I have gathered some notes below and raise the question as to whether or not Slido can truly benefit all students in collaborative learning. I use these points to elaborate further onto my literature review.
Theoretical Framework
Constructivism (Piaget, Vygotsky): learning through shared experiences
Engaged Pedagogy (Greenwood-Hau): challenging power dynamics
Critical Pedagogy (Freire): dialogue, critical thinking, active participation
Additional Connections
Slido’s features can potentially address some challenges (e.g., anonymous participation)
Action research is needed to explore Slido’s impact on diverse student groups
Intersectionality needs to be considered to create a just learning environment
My Role
Academic Technician in Psychology
Leverage Slido’s features to enhance collaborative learning
Conduct action research on Slido’s effectiveness
Promote a critical and inclusive learning environment.
The question that I raise is how can I use technology to make sure all students especially those without many resources can work together in class to learn critical thinking, solve problems, and fight for fairness? The works of Paulo Freire (1970) and Lev Vygotsky, though originating from different cultural and historical contexts, share a profound commitment to empowering learners through social interaction and critical reflection. Freire’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” (1970) offers a radical vision of education as a tool for liberation. He advocates for a dialogue-based approach that challenges traditional, hierarchical models of teaching and learning. By engaging in critical dialogue, learners can develop a deeper understanding of their own experiences and the social structures that shape their lives. Freire’s emphasis on problem-posing education aligns with Vygotsky’s constructivist perspective, as both theorists recognize the importance of active learning and the construction of knowledge through social interaction. The convergence of Freire’s and Vygotsky’s ideas has significant implications for collaborative learning. By creating inclusive and supportive learning environments, educators can foster critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity. Collaborative learning activities, such as group discussions, peer tutoring, and project-based learning, can help students develop the skills and knowledge they need to become active, engaged citizens.
Drawing on Freire’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” (1970), I believe that the emphasis on current digital era in Higher education should promote critical thinking and active participation. I recall Piaget (1950) and Vygotsky (1978)’s work as both laid the groundwork for understanding how social interaction fuels cognitive development. Scholars like Johnson and Johnson (2002) built upon this foundation and highlight the transformative power of collaborative learning. Their findings indicate that engaging in dialogue and debate, students are challenged to confront alternative perspectives of their peers by engaging in dialogue. And this leads to deeper understanding and critical thinking. As Johnson& Johnson (2002) argue there is a “cognitive clash” that empowers learners to construct knowledge collectively.
The integration of technology into the classroom has revolutionized collaborative learning. Digital tools enable students to connect with peers from around the world, fostering intercultural understanding. Online platforms provide opportunities for asynchronous and synchronous collaboration, allowing students to work together at their own pace and share ideas in real-time. As a specialist technician, I use technology to make learning more engaging and accessible. By harnessing the power of tools like Slido, I believe we all can collaboratively create spaces where students and academics can share ideas, and challenge each other. This kind of dynamic environment may foster critical thinking and problem-solving skills, which are essential for success in today’s world.
Gokhale’s (1995) research underscores the crucial role of critical thinking in addressing social justice issues. By questioning information, analyzing multiple perspectives, and evaluating evidence, students can develop informed opinions and take action to create positive change. Collaborative learning provides an ideal context for cultivating these skills, as students work together to investigate complex problems, challenge assumptions, and propose innovative solutions. Scholars have emphasized the importance of collaborative learning strategies such as small group discussions, intentional dialogues, active listening, and flattening hierarchical dynamics (Kolb and Kolb, 2005; Sidelinger and Booth-Butterfield, 2010; Burress and Peters, 2015; Ha and Pepin, 2017; Cook-Sather, 2018). These strategies foster a sense of community and shared understanding, promoting critical thinking and problem-solving skills. By actively engaging with peers, students can challenge their own assumptions, consider diverse perspectives, and construct deeper knowledge.
As a specialist technician , I have a responsibility to create learning environments that foster collaboration, critical thinking, and social justice. By embracing the power of technology and using online platforms can collectively engage students in classroom and empower them to become active participants in their own learning and agents of change in their communities. How can I ensure that all students have equitable access to technology in classroom so can raise their questions , rate the engaging content of their learning, look at their peers’ responses and collectively harness knowledge and skills? By delving deeper into this question, I can continue to refine pedagogical practices and create more meaningful learning experiences for students and myself.
Research consistently indicates that collaborative learning can positively impact students’ academic experiences (Loes & Pascarella, 2017 ;Table 1). However, it is important to consider whether these benefits are equitable across all student populations. While collaborative learning can be particularly beneficial for racial minorities and white students with lower academic abilities (Barkley et al., 2014; Loes and Pascarella, 2017), it is crucial to ensure that all students could participate meaningfully in collaborative activities.
Caroline Lenette’s (2023) work highlights the power of participatory action research (PAR) to amplify marginalized voices. By involving community members as co-researchers, PAR challenges traditional, top-down research models and promotes social justice. Lenette acknowledges the limitations of PAR, including time constraints and institutional hurdles. Yet, these do not diminish its potential. Building strong partnerships with communities takes time and effort, but the rewards are worth it. This reflection brings my current research project to mind. While testing the validity of tools like Slido with colleagues is valuable, true rigor in social justice research comes from genuine collaboration with the students and academic community I aim to impact. How can I integrate PAR principles into my own research practice? Perhaps conducting the slido intervention with a colleague could be the next steps in my project. By involving him throughout the research process, I can ensure that my findings are relevant and truly empowering for students and marginalised community in classroom.
Table 1. Benefits of collaborative learning in Higher Education.
| Attribute | Description | |
| Improved academic achievement | Students who engage in collaborative learning activities tend to have higher academic achievement compared to those who do not (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998; Springer et al., 1999). | |
| Positive attitudes toward STEM courses | Collaborative learning can lead to more positive attitudes toward science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses (Bowen, 2000). | |
| Increased psychological adjustment | Students who participate in collaborative learning activities tend to have better psychological adjustment (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). | |
| Appreciation for fine arts and increased understanding of science and technology | Collaborative learning can also lead to a greater appreciation for the fine arts and a deeper understanding of science and technology (Cabrera et al., 1998). | |
| Openness to diversity | Collaborative learning experiences can help students to be more open to diversity (Cabrera et al., 2002). | |
| Greater ability to transfer information | Students who collaborate on learning activities tend to develop a greater ability to transfer information from one setting to another (Johnson et al., 1991). | |
| Ability to generate new ideas | Collaborative learning can also lead to an increased ability to generate new ideas and solutions (Johnson et al., 1991). | |
| Increased cognitive motivation | Studies have shown that collaborative learning can increase cognitive motivation (Castle, 2014). | |
| Persistence to the 2nd year of college | Students who engage in collaborative learning are more likely to persist to the second year of college (Loes et al., 2017). | |
| Improved liberal arts outcomes | Collaborative learning has also been linked to improved liberal arts outcomes (Seifert et al., 2008). | |
Expanding the collaborative circle :Technology and Inclusive learning
Greenwood-Hau (2024) argues that collaborative learning promotes “engaged pedagogy,” challenging traditional power dynamics and fostering a “community of learners.” This approach encourages active student participation, turning teachers into co-learners. It contrasts with the traditional model that isolates critical thinking and creates a divide between students and teachers. Based on these scholars, the current project will investigate participation of students in classroom via technology.
Greenwood-Hau’s (2024) idea of “engaged pedagogy” really got me thinking. How can I break down those old power dynamics and make my psychology class a real community? Emoji Insights utilised in Slido could make a difference, A simple emoji can say a lot. I used them to gauge understanding and mood. Red frowny faces for “disatisfied,” and everything in between. Rating reality utilised as students could rate their confidence on a scale. It is a quick way to identify areas where I need to dig deeper. Question time is also utilised via slido. Instead of a one-way lecture, I toss questions out there. Students can anonymously share their thoughts. It will be like a digital class discussion, but without the fear of judgment. Slido can level the playing field, and maybe students are more active, more engaged, and more vocal. May it feel like we are all co-learners, not just me up front lecturing?
Lately, I have been thinking a lot about how to make the classroom a more collaborative space. Research by folks like Peters and Mathias (2018) and Vespone (2023) really resonates with me. They talk about how working together, with peers, teachers, and even technology, can create a much richer learning experience. It is about moving away from me talking at the front and towards everyone actively building knowledge together. Discussions, group work, and reflection exercises that is the kind of energy I want to see (Vespone, 2023). The engaged pedagogy concept connects to creating a safe space where students feel comfortable sharing ideas and taking risks. It is great, but it needs support. Crooks, Owen, & Stone (2012) highlight the importance of resources and policies to achieve this. That is where I see online platforms like Slido coming in. It could be a fantastic tool for students to share perspectives and connect, fostering a more inclusive learning environment.
Technology that allows for anonymous collaboration and discussion is particularly exciting. Serres (2014) also talks about how traditional institutions are changing. Thumbelina, represents the transformative nature of millennial to tech savvy ones (Notebook). The internet is creating a space for everyone to have a voice and participate in the learning process. There is a shift from a single “teacher” to a multitude of voices, which can be both challenging and amazing. Slido, with its anonymous features, could be a way to navigate this complexity and ensure everyone feels comfortable contributing.
In the end, collaborative learning, backed by technology like Slido, can be a powerful tool. It encourages critical thinking, dialogue, and a sense of community. This empowers students to take charge of their learning journey. As a specialist technician in the classroom, I believe this approach, along with acknowledging potential challenges like group dynamics and assessment can create a rich and rewarding academic experience for all students.Time to dive deeper into Slido and explore how it can best support collaborative learning in the classroom.
