An experimental investigation into the efficiency of cooperative learning with consideration of multiple grouping criteria

The present study conducts an experimental investigation to compare the efficiency of the cooperative learning method with that of the traditional learning method. A total of 42 engineering students are randomly assigned to the two learning conditions and are formed into mixed-ability groups comprising three team members. In addition to the regular daytime classes, homework sessions are arranged such that the out-of-hours learning method and learning time can be effectively controlled. The students’ academic achievement is evaluated by means of unit tests in the daytime classes and homework tests in the out-of-hours sessions. As an alternative method for resolving the multiple grouping criteria problem, the analysis of covariance method is used to compensate for the initial difference in the prior knowledge of the students in the two learning conditions regarding the course contents. The results show that given an equivalent learning time, the students in the cooperative learning condition outperform those who study alone in both the unit tests and the homework tests. Therefore, it is concluded that cooperative learning has a higher efficiency than the individualistic learning method.

[1]  J. Novak,et al.  A Twelve-Year Longitudinal Study of Science Concept Learning , 1991 .

[2]  R. Slavin.  Research on Cooperative Learning: Consensus and Controversy. , 1990 .

[3]  Y. Lou,et al.  Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis , 2001 .

[4]  David W. Johnson,et al.  The Effect of Positive Goal and Resource Interdependence on Individual Performance , 1996 .

[5]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Impact of Group Processing on Achievement in Cooperative Groups. , 1990, The Journal of social psychology.

[6]  Chien Chou,et al.  Developing web-based curricula: Issues and challenges , 2002 .

[7]  Leonard Springer.  EFFECTS OF SMALL-GROUP LEARNING ON UNDERGRADUATES , 2012 .

[8]  R T Johnson,et al.  Effects of cooperative and individualistic learning on prospective elementary teachers' music achievement and attitudes. , 1993, The Journal of social psychology.

[9]  David W. Dalton,et al.  Effects of individual and cooperative computer-assisted instruction on student performance and attitudes , 1989 .

[10]  Daniel J. Inman,et al.  Engineering Mechanics: Dynamics , 1966 .

[11]  Michael J. Prince,et al.  Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research , 2004 .

[12]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Individual versus Group Feedback in Cooperative Groups , 1994 .

[13]  J. E. Sharp,et al.  Assigning Functional Groups: The Influence of Group Size, Academic Record, Practical Experience, and Learning Style , 1997 .

[14]  Simon Hooper,et al.  Cooperative CBI: The Effects of Heterogeneous versus Homogeneous Grouping on the Learning of Progressively Complex Concepts , 1988 .

[15]  Russell K. Schutt,et al.  Research Methods in Education , 2011 .

[16]  E. Yalow.  On Educational psychology: A cognitive view. , 1979 .

[17]  Jaime Lloret,et al.  Improving Teamwork with University Engineering Students. The Effect of an Assessment Method to Prevent Shirking. , 2008 .

[18]  R T Johnson,et al.  Oral interaction in cooperative learning groups: speaking, listening, and the nature of statements made by high-, medium-, and low-achieving students. , 1985, The Journal of psychology.

[19]  Leonard Springer,et al.  Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis , 1997 .

[20]  Imad H. Elhajj,et al.  Turning Student Groups into Effective Teams , 2004 .

[21]  Stuart O. Yager,et al.  Oral Discussion, Group-to-individual Transfer, and Achievement in Cooperative Learning Groups , 1985 .

[22]  Leonie Kohl,et al.  Fundamental Concepts in the Design of Experiments , 2000 .

[23]  Chien Chou,et al.  Experiencing CORAL: design and implementation of distant cooperative learning , 1996 .

[24]  C. Ireland.  Fundamental concepts in the design of experiments , 1964 .

[25]  David W. Johnson,et al.  The impact of positive goal and resource interdependence on achievement, interaction, and attitudes , 1991 .

[26]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[27]  C A Nelson,et al.  Learning to Learn , 2017, Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining.

[28]  Rebecca Brent,et al.  Cooperative Learning in Technical Courses: Procedures, Pitfalls, and Payoffs. , 1994 .

[29]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. , 1978 .

[30]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research , 1989 .

[31]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Impact of Positive Interdependence and Academic Group Contingencies on Achievement , 1988 .

[32]  Miguel Nussbaum,et al.  Dynamic Grouping in Collaborative Learning Supported by Wireless Handhelds , 2005, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[33]  R. Felder,et al.  Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning. , 2001 .

[34]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning. Fourth Edition. , 1991 .

[35]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative Learning Returns To College What Evidence Is There That It Works , 1998 .

[36]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  An Enhanced Genetic Approach to Composing Cooperative Learning Groups for Multiple Grouping Criteria , 2008, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[37]  Quinn McNemar,et al.  Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. , 1967 .

[38]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom‐Based Practices , 2005 .