Teaching and Learning > DISCOURSE

A Preliminary Study of Group Learning/Teaching in the Culture of Religious Studies

Author: Rosemary Beckham

Journal Title: PRS-LTSN Journal

ISSN:

ISSN-L:

Volume: 2

Number: 2

Start page: 73

End page: 166

Return to vol. 2 no. 2 index page

1. Introduction

1.1 Preface

Most educational theory is generalised and not tied to any specific subject area. The PRS-LTSN1 has ‘recognised that, in comparison with other subject areas, very little has been published about teaching at HE level in philosophical and religious studies’.2 This project is a response to that lack. The intention is to provide a preliminary view of group learning/teaching in RS by looking at how the overall learning/teaching culture affects teaching in small groups. It attempts:

The project consists of three parts:

1.2. Key concerns of RS

The questionnaires and case studies are broad-ranging and suggestive. They make no claims to be scientific or prescriptive. They have been designed using education theory on learning/teaching styles and on teaching in small groups and constitute a first attempt to compare attitudes against practice, looking at some of the complex inter-relational overlaps between the different learning/teaching styles of teachers and students. Some preliminary conclusions have been drawn from the broad patterns which have emerged.4 This is a halting step towards understanding the problems involved in group learning/teaching in RS. Some of the key concerns highlighted in the PRS-LTSN survey, 2001, have been incorporated into both the survey and its conclusions, in particular:

The research sets out, at both the design level and in its conclusions, to relate the relevance of these key concerns to the role of group learning in overall learning/teaching strategies.

1.3. Critical thinking and group learning

The prioritisation of critical thinking is one thing that distinguishes RS from other disciplines. This was highlighted in the PRS-LTSN questionnaire in 2001:

One of the more distinctive features of our disciplines is an emphasis on critical thinking, rather than on the mere absorption of facts or the acquisition of technical skills.6

As a discipline, we aim to encourage students in the development of the ‘more elusive skills’7 that are essential to the kind of critical thinking specifically required in our discipline.

As well as the ability to critically read primary texts and to assimilate difficult abstract concepts, students must develop an ability to question and to relate difficult materials and concepts to previous knowledge and experience. They have to learn how to demonstrate the synthesis of these skills in the presentation of arguments (both verbal and written).

But how are these skills best taught? Or, alternatively, how are these skills best learned? Ramsden describes the ‘depressing picture [that] emerges from studies of the quality of students’ understanding … It seems that many students often do not change their understanding in the way that lecturers would wish.’9 Student-centred approaches to learning/teaching encourage us, as practitioners, to look at education through their eyes. As active discussion by students in formalised group situations is undoubtedly a major constituent in the RS HE educational process, closer scrutiny of the joint experience of group learning/teaching may help to understand how students will develop their skills in three qualitatively different areas:10

I have considered the status of group learning in the overall process of learning/teaching in RS because it is in this particular learning/teaching environment that the development and expression of critical thinking can be most visibly observed and shared by teachers and students. One of the clearest results of the general survey to teachers in RS, is that critical thinking is our most highly prized development aim. In 80% of departments surveyed, this was rated our highest priority.11 Paul Ramsden suggests that the most important competence in academic disciplines can be summed up as the development of ‘understanding’. He adds:

By understanding, I mean the way in which students apprehend and discern phenomena related to the subject, rather than what they know about them or how they can manipulate them.12

But what part does group discussion and interactivity play in its development?

In the survey results, 85% of teachers see group work and discussion as the best means to develop critical thinking and a personal sense of reality.13 This adds weight to David Jacques’ statement that:

Teaching and learning in small groups has a valuable part to play in the all-round education of students. It allows them to negotiate meanings, to express themselves in the language of the subject, and to establish a more intimate contact with academic staff than more formal methods permit. It also develops the more instrumental skills of listening, presenting ideas and persuading.14

Small group learning (a teaching strategy of working with groups of less than 30 students)15 seems, therefore, to provide the perfect learning/teaching format in which students will be able learn what we want them to learn—that is, the development of an understanding of our subject in the way that the RS discipline understands it.

