Apprendimento cooperativo e collaborativo - Confronto

Exploring Different Assumptions about the Nature and Authority of Knowledge

"Second, when using one method or the other method, teachers tend to make different assumptions about the nature and authority of knowledge." These different assumptions will be explored throughout the paper. The age or education levels as a distinction have become blurred over time as practitioners at all levels mix the two approaches. However, what determines which approach is used does depend upon the sophistication level of the students involved, with collaborative requiring more advanced student preparation working in groups. Other determining factors are the philosophy and preparation of the teacher.

Brufee sees education as a reacculturation process through constructive conversation. Students learn about the culture of the society they wish to join by developing the appropriate vocabulary of that society and by exploring that society's culture and norms (i.e. that of mathematician, historian, journalist, etc.). Brufee identifies two types of knowledge as a basis for choosing.

an approach. Foundational knowledge is the basic knowledge represented by socially justified beliefs we all agree on. Correct spelling and grammar, mathematics procedures, history facts, a knowledge of the contents of the constitution, etc., would represent types of foundational knowledge. Brufee contends that these are best learned using cooperative learning structures in the early grades. He states:

"The main purpose of primary school education is to help children renegotiate their membership in the local culture of family life and help them join some of the established knowledge communities available to them and encompassing the culture we hold in common. An important purpose of college or university education is to help adolescents and adults join some more of the established knowledge communities available to them. But another, and perhaps more important purpose of college or university education is to help students renegotiate their membership in the encompassing common culture that"

“Until then has circumscribed their lives.”

Brufee defines nonfoundational knowledge as that which is derived through reasoning and questioning versus rote memory. He writes: “It is more likely to address questions with dubious or ambiguous answers, answers that require well-developed judgment to arrive at, judgment that learning to answer such a question tends, in turn, to develop.”

The other way in which nonfoundational education differs from foundational is that it encourages students not to take their teacher’s authority for granted. Students should doubt answers and methods for arriving at answers provided by their professors, and perhaps more importantly they need to be helped to come to terms with their doubts by participating actively in the learning and inquiry process. Out of this process new knowledge is often created, something not likely to occur when dealing with the facts and information associated with foundational knowledge.

Collaborative learning shifts

the individual's contributions and promotes active participation. CL is based on the belief that learning is a social process and that knowledge is constructed through interaction and collaboration with others. In CL, students work together in small groups to achieve a common goal. They engage in discussions, problem-solving activities, and projects that require them to share ideas, listen to others, and negotiate meaning. The role of the teacher in CL is that of a facilitator, guiding and supporting students' learning process rather than being the sole source of knowledge. Collaborative learning has several benefits. It promotes critical thinking and problem-solving skills, as students are encouraged to analyze and evaluate different perspectives. It also enhances communication and interpersonal skills, as students learn to express their ideas clearly and respectfully, and to listen actively to others. Additionally, CL fosters a sense of belonging and community among students, as they work together towards a common goal. Overall, collaborative learning shifts the focus from the teacher as the expert to the student as an active participant in the learning process. It empowers students to take ownership of their learning and develop important skills for success in the 21st century.studentcentered. Spencer Kagan (1989) provides an excellent definition of cooperative learning by looking at general structures which can be applied to any situation. His definition provides an umbrella for the work cooperative learning specialists including the Johnsons, Slavin, Cooper; Graves and Graves, Millis, etc. It follows: "The structural approach to cooperative learning is based on the creations, analysis and systematic application of structures, or content-free ways of organizing social interaction in the classroom. Structures usually involve a series of steps, with proscribed behavior at each step. An important cornerstone of the approach is the distinction between "structures" and "activities". To illustrate, teachers can design many excellent cooperative activities, such as making a team mural or a quilt. Such activities almost always have a specific content-bound objective and thus cannot be used to deliver a range of academic content. Structures may

"Collaborative learning can be used repeatedly with almost any subject matter, at a wide range of grade levels and at various points in a lesson plan." - John Mayers

John Mayers points out that the dictionary definitions of "collaboration", derived from its Latin root, focus on the process of working together; the root word for "cooperation" stresses the product of such work. Co-operative learning has largely American roots from the philosophical writings of John Dewey stressing the social nature of learning and the work on group dynamics by Kurt Lewin.

