning
arrangements result in higher productivity on tasks than independent arrange-
ments, as students who regularly work cooperatively with peers grow accustomed
to sharing perspectives, ideas, and knowledge about the topics being covered
(Johnson & Johnson, 1999).

Self‑Efficacy
An additional benefit of having students work cooperatively with their peers,
which is related to level of motivation, is an increased sense of self-­efficacy as a
learner. Bandura (1977) identifies four factors that contribute to self-­efficacy: mas-
tery experiences, social modeling, social persuasion, and psychological responses.
Many of these are essential elements of small-group instructional arrangements.
When students work in cooperative arrangements with their peers, their perceived
ability as a learner has been shown to improve (Jones & Henriksen, 2013; Stevens &
Slavin, 1995). Gillies (2003) examined the use of cooperative groups for students in
eighth grade and found that placing students in structured groups with a specific
shared problem-­solving task was associated with students having strong percep-
tions that the work they were doing together in groups was of high quality. As a
student, understanding how to obtain assistance for a problem that you are unsure
how to solve is just as important as knowing the answer—­both of these, process
and outcome, are emphasized in cooperative learning groups.

Social Development
As previously mentioned, placing students in small-group arrangements with
peers to work on tasks provides ample opportunities to explicitly target, teach,
and model appropriate social skills. At the elementary level, cooperative learning
groups have been associated with improvement in sharing and listening to diverse
perspectives (Stockall, 2011). It has been noted that explicit instruction on social
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 229

skills may be necessary to modify the social behaviors of students with disabilities
(Zentall et al., 2011); arranging students in groups with their peers provides oppor-
tunities for these students to practice targeted social skills and observe typically
developing peers engaging in targeted and other appropriate social skills (Ledford
& Wolery, 2013). Additionally, incorporating small-group instructional arrange-
ments increases the collaborative skills of all students (Gillies, 2003), which has
the proximal benefit of improving the classroom climate, and the distal benefit of
reinforcing skills that are essential to success in work settings.

Social Acceptance
The use of small-group arrangements not only provides increased academic per-
formance, it also promotes the social inclusion of students with disabilities (Gillies
& Ashman, 2000; Stevens & Slavin, 1995). Including students with disabilities in
general education classrooms requires planning and preparation. In order to foster
quality inclusive environments, it is necessary that students with disabilities have
the opportunity to work cooperatively with typically developing peers to achieve
a common goal (Alquraini & Gut, 2012). While such arrangements have the poten-
tial for these students to learn appropriate social skills from observing their peers
(Ledford & Wolery, 2013), the arrangement also affects the peers. The increased
exposure and interaction with students with disabilities helps typically develop-
ing peers understand that these students have things in common with them, ulti-
mately increasing typically developing peers’ social acceptance of students with
disabilities (Kuester & Zentall, 2012; Stevens & Slavin, 1995). The use of cooperative
learning groups has also been shown to increase the number of friends students
have overall (Stevens & Slavin, 1995).

Lesson Qualities That Maximize Benefits for Students

In order to best capitalize on the strength of small-group instruction, teachers

should be mindful of four important lesson plan elements:

1. Group composition
2. Nature of the group task
3. Individual accountability
4. Relative ability of group members

These four elements can have a significant impact on increases in task-­related

interactions and increases in academic achievement. Each of these four elements
is further described and illustrated in the following sections. Figure 7.1 provides a
graphic depiction of a summary of the step-by-step decision process and instruc-
tional elements that educators should consider when designing cooperative learn-
ing lessons.
230 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

Step 1: Group Composition

Form groups consciously
• Heterogeneous groups (i.e., mixed ability groups)
Math or Science tasks
• Homogenous groups (i.e., similar ability groups)
Reading tasks

Step 2: Nature of Group Task

Arrange for positive interdependence
• Identify group goal
• Specify roles
• Incorporate group contingency

Step 3: Individual Accountability

Incorporate plan for assessing individual students
• Quizzes
• Summary sheet
• Roles in group project (e.g., expertise in area)

Step 4: Relative Ability of Group Members

Create equal opportunities for success
• Improve on individual past performance
• Allow for multiple forms of contribution

Step 5: Roles of Educational Professionals

Identify roles for various educational professionals
• Assist with progress monitoring of groups
• Facilitate discussion within groups
• Monitor and reward appropriate behavior

FIGURE 7.1. Step-by-step outline of how to arrange cooperative learning groups.

 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 231

Group Composition
The decision to place students in heterogeneous versus homogeneous ability
groups with peers depends on the nature of the learning task (Noddings, 1989).
With regard to subject area of instruction, a meta-­analysis of within-­class grouping
found that overall effect sizes for homogeneous and heterogeneous ability instruc-
tional groups in mathematics and science were not significantly different; in read-
ing, however, placing students in homogeneous ability groups with peers was
superior (Lou et al., 1996). This finding may be due to the fact that tasks in math
and science are typically more hierarchical; thus, group discussion and assistance
from peers of varying abilities may be more likely to benefit student progress (Lou
et al., 1996).
Lou et al.’s (1996) meta-­analysis also determined that the effects of homoge-
neous versus heterogeneous groups were not stable across student ability. Stu-
dents whose academic skills were low learned significantly more when placed in
heterogeneous groups with peers, regardless of subject matter. This outcome is
most likely because students who are farthest from mastery of a particular content
have the most to gain from peer interaction around learning tasks. When placed
in homogeneous groups, with other students who are equally far from mastery,
struggling students then lack access to models of more capable thinkers as well as
peers who can stretch their learning. When placed in heterogeneous groups, stu-
dents whose grasp of the content is initially more tenuous can think through the
academic tasks at hand with peers whose understanding is more advanced than
their own. Lev Vygotsky named this learner space the “zone of proximal develop-
ment,” referring to the distance between a learner’s current, actual developmental
level and his or her potential level of development (1978, p. 86). Working with peers
whose development (i.e., understanding of the current academic task), is slightly
advanced allows a student to edge his own mastery of the task forward. Teachers
who structure learning tasks to take advantage of the heterogeneity in their class-
rooms are capitalizing on this phenomenon. See Figure 7.2 for a depiction of differ-
ent options for group composition for cooperative learning groups.
The benefit of participating in learning tasks with peers of differing abilities
applies to social learning as well. For students who exhibit challenging behavior,
the social benefits of learning alongside peers who are more socially adept are well
established. This research underscores that the social and academic growth of stu-
dents with disabilities is maximized by their participation in heterogeneous ability
groups during small-group instruction, particularly in math and science.