Traditionally, however, group learning/teaching has been used as an adjunct to lectures. Often viewed as less demanding, requiring fewer skills as well as less informational or authoritative than lectures, this approach would not seem to prioritise group learning. 16 A range of typical problems are associated with the practice of group learning/teaching. These can be summarised as follows:

These problems, I suspect, will be recognisable to anyone who has applied group learning/teaching techniques and yet I am convinced that imaginative group learning/teaching practice that encourages the dynamic interactivity between peers (and tutors) offers one of the most potentially effective tools of learning/teaching.

1.4. Teaching styles and group learning

According to Ramsden the types of problem outlined above reflect a particular type of teaching style. This is called the transmission or transfer theory, in which teachers’ overriding concern is to instil in students the subject content.18 According to this theory the teacher is viewed as ‘the source of undistorted information’, which the student will observe, absorb, assimilate and emulate through individual effort. The lecture provides the bed-rock of learning whilst in individual study the student will learn to understand and evaluate the subject content.19 This will be articulated in, and assessed by, written essays and examination questions. Discussion may help in this process but only in so far as the individual student is prepared to make contributions to it. To what extent does Ramsden’s transmission or transfer model of teaching represent the dominant RS teaching practice?

There is a second, related theory of teaching in which the teacher aims to ‘shape’ student learning and which Ramsden suggests may equally create those problems typically encountered in group learning/teaching. In the shaping model, the teacher articulates the techniques required to learn and then supervises the learning process, aiming to provide a fail-safe set of methods. In this theory, as long as students follow the procedures, reflection, understanding and the application of knowledge will be the natural outcome of their application. Ramsden, however, sees this approach to teaching as ‘about extending a lecturer’s repertoire of techniques rather than changing his or her understanding’ of the learning/teaching process. 20

Few would like to think that they have not moved away from traditional transfer or shaping models of teaching. Does RS teaching practice in any way reflect these models? The following extract from the PRS-LTSN document on major grant areas highlights some of our key concerns about discussion:

PRS disciplines lay greater stress than most on the importance of active discussion by students; but one of the most difficult problems faced by teachers is that of creating a framework within which fruitful discussion will take place. New students (especially some international students) are used to an educational model in which they are given information by teachers as authority figures. How can they be brought round to accepting a reversal of roles? How can students be trained in the art of contributing effectively to discussion in different ways, such as chairing, minute-taking, and making positive contributions in accordance with different personality types? What techniques are there for ensuring that students arrive in the discussion room primed with the necessary information and ideas? What is the role of student-only discussions, and how should they be managed? What use can be made of hybrid methods, such as buzz-groups within a lecture? Is it possible to devise a fair, objective, and unburdensome way of assessing student performance in discussion? How should one handle equal opportunities issues over less assertive students, or those whose culture discourages independent thinking, especially on religious, moral, or philosophical issues? How should one deal with offensive or insensitive interventions, whether or not the teacher is present?21

This statement highlights the genuine concern to improve learning/teaching in groups (with a particular emphasis on student-led discussion in group work). Implicit in the concerns expressed above, is the desire to move away from transfer or shaping teaching types towards what Ramsden terms as a ‘compound view of instruction’ in which teaching is seen as ‘a process of working cooperatively with learners to help them change their understanding.’22 The survey results, however, indicate that many of us have not changed as much as we might like to think.23

1.5. Learning styles and group learning

The statement on page 78 highlights the other side of the learning/teaching equation—that of student attitudes to learning. Student expectations of learning/teaching may equally contribute to difficulties in group learning and confound attempts to change practice. The attitudes and learning experiences of the students, prior to entry into HE have a significant impact on how students behave in groups. These contribute to the kind of mismatch between expectations and outcomes in learning/teaching in groups expressed in Ramsden’s list of problems. The individual learning style of students is, therefore, as important as our own teaching styles.

