No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Performance in the Interdependent Classroom: A Field Study
Abstract
The present study was conducted in 5th and 6th grade classes to compare the performances of Anglos and minorities working in small interdependent learning groups with their performance in traditional, teacher-focused classrooms. A covariance analysis indicated that Anglos perform equally well in both interdependent and traditional classes. Minorities performed significantly better in interdependent classes than in traditional classes.
... Bien que ces auteur·es attestent l'existence d'un consensus des effets positifs de l'apprentissage coopératif en général, des écarts importants d'efficacité subsistent entre les différentes pédagogies coopératives (Johnson & Johnson, 2005 ;Slavin, 2016 (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011), malgré ses effets assez mitigés sur les apprentissages (Newmann & Thompson, 1987 ;Johnson et al., 2000). (Aronson et al., 1978 ;Aronson & Bridgeman, 1979 ;Lucker et al., 1976). L'hypothèse du contact d' Allport (1954) (Qin et al., 1995 ;Stanne et al., 1999), la structure des classes dans les pays occidentaux favorise les contextes individualistes et compétitifs ce qui peut avoir pour effet de mettre en difficulté les élèves (Butera et al., 2006 ;Di Stasio, 2016 (Lucker et al., 1976 ;Aronson et al., 1978). ...
... (Aronson et al., 1978 ;Aronson & Bridgeman, 1979 ;Lucker et al., 1976). L'hypothèse du contact d' Allport (1954) (Qin et al., 1995 ;Stanne et al., 1999), la structure des classes dans les pays occidentaux favorise les contextes individualistes et compétitifs ce qui peut avoir pour effet de mettre en difficulté les élèves (Butera et al., 2006 ;Di Stasio, 2016 (Lucker et al., 1976 ;Aronson et al., 1978). Selon la théorie de l'interdépendance positive, c'est l'interdépendance de ressources (i.e., complémentarité des contenus) et de buts (i.e., accéder à la représentation complète de la leçon) qui expliqueraient, dans un tel contexte, les effets positifs sur les performances scolaires (voir Tableau 3). ...
... Leur apprentissage était mesuré à l'aide d'une évaluation de connaissances portant sur la leçon vue en cours, composée de 37 items de questions à choix multiples. Les résultats cette étude mettent en évidence un effet d'interaction entre l'origine ethnique et la condition expérimentale : les élèves en situation de minorité ethnique ont obtenu de meilleurs résultats lorsqu'ils ont étudié avec la méthode Jigsaw, comparativement à ceux qui ont suivi le cours de manière habituelle (Lucker et al., 1976). Ils n'observent pas de différences significatives entre les conditions Jigsaw et de classe habituelle chez les élèves en majorité ethnique, c'est donc principalement aux minorités qu'a bénéficié la méthode. ...
Ce travail de recherche a pour objectif de tester les effets de la classe puzzle, ou « Jigsaw classroom », sur les apprentissages. La méthode Jigsaw est une pédagogie coopérative créée par Aronson et collaborateurs dans les années 1970, afin de favoriser l’inclusion des minorités ethniques (e.g, Mexicain·es et Afro-Américain·es) dans les écoles nouvellement désegréguées. Selon la théorie de l’interdépendance sociale les effets positifs de l’apprentissage coopératif dépendent de la structuration des interactions entre individus (Deutsch, 1949 ; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Dans Jigsaw, la structuration de cette interdépendance provient essentiellement de la distribution de ressources complémentaires : chaque individu dispose d’une « pièce du puzzle » à reconstituer à l’aide des autres membres du groupe. La coordination des efforts entre membres devrait amener ces dernier‧es à mettre en place des interactions facilitatrices (e.g., comportements d’entraide, explications et questionnements) et aboutir à un meilleur apprentissage. Toutefois, bien que cette méthode soit présentée par ses concepteur·rices comme un outil efficace pour améliorer l’apprentissage des élèves, les preuves empiriques tendent à manquer. Dans cette thèse, l’efficacité de Jigsaw sera questionnée à travers une analyse de la littérature scientifique, ainsi qu’une méta-analyse sur les travaux récents et un ensemble d’études expérimentales menées auprès d’élèves de sixième. À notre connaissance, bien que certaines recherches testant les effets de Jigsaw soient compilées dans des méta-analyses (Kyndt et al., 2013), il n’existe pas à ce jour de méta-analyses testant spécifiquement les effets de Jigsaw sur les apprentissages. À travers six chapitres, nous tenterons d’apporter des éléments permettant d’évaluer l’efficacité de la méthode Jigsaw sur les apprentissages. Dans le chapitre 1, nous présentons la théorie de l’interdépendance sociale, plusieurs définitions et manières de structurer de la coopération entre élèves ainsi qu’une revue des leurs effets sur les apprentissages. Nous développons l’idée qu’il existe des différences d’efficacité entre les pédagogies coopératives créées entre les années 1960 et 2000 (Newmann & Thompson, 1987 ; Johnson et al., 2000), et que certaines d’entre elles n’ont pas encore fait l’objet d’une validation empirique solide. Le chapitre 2 examine l’une d’elle en détail : Jigsaw (Aronson et al., 1978 ; Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Nous y décrivons l’évolution des études empiriques menées depuis sa création jusqu’à ce jour. Le chapitre 3 pointe certaines limites de cette littérature, notamment par rapport à la puissance statistique et les procédures méthodologiques, ainsi que les impacts qu’elles peuvent avoir sur l’estimation de l’efficacité de Jigsaw sur les apprentissages. Nous y développons aussi notre hypothèse de recherche, son opérationnalisation ainsi que les outils et procédures statistiques que nous utilisons dans les chapitres empiriques : tests d’équivalence (Lakens, 2017), plus petite taille d’effet d’intérêt (Hattie, 2009) et méta-analyses (Borenstein et al., 2010 ; Goh et al., 2016). Le chapitre 4 présente les résultats d’une méta-analyse des effets de Jigsaw sur les apprentissages, à travers des articles empiriques publiés entre les années 2000 et 2020. Nous testons plusieurs modérateurs (e.g., niveau scolaire, discipline étudiée, type de Jigsaw, localisation des recherches) afin de quantifier la dispersion des effets de Jigsaw et de mieux comprendre l’hétérogénéité entre les études. Le chapitre 5 synthétise cinq études menées auprès de populations de collégien·nes français·es dans lesquelles nous testons l’efficacité de Jigsaw sur les apprentissages comparativement à des conditions de travail individuelles (études 1 et 2), ou d’enseignement habituel avec des enseignant‧es volontaires (études 3A, 3B et 3C). [...]
... The results of our tests to determine whether the influence of collaborative learning on critical thinking is moderated by race were somewhat inconsistent with previous studies on this topic. In particular, given the findings from previous studies suggesting racial and ethnic minorities may derive greater educational benefit from learning collaboratively (Lucker et al., 1976;Slavin, 1978;Slavin & Oickle, 1981;Treisman, 1985), we expected students from these underrepresented groups to accrue greater benefit in terms of critical thinking skills compared to their White peers. Instead, we found that Whites—but not their racial and ethnic minority counterparts—who were exposed to collaborative learning benefitted most in terms of first-year gains in critical thinking skills. ...
... The differences in moderating effects between the present investigation and prior studies might be explained by variation in outcomes studied. For example, theLucker et al. (1976), Slavin (1978,Slavin & Oickle (1981), and Treisman (1985) investigations explored the influence of collaborative learning on either " problem-solving " or student achievement (typically measured by grades), and revealed that racial/ethnic minorities benefitted from collaborative learning compared to their White counterparts. It may be, however, that differences between this group of studies and ours can be attributed to differences in outcomes studied (we did not examine grades or a non-standardized measure of critical thinking as our dependent variable). ...
... The results of our tests to determine whether the influence of collaborative learning on critical thinking is moderated by race were somewhat inconsistent with previous studies on this topic. In particular, given the findings from previous studies suggesting racial and ethnic minorities may derive greater educational benefit from learning collaboratively (Lucker et al., 1976;Slavin, 1978;Slavin & Oickle, 1981;Treisman, 1985), we expected students from these underrepresented groups to accrue greater benefit in terms of critical-thinking skills compared with their White peers. Instead, we found that Whites—but not their racial-and ethnic-minority counterparts— who were exposed to collaborative learning benefitted most in terms of 1styear gains in critical-thinking skills. ...
In this paper, we investigate whether exposure to collaborative learning activities during the first year of college influences the development of critical thinking skills. To explore this issue, we analyze longitudinal data from 1,455 freshmen at 19 institutions throughout the United States. With statistical controls in place for a host of potential confounders, including a parallel pretest critical thinking measure, we find that exposure to collaborative learning activities is associated with gains in critical thinking at the end of the freshman year of college, but only for White students and those who were the least well-prepared academically for college. Lastly, the results of a three-way interaction suggest that exposure to collaborative learning among Whites who also have relatively low levels of tested precollege academic preparation is positively associated with gains in critical thinking skills.
... CL with a focus on Jigsaw is among new and important methods on which many studies have been conducted. Among such studies, one could mention the study by Behrangi and Aghayari (2004) (2001), Walker andCrogan (1998), Holliday (1995), Reuman and Mac Iver (1994), Lazarowitz et al. (1994), Lucker & Rosenfield & Sikes & Aronson (1977). All studies indicate that jigsaw technique will enhance academic achievement in students. ...
... Since the mean scores of the pre-test was almost the same for the experimental group and the control group, and there was no significant difference between the mean scores, it could be concluded that Jigsaw II has been effective on the academic achievement of the students. This is indeed consistent with the studies conducted by Behrangi and Aghayari (2004), Sahin (2010) Holliday (1995), Reuman and Mac Iver (1994), Lazarowitz et al. (1994), Aronson et al. (1978), and Lucker & Rosenfield & Sikes & Aronson (1977). Therefore, it could be said that the result obtained in this study with regard to the effect of the proposed teaching method on the academic achievement of students has been confirmed by different other studies. ...
This study aims to investigate and compare the effect of cooperative learning with an emphasis on Jigsaw technique on the academic achievement of 2 nd -grade middle school student in district 1 of Bandar Abbas city. It is considered a semi-experimental study and the method is pre-test post-test with a control group. The sampling is multi-stage and the sample size includes 153 students. The tool used in this study is Teacher's Academic achievement. It uses the statistical method of analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The findings of the study indicate that a cooperative learning method that focuses on Jigsaw technique has significant effect on students' academic achievement. INTRODUCTION The old longing of any society is the progress and elevation of its members and to have wise and intellectual students. It is obvious that any kind of progress in different areas such as culture, economy, society, politics and the like require having sensible, creative, and critical people who can make the right decisions and can have the right planning. This depends on the existence of active and dynamic systems of education. Thus, it could be said that any kind of progress is the result of a correct and efficient system of education. This indeed depends on a variety of different factors such as changing methods and methodologies in a way so that to benefit from modern and dynamic methods of the day (Yazdianpoor, 2009). The reality is that traditional teaching methods, due to different reasons, are not able to respond to recent changes and are not in line with goal of teaching human resources that the modern society needs. Thus, it is important to replace them with modern and revolutionary methods (Khodadadnezhad, 2009). Talmud explicitly states that any person needs a learning partner in order to be able to learn. According to Quintilian, students would benefit most from teaching to one another (Johnson and Johnson, 1987). Jigsaw is one of the techniques used in cooperative learning (CL) that has widely been used for years (Aronson et al., 1978 and 2002; Doymus, 2007; Hedeen, 2003; Holliday, 1995; Slavin, 1986; Stahl, 1994). According to Doymus et al. (2010), there are different versions of Jigsaw technique available.
... Jigsaw is a cooperative learning technique whereby students teach part of the regular curriculum to a small group of interdependent peers (Aronson, Blaney, Stephan, Sikes, & Snapp, 1978). Prior research on Jigsaw has found positive effects on elementary students' achievement (Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976), self-esteem, and attitudes toward peers and school (Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, Aronson, & Sikes, 1977). ...
... In this study, the average amount of participation in Jigsaw was two hours per week over 24 weeks. Prior studies, which only lasted for 2 and 6 weeks, had 4 and 2 hours per week of student exposure (Blaney et al., 1977;Lucker et al., 1976). While amount of exposure is one component of implementation for which there exists documentation across studies, there is an absence of discussion regarding the quality of Jigsaw implementation. ...
Cooperative learning techniques have been promoted for the development of social competencies and constructive peer relationships. One such technique, Jigsaw, was evaluated for its effects on students’ attitudes and behaviors with regard to themselves, peers and school. Fifth- and sixth-grade teachers implemented Jigsaw for about 2 hours each week over a school year. Using a randomized invitation design, these teachers were compared with controls who were willing to be trained in Jigsaw had they been offered it. Few affective gains were found although participants in Jigsaw rated their classes as less competitive and sixth graders rated their classes as more cooperative. Analyses of exemplary Jigsaw classes revealed similar results and also improved attendance. Results were discussed in terms of problems inherent in the strategy and the generalizability of the findings.
... Prior evaluations of Jigsaw showed mixed results. Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, and Aronson (1976) found that, as compared to traditional classrooms, Jigsaw improved academic performance on a social studies lesson for blacks and Mexican-Americans, but not for Anglos. Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, Aronson, and Sikes (1977) found that Jigsaw participants had greater self-esteem and liked students in their group better, but did not have more positive attitudes toward their classmates. ...
... In our studies, Jigsaw participation averaged about 2 h per week over a 24-week period, yielding approximately 48 h of total exposure. Other studies had 2 to 4 h per week of Jigsaw participation, but they lasted only 2 to 8 weeks, yielding 8 to 24 h of overall exposure (Blaney et al., 1977;Geffner, undated;Lucker et al., 1976). Unfortunately, other studies did not assess the quality of Jigsaw implementation; thus, it is impossible to contrast studies on this dimension. ...
Cooperative learning techniques have been promoted for the development of academic and social competencies. One such technique, Jigsaw, creates cooperation by structuring student interdependence through the learning task, rather than through the grading system. A process and outcome evaluation of Jigsaw was conducted. Eleven teachers of fifth-grade classes received Jigsaw in-service training and conducted Jigsaw in their classes over a school year. Students in 13 other fifth-grade classes served as a comparison group. Students received a pretest and a post-test assessing attitudes toward self, peers, and school, and achievement and attendance records were collected. The process evaluation revealed that the quality and frequency of Jigsaw implementation varied greatly. Jigsaw failed to have a positive effect on the outcome variables, even for the five classes where it was implemented proficiently. The results, which are consistent with an earlier study (J. Moskowitz, J. Malvin, G. Schaeffer, & E. Schaps, 1983, American Education Research Journal, 20, 687–696), are discussed in terms of a theoretical shortcoming of this technique.
