DOCUMENT RESUME EA 023 682 ED 342 088 Hadderman, Margaret AUTHOR Cooperative Learning in Elementary Schools. TITLE INSTITUTION ERIC Clear:'.nghouse on Educational Management, Eugene, Oreg.; National Association of Elementary School Principals, Alexandria, VA. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), SPONS AGENCY Washington, DC. ISSN-8755-2590 REPORT NO PUB DATE 92 CONTRACT RI88062004 NOTE 5p. National Association of Elementary School Principals, AVAILABLE FROM 1615 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 ($2.50 prepaid; $2.00 each on orders of 10 or more). Collected works - Serials (022) PUB TYPE Research Roundup; v8 n2 Win 1992 JOURNAL CIT MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE *Academic Achievement; *Cooperative Learning; DESCRIPTORS Elementary Education; *Group Dynamics; Incentives; Learning Strategies; Models; Rewards; *Self Esteem; Socialization; Social Values; *Student Motivation; Student Responsibility; Teacher Role; *Teamwork ABSTRACT Cooperative learning is being recommended as a solution for numerous education problems, from enhancing disadvantaged children's self-esteem to ensuring academic success for all students. Cooperative learning has great potential as a supplement or alternative to traditional teaching methods when students are adequately socialized and motivated. The teacher's role is crucial, since conventional workbook exercises are usually inadequate and students must te led to assume responsibility for their own learning and deportment. This "Roundup" summarizes cooperative learning research studies ty four major contributors. Robert Slavin's comprehensive review article, stressing group goals and individual accountability, links the use of Student Team Learning and Group Investigation models to student gains in achievement, intergroup relations, and self-esteem. David Johnson and Roger Johnson's meta-analysis shows the superiority of cooperative learning strategies in promoting student achievement and identifies factors influencing group success or failure. Elizabeth Cohen's article argues that cooperative learning's survival depends on developing new curriculum materials, addressing student status problems, and creating collegial and administrative support systems for teachers. Daniel Solomon's study of cooperative learning in a longitudinal Child Development Projet shows that K-4 students in three program schools exhibited more socially responsive behavior and concern for democratic values that their peers in control schools. (MLH) *t********************************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * * *********************************************************************** -esearch VOLUME 8, NUMBER 2 WINTER 1992 U S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational RefeatCh and Improvement IliED CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has Wen reproduced as received from the person or organization _ROUNDUP originating it 0 Minor changes have been mad* to improve reproduction Quality Points of view Of opinions staled in this doCu- mem do not necessarily rewesent official OERI positron or policy SCHOOL PRINCIPALS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ELEMENTARY Cooperative Learning in Elementary Schools Margaret Hadderman Cooperative learning, simply defined as school With this basic information about cooperative learn- work done in groups. began as a grassroots ing in mind, what does the research literature have to offer movement involving a handful of professors the interested practitioner'? Robert E. Slavin. director of the Elementary School and researchers. Today. .00perative learning has become widespread and is being recommended as a solution for a Program at Johns Hopkins University, believes strongly variety of education problems. from enhancing the self- in the importance of group goals and individual account- esteem of at-risk children tc ensuring academic srccess ability. His comprehensive review article links the use of for all students. It has also been prescribed as a means of Student Team Learning and Group Investigation models improving racial relations and mitigating adverse effects to student gains in achievement, intergroup relations, and of tracking and remediation. self-esteem. Although some of these expectations might seem David Johnson and Roger Johnson, co-directors of the Cooperative Learning Center at the University of farfetched. cooperative learning has demonstratc3d great Minnesota, have extensively researched the effects of potential as a supplement to whole-class instruction and as an alternative to traditional teaching methods. The competitive, individual istic, and cooperative learning strat- problem lies in translating a relatively simple concept into egies on productivity and achievement. In a recent paper, a purposeful activity that facilitates students' learning .;ve learning the Johnsons show the superiority of coop. while engaging their wholehearted participatiou. strategies in promoting student achievement. and identify In classrooms, as elsewhere, old habits die hard. factors influencing group success or failure. Sociologist Elizabeth Cohen views cooperative Students trained from an