Combining Cooperative Learning
with Reading Aloud by Teachers
George Jacobs, JF New
Paradigm Education, Singapore
gmjacobs@pacific.net.sg, www.georgejacobs.net
Dan Hannah, Bui O Public School and C.C.C. Tai O Primary
School, Hong Kong
Abstract
This article begins with a section that describes
cooperative learning and explains eight cooperative learning principles. The
second section discusses the interface between cooperative learning and
language pedagogy. Next is a section about the why and how of reading
aloud by teachers. The heart of the article resides in the last and longest
section which describes techniques for integrating cooperative learning with
reading aloud by teachers. These techniques include ones that can be used
before, while and after the teacher has read aloud to the class.
Literacy provides perhaps the most essential tool
needed by students. Educators seek to promote literacy by encouraging within
students a life-long facility with and desire to employ the written word. These
efforts begin early on in preschool and continue throughout the formal
education process, for there are no areas nor levels
of learning for which the written word does not constitute a powerful tool.
This article describes two means of promoting literacy and other desired
educational outcomes - cooperative learning (CL) among students and reading aloud
by teachers - and suggests ways in which these two routes towards literacy can
converge.
The first section of the article
introduces CL, a pedagogy for enlisting the power of
peers for promoting learning. After this introduction to the history, research
findings, theoretical underpinnings and principles of CL, the article’s second
section explains some of the roles that CL can play in language learning.
Section 3 moves on to the other main element of the convergence suggested in
the article, i.e., teachers reading aloud to their students. With these three
sections as background, in Section 4 the article then provides practical
suggestions for combining CL and reading aloud by teachers. If we conceive of a
read aloud session as having three parts – before the teacher reads aloud,
during the reading and after the reading session has finished – the article
suggests techniques for all three parts. This article does not consider the
topic of reading aloud by students, although CL certainly has insights to offer
here as well (MAACIE, 1998; Taylor, 2000).
Cooperative
learning (CL) is by no means a new idea. For thousands of years, humans have
recognised the value of cooperation in a broad range of endeavours, including
education. However, the term cooperative learning seems to date back to
the 1970s when a great deal of research and practical work began on discovering
how best to harness peer power for the benefit of learning. This work continues
to this day. Thus, CL has a strong foundation in research. Many hundreds of
studies - by now 1000s - across a wide range of subject areas and age groups
have been conducted (for reviews, see Cohen, 1994b; Johnson, Johnson, & Stanne, 2001; Sharan, 1980; Slavin, 1995).
The overall findings of these
studies suggest that, when compared to other instructional approaches, group
activities structured along CL lines are associated with gains on a host of key
variables: achievement, higher level thinking, self-esteem, liking for the
subject matter and for school and inter-group (e.g., inter-ethnic) relations.
Indeed, Johnson (1997) claims that CL is one of the, if not the,
best-researched approaches in education, and that when the public asks
educators what we know that works in education, CL is one of our surest
answers. In an earlier interview (Brandt, 1987 p. 12), he stated:
If there's any one educational technique that has firm
empirical support, it's cooperative learning. The research in this area is the
oldest research tradition in American social psychology. The first study was
done in 1897; we've had 90 years of research, hundreds of studies. There is
probably more evidence validating the use of cooperative learning than there is
for any other aspect of education.
What is CL? Cooperative learning,
also known as collaborative learning, is a body of
concepts and techniques for helping to maximize the benefits of cooperation
among students. There exists no one generally accepted version of CL. Indeed, disparate
theoretical perspectives on learning – including behaviourism, sociocultural theory, humanist psychology, cognitive
psychology, social psychology and Piagetian
developmental psychology have informed the development of different approaches
to CL. Against this background of heterogeneity, various principles have been
put forward in the CL literature (e.g., Baloche, 1998, Jacobs, Power, &
Loh, 2002, Johnson & Johnson, 1999, Kagan, 1994 and Slavin, 1995). In the
current section of this article, we discuss eight CL principles and how they can
inform teaching practice.
1.
Heterogeneous Grouping. This principle means that the groups
in which students do CL tasks are mixed on one or more of a number of variables
including sex, ethnicity, social class, religion, personality, age, language
proficiency and diligence. Heterogeneous grouping is believed to have a number
of benefits in comparison with homogeneous grouping, such as encouraging peer
tutoring, providing a variety of perspectives, helping students come to know
and like others different from themselves and fostering appreciation of the
value of diversity.
In CL, groups often stay together for
five weeks or more. To achieve heterogeneous groups for listening to reading
aloud by teachers and other activities, teachers might want to look at their
class and make conscious decisions about which students should work together,
rather than leaving the matter to chance or to students’ choice. The latter
option often results in groups with low levels of heterogeneity. Furthermore,
when we opt for heterogeneous groups, we may want to spend some time on ice
breaking (also known as teambuilding) activities, because as Slavin (1995)
notes, the combination of students that results from teacher-selected groups is
likely to be one that would never have been created had it not been for our
intervention.
2.
Collaborative Skills. Collaborative skills are those
needed to work with others. Students may lack these skills, the language
involved in using the skills or the inclination to apply the skills during a
reading aloud session. Most books and websites on cooperative learning urge
that collaborative skills be explicitly taught one at a time. Which
collaborative skill to teach will depend on the particular students and the
particular task they are undertaking. Just a few of
the many skills important to successful collaboration are: checking that others
understand, asking for and giving reasons; disagreeing politely and responding
politely to disagreement and encouraging others to participate and responding
to encouragement to participate. Collaborative skills often overlap with
thinking skills, e.g., asking for and giving reasons pushes students to think
more deeply, and disagreement when handled properly encourages students to
explain what they have said.
3. Group Autonomy. This principle encourages
students to look to themselves for resources rather than relying solely on the
teacher. When student groups are having difficulty, it is very tempting for
teachers to intervene either in a particular group or with the entire class. We
may sometimes want to resist this temptation, because as Roger Johnson writes,
“Teachers must trust the peer interaction to do many of the things they have
felt responsible for themselves” (http://www.clcrc.com/pages/qanda.html).
Yes, teachers will sometimes intervene, but perhaps intervention should not
always be the first option.
4.
Simultaneous Interaction (Kagan, 1994). In classrooms in which
group activities are not used, including in the typical reading aloud by
teachers session, the normal interaction pattern is that of sequential
interaction, in which one person at a time – usually the teacher – speaks. For
example, the teacher stops at some point while reading aloud, asks a question
to check students’ comprehension, calls on a student to answer the question and
evaluates that student’s response.
In contrast, when group activities
are used, one student per group is, hopefully, speaking. In a class of 40
divided into groups of four, ten students are speaking simultaneously, i.e., 40
students divided by 4 students per group = 10 students (1 per group) speaking
at the same time. Thus, this CL principal is called simultaneous interaction.
If the same class is working in groups of two (pairs are also groups), we may
have 20 students speaking simultaneously.
Even when teachers use groups, it is
common at the end of a group activity for each group, one at a time, to report
to the class and the teacher. When this takes place, we are back to sequential
interaction. In order to maintain the simultaneous interaction that
existed during the group activity, many alternatives exist to this
one-at-a-time reporting. For instance, one person from each group can go to
another group. These representatives explain (not just show or tell) their
group’s ideas. Of course, simultaneous and sequential interaction may be
usefully combined.
5.
Equal Participation (Kagan, 1994). A frequent problem in
groups is that one or two group members dominate the group and, for whatever
reason, impede the participation of others. CL offers many ways of promoting
equal participation in groups. Two of these are the use of rotating roles in a
group, such as facilitator, checker (who checks to see that everyone
understands what the group is doing/has done), questioner, praiser,
encourager and paraphraser, and the use of multiple
ability tasks (Cohen, 1994; Gardner, 1999), i.e., tasks that require a range of
abilities, such as drawing, singing, acting and categorizing, rather than only
language abilities.
6.
Individual Accountability. Individual accountability is,
in some ways, the flip side of equal participation. When we encourage
equal participation in groups, we want everyone to feel they have opportunities
to take part in the group. When we try to encourage individual
accountability in groups, we hope that no one will attempt to avoid using
those opportunities. Techniques for encouraging individual accountability seek
to avoid the problem of groups known variously as social loafing, sleeping partners
or free riding.
These techniques, not surprisingly,
overlap with those for encouraging equal participation. They include
giving each group member a designated turn to participate, keeping group size
small, calling on students at random to share their group’s ideas and having a
task to be done individually after the group activity is finished.
7.
Positive Interdependence. This principle lies at the heart of
CL. When positive interdependence exists among members of a group, they
feel that what helps one member of the group helps the other members and that
what hurts one member of the group hurts the other members. It is the “All for
one, one for all” feeling that leads group members to want to help each other,
to see that they share a common goal.
Johnson & Johnson (1999) describe
nine ways to promote positive interdependence. Six of these are
discussed below.
a.
Goal positive interdependence: The group has a common goal
that they work together to achieve.
b.
Environmental positive interdependence: Group members sit
close together so that they can easily see each other’s work and hear each
other without using loud voices. This may seem trivial, but it can be
important.
c.
Role positive interdependence: In addition to the roles
mentioned above, there are also housekeeping types of roles, such as timekeeper
who reminds the group of time limits and ‘sound hound’ who tells the group if
they are being too loud in their deliberations.
d.
Resource positive interdependence: Each group member has
unique resources. These resources can be information or equipment, such as
paper or a particular colour marker.
e.
External Challenge positive interdependence: When the same
group stays together over a period of time – this is recommended by most books
and websites on cooperative learning partly as a means of allowing groups to
work to improve their group dynamics – students can aim to improve on past
performance.
f.
Reward positive interdependence: If groups meet a pre-set
goal, they receive some kind of reward. Rewards can take many forms: grades,
sweets, certificates, praise, the choice of a future
activity the class does, the chance to do their team cheer or handshake or just
a feeling of satisfaction. If extrinsic rewards are used, Lynda Baloche
(personal communication, May 14, 2001) recommends that teachers never begin an
extrinsic reward program without having a plan for how to end it.
8.
Cooperation as a Value. This principle means that rather
than cooperation being only a way to learn, i.e., the how of learning,
cooperation also becomes part of the content to be learned, i.e., the what of learning. This flows naturally
from the most crucial CL principle, positive interdependence.
Cooperation as a value involves taking the feeling of “All for one, one for
all” and expanding it beyond the small classroom group to encompass the whole
class, the whole school, on and on, bringing in increasingly greater numbers of
people and other beings into students’ circle of ones with whom to cooperate.
One way of expanding the scope of the
positive interdependence felt by students is to read aloud books and
other materials on the themes related to cooperation and global issues. Global
issues include such areas of education as peace education, environmental
education, human rights education, multicultural education, and development
education (Smallwood, 1991; TESOLers for Social
Responsibility www.tesolers4sr.org;
Wood, Roser, & Martinez, 2001).
This concludes the introduction to CL
as an overall approach to teaching that can be used with any subject area. The
next section of the article looks more specifically at CL in regard to language
pedagogy.
Section 2: Cooperative Learning and
Language Pedagogy
As stated earlier, a great deal of research has been
done on cooperative learning (CL). However, first language pedagogy is probably
not the subject area in which the most CL research has been done, with even
less having been done in the area of second language instruction. Nonetheless,
these areas have not been neglected. A great deal of practical and theoretical
work of relevance to the interface between CL and language learning has been
done, and group activities are certainly a prominent feature of language
teaching in many classrooms (Jacobs, Crookall, & Thiyaragarajali, 1997). This second section of the article briefly
examines eight hypotheses, theories and perspectives on language pedagogy in
terms of their overlap with CL.
The input
hypothesis
The
input hypothesis (Krashen & Terrell, 1983) states
that we acquire a language as we comprehend meaning in that language in the
form of written or spoken words. Thus, reading and listening provide input
which our brains utilise to build language competence. Our knowledge advances
as we understand input at the i+1 level,
i.e., input that is slightly above our current level of competence.
Three ways that CL helps increase
the quantity of comprehensible input are:
a)
Peers can provide each other with
comprehensible input.
b)
Input from fellow learners is likely to
be comprehensible.
c)
Peer groups may provide a more
motivating, less anxiety-producing environment for language use, thus,
increasing the chances that students will take in more input.
The
interaction hypothesis
A
second hypothesis about language learning that overlaps with CL is the
Interaction Hypothesis which states that language learners increase the quantity
of comprehensible input they receive by interacting with their interlocuters (the people with whom they are speaking).