Notebook
References
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014) Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bowen, C. W. (2000) ‘A quantitative literature review of cooperative learning effects on high school and college chemistry achievement’ Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 116–119. doi:10.1021/ed077p116.
Burress, M. D., and Peters, J. M. (2015) ‘Collaborative learning in a Japanese language course: student and teacher experiences’ SAGE Open, 5(2), pp. 1-14. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015581016.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., Bernal, E. M., Terenzini, P. T., and Pascarella, E. T. (1998, November) ’Collaborative learning: Preferences, gains in cognitive & affective outcomes, and openness to diversity among college students’ Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Miami, FL.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., Crissman, J. L., and Terenzini, P. T. (2002) ‘Collaborative learning: Its impact on college students’ development and diversity’ Journal of College Student Development, 43(1), 20–34.
Castle, T. D. (2014) The impact of cooperative learning on the development of Need for Cognition among first-year college students (Doctoral dissertation).University of Iowa. Available at: http:// ir.uiowa.edu/etd/1437.
Crooks,V.A., Owen,M., and Stone,S.D. (2012) ‘Creating a (More) Reflexive Canadian Disability Studies: Our Team’s Account’ Canadian journal of disabilities studies, CJDS 1.3. Published by the Canadian Disability Studies Association. The University of Waterloo.
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. (eBook in library).
Freire, P. (1996) Pedagogy of the oppressed (revised). London: Penguin.
Freire, P. (1997) Pedagogy of the heart. New York: Continuum.
Gokhale, A. A. (1995) ‘Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking’ Journal of Technology Education, 7, 22–30. doi:10.21061/jte.v7i1.a.2
Greenwood-Hau,J (2024) ‘Teaching facts or teaching thinking? The potential of hooks’ ‘engaged pedagogy’ for teaching politics in a ‘post-truth’ moment’ Teaching in Higher Education,VOL. 29, NO. 1, 75–92. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1965567(Assecced 28 October 2024).
Routldege:Taylor & Francis Group.
Ha, L. and Pepin, J. (2017) ‘Experiences of nursing students and educators during the co-construction of clinical nursing leadership learning activities: a qualitative research and development study’ Nurse Education Today, 55, pp.90-95. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.05.006
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989) Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2002) ‘Social interdependence theory and university instruction: Theory into practice’ Swiss Journal of Psychology, 61, pp. 119–129. doi:10.1024//1421-0185.61.3.119
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. (1991) Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction.
Kolb, A. Y. and Kolb, D. A. (2005) ‘Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential learning in higher education’ Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(2), pp.193-212. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40214287.
Lenette, C. (2023) Participatory Action Research: Ethic and Decolonization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Loes, C. N. and Pascarella, E. T. (2017) ‘Collaborative Learning and Critical Thinking: Testing the Link’ The Journal of Higher Education, 88(5), pp. 726-753. DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2017.1291257.
Peters, J. and Mathias, L. (2018) ‘Enacting Student Partnership as Though We Really Mean It: Some Freirean Principles for a Pedagogy of Partnership’, International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2). Newman University, UK.
Seifert, T. A., Goodman, K. M., Lindsay, N., Jorgensen, J. D., Wolniak, G. C., Pascarella, E. T., and Blaich, C. (2008) ‘The effects of liberal arts experiences on liberal arts outcomes’ Research in Higher Education, 49, 107–125. doi:10.1007/s11162-007-9070-7.
Serres, M. (2014) Thumbelina : The Culture and Technology of Millennials. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Incorporated. ProQuest Ebook Central. Available at: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ual/detail.action?docID=1827533 (Accessed: 20 October 2024).
Sidelinger, R. J. and Booth-Butterfield, M. (2010) ‘Co-constructing student involvement:An examination of teacher confirmation and student-to-student connectedness in the college classroom’CommunicationEducation,59(2),pp.165-184.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03634520903390867.
Slido (2022) ‘How to use Slido for Live Polls in PowerPoint Presentation’. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUAM-5DFe6A (Accessed: 24 June 2024).
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999) ‘Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: A meta-analysis’ Review of Educational Research, 69, 21–51. doi:10.3102/00346543069001021
Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) ‘Interaction between learning and development’, in Gauvain, M. and Cole, M. (eds.) Readings on the development of children’ Scientific American Books, pp. 34-40.
Vespone, B. (2023) ‘Co-constructing teaching and learning in higher education: a literature review of practices and implications’ Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 27, pp. 1-25. Available at: https://journal.aldinhe.ac.uk/index.php/jldhe/article/view/997 Doi:10.47408/jldhe.vi27.997(Accessed: 6 November 2024).