early age to compete for teacher learning's increasing popularity with mixed feelings. She attention and grades are suddenly challenged to consider their classmates as resources rather than competitors. believes that its survival depends on the development of While researchers dispute the value of competition and new curriculum materials. successful treatment of student status problems, and the availability of collegial and rewards in group work. they agree that students must be sufficiently motivated if they are to help each other administrative support systems for teachers. Daniel Solomon and his associates evaluated coop- progress to .vard common learning objectives. To be suc- cessful in a cooperative setting. children must also ac- erative learning as a major strand of their Child Develop- quire necessary social skills and develop feelings of ment Project, an extensive longitudinal experiment in responsibility for achieving group and individual goals. fostering young children 's Icial development. They found The teacher's choice of materials is critical in a that K-4 students in three program schools consistently exhibited more socially responsive behavior and concern cooperative learning classroom, since conventional work- book exercises are usually too dull or too easily com- for democratic values than their peers in control schools. pleted to elicit spirited debate among group learners. .ust also learn new strategies in order to help TeacherF Margaret Hadderman is a research analyst and writer for the students gradually assume responsibility for their own ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management at the Uni- learning and behavior. versity of Oregon. r RT PrIPV AVAII iii two- to six-member groups, choose topics from a study Slavin, Robert E. "Synthesis of Research on unit, assume individual tasks, and present results to the Cooperative Learning."Educational Leadership entire class. 48:5 (February 1991): 71-82. Cooperative learning methods are among the most extensively evaluated instructional alternatives. Accord- ing to Slavin, 41 of 67 high-quality studies measuring What are the most widely used cooperative learning student achievement outcomes in elementary and second- strategies and how do they affect student outcomes? ary schools found that cooperatively taught youngsters Slavin's comprehensive review article effectively an- consistently outperformed their conventionally taught swers both these questions, while highlighting the author's peers. When methods stressing group goals and account- own research. Among the evaluated cooperative learning ability were evaluated in comparison studies, 37 of 44 models are Student Team Learning (STL), Jigsaw, Learn- comparisons with conventionally taught control groups ing Together, and Group Investigation. found significantly positive achievement results for co- STL, developed by Slavin, stresses team goals and operatively taught students. team success. Students master learning objectives while Cooperative learning methods seem to be equally working together in four-member teams. Team rewards, effective with all typ s of students, regardless of ability individual accountability (through quizzes or weekly tour- leve1, according to Sla in, and they can enhance achieve- naments), and equal opportunities for success are central ment at "all grade levels, in all major subject areas, and in to four STL variations. Three of these varimionsStu- urban, rural, and suburban schools." Group learning also dent Teams-Achievement Divisions, Teams-Games-Tour- tends to promote friendships across ethnic lines and nament, and the more comprehensive Team-Assisted greater acceptance of handicapped classmates. Individualizationinvolve mathematics instruction. The Group learning techniques can also influence other fourth variation, Cooperative Integrated Reading and important educational student outcomes, including a lik- Composition, is used for language arts instruction in the ing for school, a desire for academic success, a sense of upper elementary grades. individual control, and a predilection for cooperative and In Elliot Aronson's Jigsaw I method, students as- altruistic behavior. signed to six-member teams work on academic material MIN=MMiNEM, :!sentatives meet in "ex- broken into segments. Team re., pert" groups to discuss their segments and then take turns Johnson, David W., and Johnson, Roger T. teaching this material to their own teammates. In Slavin's "Cooperative Learning and Achievement." In Jigsaw II variation, students read a common narrative and Cooperative Learning: Theory and Research, become "experts" on different topics within it. edited by Shlomo Sharan. New York: Praeger, The Learning Together model, developed by David 1990: 23-27. and Roger Johnson, involves four- or five-member mixed- ability student teams working to complete a group prod- For the past 15 years, the Johnson brothers have uct worthy of praise and rewards. This method stresses conducted classroom-based research studies on the rela- team-building and regular group processing discussions. tive effectiveness of competitive, individualistic, and Group Investigation, a consistently successful model cooperative learning