This interaction is called negotiating for meaning. Pica (1994: 494) defines
negotiation for meaning as "the modification and restructuring of
interaction that occurs when learners and their interlocutors anticipate,
perceive, or experience difficulties in message comprehensibility." Students
negotiate for meaning by such means as requesting repetition, explanation and
clarification. Reid (1993) states that negotiating for meaning can also take
place during peer feedback on student writing.
Two ways that CL may promote
interaction are:
a) Group
activities, especially those in which members feel positively interdependent
and individually accountable, provide a context in which students may be
more likely to interact than in a whole class setting.
b) Long (1996) proposes that group activities
can encourage students to interact with each other in a way that promotes a focus
on form, i.e., "to attend to language as object during a generally
meaning-oriented activity" (p. 429). Such a focus on form can be
encouraged when grammar constitutes at least one aspect of group tasks.
The output hypothesis
The
Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985) proposes that in order for learners to increase
their language proficiency, they need to generate output, i.e., produce
language via speech or writing and receive feedback on the comprehensibility of
their output. Input is necessary, but not sufficient for language learning.
Output is seen to be essential as it promotes fluency; pushes students to
engage in syntactic processing of language, rather than only attending to meaning;
gives students opportunities to test their hypotheses about what works and is
acceptable in a particular language and affords students opportunities to
receive feedback from others.
The main way that CL overlaps with
the Output Hypothesis is illustrated in the CL principle simultaneous
interaction, because CL greatly increases students’ opportunities to create
output, as many students are talking simultaneously, instead of one person,
normally the teacher, doing all the talking (Long & Porter, 1985). The CL
principle equal participation attempts to balance the opportunities that
each student has for creating output.
The ideas of Vygotsky
(1978) and related scholars have found many applications in language pedagogy. Vygostky’s sociocultural theory views
humans as culturally and historically situated - not as isolated individuals. A
key emphasis lies in the ways that we help each other learn, rather than
learning on our own. This help can be called scaffolding (the support provided as
buildings are being constructed). Scaffolding can be provided to a student by
teachers, more capable peers and even by students at or below that student’s
current level. When teachers use CL, they seek to enable students to work
towards groups in which scaffolding takes place because the members care about
each other, have the skills to help one another (see the CL principle collaborative
skills) and are involved in tasks they find meaningful (see the CL principal
cooperation as a value).
CL overlaps with Sociocultural Theory by attempting to build an environment
that fosters mutual aid. As Newman and Holtzman
(1993, p. 77) note:
Vygotsky’s strategy was essentially
a cooperative learning strategy. He created heterogeneous groups of … children
(he called them a collective), providing them not only with the opportunity but
the need for cooperation and joint activity by giving them tasks that were
beyond the developmental level of some, if not all, of them.
The key concept underlying content-based
instruction is that language is best learned while focusing on meaning rather
than focusing on the form of language. Thus, an overall inductive approach is
followed in which students learn content from anywhere in the curriculum, e.g.,
science or social studies, but at the same time, they are learning grammar and
vocabulary as they receive input and produce output while learning that
content.
Content-based language
instruction fits well with CL (Chamot & O'Malley,
1994) as:
a)
Research suggests that CL promotes learning regardless of the
subject area, making it useful for teaching any subject, not just for teaching
language.
b)
The CL principle cooperation as a value provides a
rich vein of content that may also enhance students’ understanding of the
benefits of cooperation. Examples of such content include how insects cooperate
among each other, how environmental destruction in one part of the world
impacts plants and animals elsewhere, how people throughout history have
collaborated and how we depend on so many people in various parts of the world
for so many of the things we do and use everyday.
In
the past, there was a tendency in education towards an assembly line model of
education in which all students were to learn in the same way. Today, the
pendulum has swung somewhat, and there is a great appreciation of the many
differences that exist between students and a belief that teaching needs to
take these differences into account. Kagan and Kagan (1998) capture this new perspective
in the slogan “The more ways we teach, the more pupils we reach” (ch. 2, p. 6).
The individual differences perspective on learning fits
well with CL as:
a)
group activities provide a different
mode of learning rather than a steady diet of teacher-fronted instruction
b)
within groups, students can develop
more fully as they can play a wider range of roles than are normally available
via teacher-fronted instruction
c)
the CL principle heterogeneous
grouping encourages students to interact with peers different from
themselves, providing students opportunities to benefit from this diversity and
to learn to work with people different from themselves
d)
when
groups are working on their own (see the CL principle group autonomy),
teachers have more time to spend with students who may need individual
attention.