According to Ramsden, the development of critical thinking is only achieved when a ‘deep’ approach to learning is taken by students. Deep learning strategies lead to ‘higher quality outcomes and better grades.’24 A deep approach to learning is constituted by the desire to understand the meaning of texts and lectures, to relate ideas from one subject to another and to real-life experiences. In order to understand new ideas, the student will seek answers to questions which the course material should help to provide, enabling the synthesis and evaluation of previous material with newly acquired ideas and knowledge.25 And yet, the problems expressed above suggest that many students still subscribe to a ‘surface’ approach to learning, in which recall is prioritised (i.e., the retention of factual content along with an acceptance of ‘the statements and ideas of … lecturers’) over the ability to tease out for themselves the complex implications of the subject into some sort of overall picture.26 It is this learning approach that is reflected in the negative experiences of group discussion sessions outlined by Ramsden and suggested by PRSLTSN findings, suggesting that in the two-way process of learning/teaching, both teachers and students contribute to problems typically associated with group learning.

The genuine concern of RS to develop a student-centred approach to learning/teaching arises from a recognition of the importance of the development of critical thinking through discussion. If group learning works best, as Jacques and Ramsden suggest, when it encourages student-centred learning, are we employing the kinds of techniques that help students to learn what we want them to learn? If not, what can we do to improve our practice?

1.6. Education theory on group learning/teaching

In order to analyse the source of problems in learning/teaching in groups, it is helpful to understand what is meant by a group. This section defines the term, considers the group dynamics and looks at how best to achieve results when working with small groups. David Jacques suggests that, A group can be said to exist as more than a collection of people when it possesses the following qualities:

Jacques points out that whilst no single characteristic defines a group, each one constitutes an important aspect of the group dynamic. Group activity can be summarised, therefore, as essentially consisting of an interaction between members, in which members manifest the ‘need to influence, share and be responded to’.28

Jacques is providing a definition of the group in its broadest, generic sense. It could refer to any RS department, as the group is defined by the type of social organisation in which clear norms, roles and statuses in any type of learning/teaching situation are first and foremost constituted by membership to the departmental group discipline. After all, the dissemination of RS must be a shared aim and a prerequisite to membership of any RS department. According to this description, any of our teaching activities, from the teacher-led lecture (with or without discussion) the one-to-one tutorial, the group discussion to the traditional seminar involves elements of this definition. This helpful reminder highlights that group activities are, in some sense, central to all learning/teaching processes. Understanding this helps to clarify those aspects of the group such as its perceptions of itself, its shared aims, the interdependence of its members, as well as its social organisation and membership. Whereas learning/teaching aims and outcomes will vary according to the type of group teaching strategy selected, all learning/teaching is group learning/teaching. It provides a sense of the overarching rationale of the whole RS group constituency in which smaller learning/teaching forms are situated. Within the broad generic definition of the group, discussion constitutes one form of activity within the whole. It will tend to take place in small groups. A small group is defined by Ramsden as ‘any teaching strategy involving up to 30 students where student participation is expected’.29 This form is most commonly used as a supplement to a lecture series and is at its most successful when the teaching strategy has been selected to reflect specific goals.30 These will normally be motivated by specific aims in student learning that involve discourse. Relating this to Jacques’ definition of the group, small groups will tend to reflect the characteristics of interdependency (between teachers and students), interaction, cohesiveness within the same shared needs and aims. In this sense, small group learning, what happens beyond the classroom can be as important as what happens in the classroom, as responsibilities to the group are at play even when its members are not collected together.

