Abstract
Togetherness, academic help, peer support—all good things for a college student, right? Mostly. Michelle Maher followed several students co-enrolled in a cohort around for almost a year to discover what's good, what's not so good, and what we can do with both.
ASK A RESEARCHER to describe the impact of enrolling groups of students in courses together as a cohort and the answer is likely to be “Mostly good.” Improved academic performance, greater satisfaction with the college experience, and increased retention rates are all well-documented consequences of co-enrolling groups of students in more than one course. Ask educators who have taught in student cohorts to describe the experience, and they're likely to report “Mostly good; however …”
This article examines student cohorts. It is an exploration of both the “however”—the challenges that come with facilitating a cohort—and the “mostly good,” the unique opportunities for learning that arise when students are brought together in this way. Much of what I ‘ve learned about student cohorts is drawn from an ethnographic study of a thirteen-member graduate student cohort that I conducted for approximately a year. While the lessons I share are drawn from adult students, my understanding of the literature on student learning communities and other intentionally designed student groups leaves me fairly confident that these lessons can be applied to other groups as well. I undertook my study to better understand how students (in this case, practicing K—12 teachers) made meaning of their cohort membership and how they felt this membership affected how and what they learned as they worked to complete master's degrees in education. Through in-depth interviews with students and instructors and observations of both as they interacted in this environment, I came to understand that from an instructor's perspective, implementing a successful cohort is a more challenging task than one might first expect. In fact, facilitating student learning in any collaborative environment may be quite comfortable for some instructors, but for those who are accustomed to a more authoritative instructional approach or who are new to college teaching, it may offer some surprises. Carefully managed, I believe those surprises can be turned to the students’ advantage and render the learning experience in a cohort mostly good.
What is a cohort?
MOST STUDENTS experience higher education as a solo performance. In relative isolation from their peers, they spend each term selecting from a menu of individual courses that also operate in relative isolation from each other. Cohort programs have, for decades, attempted to break the separation between students and between courses. Bruce Barnett and Rosemary Caffarella define cohorts as groups of students who begin programs of study together and complete a series of common learning experiences over time. Cohorts can vary across a number of dimensions, including whether they are used in undergraduate or graduate programs, the length of time students are together, the types of common activities in which students are expected to participate, and whether the cohort is closed (one student entry point and lock-step cours ework) or open (multiple student entry points and more student choice in coursework sequence).
Iris Saltiel and Charline Russo recently suggested that cohorts have four primary characteristics:
A defined membership within a long-term group of learners A common goal among members (such as completion of a graduate or certificate program) that can best be achieved when members are academically and emotionally supportive of one another A highly structured and often intense meeting schedule (for example, extended evening and weekend sessions) A network of synergistic learning relationships that is developed and shared among the members
Cohorts are implemented to address a number of student needs. Katherine Chaddock Reynolds and Ted Hebert found that cohorts are associated with cognitive and affective learning gains, including self-understanding and values clarification. Bruce Barnett and his colleagues note that cohorts are related to higher levels of student cohesion and the development of leadership among students. In my own research, I discovered that cohort formats send students on a deep exploration of sensitive issues that they may not acknowledge when they are with groups of student strangers. I often observed the cohort I studied engaging in an extensive discussion that freely moved from student to student until most students had contributed at least once. Students felt that their discussions in the cohort were different from those they experienced in other educational settings. They said that since the students were familiar with one another, their conversations could reach a deeper level of analysis and reflection. One student commented, “There's been a lot more really open and thoughtful sharing versus more of the superficial ‘Let's make it through class’ type of sharing. I think our discussions over the year as we have gotten to know each other have gotten deeper and deeper.” Another agreed, “I do think that the level of discussion in these classes has been notably different than the ones in some of my other classes. Just by virtue of being in the cohort together all that time, the discussion is at a different level.”
Students have experienced this level of interaction in cohorts for many years in professional schools, such as schools of law and medicine, and in the military, where they have been grouped into competitive, lock-step programs for study or training. Student cohorts have also been used intermittently in other programs in higher education since the 1940s, depending on how well such a collaborative approach fit the prevailing views of curriculum theory. Student cohorts experienced a revival in the mid-1980s, when the redesign of more than twenty school principal preparation programs was funded by a Danforth Foundation Initiative; each of the principal preparation programs used a cohort format as part of its redesign effort, and programs in other academic areas soon followed their lead.
Today, student cohorts are used across a wide range of higher education programs, particularly in programs designed to attract nontraditional-age (twenty-five and older) part-time students who may also be employed full-time. Evidence from colleges and universities across the nation suggest that the use of the cohort format is increasing in popularity. The College of St. Elizabeth in New Jersey for example, offers two fast-track cohort-based Bachelor of Arts degrees: one in communication and one in business administration. Shelly Zimmerman, recruiter and adviser for these fast-track programs, told me that the cohort format provides a nurturing and collaborative learning environment in which students can make connections with each other and learn from other students’ professional experiences: “When we tell new applicants about the cohort format, they get very excited. It fits into their lifestyle, helping them juggle work, family, and personal responsibilities. It's a great way to welcome them back to college, especially if they have been away from a classroom for a very long time.” Educators may be attracted to cohort scheduling because it allows them to conveniently plan the timing of collective learning experiences for each student group.
All that said, just building a cohort structure “does not in itself ensure a cohort,” Cynthia Norris and Bruce Barnett caution. A poorly implemented and maintained cohort can quickly become a liability for everyone involved. Educators who will be participating in a cohort experience would be well advised to go into it with their eyes open.
Facilitating Individual and Group Experiences
FOR STARTERS, a well-designed student cohort program requires instructor responsibilities beyond what would be considered the norm in other settings. Because students are enrolled in courses together, instructors have the opportunity to increase the sense of community among themselves and their students. That takes time and generally means organizing off-campus activities, including team-bui1ding exercises, experience-based cours ework, and social activities that are held outside of traditional course hours, including evenings and weekends. Building community also may mean team teaching or presenting course material and assignments that stretch across classes. All of these activities require additional interaction among individual instructors, many of whom may be accustomed to teaching classes or guiding programs in relative isolation. Obviously, discussing additional responsibilities and expectations for instructor participation before the cohort starts is a good idea.
In a well-designed cohort program, student applicants have also been told that they are about to embark on a group experience. They understand how the structure of the cohort might subtly—or profoundly— change the nature of their relationship with instructors and other students. I was surprised to find that many students apply to programs offered in a cohort format without knowing what a cohort is and without considering whether a cohort format is right for them. One student who is new to the cohort program I studied confided, “Actually, I had no idea what a cohort was and I really still don't know exactly except that it seems like I'm going to be with these people for a while, that we'll be studying together and moving through this program together.”
In addition, many cohorts, particularly closed cohorts, require students to commit to an inflexible course schedule with unchanging student peers. For students who enjoy collaborating on academic projects, this arrangement may be ideal. Reflecting on her feelings toward becoming a new cohort member, one student mused to me, “I guess I have some positive feelings, because I know that a cohort can enhance your learning.” When I asked a second student about joining a cohort, she replied, “I tend to be an independent worker. If there wasn't a requirement to work in a group, I would probably choose not to.” Cohorts are intended to allow students to commit to a greater level of interaction with others over a longer period than in a traditional program. Student applicants should be informed of that.
Building a Family
I FOUND THAT the cohort format raises issues about the nature of interactions between students and instructors that are not typically present in the traditional learning environment. At the heart of these issues is the understanding that when students are brought together to interact as a cohort over time, a sense of cohort agency emerges, usually as a result of the development of strong interpersonal student relationships. Students described these relationships to me as “just like a family” and “an immediate bond.”These relationships are beneficial because, as Vincent Tinto notes, they fulfill learners’ needs for affiliation in the learning environment, particularly the needs of adult students, who, because of off-campus work and family responsibilities, may have only the classroom environment in which to build interpersonal networks.
However, as students spend more time together in tightly bound cohorts, the strength of their cohort agency may be surprising. In the K—12 teachers’ cohort, I discovered that soon after the group was formed, students began to describe their relationship with instruc-tors in terms of “we-they” not “I-she” or “I-he,” even when I specifically asked, “How would you describe your relationship with faculty members?” For example, students replied, “We had suggestions, and they were open to them”; “She was always supportive about ironing out anything we were upset over”; and “Somewhere along the line, we all got confused with what she said.” As one student noted, “I think that there is a definite ‘we-they’ in terms of professors and students.”
I saw cohort agency most clearly when the students were under duress, a frequent state among those who attempt to balance career and class-related obligations on a compressed cohort class schedule. I found that most students were under tight professional time and schedule constraints in their jobs as teachers due to state-mandated standardized testing expectations and regularly occurring time-consuming obligations such as parent-teacher meetings and report card development. In short, they were stressed, and as the cohort progressed, they became increasingly proactive in providing input and feedback about program activities and expectations.
A telling instance of the cohort's sense of agency occurred late in the fall semester. One of the group's course instructors looked around at the students and began the class by saying,”I'd like to talk to you about your stress level. I would be concerned if you were not stressed, but I don't want you to be stressed out. When you have too much stress, eve rything shuts down and you can't think clearly. Let me take you back to when you started. This is a very innovatne program with overlapping classes. …” She then discussed different options for class scheduling over the next month and ended by offering students the opportunity to begin the third class a few weeks late, allowing time to finish the first two classes.
With this opportunity to discuss scheduling changes before them, the students reacted by collectively broaching other desired changes. One student led this effort by saying to the class, “I think it is time to talk as a cohort. I wanted to see if you are frustrated with the deadlines in [another cohort instructor's] class. Right now we have report cards, assessments, and I know that Donna and Chris have to meet their parents after school.” She then turned to the instructor and said, “I think it's the first time that this [kind of] cohort has existed and we're seeing things you [the instructors] haven't seen from the inside of the courses.”
