For my pedagogy class, I’m researching collaboration, so I was particularly drawn to the research by Nancy Allen and others into collaboration in the workplace. And I was happy when their subjects mentioned the importance of disagreement in their collaborations. Citing one research subject, they write: “While he agreed that mutual respect between collaborators was important, he also believed that too much respect would prevent members from challenging one another and would thereby lessen the group’s creativity” (359). If we accept that disagreements are important, I think it raises a question: Can we teach disagreement?

I would argue that we can’t teach disagreement for disagreement’s sake. After all, too much discord would leave an collaborative work impossible to carry through. And a lot of the foundational studies of collaboration (cited by Allen and also noted in my own readings) come from Kenneth Bruffee. Bruffee says an aim of collaboration is consensus. Everybody needs a stake in the issue and a group needs a goal of reaching consensus. But Bruffee himself notes that collaboration without proper guidance can “perpetuate, perhaps even aggravate, the many possible negative effects of peer group influence: conformity, anti-intellectualism, intimidation, and leveling down of quality” (Bruffee, 1984, 652). Therefore, Bruffee says the selection of groups is important to ensure that the groups work together well (Bruffee, 1973 637). Of course, looking at Allen’s work with her colleagues, this type of “perfect” group is not always possible. In fact, when discussing the typologies of group collaboration, Allen notes that some groups are designed to “synthesize” otherwise disparate knowledge (363). So, in the real world, we may not always be able to rely on perfectly drawn up groups.

Bruffee introduces another idea for combating the negatives of collaboration: abnormal discourse. Certain group members will be outside the normal discourse of the group. This could result in the person being marginalized in the group, but it could also result in a revolution in the way the group thinks (Bruffee, 1984, 648). To me the question (that I will leave unanswered) is how can we ensure a positive result from abnormal discourse? Can we—or should we—train students to introduce “noise” into a discussion to see whether that results in a better outcome? Maybe.

John Trimbur offers a critique of Bruffee’s ideas in “Consensus and Difference in Collaborative Learning.” Here, Trimbur argues against accepting consensus as a goal for many of the same reasons that Bruffee was hesitant. Trimbur, though, is unwilling to say that consensus will ever necessarily create an outcome that is good for everyone. “Instead,” he writes, “I want to displace consensus to a horizon which may never be reached.” In this way, consensus becomes “a utopian project, a dream of difference without domination” (615). In other words, consensus is a measure against which you can pit reality. By interrogating the difference between the reality and some supposed “consensus,” we may be able to better understand each other in group work. Perhaps this is something more teachable.

What might be troubling is that both Trimbur and Bruffee were discussing collaboration in the context of collaborative learning. Allen and her compatriots are looking at collaboration as a real world product. Still, while the trick to productive collaboration may just be to collaborate more (just as the trick to better writing may just be to write more), some understanding of how we can better prepare students for these activities might improve workplace writing long term. Allen’s work seems to confirm some of the suspicions voiced by Bruffee and Trimbur. And looking at them together, perhaps we can create a coherent way to address collaboration in the classroom.

Works Cited

Allen, Nancy et al. “What Experienced Collaborators Say about Collaborative Writing.” Central Works in Technical Communication. Ed. Johndan Johnson-Eilola and Stuart A. Selber. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. 351-364. Print.

Bruffee, Kenneth A. “Collaborative Learning and the ‘Conversation of Mankind.’” College English. 46.7 (1984): 635-652. PDF.

Bruffee, Kenneth A. “Collaborative Learning: Some Practical Models.” College English. 34.5 (1973): 634-643. PDF.

Trimbur, John. “Consensus and Difference in Collaborative Learning.” College English. 51.6 (1989): 602-617. PDF.