Nature of the Group Task
Designing a cooperative learning lesson starts with learning objectives that are
cooperative in nature or require interdependence to complete successfully. Simply
placing students in groups and asking them to complete an assignment that could
just as easily have been completed alone will not reap the positive social and aca-
232 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

FIGURE 7.2. Variations in composition of cooperative learning groups.

 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 233

demic benefits that small-group work has to offer. Learning objectives that encour-
age or, ideally, require students to work together are an important foundational
element of successful cooperative learning lessons.
Although it may seem obvious, one important part of designing a coopera-
tive lesson to keep in mind is that the task must include a true group goal, oth-
erwise known as positive interdependence. Positive interdependence exists when
individual students perceive that their accomplishments contribute positively to
the accomplishments of others. When students in small groups are recognized
for the accomplishments of their group as a whole, positive interdependence is in
place and the learning is considered cooperative. When students are physically
placed into small groups with peers for instruction but no structure is in place
for positive interdependence, the learning is considered competitive or individu-
alistic in nature. Students working toward a collaborative or group goal have
been found to develop concepts that are richer and more precise than students
who work independently under competitive or individualistic goal structures
(Kol’tsova, 1978).
Ensuring that students work toward a group goal is best facilitated by assign-
ing group tasks. A group task is one that requires some type of input from all the
peers in the group in order for the group to be successful (Cohen, 1994). A task
that could easily be completed by the individual group members without each
other’s input or assistance is not likely to facilitate interaction for all group mem-
bers. This is particularly true for students who struggle to master new content
or who struggle socially; these are the students who may be perceived by their
peers as having little to offer the group. To circumvent this problem, Cohen and
Cohen (1991) suggest utilizing a classroom management system that encourages
students to be responsible for each other’s success, issuing specific roles during
group work to help ensure that groups function in a prespecified manner and
utilizing ill-­structured tasks (i.e., ones that do not have a single correct answer)
for group collaboration. Figure 7.3 presents sample cooperative learning group
tasks in the form of lesson objectives that incorporate positive interdependence.
Figure 7.4 includes sample group tasks that lack elements that encourage posi-
tive interdependence, along with suggestions on how to improve those tasks to
optimize their effectiveness for promoting social competence and collaboration
among peers.
Positive interdependence in small-group work can be created through goal
interdependence, as described previously, but can also be promoted through con-
tingencies and reward structures, referred to as reward interdependence. This is an
effective technique that teachers can use to create a cooperative learning group
task for which all peers in the group receive a reward when the group collectively
has met some standard. In behavioral literature, this concept is referred to as an
interdependent group contingency. When an interdependent group contingency
is set up, peers will encourage each other to ensure that the group is successful.
Instigating an interdependent group contingency has the added effect of ensuring
 234 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

Cooperative Learning Lesson Objectives Evidence of Positive Interdependence

Academic: When working in small groups and playing the Students are responsible for asking questions
question game, students will correctly answer a minimum of of the other members in their small groups.
three comprehension questions. This activity cannot be completed successfully
Social: When working in small groups, students will take unless each student actively participates by
turns when choosing and answering question cards. asking and answering questions aloud.

Academic: While working in pairs, students will ask “who,” Students decide with their partners how many
“what,” and “where” questions related to the book they pages each will read before switching roles.
are reading. Also, while working in pairs, each student will The students also decide how many pages
answer his or her partner’s questions using details from the they will read before stopping to generate
book they are reading. questions. Each student is responsible for
Social: Students will interact positively in relation to their asking one question at each stopping point.
shared reading tasks, which include shared questioning and The activity cannot be completed unless both
answering responsibilities. partners are actively listening and responding.

Academic: Students will work together to create and act out Each student has a role that he or she must
a short play. All members of the group will articulate different fulfill in order for the group to act out their
points of view via the different characters in the play. play.
Social: Students will use their group roles to work together
cooperatively and use conflict resolution skills when creating
a script for their play.
Academic: Students will accurately measure the length of Partners need to share supplies and help each
three different jumps by using strips of paper. Students will other roll out the paper to measure the length
accurately use strips of paper to measure how many units are of each partner’s jump. The students cannot
in their longest and shortest jumps. do this by themselves because there are not
Social: Students and their partners will work cooperatively by enough materials and the task is physically
helping each other mark their jumps with tape on the ground difficult to accomplish without at least one
and rolling out long strips of paper. helper.

FIGURE 7.3. Sample cooperative learning tasks that encourage positive interdependence. Sample
lesson objectives provided by Grace Doval and Jaime Ropski.

Group task that lacks Potential problem Suggestions for increasing positive
positive interdependence interdependence
In small groups, students One student may complete • Give each student in the group a role in
will create a cartoon the task for the whole the cartoon creation. Examples include
that demonstrates their group. illustrator, copy editor, and timekeeper.
understanding of analogies. • Require groups to create a brainstorm list
on chart paper that contains at least two
ideas from each group member before
they begin drafting the cartoon.
Students study a map Students will not • Give students a script to follow to quiz
together to prepare for a necessarily be invested their partners on the important map
U.S. history test. in their partners’ level of features. Have students “sign off” on
preparation for the test and their partners’ study sheet(s) when they
may not utilize the study have gone over the map questions at
session productively. least two times. Give credit on the test
for students who signed off on their
partners’ study sheets.

FIGURE 7.4. Solutions to potential problems with group tasks.

 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 235

that all group members actively participate and thus have the chance to benefit
academically. See Figure 7.5 for examples of interdependent group contingencies
that would be appropriate in a variety of subjects and across grade levels.
According to Slavin (1995), creating an interdependent group contingency is
the best way to avoid small-group work in which one or more members “slack off”
or where low-­status or low-­ability students are discouraged by the other members
of the group from participating. By making increased achievement the group goal
for all members and by rewarding groups that accomplish their goal (i.e., reward

Appropriate Subject
grade level area Sample interdependent group contingency
Elementary Any Students will self-assess their contribution to the group work using a checklist.
If all group members complete the checklist, the whole group gets a sticker.
Science In small groups, students complete a K-W-L chart (“K” = Know, “W” = Want
to know, “L” = Learned). Groups are instructed that each member of the
group must add an item to the “K” and “W” columns and have those items
checked by a teacher before they can retrieve the materials for the science
activity. When checking the K-W-L charts, the teacher can place a star next
to at least one “W” (“Want to know”) item for each member of the group.
(Note: the teacher may have to facilitate the addition of more “W” entries to
ensure that the items will be addressed by the upcoming activity.) At the end
of the activity, groups will receive a reward if each member can complete the
“L” section of the chart with an entry that corresponds to the starred “W”
items.
Middle English After having been instructed to brainstorm a list of analogies on chart paper,
school with each member being expected to contribute, groups will be graded
on the degree to which all group members’ ideas are reflected in the final
brainstorm list.
Science Students are each given 10 previously unknown vocabulary words to study.
(Note: word lists can be individualized by the teacher, or even selected from a
pool of words by the students themselves.) Students are put into small groups
and instructed to help each other learn the new words. Each group whose
members all score at least 8 out of 10 on the vocabulary quiz gets to choose a
song to play during Friday lab cleanup.
High school Math After completing a small-group study activity reviewing a practice test, all
members of the group get 3 extra points on the test if every member of
the group increases his or her score from the score achieved on the previous
attempt at the practice test.
History Groups of three students will be assigned to research a specific political
movement and write a three-paragraph summary. As part the assignment,
each student will have a first draft edited by one group mate and the teacher.
The second group mate will review the final draft to make sure that all
suggestions on the first draft (from the peer and the teacher) have been
incorporated into the final draft. Final grades for the project will be based on
the quality of the final draft, the extent to which feedback was incorporated,
and the extent to which peers made sure that their group mates incorporated
feedback.

FIGURE 7.5. Sample interdependent group contingencies and group reward structure. Italicized
text denotes the rewarded interdependence in each example.
236 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

interdependence), all members of a group will be more likely to interact, maxi-

mizing academic growth for all. Various researchers have supported this notion,
reporting that the greatest effects of cooperative learning come when groups are
rewarded for the increased achievement of all the members of their groups (David-
son, 1985; Ellis & Fouts, 1993; Manning & Lucking, 1991; Slavin, 1983). The sample
group contingencies in Figure 7.5 could be adapted for use in a wide variety of
inclusive classrooms to promote cooperative behavior when working in groups
with peers.
Another consideration for teachers when designing a group task is to think
about ways that the task could be individualized for specific students. The impor-
tance and merit of this facet of small-group instruction is underscored by research-
ers’ findings that the effectiveness of small-group work as an instructional strategy
is magnified when teachers are able to individualize instructional materials across
groups (Lou et al., 1996). This individualization can take the form of assigning
roles that are crafted to allow students with a range of strengths and abilities to be
pushed to learn and grow, or it can take the form of individualizing specific tasks
expected of students under the umbrella of an encompassing group goal. The sam-
ple lesson in Figure 7.6 provides examples of ways that tasks can be individualized,
through the use of accommodations and role differentiation, without losing access
to the benefits of cooperative group learning. See Section V of the sample lesson
plan for specific examples of accommodations made for learners with disabilities.
The lesson plan in Figure 7.6 also includes the other lesson plan elements that are
recommended for effective cooperative learning instruction.
Overall, positive interdependence that is established by utilizing group
rewards in conjunction with group goals maximizes the positive effects of small-
group instruction on academic growth for all students. Tudge (1992) contends
that adding these factors to group work introduces the element of motivation
that is lacking in most work in the Vygotskian and Piagetian traditions. It may
not matter, for example, how much overlap exists in students’ zones of proximal
development if they simply refuse to speak to each other. Adding the elements of
explicit group goals and group rewards provides the motivation for the valuable
interaction to take place. Attention to these additional elements acknowledges
that contextual factors also influence learning when peers come together around
academic tasks.
This acknowledgment that students may need motivation to participate fully
and effectively in group work may be especially relevant for students with emo-
tional and behavioral disorders or other students with disabilities who have social
skill needs delineated in their individualized education programs (IEPs). These
students are prime candidates for missing the benefits of task-­related peer interac-
tion if they are left in small groups with little structure and where their participa-
tion in the group task may not be a welcome prospect to peers. Additionally, it is
well established that students with emotional and behavioral disorders, particu-
larly, frequently respond well to behavioral interventions.
(text continues on p. 240)
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 237

Cooperative Learning Lesson Plan

Curriculum Area: Math Time Frame: 9:00–10:00
Name of lesson: Jump Measuring Grade level: 2

I. Enduring understandings:
• Students will accurately measure the length of three different jumps by using strips of paper.
• Students will accurately use strips of blue paper to measure how many units are in their
longest and shortest jumps.
• Students will work cooperatively with their partner(s) by helping each other mark their jumps
with tape on the ground and rolling out the long strips of paper to measure their jumps.

Essential questions:
• How can I accurately measure how far I can jump using blue strips of paper as the units?
• How many yellow strips of paper are in a blue strip of paper?
• How can I work with a partner to help me accurately track and measure my jump?

II. Common Core State Standards addressed in this lesson:

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.2.MD.A.1
Measure the length of an object by selecting and using appropriate tools such as rulers,
yardsticks, meter sticks, and measuring tapes.

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.2.MD.A.4
Measure to determine how much longer one object is than another, expressing the length
difference in terms of a standard length unit.

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.2.MD.A.2
Measure the length of an object twice, using length units of different lengths for the two
measurements; describe how the two measurements relate to the size of the unit chosen.

III. Evidence of understanding/learning (student assessment procedures):

Students will fill out a worksheet and answer the questions. I will use this to check for
understanding, and the adults in the classroom will also supervise when the students jump to
make sure that they are following directions and measuring correctly and accurately (using the
skills and rules that are discussed at the beginning of the lesson).

In the first part of the worksheet, the students have to figure out which jump is the longest
and shortest. The students know and understand the difference between “long” and “short”
so they should be able to answer these questions on their own. The additional questions on the
worksheet will be used to check for understanding. The adults in the classroom will observe the
students as they are using the blue and yellow strips of paper to measure the length of their
jumps. The blue strips of paper are twice the size of the yellow strips, and the students will have
to understand this in order to use both of the strips of paper to measure. Using observations,
I will look to see which students understand this concept, and which students need more help
with it. Based on their worksheets and the strips of paper that they will attach to them, I will
be able to see how accurate their answers are when comparing the length of their jumps to the
blue and yellow strips of paper.

(continued)

FIGURE 7.6. Sample cooperative learning lesson plan.

238 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

IV. Lesson objectives and outcomes:

A. Academic: Students will accurately measure (using the rules of measuring) the length of
three different jumps by using strips of paper.
Students will accurately use strips of blue paper to measure how many units are in their longest
and shortest jumps.

B. Social: Students will work cooperatively with their partner(s) by helping each other mark
their jumps on the ground with tape and rolling out the long strips of paper.

V. Lesson objectives for students with unique learning characteristics:

Cailey:
• Cailey often does not participate in class activities, so my main goal is for her to participate.
In addition, I have the same social and academic goals and expectations for her as I do for
the rest of the class. Socially, I would like to stress the importance of Cailey working with her
partner instead of working alone and refusing to work with others, as she has done in the
past.
• If Cailey leaves the classroom or does not want to participate, I will invite her into the activity
multiple times, and if she does not decide to participate then she will not participate. I also
will try to work with her to see if that gets her to become more interested in working on this
activity.

Carlisle:
• Carlisle also has the same social and academic goals as the rest of the class, but I would like
to stress the social goal for him as well. He often does not work well with other students in
the class, and I would really like to see him help out his partners. He worked with the same
partners in one of the last measuring activities and did a great job, so I would like to see the
same for this lesson. If he is being contrary with his peers during this activity, I will have him
take a break and finish what he missed during snack/recess.

Leslie:
• For Leslie, I would like to stress the measurement vocabulary and the size of the blue and
yellow strips. I think that she will have a hard time understanding that the blue strip is twice
the size of the yellow strip, as well as the other measurement rules, so I will make sure to
stress this with her. I will also talk with her specifically about one measuring rule—do not
leave space between the strips of paper—so that she will keep this rule in mind, and I will call
on her to share it at the end of the lesson.

VI. Materials: jumping worksheet, tape, rolling paper, blue and yellow strips, rules for measuring
strips of paper, scissors, paper clips

VII. Key or new vocabulary and concepts:

• Measurement
• Units
• Frog, rabbit, human jump

(continued)

FIGURE 7.6. (continued)

 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 239

VIII. Teaching procedure and techniques:

a. Introduction or anchor activity (30 seconds)
Students will meet at the carpet.
“Raise your hand if you think that you can jump really far” (watch as students raise their
hands). “Great! Today we are going to measure how far you can jump!”
b. Instructional sequence

Instructions and demonstration (15 minutes):

• “You are going to work with a partner to mark and measure three different jumps: a frog
jump, a rabbit jump, and a kid jump. For the frog jump, you will start from a squatting
position, starting and ending with both your hands and feet on the floor” (choose student to
demonstrate). “For the rabbit jump, you will jump from an almost standing position with your
knees bent, feet together, and hands staying in front” (choose student to demonstrate). “For
the kid jump, you will do the same thing as the rabbit jump, but you can use your arms to
pump forward” (choose student to demonstrate).
||“When you do each of your three jumps, you will begin at the piece of tape that is marked

on the floor. Your toes should be behind that piece of tape (demonstrate). After you jump
you MUST land with both of your feet next to each other. If your feet are not next to each
other, then your partner will mark the foot that is furthest back. When you land with both
of your feet together, you will stand where you landed while your partner puts a piece of
tape behind your HEELS to mark where you landed.”
||“Make sure that you are working with your partner for this part. You will not be able to

do it on your own. Then, you will take a strip of paper. Have your partner hold it at the
starting line and roll it out to where your partner taped your landing spot on the floor. Cut
the piece of paper where your landing spot was. Then, write your name and the jump you
did on the piece of paper. Repeat this for each of the jumps for you and your partner.”
• “Once you complete all three jumps, you will decide which jump was the longest and which
was the shortest. You are going to measure those two jumps using these blue strips of
paper. Mrs. A told me that you did a great job using these strips of paper last week, so I am
expecting you to do the same today.”
||“Are these strips of paper the same size?”

||“No, the blue piece is twice the size of the yellow piece.”

||Demonstrate measuring a line on the chalkboard with the yellow and blue strips.

„„ “Should I start at the edge or go over the edge with my strip?”

„„ “What do I do if I do not have enough strips to reach the whole line?”

††“Use your finger or chalk to mark where you were.”

††“Use yellow or blue pieces.”

„„ “Can I leave spaces between each strip?”

„„ “What if my paper goes over/under my ending line?”

„„ “Can I overlap the strips?”

„„ “Can I move the strips in a crooked line?”

Dismiss students to stations

c. Activity (35 minutes)

Walk around to assist, observe, and answer student questions.
When students are finished, they can record their jumps on the chart in the front of the
room. If there is not time, they can record it next time.
• Chart: longest jump, shortest jump, blue strips, yellow strips (figure this out—yellow is half
of the blue).
(continued)

FIGURE 7.6. (continued)

240 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

d. Closure (10 minutes)

Have students write the length of their longest jump and shortest jump on the board.
• Look at results and discuss.
“I saw a lot of you measuring your jumps in different ways. What are some of the rules we
need to remember when we are measuring our jumps?”
Discussion and reflection on working with partners.
• “How did your partner help you with this activity?”
• “Could you have completed this activity without your partner?”
“Next time, we are going to figure out how to find the difference between our longest and
shortest jumps.”

Transition to next activity

I will have the students give me their worksheet and pieces of paper from their jumps (paper
clip them together), and then dismiss the students to either get on their jackets for recess or
wash their hands for lunch.

IX. Extension and enrichment:

If students finish measuring their jump using the blue and yellow strips early, I will have them
practice measuring using popsicle sticks and their own feet. They may also solve the difference
between their longest and shortest jump if they finish all of this.

X. Application/maintenance/generalization of skills and concepts:

Students will continue using measurement throughout their schooling experience and in
everyday life. Upcoming lessons will reinforce these skills and we will build on them now, as
teachers will in future grade levels.

XI. Additional cooperative learning elements:

Group Processing: The discussion at the conclusion of the lesson will give me feedback from the
students and get them to think about how well they worked in partners and how their partners
helped them in this activity.

Social Skills: When students are working in partners, they need to interact by sharing supplies
and communicating while measuring the length of their jumps.

Face-to-Face Interactions: Partners need to assist one another in marking where each partner
jumped to, as well as helping roll out the paper and cutting to measure the length of their jump.
The students will not be able to do the assignment by themselves because there are too many
materials and the paper will roll up if one person is not holding the other end.

FIGURE 7.6. (continued)

Individual Accountability
While the importance of having all group members invested in their peers’ suc-
cess has been established, it is also important to incorporate a mechanism for indi-
vidual accountability. A lesson that includes individual accountability ensures that
growth or success for each student in each group is given attention. Individual
accountability is in place when the teacher overseeing the lesson can ascertain
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 241

on an individual basis whether or not students have met the learning objectives.
Examples of ways that individual accountability can be ensured include:

• Individual quizzes
• Individual summary sheets submitted along with group summary sheets
• Group lessons that require individual students to acquire expertise on a
topic and share information on that topic with their peers in order to com-
plete the group project

In all these examples, a teacher could easily check an individual student’s learning
and hold each student accountable for mastering learning objectives. See Figure 7.7
for classroom examples of ways that teachers can incorporate individual account-
ability into cooperative learning lessons. These examples correspond to sample
lesson plans referenced in earlier sections of this chapter.
When incorporating individual accountability, it is important to do so in a way
that does not undermine the positive interdependence that was established by the
creation of a group goal. Consider one of the examples from Figure 7.7. If a high
school teacher were to individually assess students on their understanding of an
assigned text that was explored and studied by students collaboratively in coop-
erative groups, this approach would certainly have the intended effect of holding
each student accountable for the learning objectives. However, if the only assess-
ment were the individual students’ performance on a test, the students would have
little incentive to be invested in their group mates’ acquisition of the content. How-
ever, if the teacher also assigned a grade to the groups based on their completion
of a self-­assessment form using group processing or required students to turn in

Appropriate
grade level Example of individual accountability
Any By fulfilling activities associated with assigned group roles, all students are required to
be active participants in their groups.
K–1 Every student will have to write at least one new adjective on his or her group’s poster.
Everyone will have a different color marker, so this will make it clear to the teacher and
students in the group that each student has contributed.
3–5 During a shared reading activity, each student is responsible for generating his or her
own question at each stopping point. Each student is also responsible for answering his
or her partner’s questions at each stopping point.
6–8 Students complete all tasks associated with their roles in the group and contribute at
least one idea for the group’s culminating play. During the lesson, students write ideas
for the play on separate pieces of paper. The final product must include at least one
idea from each group member.
9–12 Each student in the group is responsible for knowing the assigned text well enough to
answer the comprehension questions individually.

FIGURE 7.7. Examples of ways to include individual accountability in cooperative learning lessons.
Lesson elements provided by Emma Becher, Grace Doval, Tiffany Mason, and Jaime Ropski.
242 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

a study sheet completed collectively by all group members prior to the individual
tests being administered, the teacher would be ensuring that the groups still had
reason to be invested in high-­quality interaction with their peers.

Relative Ability of Group Members

As underscored earlier in the chapter, the relative abilities of the members of a
group—both in academic as well as social domains—­have a significant impact on
the success of cooperative learning groups as a mode of instruction. Assuming an
increase in the social acceptance of students with disabilities is a goal, the coop-
erative learning group tasks that teachers create must involve quality interactions.
One important way to promote quality interaction is to ensure that all group mem-
bers believe they have an equal opportunity for success. If tasks are structured in
such a way that certain members of the group can succeed more easily than others,
the stage for divisiveness may be set. Placing students in heterogeneous-­ability
cooperative learning groups will not necessarily lead to an increase in positive
interactions unless some structure is built into the activity to create an “even play-
ing field.” Creating group tasks in which all students believe they can contribute to
the good of the group helps promote acceptance and leads to more positive interac-
tions and, it is hoped, to increased achievement.
Some manifestations of cooperative learning have these characteristics.
For example, researchers at Johns Hopkins University have developed coopera-
tive learning techniques that allow students to contribute to their group’s goal
by improving their own past performance. In these methods, group rewards are
given to groups based on the extent to which individual members meet or exceed
their own earlier levels of achievement. These methods prevent peers from view-
ing low-­achieving students as burdensome and promote acceptance of students for
whom mastery of academic content is more challenging, including some students
with disabilities (Madden & Slavin, 1983; Slavin, 1984).
Because students with emotional and behavioral disorders and learning dis-
abilities also struggle academically, methods that provide equal opportunities for
success for all students—­such as having students work cooperatively with peers—­
should be maximized in order to increase positive peer interactions. Increases in
peer interactions around academic tasks should then lead to better understanding
of the academic content around which the interactions take place.
To create cooperative learning activities that provide students with disabilities
with equal opportunities for success, teachers sometimes have to be highly cre-
ative. When using a cooperative learning method such as Slavin’s (1995) Student
Teams Achievement Divisions, groups are rewarded for their joint performance on
quizzes, but students add to their group’s performance depending on how much
they improve from their previous quiz score. This modification allows students to
compete with themselves rather than feeling like they must meet the same criteria
as all of the peers in their group to be deemed successful.
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 243

Other forms of cooperative learning produce equal opportunities for success

by allowing for alternative forms of assessment or by using group projects that
allow for multiple forms of contribution (e.g., one person creates illustrations, one
reads a defining passage aloud, one summarizes) as assessment activities. In these
ways, students are allowed to contribute according to their strengths while every-
one is still held responsible for learning and demonstrating that learning.

Suggested Solutions for Common Problems

in Cooperative Learning Arrangements

While use of cooperative learning groups is associated with many benefits for stu-
dents and teachers alike, some implementations of cooperative learning groups
can lead to problems in the classroom. These problems can usually be successfully
averted or corrected for the future by attending to a few important details. The
scenarios below provide depictions of common problems that teachers encounter
when using small-group instruction and tips for addressing those problems.

Scenario 1. Problems with Small‑Group Composition:

How Much Heterogeneity Is Too Much?
Ms. Joyce teaches sophomore English. During a poetry unit, she decides to arrange
her students into small groups for a cooperative peer editing activity. Ms. Joyce
consciously creates heterogeneous ability groups in hopes that this will benefit
her most academically challenged students by allowing them more individual
attention and practice at editing. However, when the students are instructed to
meet with their groups for the first time, Ms. Joyce notices almost immediately that
Group 1 is going to have problems.
Group 1 comprises Ruth, a quiet student who is the strongest writer in the
class; Ali, a friendly, capable student who does not exhibit any behavior difficul-
ties; and Darryl, a student with a learning disability with a pattern of noncompli-
ance when it comes to teacher requests. Ms. Joyce had hoped that Darryl would
feel at ease with Ruth and Ali and that he would exhibit less disruptive behavior in
a small group of three students. She also hoped Darryl would benefit from Ruth’s
expertise in writing. What she noticed, however, is that as soon as Ruth began giv-
ing a verbal overview of her written response, which was the first step of the small-
group peer editing assignment, Darryl became increasingly boisterous. Although
he was being complimentary to Ruth, it seemed clear to Ms. Joyce that Darryl was
self-­conscious about his own written response. Ten minutes into the group activity,
Darryl was making loud jokes and refusing to participate seriously.
Ms. Joyce had set up an interdependent contingency, wherein part of the stu-
dents’ overall grade on the paper would be based on the success of their group’s
peer editing exercise. Unfortunately, what Ms. Joyce saw unfolding was that ­Darryl
244 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

had little to gain, since he assumed he would eventually get a poor grade on the
assignment no matter whom he worked with. Since Ruth was a shy student, she
was not well equipped to redirect Darryl’s raucous jokes. Also, since Ruth’s grade
was the highest in the class, she had little motivation to ensure Darryl’s success.
(There was little chance that Ruth would get anything other than an A in the course
overall.) Ali was more invested in the peer editing process—­and the activity in
general—­than either Ruth or Darryl. However, Ali—like the rest of the students
in the class—was also aware of Ruth’s status as the strongest student and seemed
more set on deferring to Ruth than on actually working to get Darryl back on task.
At the moment when Ms. Joyce realized that Group 1 was on an unproductive
path, Ms. Joyce decided to address the situation by pulling Darryl out of the group
to work with her individually, directing Ruth and Ali to finish the assignment as a
pair, thus undermining the success of the cooperative activity and reinforcing the
idea that Darryl could not be successful in a group.
In this scenario, Ms. Joyce and her students experienced the negative effect
of too much heterogeneity. In order to prosper from interaction with peers, it is
important for students to work with others who are within their zones of proximal
development. Given the wide range of abilities that are typically found in general
education classrooms, the gap between the strongest student in a particular aca-
demic domain and the student with the greatest needs is often too great for those
students to work productively in a small group together. In this example, Darryl
might have benefited more from a small group consisting of Ali and one other
student who also struggled, but whose performance in the class was somewhere
between Ali and Darryl. With that group composition, Darryl would not have felt
as self-­conscious about his writing and may have had better, more productive role
models. Another benefit would have been that Ali would have been placed in the
role of de facto group expert, which might have been good for her self-­concept as
well. If Ms. Joyce were worried about having two struggling students in the same
group, she could have made a point to sit down with the group for part of their
work time, so as not to overburden Ali in the role of teacher.
The take-home message: Manage the bands of heterogeneity so that the gap
between the strongest student and the most challenged student in a group is not
too great.

Scenario 2. When a Group Goal Is Too Much Pressure

for Students Who Struggle
Mr. Sumi decides to place his fifth-grade students in cooperative learning groups
as part of a unit on the Harlem Renaissance. He decides to use a “jigsaw” strategy.
As a first step, Mr. Sumi organizes all the students in his class into “expert” groups,
where each expert group of five students is charged with doing research on a par-
ticular aspect of the Harlem Renaissance. After three class sessions, during which
the groups of experts spend time researching their group’s topic collectively, new
“jigsaw” groups, consisting of one student from each expert group, are formed. Mr.
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 245

Sumi decides to motivate the expert groups by saying that each expert group will
be evaluated by how well the other students in the later jigsaw groups learn the
content from each expert.
Nate is a student with a behavioral disorder who is prone to anxiety and mis-
trust in social situations. He has been assigned to the expert group that will be
researching music and dance. Mr. Sumi chose this group specifically for Nate
because of Nate’s interest in music; he correctly predicted that the content would
be of high interest to Nate. Unfortunately, what he did not predict was that Nate
would become so stressed by the prospect of being responsible for teaching the
music and dance content to the later jigsaw group that he actually stayed home
from school for all 3 days that the jigsaw groups were meeting. At the end of the
unit, Mr. Sumi felt deflated because he believed he had created a situation that led to
Nate’s status in the larger class—and with his “expert” group mates specifically—­
being compromised.
A suggestion for Mr. Sumi for the future would be to look for ways to provide
scaffolding to students like Nate. In this example, Mr. Sumi could have arranged
for Nate to have extra support at another time during the day to review the music
and dance content, or Mr. Sumi could have arranged for a paraprofessional to
spend time with the music and dance expert group with the explicit objective of
providing academic and emotional support to Nate without singling him out. Also,
because Mr. Sumi spent so much time and thought designing the complex assign-
ment, pulling together resources for the groups to use, and carefully choosing the
students who would be working together, he did not spend as much time thinking
about the critical skills that are required for students to teach each other content. In
this example, if Mr. Sumi had devoted a class session at the beginning of the unit to
explaining what the students could expect in the two different groups and teach-
ing the students how to teach their peers when they were put together in jigsaw
groups, Nate might have been less stressed by the activity. Just as it is important to
preteach the social skills needed to work cooperatively, it is important to teach the
interaction skills necessary to complete collaborative assignments. A class session
or two at the beginning of a unit can pay off in much higher-­quality work later in
the unit—as well as throughout other units later in the semester.
The take-home message: Students with disabilities may need support prior to
and during cooperative learning activities in order to be successful.

Scenario 3. Oil and Water: What If Some Students Just Don’t

Get Along?
It is important to remember that cooperative learning is a tool to help students
make gains in content knowledge and improve their social skills. If all goes well,
these two areas of improvement will, in turn, fuel each other. This is not the same
as having a goal of facilitating specific students getting along with other specific
students. If a teacher is aware that two students do not get along, it is fine to put
those students in different groups. In fact, it is probably preferable to put them in
246 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

separate groups so that time and energy can be spent on the learning task—not on
managing interpersonal dynamics.
As in Scenario 1, students should be placed in groups that will help them learn
and practice new skills. If students do not get along, it may be too much to expect
them to find common ground around a cooperative learning task. Just as with Sce-
nario 1, this kind of disparity between specific group members can result in group
dysfunction and hurt the other students in the group. This is not to suggest that
students only work with friends, but that teachers take care to form groups that
have a high likelihood of success.
The take-home message: Take interpersonal relationships into account when
forming groups.

Incorporating Other Educational Professionals

The use of cooperative group arrangements is highlighted in much of the literature

on the inclusion of students with disabilities—­even significant disabilities—­in gen-
eral education classrooms (Alquraini & Gut, 2012; Stevens & Slavin, 1995). Includ-
ing students with disabilities in the classroom with typically developing peers was
initiated by federal legislation and is increasingly pursued in schools across the
nation. There are various service delivery models that support inclusive education;
many of these models require collaboration across professionals and additional
personnel (e.g., co-­teaching and instructional assistants; Idol, 2006). Additionally,
students with disabilities often receive services from related professionals, such as
speech–­language pathologists (SLPs), occupational therapists (OTs), and physical
therapists (PTs). Increasingly, many of these related services are being offered in
natural settings—­or general education classrooms—­instead of in segregated ther-
apy rooms. With a variety of professionals being present in the classroom setting,
there is potential to find ways to incorporate them into classroom activities, such
as small-group instructional arrangements.
While small-group instructional arrangements emphasize the interactions
between peers to overcome a common problem or complete a task, educational
professionals still play an essential role in ensuring the effective use of such strate-
gies. Educational professionals need to facilitate learning and interactions in small-
group instructional arrangements, modeling ways to acknowledge individual peer
contributions; providing positive feedback on progress; offering prompts using
speculative, challenging questions; and monitoring student progress on targeted
skills (Gillies, 2006; Stockall, 2011). There is potential for a variety of profession-
als from various backgrounds to be present in the classroom while small-group
instruction is occurring, creating an opportunity for sharing the responsibility of
providing this feedback to the small groups in the classroom. While supporting
a specific student with a disability in a small group, paraprofessionals or other
related service professionals can, and should, remain cognizant of the progress the
group is making and keep them on track (see Jitendra et al., 2013). This requires
 Maximizing the Benefits of Working Cooperatively with Peers 247

collaboration and ultimately a community of practice where strategies and other

professional wisdom from the general educator (or special educator) are imparted
to other professionals who are willing to share this responsibility (Alquraini &
Gut, 2012; Mortier, Hunt, Leroy, Van de Putte, & Van Hove, 2010). This will not
only increase the frequency with which small groups receive feedback, but also
the quality of inclusion that students with disabilities encounter when they are
included with their general education peers.
As previously mentioned, social skills are directly incorporated and targeted
in cooperative learning groups. Considering that improving social skills may be
one of the goals that SLPs have for students with disabilities on their caseload, what
better way is there to teach and practice these skills than in the general education
classroom in an authentic setting where social skills are being refined by all stu-
dents? The SLP can also provide support for other students who may be struggling
with syntax or some other communication-­based difficulty. For students with sig-
nificant disabilities, the OT can help foster active participation within the group
by teaching and/or creating opportunities for the student to use an augmentative
and alternative communication device. Incorporating these adults into whole-class
activities will create a high-­quality inclusive educational setting.
Jitendra and colleagues (2013) evaluated the use of two different types of small-
group peer-tutoring arrangements facilitated by paraprofessionals to address the
difficulties some students were having with math (see Powell & Fuchs, Chapter 6,
this volume, for more information on peer-­mediated strategies for mathematics).
The two approaches to tutoring that were considered were schema-­based instruc-
tion (SBI) and standards-­based curriculum (SBC), or practice as usual. SBI focuses
on gaining understanding of the structure of problems, increasing the likelihood
that a solution can be reached when encountering similar problems in the future;
emphasis is placed on “think-­alouds” to monitor and reflect on the process. Results
indicated that students in both groups improved: students with low performance
on the pretest gained more on the posttest when in the SBC group, while students
with high performance on the pretest gained more on the posttest when in the
SBI group. The study also showed that paraprofessionals were able to successfully
facilitate the tutoring session, on average demonstrating high levels of fidelity.
Stevens and Slavin (1995) demonstrated the positive effects of the use of coop-
erative group arrangements on a systems level (i.e., cooperative schools). The
authors note that the key element of change for the successful implementation of
a cooperative school was the collaboration of educational professionals, which can
include all of those previously mentioned. Encouraging the use of open dialogue
in the planning and preparation of lessons can make it easy to incorporate others
into the planned activities. While schoolwide change may not be feasible in all
settings, we should consider the components that may be: open dialogue in lesson
planning, involvement of all professionals who are in the classroom, and shared
responsibility of facilitating group learning and interaction. It may be necessary
to touch base as a team periodically to ensure that all members understand their
roles. This need for continuous communication can be addressed using traditional
248 THE POWER OF PEERS IN THE CLASSROOM

means or by incorporating technology (e.g., texts, e-mail) to keep all of the team
members current on upcoming lessons.

Conclusion

In this chapter, we presented strategies for implementing one popular and effective
form of peer-­mediated instruction: cooperative learning groups. As discussed, it is
important to remember that while teachers frequently utilize small-group learn-
ing techniques, there is a continuum of benefits associated with various forms of
small-group work, with research demonstrating that some group strategies are
more effective than others. When designing instruction that relies on group learn-
ing, teachers should consider the ways in which the individual needs of students
can be met through peer mediation; creating learning tasks that rely on group
goals and on the learning of all students to accomplish those goals will be most
productive. In order to maximize benefits of small-group instruction, teachers
should consider ways that other classroom resources (e.g., related service provid-
ers and paraprofessionals) might be relied upon in planned ways to increase the
impact of instruction for all students. While use of cooperative learning groups has
been prevalent in schools for decades, the new challenges of including all students
in the general education classroom space, along with the new demands of meeting
increasingly higher academic standards, ensure that use of small-group instruc-
tion will continue to evolve and be refined.

References

Alquraini, T., & Gut, D. (2012). Critical components of successful inclusion of students with
severe disabilities: Literature review. International Journal of Special Education, 27, 42–59.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-­efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review, 84, 191–215.
Cohen, B. P., & Cohen, E. G. (1991). From groupwork among children to R&D teams: Interde-
pendence, interaction and productivity. Advances in Group Processes, 8, 205–226.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 347 639). Washington, DC: Office of Educational
Research and Improvement.
Davidson, N. (1985). Small-group learning and teaching in mathematics: A selective review
of the research. In R. E. Slavin, S. Saran, S. Kagan, R. Hertz-­Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R.
Schmuck (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 211–230). New York: Plenum
Press.
Ellis, A. K., & Fouts, J. T. (1993). Research on educational innovations. Princeton Junction, NJ: Eye
on Education.
Gillies, R. M. (2003). The behaviors, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students
during small-group learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 137–147.
Gillies, R. M. (2006). Teachers’ and students’ verbal behaviors during cooperative and small-
group learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 271–287.