At its simplest, any small group will include the following elements:

At this level, a collegiate approach is expected from the group members but it does not necessarily (at least, not from Jacques’ definition above) imply a collaborative one. Individual students may be expected to prepare and present papers, or to play a part in a formal debate, whilst their remaining colleagues are expected to respond critically in a general discussion. But this need not involve collaboration as such. Individual and surface learning approaches may still persist, as may tutor-centredness.31

At a more complex level, small groups provide students with the opportunity:

For the teacher they provide the opportunity:

Ultimately, and ideally, this more complex view of small group learning will lead to ‘a gradual shift away from dependence [on the tutor] to independence [between the tutor and the student]’ and reflect a deep learning strategy.32

It is at this level that the stated needs of employers are most clearly related to group learning practice. Their demand for wellrounded, adaptable people with a grounding in high-level analytical skills, able to learn within a team, would seem to invite the development of skills that involve working both with and alongside each other to agreed goals. Whereas students may still prepare independently beyond the classroom, in this approach, they are encouraged to relate their personal findings to those of their teacher and their peers. A collaboration is developed between teachers and students, in which teachers cooperate with learners in the planning and distribution of tasks (within clearly defined roles) as well as in the class discourse. A prerequisite in small group learning of this type is the achievement of a consensus on the accepted aims of the production, assimilation, distillation, evaluation, and finally, the presentation and defence of material within a more or less formal discourse. In small group learning/teaching, listening and spoken skills are tested within the group as well as the ability to present material formally and informally.

The kind of process in which students and teachers work together is recognised in the Dearing Report33, where it asserts that student-centred learning

… requires information and the opportunity to engage in ‘learning conversations’ with staff and other students in order to understand and be able to use new concepts in a particular field. (8.6)

Group learning activity seems, therefore, to be best reflected by Ramsden’s third theory of teaching in which ‘the subject content is actively constituted by the learner … [and where] [l]earning is [understood as] applying and modifying one’s own ideas’ and where the teacher works cooperatively with the learner to facilitate that process.34 Whilst Jacques’ generic definition of the group reflects any component of learning/teaching (including personal study) and is able to accommodate traditional transfer and shaping teaching theories, small group learning/teaching seems to reflect Ramsden’s compound view of learning/teaching in which the learning needs of the students can be brought together. It would also seem to develop the types of transferable skills demanded by the needs of a wider world.

Ramsden’s definition of a small group is one that numbers no more than thirty. Lecture formats and those seminar groups arranged around general discussion and individual presentations, often accommodate larger numbers and whilst they may seem to allow greater pedagogic control and leadership, these larger groups have been shown to develop tensions due to fragmentation, greater anonymity and passivity amongst the students. It is more difficult for the teacher to differentiate between different types of learners. Both teachers and students may be prone to project a sense of hostility or to stereotyping of one another. This introduces the issue of increases in both the type and number of students. For some of us, the desire to introduce effective small group learning formats may simply increase pressures on learning/teaching structures and formats. This is acknowledged by Jacques who states the limits imposed on educational procedures by logistics, such as disposition and availability of rooms and timetabling of other classes, frequently make the reality of curriculum development an untidy compromise. More often than not, educational ideals are decimated by timetables which organize course programmes into a fragmented collection of learning experiences for the student and give a similar sense of disconnectedness to the teachers.35

As in its various forms, group learning involves a spectrum of factors such as, authority, dependency, responsibility, boundaries and the potential for projected hostility, the size of groups in relation to all of these factors will affect the characteristics of group dynamics. It is, therefore, fair to say that size matters.36 According to Jacques, larger groups make it more difficult to encourage committed interactivity in discussion.37 Smaller groups, however, make it easier to develop a sense of cohesion and trust and in these circumstances greater commitment to and a higher level of discussion are shown to result. A group of seven or less will cohere more easily than a group of more than seven. In the larger small group, clear structural parameters, role differentiation and positive leadership are necessary to help the group to work effectively together.

One way round the issue of size is to break the group up into smaller units within the classroom. Jacques comments that

[c]ontemporary life places a premium on the ability of people to get on with each other, to be able to handle interpersonal problems rather than to avoid them, and to do so constructively and creatively. Nowhere is it more possible to practice these qualities than in small-group work when learning is not subject purely to academic limitations.38

Within the broader context, what Jacques reflects what employers require from graduates. Jacques and Ramsden suggest that we can expect to see an improvement in student-centred learning if compound teaching theory is applied to deep learning strategies.39 Learning/teaching in small groups will benefit everyone, if skills’ development is considered to be as important to learning as the subject content.

1.7. The broader context of learning/teaching: critical thinking, transferable skills and employability in nonvocational careers

According to Ramsden, research on the attitude of employers on the value of graduates demonstrates that the majority … seemed to think that higher education did improve their employees’ general skills. They believed that it enhanced academic ability and personal qualities, especially flexibility and motivations; they supported educational experiences that increased general understanding.40 A relatively small percentage of RS students remain in higher education after taking undergraduate courses. Whilst employers of professional graduates expect them to come to them equipped with an in-depth knowledge of their subject, recruiters of graduates from nonvocational courses look for a combination of the ability to think critically and those skills needed to be able to work within corporate and team structures. The transferable key skills developed in group learning/teaching are, thus, seen as essential to the world of work beyond the academic institution.

These skills include:

These expectations demonstrate how the ability to think critically connects pragmatically to the type of skills that are best acquired in group learning activities and situates them in the wider context of nonvocational work. The needs and expectations of employers are further reflected in the following statement taken from the ‘Dearing Report’42

Employers emphasised to us in their evidence the importance of high level analytical skills. The development of such skills characterises higher education, and should continue to be one of its primary purposes. Indeed, many employers are seeking individuals with highly specialised knowledge and skills … But employers are also concerned about the general capabilities and potential of those with higher education qualifications, not just about the subject they have studied. The recruitment patterns of employers demonstrate that they are often looking for rounded but adaptable people who can successfully tackle a range of tasks and be effective members of a team …[after all], for many years over 40 per cent of jobs advertised for graduates in the UK have been open to applicants from most, if not all, disciplines.43

The ability to work both independently and co-operatively is seen to assist, not only in the student’s ability to process his/her own understanding his/her specialist subject (research, analysis, critical reflection, problem-solving, synthesis, reporting back and so on), but also in his/her ability to negotiate and develop personal strategies that recognise the benefits of working within a critical environment with corporate aims, whether or not academic. This wider context presents RS teachers with the challenge to find innovative ways to encourage students to learn the importance of both critical thinking and group or team skills, without compromising the academic aims and outcomes of our own discipline. It is within this wider context that the need to think about group learning is situated throughout the project.

1.8. Pressures and challenges

The assessment of the quality of teaching by the Quality Assurance Agency is an area that challenges teachers to introduce innovative teaching practice. The ‘Dearing Report’ is another. In the recommendations in Dearing which form part of the wider context of teaching in HE, the link between the institution and the world beyond is unequivocally stressed in its summary:

It should, therefore, be a national policy objective to be world class both in learning at all levels and in a range of research of different kinds. In higher education, this aspiration should be realised through a new compact involving institutions and their staff, students, government, employers and society in general. We see the historic boundaries between vocational and academic education breaking down, with increasingly active partnerships between higher education institutions and the worlds of industry, commerce and public service. In such a compact, each party should recognise its obligation to the others.44

Whilst this challenge seems to offer opportunities to develop partnerships with the world beyond the institution, it also places real pressures on us all through an expansion of our frame of reference with regard to learning/teaching in RS, in which there are demands to think about how the content and method of our teaching relates to nonvocational careers beyond the institution. These expansions have created a generally increased expectation for researchers and teachers to understand the broader context in which RS is situated. Simultaneous to this, teachers are expected to produce research to an international standard in order to maintain or increase their funding. The balance between high-level research and professional teaching, administrative and management skills, thus, becomes ever harder to strike.

