Grade school children’s social collaborative skills: Links with partner preference and achievement

Ladd, G.W., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., Visconti, K.J., Ettekal, I., Sechler, C. M., & Cortes, K. I. (2014). Grade school children’s social collaborative skills: Links with partner preference and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 51(1), 152-183.


We are seeing renewed interest these days in what is now called “peer-mediated learning” or “PML” (p.154). PML is an umbrella term that includes various forms of paired or small group work that are designed by teachers and involve the completion of tasks that are supposed to promote learning. The emphasis on instructional activities of this nature has waxed and waned over the past few decades.

There was a high interest in what was called “cooperative learning” in the 1990s, when Robert Slavin’s book on that topic was constantly quoted, and districts like one in our area actually required teachers to implement cooperative learning several times a week or they would be negatively evaluated (you can imagine the comments I heard about THAT from the teachers in that district who were then in my evening graduate courses). That focus faded as No Child Left Behind and its focus on testable skills took over the landscape. Now, with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and their purported emphasis on higher level thinking, and on developing skills needed for college and careers, there is a renewed interest in PML. Some of the most-quoted educators today are calling for collaborative work as an essential element of English Language Arts instruction, beginning at the elementary level.

The authors here looked at PML and the social skills that were necessary for students to be successful when doing PML activities. What made this research stand out for me is that the researchers primarily looked at the viewpoints of young learners about PML, the skills required to succeed at peer learning activities, whether they perceived their classmates as possessors of those skills, and how those perceptions impacted their choices of peer partners for learning tasks. Some teacher input was sought on their perceptions of student achievement levels, but the main data came from asking 113 third, fourth and fifth graders questions about their experiences with PML and their observations of their classmates. While it is important to be cautious when interpreting any kind of self-report data, and young learners will probably not be viewing classroom events from a completely informed perspective, it still is refreshing to see their voices being heard and their perceptions being taken seriously.

The researchers developed a taxonomy for identifying and classifying the skills needed for successful participation in PML. Four categories emerged: On-Task, Cooperative Skills, Support and Concern, Conscientiousness (p. 169). Of all these, children rated being On-Task the highest in importance, though that was more true for boys’ ratings than for girls’ ratings. The children’s ratings of their classmates on the four categories showed wide variation in perceived skill levels within classrooms, a finding that will not surprise most teachers at any level. One of the challenges of implementing PML is getting everyone to participate and engage with the task and with the collaborative process. Some learners do this more easily and naturally than others. There could be many factors at work there, from individual differences in personality and learning styles, to learned responses that are strengthened by whatever consequences (positive or negative) may have been associated with PML-type activities in the past. Such responses may already be entrenched by the third grade.

Children in the study clearly knew which of their classmates possessed skills needed for success at PML, and they preferred those children as work partners, though the relationship was stronger for boys than for girls. In fact, most of the relationships among factors seemed to be stronger for the boys. Looking into the reasons for the gender differences would be interesting and important, though it would go beyond the scope of this particular study. I hope the researchers do return to the issue of gender difference and what it means in the findings here. Another aspect for further exploration is how to build the skills needed for PML so that all learners can benefit. How do you make sure all learners are engaged and on task and successful, while still honoring and utilizing each learner’s unique strengths and ways of learning? I expect to see more from these researchers, and from others, on how PML works and how we can maximize its benefits for all learners.