The
concept of learner autonomy implies that students should take an important role
in choosing what and how they learn and in monitoring their own learning. This
fits with the belief that education should be a self-directed, life-long
process. Learner autonomy does not necessarily mean that students are learning
alone, rather it is a matter of moving away from a situation in which control rests
solely in the hands of teachers and, instead, of moving towards students
playing the greatest possible role given the learning context.
Learner autonomy fits well with CL as:
a)
groupmates can learn to depend on each other rather than
always on the teacher
b)
in line with the CL principle group
autonomy, teachers seek to devolve authority to the groups, while still
playing a guiding role
c)
students provide feedback to and receive feedback from each other, thereby
developing their evaluation ability (which can then be used for
self-assessment) and the proclivity to look beyond authority figures for
feedback.
Success
in learning depends not just on cognitive factors,
such as the way that information is presented, but also on the environment in
which instruction takes place and students’ own perception of the educational
context they find themselves in. Therefore, affective factors, such as anxiety,
motivation and attitudes, demand attention in any approach to pedagogy.
Two examples of how CL might improve
the affective climate and, thus, promote language learning are:
a)
when working in supportive CL groups,
students may feel less anxious and more willing to take risks
b)
when
students feel that groupmates are relying on them (see CL principle positive
interdependence), they may feel more motivated to make the effort needed to
maximise learning (Dornyei, 1997).
This concludes the first two
sections of the article which have provided background on CL, in particular CL
principles and the link between CL and language pedagogy. We now turn to the
topic of reading aloud by teachers, the second component of the combination
which is the focus of this article. Section 3 discusses why teachers should
read aloud to their students and provides some ideas about how this reading
aloud can be done.
Section 3: Reading Aloud by Teachers
Reading aloud by parents and other in-home caregivers
(Bus, Ijzendoorn, & Pelligrini,
1995; Fox, 2001; Trelease, 2001) and by teachers
(Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985;
Barton & Booth, 1990; Blok, 1999; Elley, 1998) is a well-known practice for enhancing
literacy. Many benefits have been proposed for reading aloud to students. Some
of these are discussed below. Furthermore, the sole role of reading aloud is
not as the predecessor to silent reading. Indeed, teachers of upper primary,
intermediate, and secondary school students who are already reading on their
own also find reading aloud to be a useful practice (Jacobs & Loh, 2001; Trelease, 2001).
Benefits of reading aloud
The list below contains some of the purported benefits
of reading aloud divided into two groups: benefits for students who are learning
to read and benefits for all students.
a. Reading aloud helps students see the link between
print and language, i.e., those black marks on the page represent sounds and
words, and students see the direction in which words and letters flow in the
language of the book being read to them.
b. Teachers demonstrate how to hold a book, to open a
book, and to turn the pages.
c. Students build their memories as they seek to
recall earlier parts of a book and previously read books.
d. Hearing books read to them inspires students to
want to learn to read.
a.
Students can learn new language items, such as vocabulary and
grammar, and their understanding of previously learned language is deepened and
broadened by new and repeated encounters.
b.
Students’ listening skills increase.
c.
A bond of shared experience is built between the reader and
the listeners.
d.
Reading aloud can be used to launch a discussion about life,
topics currently being studied, and language.
e.
Students build their knowledge of the world and its
inhabitants.
f.
Teachers share their enthusiasm for reading, encouraging
students to read the same book, books by the same author or of the same type,
or any sort of reading matter on their own.
By way of review, as reading aloud forms part of many
language teacher education programmes, certain general pointers on how teachers
can read aloud to students are listed below. However, how to read aloud will
differ according to the specific students being read to, teachers’
instructional objectives and teachers’ personalities and skills.
a.
Choose stories that will appeal to students and, hopefully,
to you (the reader) as well.
b.
Consider whether to modify, summarize, or even omit sections
of the book which may be less interesting or overly difficult. In other words,
there is no need to read the book exactly as it is written.
c.
Consider places in the book where you might wish to vary your
reading style, e.g., when a small or large animal is speaking. At certain
places, for instance, you may wish to speak louder or softer, faster or slower
than normal. This, however, does not mean that teachers must be professional
actors to read aloud.
d.