Collaborative learning has British roots, based on the work of English teachers exploring ways to help students respond to literature by taking a more active role in their own learning. The cooperative learning tradition tends to use quantitative methods which look at achievement: i.e., the product of learning. The collaborative tradition takes a more qualitative approach, analyzing student talk in response to a piece of literature or a primary source.

history.Mayers points out some differences between the two concepts: "Supporters of co-operative learning tend to be more teacher-centered, for example when forming heterogeneous groups, structuring positive inter-dependence, and teaching co-operative skills. Collaborative learning advocates distrust structure and allow students more say if forming friendship and interest groups. Student talk is stressed as a means for working things out. Discovery and contextual approaches are used to teach interpersonal skills. Such differences can lead to disagreements...I contend the dispute is not about research, but more about the morality of what should happen in the schools. Beliefs as to what should happen in the schools can be viewed as a continuum of orientations toward curriculum from "transmission" to "transaction" to "transmission". At one end is the transmission position. As the name suggests, the aim of this orientation is to transmit knowledge to

students in the form of facts, skills and values. The transformation position at the other end of the continuum stresses personal and social change in which the person is said to be interrelated with the environment rather than having control over it. The aim of this orientation is self-actualization, personal or organizational change."

Rocky Rockwood describes the differences by acknowledging the parallels they both have in that they both use groups, both assign specific tasks, and both have the groups share and compare their procedures and conclusions in plenary class sessions. The major difference lies in the fact that cooperative deals exclusively with traditional (canonical) knowledge while collaborative ties into the social constructivist movement, asserting that both knowledge and authority of knowledge have changed dramatically in the last century. Rockwood states: "In the ideal collaborative environment, the authority for testing and determining the appropriateness of the

The group product rests with, first, the small group, second, the plenary group (the whole class) and finally (but always understood to be subject to challenge and revision) the requisite knowledge community (i.e. the discipline: geography, history, biology, etc.)

The concept of non-foundational knowledge challenges not only the product acquired, but also the process employed in the acquisition of foundational knowledge.

Most importantly, in cooperative, the authority remains with the instructor, who retains ownership of the task, which involves either a closed or a closable (that is to say foundational) problem (the instructor knows or can predict the answer).

In collaborative, the instructor--once the task is set--transfers all authority to the group. In the ideal, the group's task is always open ended.

Seen from this perspective, cooperative does not empower students. It employs them to serve the instructor's ends and produces a "right" or acceptable answer.

Collaborative does truly empower and braves all the risks of empowerment (for example, having the group or class agree to an embarrassingly simplistic or unconvincing position or produce a solution in conflict with the instructor's). Every person, Brufee (1995) holds, belongs to several "interpretative or knowledge communities" that share vocabularies, points of view, histories, values, conventions and interests. The job of the instructor is to help students learn to negotiate the boundaries between the communities they already belong to and the community represented by the teacher's academic discipline, which the students want to join.

Every knowledge community has a core of foundational knowledge that its members consider as given (but not necessarily absolute). To function independently within a knowledge community, the fledgling scholar must master enough material to become conversant with the community."

Rockwood concludes: "In my teaching experience,

o engage in cooperative learning activities. Cooperative learning involves students working together in small groups to achieve a common goal. This approach not only enhances their understanding of the subject matter but also develops important social and communication skills. In cooperative learning, students take on different roles within their group, such as leader, recorder, or timekeeper. This encourages active participation and ensures that everyone has a chance to contribute. By working together, students can share their ideas, ask questions, and help each other solve problems. Cooperative learning also promotes a positive and supportive learning environment. Students learn to respect and value each other's opinions and perspectives. They learn to listen actively and communicate effectively. This not only improves their academic performance but also prepares them for future collaborative work in the real world. In conclusion, cooperative learning is an effective approach to mastering foundational knowledge and developing important skills. By working together, students can deepen their understanding, enhance their social skills, and create a positive learning environment.