COOPERATIVE LEARNING STRATEGIES

Publisher Summary This chapter describes the concept of cooperative learning strategies. By interacting with one another, students can improve their acquisition of academic knowledge and skills. Such interaction among students, based on equal partnership in the learning experience as opposed to a fixed teacher/learner or tutor/tutee role, has been termed cooperative learning. This type of learning appears to foster two potent activities: active processing of the information and cross modeling/imitation. The chapter discusses a research program that was designed to remedy drawbacks of prior cooperative learning studies by systematically analyzing the effects of learning strategies and individual differences on the acquisition of scientific knowledge and learning skills in the context of a dyadic learning situation. Student dyads were chosen as the unit of analysis because larger groups make it more difficult to delineate processing and interaction parameters and they may promote the formation of coalitions, thus encouraging competition rather than cooperation. The cooperative learning strategy used in the present research was originally developed as an individual text learning strategy. This strategy was modified for use in a dyadic learning situation. In general, the strategy requires each pair member to read approximately 500 words of a 2,500-word passage. One pair member then serves as recaller and attempts to orally summarize from emory what has been learned. The other member of the pair serves as the listener/facilitator and attempts to correct errors in the recall and to further facilitate the organization and storage of the material. The partners alternate roles of recaller and listener/facilitator.

[1]  R. Slavin,et al.  Teams-Games-Tournaments (TGT): Review of Ten Classroom Experiments. , 1978 .

[2]  Ernst Z. Rothkopf,et al.  The Concept of Mathemagenic Activities1 , 1970 .

[3]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. , 1981 .

[4]  Penelope L. Peterson,et al.  Individual Characteristics and Children's Learning in Large-Group and Small-Group Approaches: Study II. Report from the Project on Studies of Instructional Programming for the Individual Student. , 1979 .

[5]  J. Sonquist,et al.  Cooperative Task-Oriented Groups in a College Classroom: A Field Application. , 1976 .

[6]  Larry W. Brooks,et al.  Effects of Structural Schema Training and Text Organization on Expository Prose Processing. , 1983 .

[7]  Angela M. O'Donnell,et al.  Effects of metacognitive and elaborative activity on cooperative learning and transfer , 1985 .

[8]  W. Friesen,et al.  Managing emotionally disturbed children in regular classrooms. , 1966 .

[9]  Karen W. Collins,et al.  Evaluation of a hierarchical mapping technique as an aid to prose processing. , 1979 .

[10]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Student teams and comparison among equals: Effects on academic performance and student attitudes. , 1978 .

[11]  Donald F. Dansereau,et al.  Verbal Ability and Cooperative Learning: Transfer of Effects , 1984 .

[12]  Steven M. Ross,et al.  Oral summary as a review strategy for enhancing recall of textual material. , 1976 .

[13]  L. Baker,et al.  Comprehension Monitoring: Identifying and Coping with Text Confusions1 , 1979 .

[14]  J. Rotter Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. , 1966, Psychological monographs.

[15]  Chester W. Harris,et al.  Efficiency of initial learning and transfer by individuals, pairs, and quads. , 1963 .

[16]  I. Sarason Effect of anxiety, motivational instructions, and failure on serial learning. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  S. Sharan Cooperative Learning in Small Groups: Recent Methods and Effects on Achievement, Attitudes, and Ethnic Relations , 1980 .

[18]  A. L. Beaman,et al.  Effects of Voluntary and Semivoluntary Peer-Monitoring Programs on Academic Performance. , 1977 .

[19]  Ann L. Brown Knowing When, Where, and How to Remember: A Problem of Metacognition. Technical Report No. 47. , 1977 .

[20]  Ellen M. Markman,et al.  Realizing that you don't understand: elementary school children's awareness of inconsistencies. , 1979 .

[21]  J. P. Das,et al.  The Case of the Wrong Exemplar: A Reply to Humphreys. , 1978 .

[22]  D. Dansereau,et al.  Cooperative Learning Strategies in Processing Descriptive Text: Effects of Role and Activity Level of the Learner , 1984 .

[23]  L. Reder The Role of Elaboration in the Comprehension and Retention of Prose: A Critical Review , 1980 .

[24]  Noreen M. Webb,et al.  A process‐outcome analysis of learning in group and individual settings , 1980 .

[25]  Lawrence T. Frase,et al.  Boundary Conditions for Mathemagenic Behaviors1 , 1970 .

[26]  J. Bieri Cognitive complexity-simplicity and predictive behavior. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[27]  E. Lemke Effects of Degree of Initial Acquisition, Group Size, and General Mental Ability on Concept Learning and Transfer. , 1969 .

[28]  L. Siegel,et al.  EDUCATIONAL SET: A DETERMINANT OF ACQUISITION. , 1965, Journal of educational psychology.

[29]  Donald F. Dansereau,et al.  Cooperative dyads: Impact on text learning and transfer , 1985 .