see below

¶ … Groups and Classroom Education

By the very nature of culture and humanity, humans tend to be group animals -- they thrive in groups, coalesce into groups, indeed, the very process of moving from hunter-gatherer to cities was part of a group behavior. Within this essay we will first look at group normative behavior, intergroup communication and leadership, and finally the way in which group behaviors influence individuation and specific responses to that group's culture. Group norms are defined as a set of internal rulings that are followed by the group members in order to increase the overall efficiency of the group's activity. These norms usually refer to the members' behavior towards themselves, their hierarchical superior and group outsiders, as well as to their approach and attitude towards the work they are expected to perform. Norms determine the way in which groups solve problems, make decisions and do their work. They influence interactions between members and between the group and the facilitator. Norms reflect the group's culture of shared values (Berry, 2007; Characteristics of A Group - Group Composition, 2007).

A group's cohesive nature is given by its features' and members' ability of coexisting and completing each other in order to form a balanced and harmonious whole. To achieve these, group leaders needs to take into consideration three major elements: interpersonal relationships, structural relationships and organizational relationships. After having taken into consideration the three relationships, group leaders need to consider two additional forces that influence the unity of the group: the size of the team and the technology used within the group (McClure, 2005). The size of the group has a direct influence upon the cohesion of the group in the meaning that it critically impacts communication between members. The greater the number of members within a group, the harder it is for them to properly send out their messages and insure they are clearly understood. In their path from the transmitter to the receiver, information may be distorted or even lost; thus impairing the function of the group (Witte and Davis, 1996).

Groups and the Classroom- Within the classroom situation, groups are unavoidable, and yet sometimes the very thing an instructor wants. Individuals within classrooms form hierarchies -- these may be based on social groups, age, commonality, or, in many cases, antipathy toward the instructor. Varying degrees of age and maturity also define group structure in the classroom; more defined groups in secondary school, less or more fluid in elementary school, and by college, little or no group activity unless a group of similar majors are taking classes together. These educational groups are often drawn together by common requirements, needs, or even abilities. This allows the instructor a rare opportunity to provide a more positive learning environment and to treat the group as a learning experience and the group dynamics as a part of curriculum development (Resnick, 1951).

Group dynamics can also affect the cognitive learning environment within a classroom; processes can hinder, or help the dynamics between student and teacher, and clearly change expectations within the socio-cultural paradigm of individual classes. For example, the dynamics in a quantitative course are likely to be more structured based on the curriculum; while a qualitative class that engenders discussion and free thinking and expression of ideas may have a more open, inclusive, and active paradigm set (Schmuck, 1975).

For some time, the idea of groups in classrooms has engendered sociological speculation about ways to improve the social climate in the classroom. Teachers realize that groups of children are more than an amalgamation of individuals; and the subtle interpersonal relationships sometime difficult to uncover at times. One theory holds that a variety of sociometric techniques will bring relations into view, structure, them, and use sociometrty to measure and diagnose the peer relations, friendships, and social status of individuals within the classroom. Once this data is recovered, using the proper template, an aggressive management of group dynamics may occur -- more powerfully in the younger years where authority and time are more conducive, but still powerful in the secondary classroom (Sherman, 2002; Harris, 1998).

In the primary grades, the instructor can often create and manage the group -- size, composition, stabliity, etc. For maximum effect on certain projects. This allows students to both learn and teach, but the instructor to manage the inner dynamics in a proactive manner (Baines, Kutnick and Blatchford, 2009). In fact, one of the great pedagogical challenges that, if done correctly, meets a number of classroom goals is the ability to create high performance groups within the classroom. Research indicates that cooperative learning takes place, various sociological constructs are emphasized (teamwork, empathy, politeness, etc.), and naturally bleeds off into a more shared leadership role and the hierarchical levels to which many individuals gravitate. However, it is the self-management and extreme prblem solving that seems the most popular in creating effective groups ((Brown, 2000).

Within group theory, however, we find there are a number of group types that may be more effective within the classroom -- aand of course, grade level, student achivement, an inner robustness of the curriculum. Briefly, there are: