Research indicates that the probability of students learning from small-group activities with classmates depends to some considerable extent upon the nature of their group's interaction. In particular, positive outcomes are most likely when group members share, build on and constructively evaluate each other's ideas, strive towards consensus, and when they disagree give reasons for their viewpoints. Nevertheless, while such features often prove beneficial, positive consequences are not guaranteed, raising the question of whether additional sources of support can be identified. Focusing on strategies that could potentially be used during and after small-group activity, a study is reported that addresses this issue. The study revolved around the group work taking place during two lessons (covering two of mathematics, literacy and science) that were observed and video-recorded in each of 71 demographically diverse classrooms (students aged 10–11 years). With four out of five measures of student learning, the results indicate positive associations with ‘beyond-group sharing’, that is activities where students sketch what happened within their groups to classmates who did not participate. By contrast, the results indicate no positive consequences for ‘goal-achievement checking’, a prevalent form of intervention where teachers ensure that objectives for small-group activities have been reached.

研究表明，学生从与同学的小组活动中学习的可能性在一定程度上取决于小组互动的性质。尤其是，当小组成员共享，建立和建设性地评估彼此的想法，努力达成共识时，以及当他们不同意时提出自己的观点时，最有可能取得积极成果。然而，尽管这些功能通常被证明是有益的，但不能保证产生积极的后果，这带来了是否可以确定其他支持来源的问题。报告指出，针对可能在小组活动期间和之后使用的策略，一项研究致力于解决这一问题。该研究围绕两个课程中的小组工作进行（涵盖了两个数学，识字和科学），并在71个人口统计学上各异的教室（年龄在10-11岁之间的学生）中进行观察和录制。在五分之四的学生学习衡量中，结果表明与“超越群体共享”具有正相关性，即学生向未参加的同学描述他们在团队中发生的事情。相比之下，结果表明对“目标实现检查”没有积极影响，这是一种普遍的干预形式，教师可以确保已达到小组活动的目标。在这种活动中，学生向未参加比赛的同学速记小组中发生的事情。相比之下，结果表明对“目标实现检查”没有积极影响，“目标实现检查”是一种普遍的干预形式，教师可以确保已达到小组活动的目标。在这种活动中，学生向未参加比赛的同学速记小组中发生的事情。相比之下，结果表明对“目标实现检查”没有积极影响，这是一种普遍的干预形式，教师可以确保已达到小组活动的目标。