Chapter 15 page 380
Response: One problem with these prompts is that the first two are completely specific
to this task. To promote generalization, cognitive prompts are typically worded more
generally, such simply “Generate reasons and evidence in support of your idea.” Another
issue that arises with this set of prompts is whether there are enough prompts to get
students to think about the full range of writing strategies (recall these from Chapter 7).
There are no questions that encourage organization, major revision, minor revision, or
audience consideration. In the problems at the end of the chapter, you will see other set
of cognitive prompts for a writing task that you can compare with this set.Social and cognitive roles. Another form of scaffolding that may improve group collaboration is
to assign roles to each student. Social roles focus on social and procedural processes that the groups
perform. For instance, one possible social role is discussion leader. The discussion leader is responsible for
making sure that the discussion runs smoothly and that everyone is contributing. Another social role is
cleaning up. The student responsible for cleaning up carries out a crucial procedure that the group must
perform. Cognitive roles focus on the use of particular cognitive strategies the group must use to solve a
problem (cf. Herrenkohl & Guerra, 1998). For example, a possible cognitive role is explainer. The
explainer would be responsible for ensuring that the group engaged in good explanations.
As an example of social roles, Elizabeth Cohen (1994a) developed roles for a project involving
collaborative learning with second grade students. These roles were predominantly social roles because they
focused on social and procedural processes that the groups were to perform. Figure 15.14 provides
example of these roles. Teachers first assign each child a role and then had the children switch roles
periodically. Teachers decided which roles to use for a given task, although groups always had a facilitator.
Another example of predominantly social roles comes from the Group Investigation example that you saw
earlier (Y. Sharan & Sharan, 1992). The group of students whose plan is shown in Figure 15.7 selected
for themselves the roles of coordinator, resources persons, steering committee, and recorder. These roles
focus mainly on managing the group’s procedures as they carry out the process (e.g., locating resources,
recording findings, and so on).
Cohen (1994b) urged teachers to avoid role divisions such as “thinker” and “typist”; which leads
some students to be intellectually involved and others to be passive and uninvolved. It is important the roles
be comparable in responsibility and that some roles do not imply a low level of participation.
Other roles that teachers can assign are more cognitive than social. Johnson and Johnson (1991)
suggested the following roles:
Ɣ Summarizer: Restates the group’s major conclusions or answers.
Ɣ Checker: Ensures that all group members can explicitly explain how to arrive at an answer or
conclusion.
Ɣ Accuracy coach: Corrects any mistakes in another member’s explanations or summaries
Ɣ Relater/Elaboration seeker: Asks members to relate current concepts and strategies to materials studied
previously.
Ɣ Recorder: Writes down the group’s decisions and edits the group’s report.
Ɣ Observer: Keeps track of how well the group is collaborating (D. W. Johnson & Johnson, 1991, pp.
67-78).
The first four roles are distinctly cognitive, in that each one focuses on the use of a cognitive strategy that
the students in the group must use to solve a problem. For instance, the accuracy coach is responsible for
monitoring the performance of other students. The relater/elaboration seeker encourages the use of the
strategy of elaboration.