The cohort continued to discuss their dissatisfaction with scheduling and class content problems, ending by encouraging the instructor to contact a second instructor and ask for a change in class content and assignment deadlines on behalf of the cohort. To this, the instructor replied, “Perhaps you could write to her. I could do it for you, … but I think you should do it yourselves and take ownership. I think it's more professional that way.” With the instructor's encouragement, the cohort students agreed to collectively write a letter to the instructor, first selecting a spokesperson and then drafting the contents of the letter. By the end of the evening, the cohort had acted in unison to solve a problem and had realized the power of their collective ability to influence the agenda of the program.
Because this level of student ownership in the workings of a cohort program could lead to confusion or resentment between instructors and students, deciding in advance how and when students will be involved in decision making is in order. Some instructors invite a student cohort representative to attend planning meetings, while others discuss the decision points as they arise with the cohort as a whole. Responses to cohort agency are best when they are preemptive and positive.
Managing the Power of a Cohort
THE COHORT I studied was subject to the evolutionary processes and dynamics associated with groups. Research on group development suggests that most groups encounter periods associated with orientation, conflict and ambiguity, commitment and cohesion, performance, and dissolution or renewal. Cohorts need time to develop the group norms and roles that will support cohesion and group performance, particularly if students engage in activities requiring a high degree of peer interdependence. In my study, I learned that instructors should be on the lookout for groupthink and collusion. Groupthink was identified by Irving Janis as a group member's tendency toward deterioration of mental efficiency and judgment resulting from pressures associated with group membership. Some cohort students reported a tendency to limit their thinking patterns to those commonly used and accepted in the cohort. During discussions with cohort members enrolled in a master of organizational learning program that served as the pilot study for my larger study, one student told me, “We tend to converge a bit on group-think on some occasions.…Where if it wasn't a cohort, then you would have to have all these different people mixed up all the time with different ideas going on.”It seems to me this tendency may be particularly acute in closed cohorts, because stable cohort membership may promote adherence to set patterns of thinking.
I learned that at times students may be tempted to collude passively by not participating fully in group projects or by not holding accountable those students who are not doing their fair share of the work. My advice is to have open discussions with students early in the cohort program and to solicit ideas on preventing negative group dynamics. Instructors in some cohorts implement group charters that define expectations for group members and specify steps to be taken should negative group dynamics arise.
During my study, I witnessed students assuming a variety of roles as they worked to complete class requirements and provide each other with socioemotional support. Clare's role in the cohort of my research first caught my attention in the fall. In each class, her role appeared to be that of someone who clarified and organized the task at hand. Whenever there was ambiguity in the requiraements for assignments, assignment due dates, or the class meeting time or location, Clare questioned the instructor until the ambiguity was resolved. Beth noted her dependence on this role: “Every once in a while when I get confused, I hope Clare will say something.” Clare was singularly focused on assignments and would routinely finish them several days before they were due. This intimidated some students and motivated other students. As Nel noted, “You look at Clare's role, and her role is organization and getting it done, and so you work with that.” Later, Nel said, “I think different people teach you different things. From Clare, I might learn about organization and how you can get your project done ahead of time.” Clare described herself to me as having “some mild attentional difficulties, which people wouldn't believe knowing me, that I do, because I stay real organized and I stay real focused and I accomplish a lot.”
Terry was the tension breaker who routinely provided levity for the cohort, especially when the group seemed tense or when the class period began to drag. She would often express thoughts out loud that other people might have but might never say, and her expressions were usually accompanied by sound effects. As Beth noted, “You have people like Terry who just break the monotony; you know what Terry's like, and she just shocks us all.” Clare said, “Then there is Terry, who makes us all crack up, and we all laugh and kind of find her amusing.” Although Terry said she didn't think she was as “extroverted as I used to be, definitely not in this class; I'm very quiet,” the other students said her humor added levity to sometimes stressful or tedious situations.
I learned that cohort students may develop such strong interpersonal bonds that they view students who are enrolled in cohort classes but are not cohort members as outsiders and treat them as such. These outsider students reported to me that they felt that their views were not as accepted or important as those of the cohort members. I found that even students who are cohort members but who fall behind the cohort course schedule have been treated as outsiders by other students in their cohort. Susan, a member of the organizational learning cohort, recalled a student peer who had fallen behind in the cohort class sequence. “We actually feel bad for him having broken the sequence. He fell out of the sequence for whatever reason, and it was very much like ‘us’ and ‘him.’ … He wasn't ‘of us.’…” Scheduling regular debriefing sessions to discuss cohort progress and relationships may help.
Leaving the Cohort
THE STRONG interp ersonal relationships that students build in cohorts are natural starting points for networks that can help cohort alumni in their professional endeavors. I discovered that involving cohort alumni in current cohort activities can increase program coherence and a sense of community shared among cohort participants. Alumni can serve as guest speakers, class facilitators, mentors, or in any capacity that allows them to share expertise gained in and outside the program. Alumni involvement connects past and present students to the cohort experience.
Cohorts can provide instructors with a powerful opportunity to engage students more fully in the learning environment and can provide a greater sense of community in the classroom and across an entire program of study. But, as with any meaningful learning experience, to function well, cohorts need guidance from educators who understand the specific concerns of the students as individuals and as members of a group.