Smaller groups require more from each group member.
Frequency of the group interaction
Frequent, face to face interactions promote positive interdependence.
Sharing a common purpose
Both individual and group learning opportunities
(as cited in Norris & Barnett, 1994)
(Yerkes, Basom, Norris, & Barnett, 1995)
BENEFITS OF COHORT MODEL
Group projects with high levels of ambiguity and autonomy increased cohesion
“ We ate dinner together once a week between classes. These times often became gripe sessions and support sessions for cohort members.
We recognized that we were all in this experience together so there was not the competition…”
(Wesson & Holman, 1996)
Increased support and connection between students
“ Strong networks formed – more comfortable in sharing ideas and concerns with those who became more like friends and family. Family atmosphere – comfort/risk-free/have phone numbers of all members” (Teitel, 1997).
“ Some students began to see an increasing value in providing academic support to their peers, even peers who were not part of assigned small groups” (Maher, 2005).
Deeper discussions of sensitive issues
Students felt more comfortable and free from peer criticism, leading to more in-depth discussions (Maher, 2005).
Students also became more proficient in giving and receiving peer feedback (Maher, 2005).
“ There was a sense of an open society where people are committed to listening to each other in order to discover shared truths (Wesson & Holman, 1996).”
Other Benefits of Cohort Model
Individuals believed cohort model promoted their personal growth (Norris & Barnett, 1994).
After extended school breaks, class interaction quickly resumed picked up where they left off.
“ Engagement in class discussion is almost immediate – even in new classes” (Teitel, 1997).
The emergence of strong emotional ties has been linked to reduced attrition (as cited in Maher, 2005).
Personality and Intellectual mismatches (Maher, 2005) (Teitel, 1997).
Formation of cliques (Teitel, 1997).
Sense of being forced/locked into a defined role (Teitel, 1997).
Study Results Dance class and DVD Project Vs Dance Class
What percentage of people in this class do you know? DVD Project (n=15) Dance Only (n=22) Pre Semester Range 0% - 20% 0% - 20% Post Semester Range 70% - 100% 0% - 95% Pre Semester Average 8% 7% Post Semester Average 97% 49% Increase from Pre to Post Average 89% increase 42% increase
On a scale from 1-5 on average how well do you know this % of students? DVD Project (n=15) Dance Only (n=22) Pre Semester Range 1 – 3.5 1 – 5 Post Semester Range 3 – 5 1 – 5 Pre Semester Average 1.97 2.59 Post Semester Average 3.65 3.07 Increase from Pre to Post Average 1.68 0.48
Do you socialize with any people in class outside of school? If so, how often? Pre to Post DVD Project (n=15) Dance Only (n=22) No to No 3 7 No to Yes 7 2 % of No changed to Yes 70% 22%
On a scale of 1-5 how comfortable would you feel performing/teaching dance in front of this class? Pre to Post DVD Project (n=15) Dance Only (n=22) Pre Semester Range 1 – 5 1 – 4.5 Post Semester Range 1 – 5 * (4 – 5) 1 – 5 Pre Semester Average 3.23 2.84 Post Semester Average 4.47 3.85 Increase from Pre to Post 1.24 1.01
Teitel, L. (1997). Understanding and harnessing the power of the cohort model in preparing educational leaders. Peabody Journal of Education , 72 (2), 66. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Norris, C., & Barnett, B. (1994). Cultivating a New Leadership Paradigm: From Cohorts to Communities. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Barnett, B., & Caffarella, R. (1992). The Use of Cohorts: A Powerful Way for Addressing Issues of Diversity in Preparation Programs. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Maher, M. (2005). The Evolving Meaning and Influence of Cohort Membership. Innovative Higher Education , 30 (3), 195-211. doi:10.1007/s10755-005-6304-5.
Wesson, L. & Holman, S., (1996). Cohesion or Collusion: Impact of a Cohort Structure on Educational Leadership Doctoral Students. Retrieved from ERIC database.
McCarthy, J., Trenga, M., & Weiner, B. (2005). The Cohort Model with Graduate Student Learners: Faculty-Student Perspectives. Adult Learning , 16 (3/4), 22-25. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Yerkes, D., Basom, M., Norris, C., & Barnett, B. (1995). Using Cohorts in the Development of Educational Leaders. Retrieved from ERIC database.