Implementing individual and small group learning structures with a computer simulation

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of implementing individual and small group learning structures with a computer simulation in accounting. College students used one of three learning structures with the simulation: (a) an individual structure, (b) a small group structure with extensive interaction, or (c) a small group structure with occasional interaction. Results indicated that performance scores were high regardless of learning structure. However, students who worked alone expressed significantly more continuing motivation for their learning structure than students who worked with a partner. Responses to student interviews revealed somewhat mixed feelings for the small group structures. Observation data indicated that students who used the extensive small group structure exhibited significantly more discussion and provided more answers to their partners' questions than students who used the occasional group structure. Implications for implementing small group structures with computer-based instruction are provided.

[1]  S. Bossert,et al.  Cooperative Activities in the Classroom , 1988 .

[2]  Edythe Johnson Holubec,et al.  Cooperation in the Classroom , 1993 .

[3]  Henry Jay Becker,et al.  How Computers are Used in United States Schools: Basic Data from the 1989 I.E.A. Computers in Education Survey , 1991 .

[4]  James D. Klein,et al.  Effects of orienting activities and practice on achievement, continuing motivation, and student behaviors in a cooperative learning environment , 1994 .

[5]  James D. Klein,et al.  The effects of cued interaction and ability grouping during cooperative computer-based science instruction , 1995 .

[6]  N. Webb.  Peer interaction and learning in small groups , 1989 .

[7]  Martha S. Doran.  The effects of individual, cooperative and collaborative learning structures using a computer simulation in accounting , 1995 .

[8]  Steven M. Crooks,et al.  Effects of Cooperative Learning and Learner-Control Modes in Computer-Based Instruction. , 1996 .

[9]  James D. Klein,et al.  Effects of cooperative versus individual learning and orienting activities during computer-based instruction , 1998 .

[10]  Gregory C. Sales,et al.  Pair versus individual work on the acquisition of concepts in a computer-based in structional lesson , 1987 .

[11]  R. Slavin.  Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice , 1990 .

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

[13]  Willem J. Pelgrum,et al.  How are computers used in schools , 1993 .

[14]  M. Cosden.  Cooperative Groups and Microcomputer Instruction: Combining Technologies , 1989 .

[15]  A. King.  Verbal Interaction and Problem-Solving within Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Groups , 1989 .

[16]  R. Slavin.  Group Rewards Make Groupwork Work , 1991 .

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

[18]  Gayle V. Davidson,et al.  The Effects of Group Computer-Based Instruction and Learning Style on Achievement and Attitude. , 1993 .

[19]  N. Webb.  Peer interaction and learning with computers in small groups , 1987 .

[20]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on computer-assisted instruction. , 1985 .

[21]  Anne S. Goodsell.  Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education. , 1992 .

[22]  K. A. Smith,et al.  The craft of teaching cooperative learning: an active learning strategy , 1989, Proceedings 1989 Frontiers in Education Conference.

[23]  Noreen M. Webb,et al.  Peer interaction and learning in cooperative small groups. , 1982 .

[24]  Michael D. Williams,et al.  The effects of cooperative learning and learner control on high- and average-ability students , 1993 .

[25]  Theodore M. Shlechter.  The Relative Instructional Efficiency of Small Group Computer-Based Training , 1990 .