Stop to ask questions, seek comments, etc. Reading aloud
should be two-way interaction, with students not just listening to their
teachers’ output; students should also be providing input to their teachers and
peers. In this way, teachers are reading aloud with students, not
reading aloud to students (Blok, 1999).
e.
Practice reading aloud beforehand in order to accomplish points b, c and d.
Traditionally, teachers read aloud to
a group or class of students. Any discussion that takes place before, during or
after the read aloud is conducted in a teacher-fronted manner, with students
directing their input, if any, towards the teacher. However, research and
theory in language education and in other areas of education suggest that
students can benefit from peer interaction in addition to the input they
receive from teachers and the interaction they have with teachers.
Sections
1-3 of this article have provided a rather lengthy prologue to the main section
of the article. Section 4 suggests 12 activities to accompany reading aloud by
teachers. In 11 of these activities, reading aloud is augmented by peer power
provided by CL.
CL can be used with any age of learner and in any
subject area. Furthermore, it can be usefully combined with almost any
instructional strategy (for examples, see Jacobs & Gallo, 2002, for how CL
can be combined with extensive reading and Jacobs & Small, 2003, for how CL
can be combined with dictogloss, a technique for teaching writing). This
section presents 12 activities, 11 of which involve CL, to accompany reading
aloud by teachers. Included are activities that can be used with fiction and non-fiction,
that last for a variety of lengths of time and that can be used with various
ages of students. The presentation of each of the activities has two parts. After
a brief introduction, first, the Steps are presented, followed by Discussion.
Three of the twelve activities are
for before reading aloud, five are for while reading
aloud and four are for after reading aloud. However, some of the activities
span overlap from one of the three phases of reading aloud to another or may
well be useful during more than one phase of a read aloud session. Furthermore,
these activities, as with CL techniques generally, can be modified in many ways
(Kagan & Kagan, 1992).
Before reading, teachers often attempt to increase
student interest and promote understanding by generating discussion related to
the upcoming reading. Here are three CL activities for doing that. The first is
a CL technique; the second is a well-known reading technique that has been
slightly modified based on CL principles; and the third combines CL with
graphic organisers.
1.
Circle of Speakers (Jacobs, Power, & Loh, 2002)
This is a very versatile and brief CL technique.
a)
One at a time, students in pairs, trios or foursomes take a
turn to speak on a topic related to the book that the teacher is going to read
aloud.
b)
After each group member has had a turn to speak, students can
take turns for another round, with each group member again having a turn to
speak. Alternatively, they can hold a general discussion.
c)
The teacher calls a number and a group, and the student with
that number shares with the class what they heard from their groupmate(s).
Circle of Speakers is a quick technique, potentially
taking as little as 2 minutes. Positive interdependence is encouraged
because the group cannot do Circle of Speakers unless
everyone takes their turn. Additionally, Step C, in which a two or three
students report to the class what they heard from their groupmate(s),
encourages everyone to listen carefully to each other and to help those who are
having trouble generating ideas. Individual accountability is promoted
because each group member needs to give an individual public performance
(Kagan, 1994) when it is their turn to speak and in case they are called on by
the teacher. Every group member has a turn to speak, thus promoting equal
participation. Heterogeneous grouping makes it more likely that each
group member will have unique knowledge and experiences to share on the topic
of the reading they are about to hear. All the discussion builds students’
interest in and knowledge about the topic of the book they are about to hear
being read.
2.
K-W-L (Ogle, 1986)
The K-W-L technique is normally used with non-fiction.
K stands for what students Know about the topic. W stands for what they Want to know, and L stands for what they Learned
from the reading. Although this technique is typically used with silent reading
and done by students working alone and then discussing as a class, it can
easily be used with reading aloud by teachers, and a group element can easily
be added to the individual work and whole-class discussion, as illustrated
below.
a)
In the K step, students work alone to list what they know on
the topic of the book the teacher is going to read. If students cannot yet
write, they draw or think about what is on their list. Group members take turns
to share their knowledge and then compile it into one list. During this
compilation, students can ask groupmates for the source of their knowledge, as
well as asking for explanations if something isn’t clear. A graphic organizer
with K, W, and L columns can be used, as shown in Figure 1.
|
What I KNOW |
What I WANT
to know |
What I
LEARNED |
Remaining and
New questions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|