High-structure versus low-structure cooperative learning in introductory psychology classes for student teachers: Effects on conceptual knowledge, self-perceived competence, and subjective task values

被引:28
作者
Supanc, Marina [1 ]
Voellinger, Vanessa A. [1 ]
Brunstein, Joachim C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Justus Liebig Univ, Dept Psychol, Otto Behaghel Str 10F, D-35394 Giessen, Germany
关键词
Cooperative learning; Structured cooperation; Higher education; Student teachers; METAANALYSIS; EDUCATION; INCREASE; FEEDBACK; GOAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.03.006
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Using group presentation classes as a control condition, in nine introductory psychology classes we examined the impact of high-structure versus low-structure cooperative learning on N = 259 student teachers' conceptual knowledge, on their self-perceived competence, and on their appraisals of task values. To vary the structure, we first created a lesson plan built upon core principles of cooperative learning, and then eliminated from this plan critical elements structuring students' shared learning. Two-level analyses revealed that students in the two cooperative conditions (a) did better on three knowledge tests administered throughout the course of this one-semester project, (b) developed a more favorable view of their subject-specific competence, and (c) appraised the utility and intrinsic value of task assignments more positively than did the control students. In each of the three knowledge tests, students in high-structure groups outperformed students in low-structure groups. These findings support the hypothesis that structuring procedures enhance the efficaciousness of cooperative learning methods in college classes. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 84
页数:10
相关论文
共 38 条
[11]  
Johnson D.W., 2014, Journal On Excellence College Teaching, V25, P85
[12]  
Johnson D. W., 1999, LEARNING TOGETHER AL
[13]   Cooperative learning at the university:: An evaluation of jigsaw in classes of educational psychology [J].
Jürgen-Lohmann, J ;
Borsch, F ;
Giesen, H .
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PADAGOGISCHE PSYCHOLOGIE, 2001, 15 (02) :74-84
[14]   How to increase the benefits of cooperation: Effects of training in transactive communication on cooperative learning [J].
Jurkowski, Susanne ;
Haenze, Martin .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 85 (03) :357-371
[15]   Social Competences, Transactive Interaction, and Achievement: Comparison of Two Differently Designed Cooperative Learning Environments and Evaluation of Scripting Transactive Interaction [J].
Jurkowski, Susanne ;
Haenze, Martin .
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PADAGOGISCHE PSYCHOLOGIE, 2010, 24 (3-4) :241-257
[16]   A Meta-analytic Review of Studies of the Effectiveness of Small-Group Learning Methods on Statistics Achievement [J].
Kalaian, Sema A. ;
Kasim, Rafa M. .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICS EDUCATION, 2014, 22 (01)
[17]   Productive group engagement in cognitive activity and metacognitive regulation during collaborative learning: can it explain differences in students' conceptual understanding? [J].
Khosa, Deep K. ;
Volet, Simone E. .
METACOGNITION AND LEARNING, 2014, 9 (03) :287-307
[18]  
Kline T.J., 1999, J SPEC GROUP WORK, V24, P102, DOI DOI 10.1080/01933929908411422
[19]   The effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics [J].
Krause, Ulrike-Marie ;
Stark, Robin ;
Mandl, Heinz .
LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION, 2009, 19 (02) :158-170
[20]   A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? [J].
Kyndt, Eva ;
Raes, Elisabeth ;
Lismont, Bart ;
Timmers, Fran ;
Cascallar, Eduardo ;
Dochy, Filip .
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH REVIEW, 2013, 10 :133-149