Withdrawal from the large group

I was observing E1 Group 3 Monday afternoon.  I was simultaneously impressed by the collaboration within Group 3 and surprised by their eventual withdrawal from the large class discussion at the end of the day.  The general outline of activities for Monday afternoon was as follows: 

- Go outside to observe “energy events”

- Group whiteboarding to create some sort of diagram/representation of one of the energy events you observed

- Walk around and view other groups’ whiteboards followed by class discussion

- Group whiteboarding to create a list of essential energy “features” that would apply to any energy “happening”

- Class discussion of essential energy features.

Within Group 3 all four members were contributing to the conversation and contributing along their different strengths (Andrew and Allison were stronger in physics, Madonna was stronger in biology and chemistry, Michelle was fairly strong in all three subjects).  I noticed different people in the group taking the markers or erasers at different times to make contributions to the whiteboard.  When not writing on the whiteboard, group members would point at or tap the board as they were expressing their ideas.  Everyone seemed to feel equal ownership of the whiteboard and equally responsible/capable of making contributions to their group.  (Abby, some talk about efficiency and loss to thermal energy here.)

During the energy representations class discussion, all the groups were attentive and involved, talking both about the activity as a whole and about features from various whiteboards that they liked or found confusing.  I didn’t get a chance to see all the whiteboards but my impression was that Group 3’s board was more technical and included more equations than the other boards.  During the “gallery walk” Group 3 finished viewing the other whiteboards and sat back down before the other groups but they were engaged and contributed to the class discussion.

Group 3 had more good discussions while whiteboarding their energy features and came up with a list of features that was longer than some of them were expecting.  However, the group sort of broke off on their own during the large class discussion.  Group 3 would contribute features from their board and listen to other groups’ features but did not engage during the group debates.  There was some class discussion of the difference between “type, form, and state” that arose based on a comment made by Group 3 but somehow Group 3 ended up being the least involved in this debate.  While the rest of the class tried out various ideas and terms, Group 3 would discuss what those terms did or did not mean amongst themselves.  They were paying attention but not engaging with the larger class.  This was very noticeable (to me, not necessarily the other teachers) due to the otherwise very productive class discussion in which participants would often ask for clarification or elaboration on someone else’s idea.  At one point Group 3 commented amongst themselves that “no one else is going to want to work with us,” recognizing that they were withdrawing from engaging with the broader class.

I’m not sure why Group 3 worked so well amongst themselves (or at least appeared to in the moment) but did not integrate as well with the whole class.  I’m also not sure why Group 3 was more engaged during the first class discussion (about energy representations) than they were during the second class discussion (about energy features).  Possibly they saw the second discussion as having more “right answers” than the first and hence withdrew from the conversation when they felt they already had the right answers.