... Likewise, research suggests that structuring classroom situations where reinforcement of a group of individuals is dependent upon the whole group's performance increases liking for all of the group members. Thus, one strategy for increasing the liking among individuals is to place them in contexts where the reinforcers each individual secures is dependent on other group members' performances (Aronson, Blaney, Sikes, Stephan, and Snapp, 1975;Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, and Aronson, 1976;Harris, 1975). These procedures increase the attractiveness each group member has for others since each member's rewards are dependent on other individual performances. ...
... In the present research, we chose to focus specifically on sixth-graders for two reasons. First, it closely matches the population investigated in the seminal studies on the jigsaw classroom (Aronson & Bridgeman, 1979;Blaney et al., 1977;Lucker et al., 1976). ...
“Jigsaw” is a peer learning procedure derived from social i nterdependence theory, which suggests that individuals positively linked by a common goal can benefit from positive and promotive social interactions (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Although jigsaw has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce. The goal of the present research is to test the hypothesis that a jigsaw intervention would yield a meaningful effect
size (d = .40) on learning outcomes, in 5 randomized experiments conducted among sixth-graders. The
jigsaw intervention was compared to an “individualistic” (NExp 1 = 252; NExp 2 = 313) or a “teaching as usual” (NExp 3A = 110; NExp 3B = 74; NExp 3C = 101) approach on the same pedagogical content. Across the 5 experiments, we did not find empirical support for this hypothesis. Internal meta-analytic estimates (ES = .00, 95% CI [-.10, .09]) showed that, overall, the jigsaw intervention did not produce the
expected positive effects on learning. The reasons why jigsaw lassrooms may not always prove beneficial for learning are discussed.
... Then all members would be rearranged so that each new group had within it a 'teacher' for each one of the lesson segments, giving every member the task of teaching the other in-group members. Early research on the jigsaw technique showed mixed results (i.e., Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976), and some showed no positive effect at all on students (i.e., Moskowitz, Malvin, Schaeffer, & Schaps, 1985); however, the vast majority of those early studies were done with elementary school students. A later university level study (Lebaron & Miller, 2005), in which nursing students involved in a jigsaw learning environment were surveyed, found a self-reported gain in knowledge and increased enjoyment with that type of cooperative, student-centered learning. ...
This paper proposes that higher level learning of criminological theory can be accomplished by having students express a theory creatively through an art form (i.e. a drawing, a dance, a poem, or role play). This type of constructivist assignment would empower undergraduate students to be theory co-creators and allow them to be actively engaged in building knowledge off of a Piagetian platform. While Piaget’s theory was formulated to explain the cognitive development in children, neuroscience has revealed its potential for expanding cognitive capacity in adults. When students are presented with a novel task requiring fuller focus, such as being required to build new knowledge onto existing schema in a uniquely creative way, deeper levels of learning are more likely to occur and be retained.
... Research on the combining arrangement as a means of achieving learning goals has focused on acquiring language through negotiating comprehensible input (Long and Porter 1985:222;Doughty and Pica 1986) and mastering content (Lucker et al. 1976). Long and Porter call combining arrangement activities "twoway task" to distinguish them from superior-inferior activities ("one-way task"). ...
... Students then form a second group including one member who learned about each different aspect, so each aspect can be peer-taught by the "expert" on that aspect. Well before the current swell of interest in for differentiation, several studies (Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, Aronson, & Sikes, 1977;Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976;Moscowitz, Malvin, Schaeffer, & Schaps, 1983) showed positive affective outcomes for use "jigsaw" methods of cooperative learning. A recent study (Law, 2011) supported the effectiveness of "jigsaw" methods for reading achievement as well. ...
The research literatures on mathematics education and gifted and talented education share many common conclusions about effective practices for strengthening students’ cognitive engagement and deep conceptual understandings. Enrichment learning and differentiated instruction comprise two broad approaches long advocated by proponents of gifted education. Enrichment learning shares many conceptual parallels with process standards advocated in mathematics education. Yet the effectiveness of applying curricular and pedagogical principles initially developed for gifted education/talent development programs to heterogeneous elementary school mathematics classrooms has received little research attention. Therefore, it is difficult to determine if these principles should be disseminated and implemented more frequently in mixed-ability classrooms, and if so, what student and contextual factors predict positive learning outcomes when using enriched and pre-differentiated instructional units in mathematics. To investigate this line of inquiry, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT) created a series of three enriched and pre-differentiated grade 3 mathematics units. The NRC/GT subsequently conducted a multisite cluster-randomized control trial to study the overall causal impact of implementing these units on students’ mathematical achievement, with performance on the Problem Solving and Data Interpretation subtest of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) as the outcome measure. In addition to completing the ITBS measure, treatment students completed researcher-developed pretests and posttests for each of the three units to measure learning gains on specific content within the curricular units. The present study used multilevel models to clarify to what extent student-level factors (quantitative ability, gender, prior mathematics achievement, and status as a “high learning potential” nominee) and contextual factors (class average quantitative ability, class average prior mathematics achievement, teacher responses to the curriculum, and school aggregate SES) predicted treatment students’ outcomes on the researcher-developed tests. Student scores on composite unit pretests, unit posttests, and on the difference scores from pretest to posttest were regressed on these predictors in a series of two-level models. Further, three-level models were tested with a measurement model at level-1 that examined each unit test as a subscale component of the composite test. Results indicate that quantitative ability, prior achievement, and being nominated as having high learning potential were predictive of composite pretest and posttest scores, but gender was not. Student gains were predicted by quantitative ability and nomination status, but not by gender and prior achievement. Classroom mean gains from pretest to posttest varied across the classrooms in the study, but only one relationship between a student-level variable and an outcome varied significantly. Consequently, no significant cross-level interactions were apparent from the two-level models. The three-level hierarchical multivariate linear models confirmed the standard HLM covariance structure was appropriate for the posttest, but suggested the pretest was more adequately modeled with heterogeneous level-1 variances. Several student-level and cluster-level predictors explained the variance in particular subscales even though these effects were not found when modeling the composite measures.
... Πρόκειται για μια συμμετοχική και συνεργατική εκπαιδευτική τεχνική, η οποία εφαρμόζεται τόσο στη σχολική εκπαίδευση, όσο και στην εκπαίδευση των ενηλίκων και στη βιβλιογραφία απαντάται ως «συνεργατική συναρμολόγηση» (jigsaw). Η ονομασία παραπέμπει σε κατασκευή ενός μαθησιακού παζλ, όπου το κάθε μέλος της ομάδας διαθέτει μόνο ένα κομμάτι του και εξαρτάται απόλυτα από τους άλλους για την ολοκλήρωσή του (Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes & Aronson, 1976). Η τεχνική έχει χρησιμοποιηθεί σε ευρεία κλίμακα και έχει συντελέσει στη δημιουργία μιας ατμόσφαιρας στην τάξη, που οδηγεί σε εντυπωσιακές αλλαγές στην επίδοση, στο ηθικό και στη συναισθηματική κατάσταση των μαθητών. ...
Οι δραματικές εξελίξεις που συμβαίνουν στις σύγχρονες κοινωνίες αντανακλούν χωρίς αμφιβολία στην εκπαίδευση και στις διαδικασίες διδασκαλίας και μάθησης. Ειδικότερα, η διαφορετικότητα στους μαθητικούς πληθυσμούς σε όλα τα επίπεδα και η συνακόλουθη αναγκαιότητα για συνυπολογισμό κάθε διαφορετικής παραμέτρου στην εκπαιδευτική διαδικασία οδηγεί στην ανάγκη διερεύνησης εναλλακτικών προσεγγίσεων στη διδακτική πράξη. Αυτές οι μετατοπίσεις σε εκπαιδευτικό και διδακτικό επίπεδο επιβάλλουν την αξιοποίηση διδακτικών μετασχηματισμών στη σχολική τάξη με στόχο την ένταξη όλων των μαθητών. Ως συνέπεια των παραπάνω, η επιμόρφωση των εκπαιδευτικών στις μέρες μας διερευνά εναλλακτικές διδακτικές πρακτικές που να στοχεύουν στην αποτελεσματική διαχείριση της διαφορετικότητας των μαθητών. Σε αυτή την κατεύθυνση, είναι χρήσιμο να εμπλουτίζεται με επιμορφωτικές τεχνικές που να συμβάλλουν στη διαμόρφωση συνεργατικών στάσεων και συμπεριφορών στους εκπαιδευτικούς. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο, η παρούσα εισήγηση παρουσιάζει μια καινοτόμο μαθησιακή διαδικασία στη σχολική εκπαίδευση και στη δια βίου μάθηση. Πρόκειται για μια συμμετοχική και συνεργατική εκπαιδευτική τεχνική, η οποία εφαρμόζεται τόσο στη σχολική εκπαίδευση, όσο και στην εκπαίδευση των ενηλίκων και στη βιβλιογραφία απαντάται ως «συνεργατική συναρμολόγηση» (jigsaw). Η εισήγηση εστιάζει σε μια βιωματική επιμορφωτική δράση, η οποία αφορά στην προσομοίωση αυτής της διδακτικής πρακτικής σε εκπαιδευτικούς πρωτοβάθμιας εκπαίδευσης. Η δράση πραγματοποιήθηκε σε τρεις εκπαιδευτικές περιφέρειες Σχολικών Συμβούλων Πρωτοβάθμιας Εκπαίδευσης της Αττικής, το έτος 2012 και συμμετείχαν οι εκπαιδευτικοί από 32 σχολικές μονάδες. Η εισήγηση θα περιγράψει τα βασικά σημεία της δράσης αυτής, τα οφέλη, τις ενδεχόμενες δυσκολίες και τους τρόπους αντιμετώπισής τους, ενώ θα χαρτογραφήσει και τις κύριες επισημάνσεις από την εφαρμογή της. Τέλος, θα παρουσιαστούν οι προϋποθέσεις για μια αποτελεσματική εφαρμογή της προτεινόμενης εκπαιδευτικής δράσης.
... On the one hand, cooperative rewards motivate individuals to engage in collaborative behaviors, such as high-quality knowledge sharing, oriented to producing better team outcomes and acquiring joint rewards (Brandenburger and Nalebuff 1996;Beersma et al. 2003;Tan et al. 2015). On the other hand, competitive rewards may motivate individuals to engage in the opposite set of behaviors, such as less highquality knowledge sharing simply, to maximize individual performance and subsequent rewards (Brandenburger and Nalebuff 1996;Lucker et al. 1976;Crozier and Friedberg 2009;Lin and Huang 2010;Johnson and Johnson 1998). We can therefore expect that the quality of knowledge sharing in pair programming teams is higher under cooperative reward structures than competitive reward structures. ...
With regard to the increased application of team-based organizational structures, great attention has been devoted to research on work groups. A growing body of literature indicates the crucial role of cooperative or competitive reward structures in determining information sharing patterns, and in turn group performance. The real situations are, however, a mixture of cooperative and competitive- coopetitive- reward structures in different intensities and mix. This study aims to provide a better understanding of coopetitive structures and their impact on group interactions. More specifically, this study investigates how two types of coopetitive reward structures (dominant cooperative and dominant competitive reward structures) are different in terms of determining the quality of information sharing among group members over time. Drawn upon the extant literature, a theoretical model of coopetitive reward structures is proposed. The model postulates that the relationship between coopetitive reward structures and high-quality information sharing is contingent upon task complexity and group dynamics. Laboratory experimental research is proposed as the research methodology. The details of the proposed research methodology including the experiment procedures, variables, and participants are discussed for validation and testing of the conceptual model.
... On the one hand, cooperative rewards motivate individuals to engage in collaborative behaviors, such as high-quality knowledge sharing, oriented to producing better team outcomes and acquiring joint rewards (Brandenburger and Nalebuff 1996;Beersma et al. 2003;Tan et al. 2015). On the other hand, competitive rewards may motivate individuals to engage in the opposite set of behaviors, such as less highquality knowledge sharing simply, to maximize individual performance and subsequent rewards (Brandenburger and Nalebuff 1996;Lucker et al. 1976;Crozier and Friedberg 2009;Lin and Huang 2010;Johnson and Johnson 1998). We can therefore expect that the quality of knowledge sharing in pair programming teams is higher under cooperative reward structures than competitive reward structures. ...
There has been a growing research interest in understanding knowledge sharing in agile development. Yet, empirical research that sheds light on its underlying practices, such as pair programming, is evolving. This study uses insights from coopetition and software literature to focus inquiry on the relation between coopetitive rewards and high-quality knowledge sharing in pair programming teams. Theoretical hypotheses are developed and validated, suggesting that: coopetitive rewards influence high-quality knowledge sharing both directly and over time through their impact on the level of knowledge sharing satisfaction, and, the impact of coopetitive rewards on high-quality knowledge sharing is dependent upon task complexity and the history of working under similar reward structure. This study generates new understanding related to the use of rewards in pair programming teams, and offers a rigorous and replicable seven-step experimental process for simulating coopetitive structures and investigating their role in pair programming and in similar collaborative contexts.
... In general, studies in middle class white schools have been somewhat less successful in showing achievement gains than those in integrated and/or working class schools. This is further borne out by the findings of Lucker et al. (1976), Slavin (Note 17), and Slavin and Oickle (Note 11) of an interaction between ethnicity and treatment favoring gains in cooperative classes by minority students. Wheeler's (Note 1) finding of a strong interaction between cooperative predisposition and achievement gains emphasizes the importance of the particular population involved in a study, particularly as many studies have shown that white, middle class Americans are less cooperatively predisposed than other groups, including American blacks and Mexican-Americans (Madsen & Shapira, 1970). ...
Research on classroom cooperative learning techniques, in which students work in small groups and receive rewards or recognition based on their group performance, has been increasing in the past few years. This review summarizes the results of 28 primary field projects lasting at least 2 weeks, in which cooperative learning methods were used in elementary or secondary classrooms. The pattern of research findings supports the utility of cooperative learning methods in general for increasing student achievement, positive race relations in desegregated schools, mutual concern among students, student self-esteem, and other positive outcomes. The various cooperative learning methods are contrasted in terms of characteristics and outcomes, and the next steps for research in this area are outlined.
... Because students are required to learn all components of the theme, they are dependent on each other to learn the material they themselves did not focus on. Assessment is individual, however; students take quizzes or exams individually and group members may receive different grades from each other (Aronson et al.; Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976). A modification, Jigsaw II (Slavin, 1980 ), adds to the structure and introduces competition among groups. ...
this paper addresses the discussion regarding whether or not cooperative learning methods are good for gifted students by considering the processes of task-related interac-tion within different cooperative structures. differences and similarities in the nature and type of task-related interactions that are promoted by different cooperative learn-ing structures are discussed. furthermore, the congruence between the types of student interaction that are promoted by different structures and theories of how students learn are considered. the implications of these points for gifted students are addressed. finally, it is suggested that collaborative learning—an extension of cooperative group structures that is premised on social-constructivist theories of learning—can provide rich learning opportunities for gifted students in mixed-ability groupings. Student interaction with other students about schoolwork, par-ticularly in small groups, has long been identified as a means of promoting learning (e.g., Johnson & Johnson, 1975; Sharan, 1980; Slavin, 1980; Webb, 1983). Cooperative learning methods, or for-mats to structure interaction within small groups, have received considerable attention over the past 30 years. Many studies have shown that cooperative learning is associated with gains in achieve-ment, in addition to having social and affective benefits (Sharan; Slavin, 1980; Webb & Palincsar, 1996). Thus, cooperative learn-ing has become especially popular with teachers (Antil, Jenkins, Wayne, & Vadsy, 1998) and is recommended by researchers (e.g., Midgley, 1993), authors of education texts (e.g., Ormrod, 2003), and policy advisers or advocates (e.g.
... Jigsaw was first used with Latino students, and much of the research on this topic has involved schools in the Southwest serving many Latino students. The first brief Jigsaw evaluation (Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976) found positive effects of the program for "minority students" (Latino and African American students analyzed together), but not for Anglos. A study in bilingual classes (Gonzales, 1981) and one in majority-Latino schools (Tomblin & Davis, 1985) found no achievement benefits. ...
... Other studies have documented academic gains from small groupwork in integrated classrooms (see Slavin, 1978;Lucker, 1976;Sharan, 1980). Techniques such as Slavin's team learning or Aaronson's jigsaw classroom demonstrate learning gains for minority children in experimental curricula. ...
A Multi-Ability classroom is a set of recommendatio ns for permanent changes in the task and evaluation structure of classroorils. These changes are calculated to increase active, engaged, learning behavior of low status students and to provide detailed enriched feedback to the student on how he or she is doing on many different specific tasks. These changes are designed to modify expectations of competence held by classmates for each other and by the student for him/herself. Instead of a set of consistent expectations for competence for a student based on how "smart" or "dumb" he or she is, we introduce multiple intellectual abilities on which each child develops mixed expectations. This classroom model requires the changing of the perception and conception of human ability from unidimensional to multi-dimensional. Active steps must be taken to prevent reading achievement from being used as the index of where each child stands on what is commonly thought to be a single dimension of human intelligence. Unless strong steps are taken, what happens in many classrooms is that a child's ability in reading is used as an index to organize expectations for how competent he or she will be at a wide range of classroom tasks. This is, of course, encouraged by making reading a prerequisite for success at almost every classroom task. However, even if we set a task, such as small group discussion or a game task not requiring reading, we have collected consistent evidence that those children who are perceived to be better readers will be more active and influential than those who are perceived to be weaker readers (Rosenholtz, 1980; Stulac, 1975). This is a kind of self-fulfilli ng prophecy whereby those who are better readers expect to be better at a wide range of intellectual tasks; and those who are weaker readers expect to do poorly at a wide range of tasks. These dif
... There is no practical reason that this should not be done. Team techniques have never been shown to impair the other important school outcomes, such as academic achievement; in fact, most have significantly positive effects on achievement Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976;Slavin, in press). Also, they are typically simple and inexpensive to implement. ...
Investigated biracial learning teams and cross-racial friendships in desegregated junior high schools. Ss were 294 7th- and 8th-grade students in 12 English classes (170 Whites, 124 Blacks). Each of 5 teachers taught 1–2 experimental classes and 1–2 control classes for 10 wks. Experimental Ss studied worksheets in 4–5 member biracial teams and received regulation based on the sum of members' quiz scores. Controls studied alone and received individual quiz scores only. Results indicate that experimental Ss increased more than controls in the number of cross-racial friendship choices made on a sociometric instrument, and in the percentage of cross-racial choices over all choices. A follow-up of a subsample of 2 classes 9 mo after the project showed the effects of the experimental treatments maintained over time. (15 ref)
... To date, most studies of cooperative learning have assessed academic achievement, school-related attitudes, or race/ethnic relations (DeVries & Edwards, 1974;Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976;Sharan, in press;Weigel, Wiser, & Cook, 1975; This study was funded by and carried out under the auspices of the Israel Center for Instructional Television. ...
Cooperative behavior of 243 3rd–7th graders who studied in cooperative small groups was compared to that of 150 pupils in classrooms conducted with whole-class instruction. An expanded version of M. Madsen's (1971) domino game was used to assess Ss' judgments about distributing payoff to themselves or to others in an altruistic, cooperative, or competitive fashion. In a 2nd experiment, 54 groups of 5 Ss were asked to construct new words from the letters appearing in an epigram, with the option to work alone or to collaborate with others. Ss from small-group classrooms were more cooperative on both judgmental and behavioral measures than were Ss from traditional classrooms. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
... It is less clear why African American children showed greater gains than Anglo American children. African American children tend to learn especially well in cooperative learning situations (Dill & Boykin, 2000;Haynes & Gebreyesus, 1992;Lucker, Rosenfield, Sikes, & Aronson, 1976) and in activities that use music and/or movement (Allen & Boykin, 1991;Allen & Butler, 1996). Our intervention included some emphasis on these factors, so this could account for the differential response, but this explanation is speculative, so replication and process studies are needed. ...
Teachers implemented a 6-week classroom intervention designed to promote emergent math skills and math interest in preschool-aged children. Teachers in experimental classrooms incorporated math-relevant activities into their daily routine during circle time, transitions, mealtime, and small-group activities. Control classrooms engaged in their typical activities. After the program, experimental children scored significantly higher than control children on a standardized test of math ability and enjoyed math activities more than the control children, as measured by both teacher and self-report. Teachers rated the program as highly satisfactory and reported that they increased their own enjoyment and skill in implementing math activities in their classrooms. The intervention effects were largely accounted for by substantial gains by boys, whereas girls showed much smaller program response. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Explores the stereotypes, prejudices, and discriminatory behavior of individuals and the manner in which these cognitions, feelings, and behaviors both affect others and are affected by others. Stephan and Stephan suggest measures to help overcome bias and improve intergroup relations that utilize techniques for eliminating stereotypes, reducing prejudice, and resolving conflicts in real-world situations. Designed to enrich all of our lives by combatting preconceptions, this book makes a significant contribution to our understanding of ourselves and others.The authors look at school desegregation in the United States as an extended case study. Throughout the book, they address social identity theory; culture shock and ethnocentrism; the effectiveness of deterrence, negotiation, mediation, and unilateral de-escalation; as well as the contact hypothesis.
This study focuses on two questionnaire surveys that were conducted about the adoption of the Private Finance Initiative (PFI prison) method in Japan as a new correctional system. For study 1, a Web questionnaire was administered to residents of within a 30 km zone of Tokyo as well as those in Yamaguchi Prefecture to determine familiarity and resistance to the PFI prison systems. For study 2, a questionnaire survey was administered to residents of a neighborhood near a PFI prison in Mine city. The results showed that the attitudes toward the PFI prison were more positive in this area. Furthermore, contact with the correctional systems promoted residents’ acceptance of prisoners and former prisoners. Finally, we discuss social and institutional support and contact with social systems to promote social inclusion.
The chances of implementing and maintaining a truly integrated school, whether the goal is harmonious, interracial relations or improved, minority group academic performance are not, at this time, high.1 This is not because such a successful school is, in principle, impossible. Rather we, as educational planners and researchers, are the victims of our own conventional and wishful thinking about the nature of the problems in this setting. We hear simplistic solutions recommended so often that they are accepted as truisms.
Commentators from Bill Cosby to Barack Obama have observed the phenomenon of black schoolchildren accusing studious classmates of "acting white." How did this contentious phrase, with roots in Jim Crow-era racial discord, become a part of the schoolyard lexicon, and what does it say about the state of racial identity in the American system of education? The answer, writes Stuart Buck in this frank and thoroughly researched book, lies in the complex history of desegregation. Although it arose from noble impulses and was to the overall benefit of the nation, racial desegegratio\n was often implemented in a way that was devastating to black communities. It frequently destroyed black schools, reduced the numbers of black principals who could serve as role models, and made school a strange and uncomfortable environment for black children, a place many viewed as quintessentially "white." Drawing on research in education, history, and sociology as well as articles, interviews, and personal testimony, Buck reveals the unexpected result of desegregation and suggests practical solutions for making racial identification a positive force in the classroom.
A growing body of literature indicates the crucial role of cooperative or competitive reward structures in determining information sharing behaviors, and in turn group performance. The real situations are, however, a mixture of cooperative and competitive- coopetitive- reward structures in different intensities and combinations. This study aims to provide a better understanding of coopetitive structures and their impact on group interactions. More specifically, this study investigates how two types of coopetitive reward structures (dominant cooperative and dominant competitive reward structures) are different in determining information sharing quality over time. A theoretical model of coopetitive reward structures is proposed. The model postulates that the relationship between coopetitive reward structures and high-quality information sharing is contingent upon task complexity and group dynamics. Laboratory experimental research is employed to examine the proposed model. Research and practical implications are discussed. © (2012) by the AIS/ICIS Administrative Office All rights reserved.
Background
How best to serve a racially and ethnically diverse student body has been a topic of intensive theory development for the past 30 or 40 years. We have strong theoretical models regarding the need for and practice of multicultural education, the goals of which include both increased educational achievement for students of color and improved inter-group relations. Nevertheless, there are few places where one can find a broad examination of the empirical support for the influence of multicultural educational practice on either student outcomes or intergroup relations.
Purpose
In this article, I use James A. Banks's widely used conceptualization of the five components of multicultural educational practice—content integration, knowledge construction, prejudice reduction, equity pedagogies, and empowering school cultures—to examine the empirical evidence for the influence of each of these five different components on the academic outcomes of students of color and intergroup relations in schools.
Conclusions
The empirical research reveals that all five components of multicultural educational practice outlined by Banks to have a strong, positive impact on the educational outcomes of students of color and to improved intergroup relations, although research has been stronger in some areas (e.g., prejudice reduction and some equity pedagogies such as cooperative learning) than others (e.g., the specific effects of content integration and knowledge construction). The evidence suggests several additional conclusions: (1) Multicultural educational practice has benefit for the academic outcomes of all students, not just students of color. (2) Multicultural educational practice is most effective when implemented with careful attention to issues of race and power. (3) The academic and intergroup relations outcomes are linked, such that efforts designed to improve one improve the other. Implications for future research on the effects of multicultural educational practice on students, as well as teacher and administrator education programs, are discussed.
Walk through any educational environment, from preschool to postsecondary, and you are bound to see examples of cooperative learning in action. Cooperative learning is applied in a wide range of settings, with all age groups, in diverse disciplines. A national survey of US teachers conducted in 1993 found that 79% of elementary teachers and 62% of middle school teachers reported making some sustained use of cooperative learning (Puma, Jones, Rock and Fernandez, 1993). In social studies, the use of cooperative learning predates John Dewey's Project Method of the 1920's. In present-day social studies classrooms, cooperative learning appears especially frequently, in a wide variety of forms. The popularity of cooperative learning methods in social studies classrooms is due, at least in part, to their effects on the social development of students. In addition to strengthening and expanding students' grasp of the formal curriculum, they impact affective outcomes inherent to social studies –outcomes beyond curriculum mastery. These include empathy toward other peoples, in other cultures (and eras), ideas of citizenship, and critical thinking. Although cooperative learning is a powerful tool with which to accomplish academic, social, and affective goals, it takes more than simply allowing children to work together in groups, an activity to which the cooperative learning label is often misguidedly affixed. More than twenty-five years of experimental research in schools indicates that outcomes, particularly achievement outcomes, are affected by how teachers structure and implement cooperative learning methods. One can think about effective use of cooperative learning in social studies as being attentive to both the social and the studies.
This article reviews classroom research on cooperative‐learning techniques. These are instructional methods in which students work in 4–6 member, heterogeneous teams to master prescribed academic material or to carry out a group project or discussion. The review is focused on the four cooperative‐learning techniques in widest use in classrooms, although less widely used methods are also discussed. Only studies which took place over a period of at least two weeks are reviewed. It is concluded that: (a) Cooperative learning methods are generally more effective than control methods in increasing student achievement, but the effects arc not consistent. Some evidence suggests that highly structured cooperative methods are best for basic skills, while more open‐ended methods are best for higher‐order skills. (b) Cooperative learning methods have generally positive effects on student inter‐ethnic relations, mutual concern, self‐esteem, liking of school, and other variables.
This study investigated the effects of cooperative group peer tutoring on the inter-ethnic relations of elementary school age children. Direct observations of social interactions on the playground and sociometric indices were used to measure inter-ethnic associations before and after the eight-week program. For first graders, inter-ethnic interactions and sociometric choices increased and improvements were found in arithmetic and reading grades. However, no significant changes were found among the third grade program children in either inter-ethnic associations or academic performance. These findings suggest that a cooperative peer tutoring classroom structure may improve the inter-ethnic relationships of first grade children who have experienced only a short history of competitive academic exercises and whose overt ethnic prejudice may be less ingrained.
The relationships among cooperation-competition, perceptions of locus of control in social situations, and perceptions of locus of control in intellectual-academic situations was compared among 89 fourth- and fifth-grade students in traditional and open classrooms. Children from the open education setting displayed substantially more cooperative behavior on Madsen's marble-pull game than children from the traditional school. They also made significant gains in cooperative behavior from the first to the second trial, while the difference between trials was not significant for the traditional students. Traditional students displayed significantly higher internality for locus of control in academic settings, while perceptions of locus of control in social settings did not differ for the two groups. Academic and social locus of control judgments were significantly correlated for the open education students, but not for the students from traditional classrooms.
Recent research studies and reports of current desegregation plans are examined against the background of two models of social systems: consensus and conflict. The article's focus moves from the community to the school to the classroom to the individual.
Two experiments, using computer avatars, examined the role of coaction contexts (competition versus cooperation) in distinctiveness-based stereotype threat. In Experiment 1, African-American participants performed an anagram-solving task with two ostensible coactors either in a high-distinctiveness (participant being a numerical minority with two Caucasian coactors) or in a low-distinctiveness (racial-cues absent with silhouette-image avatars) environment; coaction contexts were structured either in terms of competition or in terms of cooperation. Participants situated in the high-distinctiveness environment performed better when they engaged in cooperation than in competition whereas those in the low-distinctive environment did not show a significant difference. In Experiment 2, which was conducted to replicate and extend Experiment 1 with a different social category/domain, females took a mathematics test with two ostensible coactors. Whereas the competition versus cooperation difference was not significant among participants placed in a low-distinctiveness (female-majority or all-female) environment, participants situated in a high-distinctiveness (female-minority) environment showed significantly lower levels of stereotype-associated concerns and better performance on the math test in cooperation than in competition. Our findings suggest that distinctiveness-based stereotype threat is less likely to occur when the context of group performance is framed as cooperation as opposed to competition.
Cluster analysis of nine dimensions of the social environments of 200 junior high and high school classrooms yielded five distinctive groups of classes: control oriented, innovation oriented, affiliation oriented, task oriented and competition oriented. The last three types were composed of structured and unstructured subtypes, and the competition oriented classes also had a subtype characterized by an emphasis on student affiliation. The clusters showed systematic differences in student satisfaction and mood, and in teacher satisfaction.
Prejudice may be reduced by equal status contact between majority and minority groups in the pursuit of common goals. The effect is greatly enhanced if this contact is sanctioned by institutional support (i.e. by law, custom, or local atmosphere) and provided that it is of a sort that leads to the perception of common interests and common humanity between members of the two groups. (Allport, 1954, p. 281)
This is a time of great opportunity, but also of great danger in the education of students placed at risk for school failure. Students may be placed at risk for many reasons, among which are low socioeconomic status (SES), minority status, and limited English proficiency, if they attend schools that are not prepared to build on their strengths. Although individual low-income and minority students may excel, and individual schools may have great success with high-poverty students, on average such students perform significantly worse in school than do advantaged students in well-funded schools (Knapp & Woolverton, 1995; National Center for Education Statistics, 1993, 1994). In particular, African American and Latino students have, as a group, performed significantly lower than other groups. Although the gap between these groups and White students on the National Assessment of Educational Process (NAEP) and other tests has gradually diminished since the early 1970s, the gap remains substantial, and in the most recent NAEP assessments the White-minority gap actually increased slightly for the first time since the NAEP has been given (National Center for Education Statistics, 1994).
This study tests the hypothesis that cultural differences in group orientation predict an interaction between the student variable—ethnicity—and a learning context variable—reward structure—on math performance after group learning. One hundred and thirty-two African-American and European-American female and male fourth and fifth grade students studied math estimation in one of three group learning contexts. The learning contexts operationalized were: intergroup competitive, interpersonally competitive, and communal-no reward. ANCOVA confirmed a predicted interaction of ethnicity with learning context on post study session performance. Although there was no difference overall, African-American and European-American students performed best in the aggregate in different contexts. Independent ratings of students' group-positive behaviors mirrored the two-way interaction between learning context and ethnicity. The findings suggest that important student variables interact with the variable elements of group learning and should be studied in greater detail. They also support Boykin's (1994) contention that the cultural context of learning is a critical mediator of children's achievement.
This article reviews research on the achievement outcomes of three types of approaches to improving elementary mathematics: mathematics curricula, computer-assisted instruction (CAI), and instructional process programs. Study inclusion requirements included use of a randomized or matched control group, a study duration of at least 12 weeks, and achievement measures not inherent to the experimental treatment. Eighty-seven studies met these criteria, of which 36 used random assignment to treatments. There was limited evidence supporting differential effects of various mathematics textbooks. Effects of CAI were moderate. The strongest positive effects were found for instructional process approaches such as forms of cooperative learning, classroom management and motivation programs, and supplemental tutoring programs. The review concludes that programs designed to change daily teaching practices appear to have more promise than those that deal primarily with curriculum or technology alone.
Five recently published methods for conducting cooperative small-group learning in the classroom, and the experimental studies conducted by the authors of these methods are examined, evaluated, and compared in this study. The five methods are: Aronson’s Jigsaw classroom, DeVries’ Teams-Games-Tournaments (TGT), Slavin’s Student Teams and Academic Divisions (STAD), the Johnsons’ cooperative learning approach, and the Sharans’ Small-group Teaching method. The former three methods are categorized as Peer-Tutoring methods, while the latter two are classified as examples of a Group-Investigation (G-I) approach. Findings are considered from experimental studies with these five methods, in terms of their differential effects on academic achievement, students’ attitudes, and on ethnic relations in desegregated classrooms. The implications of the distinction between Peer-Tutoring and G-I methods are explored. New directions for research are suggested with these cooperative small-group techniques which appear to exert noteworthy effects on a variety of cognitive and social-affective variables.
Performance and learning process factors were determined as a function of different cooperative and individualistic learning techniques. Ninety-six African-American college women completed a 40-item vocabulary test of unfamiliar words and then were randomly assigned to one of four 30-minute word-study conditions. These four conditions were either a cooperative or individualistic study arrangement coupled with a performance-contingent competitive or criterion (i.e. based on an absolute performance standard) incentive. Performance on an alternative form of the vocabulary test, and measures of study attitudes, perceived ability, and time on study task were then assessed. Second test performance was greater following cooperative than individualistic learning. This was principally due to the difference between these conditions when they were paired with competitive incentives. Cooperative learning also led to more positive attitudes towards the learning experience, greater perceived ability, and more time on study task. The generalizability of cooperative learning effects are discussed as is the effectiveness of the approach with African-American students.
Individual learning differences under competitive and co‐operative methods of instruction were investigated. It was hypothesised that: (a) students would learn more when the method was matched to the student's preference and that (b) the co‐operative (and tutorial) methods would promote more favourable attitudes toward peer students. One hundred and thirty‐two female students participated in the experiment. In the first part of the experiment they were asked to state their preferences and in the second part, half of the students received their preferred method of instruction. Both hypotheses were confirmed. In addition, it was found that students who preferred competition had better initial knowledge of the material, learned more during the learning experience and held somewhat less favourable attitudes toward their peers. The analysis of the results suggests that the interaction between goal, individual, subject‐matter and learning methods needs to be taken into account when determining an optimal method of instruction.
Examined the determinants of changes in the racial attitudes of 65 White elementary school children during school desegregation. A multiple regression analysis showed that increases in children's self-esteem, increases in children's interethnic contact, low parental authoritarianism, and nonpunitive parental child-rearing practices were all significantly related to positive changes in racial attitudes. In addition, data are presented that indicate that parental opposition to integration is an indirect determinant of change in children's racial attitudes because of its impact on children's interethnic contact. (2½ p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
A meta-analytic review of group comparison design studies evaluating peer-assisted learning (PAL) interventions with elementary school students produced positive effect sizes (ESs) indicating increases in achievement (unweighted mean ES = 0.59, SD = 0.90; weighted ES, d = 0.33, p < .0001, 95% confidence interval = 0.29-0.37). PAL interventions were most effective with younger, urban, low-income, and minority students. Interventions that used interdependent reward contingencies, ipsative evaluation procedures, and provided students with more autonomy had higher ESs. Adequate descriptive information was missing in many studies. Researchers are encouraged to develop PAL interventions in collaboration with practitioners to maximize those interventions' use and effectiveness and to include more detailed information about students, schools, and intervention components in their reports. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
A laboratory experiment and a reanalysis of data collected in a previous field study examined the effects of cooperation and competition on liking for other group members who varied in competence. It was hypothesized that when other members of a cooperative group are relatively incompetent, they will tend to be disliked because they decrease the subject's chances of success. On the other hand, in competitive groups incompetent group members should not be disliked because they do not reduce the probability of the subject's success. Both the laboratory experiment and the field study found support for these suggestions. In addition, in the field study it was found that the race of the other group members did not affect these tendencies. Other results from the present study yielded information concerning some of the psychological processes that determine attraction in cooperative and competitive groups. These results were discussed in terms of their implications for the use of cooperative groups in desegregated schools.
Achievement in individually competitive and cooperatively reward-structured environments was examined in two high-school biology classrooms. Each was pretested and taught an identical unit of study, one in an individually competitive structure and the other using a cooperative group-investigation model. At the end of seven weeks both classes were posttested. A two-way within-subjects ANOVA was used to determine significant differences in pre- and post-test scores between the two treatment groups. The two groups were not significantly different from each other on the pretest. While both cooperative and competitive techniques obtained significantly (p < 0.05) higher posttest scores, neither treatment was superior over the other in producing academic achievement. Results are compared to previous studies which have examined differences among cooperatively, competitively, and individually structured classrooms.
International education is a thriving industry, but relatively little is known about its consequences for the social integration of international scholars in educational institutions or the wider community. This article reviews research on attitudes toward international students as a key component of intercultural relations and a significant marker of social cohesion. An organizational framework for the investigation of these attitudes is proposed with threat mediating the influences of personal and situational factors on attitudinal outcomes. Broader contextual factors are also seen to exert influence on the process of attitude development and maintenance. A model derived from this framework is then tested with student, teacher, and community samples. A “tipping point” in attitudes toward international students as a function of the proportion of international enrolments in educational institutions is also explored. Finally, the applicability of the findings for promoting social cohesion in educational institutions and the wider community is discussed.
AN EXPERIMENT ON COOPERATION AND COMPETITION BY RAVEN AND EACHUS WAS REPLICATED. MOST HYPOTHESES FORMULATED BY OTHER INVESTIGATORS IN THE FIELD OF COOPERATION AND COMPETITION IN SMALL GROUPS WERE CONFIRMED. THERE WERE 2 EXCEPTIONS, HOWEVER. CONTRARY TO RAVEN AND EACHUS' RESULTS, COALITION FORMATION WAS SHOWN TO OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY IN COMPETITIVE GROUPS THAN IN COOPERATIVE GROUPS. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE 2 EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS IN SPONTANEOUS LEADERSHIP COULD NOT BE DEMONSTRATED. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
On the basis of various matching procedures introductory psychology students at MIT were separated into 4 cooperative and 4 competitive groups. Puzzle and human relation problems were given to the groups for solution. The members of the 4 cooperative groups received final grades in the course which in part depended upon which group, as a group, turned in the best solutions. In the competitive groups the final grade was in part determined by how much
each individual contributed to his group's solution. The findings may be summarized by saying that greater productivity occurs when the members of a group are organized in terms of cooperative activities rather than competitive. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Randomly assigned 88 5th and 6th graders to 1 of 3 treatments: cooperative, competitive, or control. The 2 experimental groups were exposed to the same social studies content for 18 days and worked on inquiry-related problems within subgroups (cooperative) or independently (competitive). The control group did not receive the same instructional content. 2 attitudinal measures were given to cooperative and competitive Ss (n = 58) as a posttest. All 3 groups were given an achievement posttest. Results indicate that cooperative Ss, significantly more than competitive Ss, liked social studies class, sharing information, working together, talking with one another, and receiving group vs individual grades. However, no significant difference between cooperative and competitive groups was found on achievement, although both groups were superior to the control group. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Cooperative and competitive techniques of teaching discussion sections of general psychology were compared with respect to their effects on student anxiety, student achievement, and student satisfaction. The experiment involved 4 sections of introductory psychology. Students in these sections participated in class discussions conducted in a competitive manner for 2 weeks and with a cooperative method for 2 weeks. The competitive condition resulted in higher tension, poorer achievement in recitation, and less satisfaction than the cooperative condition.
A task was presented to 40 male triads wherein the performance of each participant was maximally determined by the behavior of the other 2. 20 triads received cooperative instructions, 20 received competitive instructions. As predicted the differences between cooperative and competitive groups were particularly great in such a task: cooperative triads, as compared to competitive triads, were more rapid in solving the problem, evaluated fellow team members more favorably, showed less indication of hostility, were more attracted to the task, were more likely to develop leaders. In addition, and contrary to prediction, there was greater concern for personal performance in the cooperative triads. Hypotheses regarding concern for team performance, coalition formation, and the effects of interference with the operations of one member were not supported. (20 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
"In this article an attempt has been made to sketch out a theory of cooperation and competition and apply this theory to the functioning of small groups… , (i) social situations of cooperation and competition were defined; (ii) some of the logical implications inherent in the definitions were pointed to; (iii) with the introduction of psychological assumptions, some of the definitions of the two objective social situations were then drawn; (iv) the psychological implications, with the aid of additional psychological assumptions, were then applied to various aspects of small-group functionings to develop a series of hypotheses about the relative effects of co-operation and competition upon group processes; and (v) finally the concept of group was defined and linked with the concept of cooperation, thus making all of the preceding theoretical development with respect to cooperation relevant to group concepts." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Subjects were read a story and then asked to recall it individually, in a group, and then individually again. During the group recall two variations in group atmosphere were employed: (a) cooperative vs competitive, and (b) democratic vs authoritarian leadership. General results included: (a) the group recall was superior to the average initial and final individual recall, and (b) the group recall in the cooperative atmosphere was superior to the group recall in the competitive atmosphere. Failure to provide adequate experimental conditions did not allow conclusions regarding the democratic-authoritarian variable.
From previous research on cooperation, competition, and studies of small groups, an attempt was made to formulate hypotheses that would integrate theoretical approaches to both areas of investigation The results of the experiment [presented] permit the following conclusions: 1. Cooperation may be considered a determinant of group cohesiveness 2. Cooperation may be considered a determinant of instrumental communications.