explain that 
"We can let them do this in groups."
"Let's have them hand in group assignments."
"If they form groups of at least six per group, I will only have 100 projects to mark."
We know these and similar phrases well, and it is most likely that (at certain times of our careers) we have voiced them. Why? There are various reasons for using “group work” as peer collaborative activities are often called. More often than not, being overwhelmed with a devastatingly high module enrolment is the main reason. As much as this is a valid concern, with groups as a possible practical solution, this should not be the main reason for using peer collaborative activities. The assessment of work that was done in groups should also not be the starting point for considering collaboration in a module.
What then should be the starting point? Collaborative and cooperative learning has been part of pedagogical discussions and recommendations for decades now.
From their point of view, Johnson and Johnson (2009:365) explain that
The brothers David and Roger Johnson (both from the College of Education, University of Minnesota) are probably two of modern day’s most well-known researchers and authors on cooperative learning. Since the 1970s they have published numerous research articles, book chapters and books - both individually and cooperatively. (David Johnson's “first published review of the research on cooperation and competition appeared in 1970 in his book, The Social Psychology of Education” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_W._Johnson_(scholar)). They are co-founders and co-directors for the Cooperative Learning Institute since 1987 (http://www.co-operation.org/).
If student cooperative and collaborative learning is worth the founding of institutes, there should certainly be value in it. What is the value? Why does it have value? Under what conditions will it have value? How can learner collaboration be structured in order to have value? These are some of the questions that will be addressed in this resource, and we hope to receive feedback from you about how this supported you in your decisions around the use of collaborative activities in your teaching.
Research, sources and websites explaining the advantages and value of collaborative group work are limitless. Brown (2017) provides brief descriptions of six of the most important advantages.
Collaborative group activities have the potential to promote the development of the following:
There is often confusion between the definitions of cooperative and collaborative learning. Panitz (1999:3) sheds some light on this by investigating a variety of definitions. Panitz concludes that collaboration can be seen as “a philosophy of interaction and personal lifestyle”, and “cooperation is a structure of interaction designed to facilitate the accomplishment of a specific end product or goal through people working together in groups.” Cooperative learning could, in other words, be seen as a structured approach to collaborative learning. Johnson, Johnson and Smith (2014) view that cooperative learning can be seen as the basis on which all other interactive teaching and learning methods are embedded. Various structured teaching and learning methods, such as team-based learning (see Michaelsen & Sweet (2011) ) and problem-based learning (PBL) could be seen as forms of structured and facilitated cooperative learning.
Promoting real collaboration is hard to do well - and it does not just happen on its own. If lecturers want real collaboration, they need to intentionally design it as part of their teaching and learning activity.