CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
2.4 Learning theories
2.4.3 Humanist theory of learning
2.4.3.3 Collaborative learning
The concept of collaborative learning as it is described in Flannery (1994) and Imel (1991) has its origins in several movements and philosophies that have influenced progressive adult education. Philosopher Dewey and social
psychologists like Piaget and Vygotsky are some of the early scholars associated with collaborative learning (Cheyne, 1995 cited in Gross and Mcllveen, 1998).
Imel (1991) asserts that one of the frequently mentioned characteristics of adult education is the fact that it should be collaborative or participatory in nature. Brookfield (1986) indicates that some of the characteristics of
collaborative learning are that: the facilitator and the learners become active in the learning process; the hierarchy between the facilitator and the learners is limited; a sense of community is created; knowledge is created, but not transferred; and that this knowledge which is created is located in the community, but not in the individuals.
The concept is now becoming popular because there is a tendency in
education circles to consider learning as a social process, and most disciplines are now moving towards innovative ways of tapping the benefits of learning as a social process. For example, Herrmann (1989 quoting Bruffe 1983 and Faigley, 1985) argues that teachers have now turned their classrooms into communities of learners as the focus of writing pedagogy shifts from written products to writing as a process and as a way of making knowledge, which are now viewed from a social or collaborative perspective.
Bruffe (1983, cited in Hermann 1989) maintains that getting students "to talk through" the task of writing is a form of collaborative learning that is
essential. Muffet (1983, cited in Hermann 1989) suggests that teachers should teach students to teach each other.
Sheridan (1998, cited in Imel 1991) explains that collaborative learning stresses the importance of community inquiry in learning, a process through which learners begin to experience knowledge as something that is created rather than transmitted from the teacher to the learners. It assumes that knowledge is socially rather than individually created by communities of individuals, and that the shaping and testing of ideas are processes in which anyone can participate (McGregor 1990; Serfert & Werner 1991, cited in Imel, ibid.).
It can therefore be said that collaborative learning is a type of learning in which, besides being helped by the teacher, more advanced children are encouraged to help less advanced children to learn. This is similar to the concept of mediation where less capable children are helped to learn through interacting with more competent 'peers'. Cheyne (1995 cited in Gross and Mcllveen 1998) explains it in the following words:
The child takes on or 'internalises'the communicative procedures that he or she experiences when interacting with a peer, and in the
process enriches his or her own intellectual capacity.
Collaborative learning can then be said to be a process whereby small
learning groups working freely in an active interpersonal environment replace the traditional concept of a 'well-controlled' class. Students are placed in small heterogeneous working groups representing what Slavin (1983 cited in
Flannery 1994), elaborating on co-operative learning calls a microcosm of the class. According to Slavin (cited Flannery 1994), co-operative learning differs from collaborative learning in that the teacher retains the control over the information to be mastered and the atmosphere or climate in which the
mastery takes place. The students remain knowledge receivers and not knowledge creators.
The main argument in collaborative learning here, which has also been espoused by Freire (1970) is that people are more prone to learn subjects or questions that they have had an active role in framing. According to Schmuck and Schmuck (1983, cited in Flannery 1994) active learning is epitomised by a collaborative group spirit. Bruffe (1986, cited in Applefield, Huber & Maollem 2000/01) equates this to social or exogenous constructivism since knowledge is socially constructed. He asserts that the most important intersection between thought and action are not those that occur in an individual, but rather those that occur among the members of the community of
knowledgeable 'peers'. Seen in this perspective, collaborative learning can be said to be the hand that fits ever so snugly into the glove of social
constructivism.
Bruffee (1986, cited in Applefield, Huber & Maollem 2000/01); Imel (1991) and Brookfield (1986) highlight numerous benefits that accrue from
collaborative learning. These include: provision of an environment for
democratic planning and decision making, possibility of effective participation or involvement, and enabling learners to draw on their previous experiences.
Hence, the role of the small student or learner-groups should be seen to construct knowledge in which the instructor is no longer a repository of the right answers, but plays the role of ensuring a supportive climate that reduces resistance to learning. This is done through minimising threats and
defensiveness as well as providing emotional support while the learner is undergoing change in thought and action (Strang 1958, cited in Flannery 1994, p.21). The concept of collaborative learning appears to fit very well in this study because the situation at hand is that of a fragile class, in which some of the members are likely to feel insecure, threatened, and above all lack emotional support.