This is accurately reflected in the chapter on teaching, in which the Dearing Report states that a current barrier to improvement in teaching exists and in which

… staff perceive national and institutional policies as actively encouraging and recognising excellence in research, but not in teaching. Although the teaching quality assessments (TQA) carried out by the Funding Bodies, which are designed to measure the effectiveness of teaching, have raised the profile of teaching within institutions, the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) has been a stronger influence and has deflected attention away from learning and teaching towards research. An analysis of the impact of the 1992 RAE in higher education institutions in England suggests that it has devalued teaching because research assessment is closely linked to the allocation of large sums of money, whereas teaching assessment is not.45

Whilst this correctly reflects the concerns of the profession, George MacDonald Ross has subsequently pointed out that: It is fair to say that the Government rejected most of the recommendations which implied increased Government funding (student support and academic salaries), and accepted those which merely meant more work for academics.46 The lack of real incentives to innovate in teaching is a potentially demoralising factor in which the changing face of higher education is placing enormous demands on all teachers without offering any motivation or increase in rewards. Pressures include the increase in numbers of students, many more of whom are mature students who, although often equipped with practical non-vocational work experience and a high level of transferable skills, bring their own challenges to teaching, such as different backgrounds, less formal qualifications, and a variable approach to learning. There are more part-timers, as well as increasing numbers of students who have to work to support themselves financially during their time in HE. Teachers have to re-contextualise RS learning/teaching, in order to take all of these changes into account.47 In all of this, it is no longer enough to produce students with a recognised accreditation in RS. The challenge (and subsequent pressure) is to demonstrate the relevance of the development of rigorous analytical skills to a broader application of transferable skills, in particular, within teams. These factors form part of the wider context into which learning/teaching in general, but arguably group learning in particular, is now situated. Critical thinking, student-centred and group learning, and the development of transferable skills for non-vocational careers all overlap.

The prioritisation of these issues in the PRS-LTSN survey, however, demonstrates a willingness to share information in order to improve our own teaching practice. Part of this process is the ability to understand our attitudes to group learning in the overall strategies on learning/teaching as, in an increasingly challenging and pressurised environment, we question how to incorporate them into our own teaching programmes, in a way that is meaningful to the wider world and to our own academic practice (without reducing the recognisably high standards for which our discipline is known).

2. Project Outline

The focus of the survey is consistently on teaching form, not content. Its interest in group learning/teaching, in relation to overall learning/teaching policies, allows the relative status of group learning to be evaluated against alternative or dominant strategies of teaching. The project, therefore, set out to evaluate whether the concerns of RS departments and their teachers are matched by practice. Group learning by its nature, demands of students a deep approach to learning. Of teachers, it requires a compound view of teaching theory in which attention is placed on both the student and the teacher. Here, as Ramsden is at pains to point out,

Teaching is comprehended as a process of working cooperatively with learners to help them change their understanding. It is making student learning possible…The content to be taught, and students’ problems with learning it, direct the methods he or she uses. 48

Whilst student-centred learning is in this theory extremely important, so too, is the ability of the teacher to intervene, guide and act as a catalyst in that process. Throughout, therefore, the questions attempt to ascertain to what extent group learning is seen as an effective tool in developing that cooperative relationship. An important question was the degree to which the planning and design of courses in relation to student learning and transferable key skills is left to individual teachers or whether departmental strategies exist to demonstrate the integration and monitoring of progressive planning of student learning and key skills. Another was the extent to which we can be certain that students are given a progressive and considered structure of learning/teaching over three levels which guarantee the inclusion of all transferable key skills.49

2.1. Format

The first part of the project consisted of a general questionnaire sent out to individual teachers in thirty-five out of forty-nine departments of RS listed in the Association of University Departments of Theology and Religious Studies’ Handbook, 2001.50 Questions about teaching styles and methods were based on the education theories outlined above and aimed:51

Return to vol. 2 no. 2 index page

This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.

 

-
The British Association for the Study of Religions
The Religious Studies Project