The Impact of Group Discussion and Formation on Student Performance: An Experience Report in a Large CS1 Course

TL;DR

This study investigates how group discussion and formation methods affect student performance in a large CS1 course, revealing complex dynamics and that grouping method has limited impact on engagement and improvement.

Contribution

It provides empirical insights into the effects of different group formation strategies and expert student presence on collaborative learning outcomes in a large programming course.

Findings

Group discussion engagement was higher in actively participating groups.

Poor-performing students showed improvement in many discussion groups.

Grouping method (random or expertise-balanced) did not significantly affect engagement or student improvement.

Abstract

Programming instructors often conduct collaborative learning activities, such as Peer Instruction (PI), to enhance student motivation, engagement, and learning gains. However, the impact of group discussion and formation mechanisms on student performance remains unclear. To investigate this, we conducted an 11-session experiment in a large, in-person CS1 course. We employed both random and expertise-balanced grouping methods to examine the efficacy of different group mechanisms and the impact of expert students' presence on collaborative learning. Our observations revealed complex dynamics within the collaborative learning environment. Among 255 groups, 146 actively engaged in discussions, with 96 of these groups demonstrating improvement for poor-performing students. Interestingly, our analysis revealed that different grouping methods (expertise-balanced or random) did not significantly influence discussion engagement or poor-performing students' improvement. In our deeper qualitative analysis, we found that struggling students often derived benefits from interactions with expert peers, but this positive effect was not consistent across all groups. We identified challenges that expert students face in peer instruction interactions, highlighting the complexity of leveraging expertise within group discussions.