| Autor: |
Adl-Amini, Katja, Völlinger, Vanessa A., Eckart, Agnes |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
European Journal of Psychology of Education - EJPE (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.); Sep2024, Vol. 39 Issue 3, p2267-2281, 15p |
| Abstrakt: |
Cooperative learning (CL) refers to teaching methods in which students work in small groups to help one another learn and improve their learning outcomes. Often CL is described by five basic elements: (1) positive interdependence, (2) individual accountability, (3) promotive interaction, (4) social skills and (5) group processing. The positive effects of CL have been extensively documented. The quality of implementation, mostly determined by application of the five basic elements of CL, has been shown to be significantly related to the effectiveness of the methods. However, due to the complex demands that designing CL sequences places on teachers, the question of how and why they implement CL methods is not trivial. The present study used an explanatory mixed methods design with sequential phases (quantitative–qualitative) to investigate the implementation of CL in school practice. A survey, structured interviews with teachers and classroom observations rated on an observation scale including indicators of the basic elements of CL were used to gather data in a total of 49 German classrooms. Results show that the implementation quality of CL lessons was rather low. Only 7% of the observed teachers implemented the basic elements. Even group goals and individual accountability, the two most important elements of CL, were implemented in only 17% of the lessons observed. Survey results indicated that implementation quality is related to teachers' evaluation of CL with regard to its appropriateness for different learning goals (r =.40*) and diverse students (r =.36*). Qualitative analysis of the teacher interviews analysed by thematic coding showed differences between teachers with high and low implementation quality regarding their beliefs. Teachers with high implementation quality see more value in social learning processes and feel more responsible for the success of CL. The results show a theory–practice gap and point to the relevance of beliefs for CL implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink