The organization of students in the classroom must facilitate learning in small groups. Regarding student learning, three basic possibilities can be considered in the interaction between students (Johnson and Johnson, 1997): a) Competing to see who is the best, which is characterized by negative interdependence where one “wins and others lose”, b) Working individually to achieve a goal without considering peers, where each student is independent and their success depends on their performance, and c) Working cooperatively with great interest in their own learning and that of others, which is known as cooperative learning, from which students work together and feel that they “swim or sink together” (Bonals, 2000).
One of the topics that must be addressed to work in small groups in the classroom is that of student groupings and their characteristics. For example, the question of what is the ideal number of members per group is usually very common. However, there is no number that can be categorized as ideal, but rather this depends on a set of factors such as the type of activity and the objective we intend with it (Bonals, 2000).
Criteria for forming groups
Number of members:
In pairs > can be enriching for specific moments; it is an easy grouping to make and effective for some activities, bordering between individual and group work. Useful for working with the computer or formulating questions about a topic of interest to the group (Bonals, 2000).
In groups of three > enables an agile and productive dynamic and allows the group to work in an adequate climate. Some studies warn of the risk of exclusion of the third member, however, at a practical level it has been shown that it is not a considerable risk factor to avoid these groups. Useful for drafting texts, making summaries, or solving math problems (Bonals, 2000).
Of four components > are the most frequent and are suitable for most tasks proposed in small groups. The dynamic remains easy and the number of groups the teacher must facilitate is reduced. They can carry out the activities cited in the two previous groups (Bonals, 2000).
Of five components > are those that are formed most frequently, after groups of four components (Bonals, 2000).
Of six students > entail difficulties regarding balanced participation. Tasks tend to become slower. Generally, it is preferred to make two groups of three people (Bonals, 2000).
Of seven or eight students > these groups are chosen for some activities that aim precisely at working on the relationship or self-image of students through facilitating techniques (Bonals, 2000).
Heterogeneity or homogeneity:
It is usually chosen to work with heterogeneous groups, which requires prior considerations. Such as the need for flexibility in the criterion of heterogeneous groupings, that is, although in the basic organization groups are formed with students of different levels, sometimes the need to carry out work at two levels of difficulty is clearly seen: one for fast-paced students and another for those who progress more slowly. At this point, the teacher can choose to group students of higher or lower levels; thus, while one part carries out a specific task, the other part performs a different activity (Bonals, 2000).
Also, the conceptual or procedural distance between students. Sometimes it is convenient for the levels of students that make up the group to be slightly heterogeneous, but that the distance between them does not exceed the level at which the less advanced cannot understand the productions of their group mates. Experience has shown that more advanced students offer very valuable help to their peers and, furthermore, develop the ability to explain to others, so in practice, this slight heterogeneity is overlooked, bringing together students of different levels (Bonals, 2000).
Specifically, the teacher considers group formation taking into account:
– Levels and paces of each student, trying to ensure that the levels among them are different but close (Bonals, 2000).
– Good “informer” students, who are those with skills to communicate knowledge, ways of doing tasks, or attitudes ready to tackle them. On many occasions, leaders are good informers for the group members over whom they exert leadership (Bonals, 2000).
– The most needy students, who may have the following characteristics: a) coming from an unstimulating environment that generates lower levels, a slower pace, and a low willingness to work, b) with relationship difficulties, as they tend to inhibit themselves and isolate themselves, so they usually sit with peers who favor the resolution of these obstacles, c) with linguistic difficulties because they do not master the language used in the classroom, d) the least accepted or those the group tends to take less into account, so an attempt is made to unite these students with good informers so they can help them, e) students repeating a grade, who have a high risk of encountering difficulties again as they must adapt to the new group, and f) new students who must be placed with peers who can best help them integrate (Bonals, 2000).
Regarding the teacher’s role in group formation, experience indicates that it is best for the teacher to be in charge of making decisions about groupings and monitoring class dynamics, as they are more aware of the optimal classroom conditions to foster the development of students’ abilities (Bonals, 2000). Furthermore, if the teacher has training in intervention for learning difficulties, they will have greater knowledge to ensure the creation of balanced groups.
This does not mean that students’ will is not taken into account. It is about forming groups that, in addition to being effective in tasks, their members feel comfortable. Therefore, one of the criteria to consider in group formation is the foresight of whether the students will feel comfortable. On the other hand, to decide on student groupings, it is necessary for the teacher to know the information regarding the levels, paces, and interests of each one, of students with the ability to inform, of the most needy, etc. (Bonals, 2000).
For this, it is suggested that there be an advisor figure who plays a significant role in helping to establish the criteria that will be used for groupings in the prior assessment of students’ levels, paces, and interests, in the detection of those who will require more help, etc. With this, the advisor can collaborate in the decision about each one’s place (Bonals, 2000).
In addition to doing observation work in the classroom, this figure (advisor) can be alert to the functioning of each group and each student to complement the teacher’s perception of the classroom, evaluating the successes and errors in the formation of small groups (Bonals, 2000).