methods. Their work is part of a 90- developed by Shlomo and Yael Sharan, is a general year social psychology research tradition that has consis- classroom management plan based on cooperative in- tently found cooperative learning methods clearly supe- quiry, discussion, planning, and projects. Students form rior to traditional instructional methods. Acknowledging the methodological shortcomings of many earlier studies, the Johnsons performed a meta- analysis of studies involving randomly assigned students, About ERIC well defined control conditions, and verified implementa- The Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) is tion success. The analysis found that "students at the 50th a national information system operated by the Office of percentile of the cooperative learning situation performed Educational Research and Improvement (0ER1). The at the 81st percentile of the competitive and individualis- ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, one of tic learning situations." 16 such units in the system. was established at the When cooperative strategies containing competitive University of Oregon in 1966. and individualistic components were compared with This publication was prepared by the Clearinghouse with "purer" cooperative learning applications, the latter con- funding from OEM. U.S. Department of Education, under sistently produced higher achievement. Research has also contract no. OERI-R-188062004. No federal funds were used in the printing of this publication. shown that cooperative learning results in greater use of higher-level reasoning, more frequent generation of new ideas and solutions (process gain), and greater success on on Educational Management DEPHIC(Clearinghouse individually taken quizzes. University of Oregon, 1787 Agate St., Eugene, Oregon To discover why cooperation produces higher achieve- 97403. group learning, since the most academically able students ment, the Johnsons attempted to isolate factors affecting will do most of the work. Conceptual learning in mixed- group instruction. They found that merely grouping stu- ability and mixed-language proficiency groups can occur dents and asking them to cooperate will not be successful. only when tasks genuinely challenge students to use Such efforts can miscarry through what the Johnsons multiple abilities, such as spatial and visual problem have labeled the "free rider," "sucker," and "rich-get- solving and reasoning. richer" effects. Groups can also founder through self- reading, writing, and incorporate Assigned tasks can induced helplessness, diffusion of responsibility, social computing skills, but these skills should not be prerequi- loafing, dysfunctional labor divisions, and destructive for group participation. To help students master sites conflict, routine functions, such as calculation skills, Cohen rec- Cooperative learning proponents disagree vehemently ommends using curricular materials based on Slavin' s concerning the role of intrinsic versus extrinsic reward Student Team Learning models. systems as achievement motivators. The Johnsons and Like Slavin, Cohen emphasizes the importance of others believe that the learning task itself should be individual products that permit low achievers to practice sufficient to motivate students toward increased achieve- skills "vital for improving their achievement." Cohen' ment. Slavin is in the extrinsic reward camp, which insists (Teachers College Press. manual Designing Groupwork that students will increase their achievement only if their 1986) suggests ways to develop such materials and to efforts are reinforced by tangible rewards. Researchers prepare students. ects of limiting resources also disagree regarding the Teachers face substantial role changes and classroom (supplies, information, etc.) k. rovided to individual team management problems when delegating authority to mul- members. tiple groups of students and dealing with unequal partici- Notwithstanding the controversy over rewards and pation. Teachers must also learn to cooperate with each resources, the Johnsons conclude that cooperative learn- other for planning, problem solving, curriculum develop- ing can flourish only when students adopt a "sink-or- ment, and feedback on their performance. s wim-together" attitude and fee! personally responsible Principals can support their teachers' efforts by ar- for pursuing group goals. 11 ranging for released time, and by recognizing that coop- erative learning strategies cannot be "plugged into old Cohen, Elizabeth G. "Continuing to organizational arrangements." A principal's commitment Cooperate: Prerequisites for Persistence." to group learning will have far-reaching implications f r Phi Delta Kappan 76:2 (October 1990). curriculum, staff development, Und the organization of 134-136, 138, EJ 414 876. teaching. Stanford University's Program for Complex Instruc- Solomon, Daniel, et al. "Cooperative Learning tion, which has introduced cooperative learning to hun- as Part of a Comprehensive Classroom dreds of California elementary school classrooms, exem- Program Designed to PromJte Prosocial plifies its director's commitment to making group work a Developmfmt." In Cooperative Learning: Theory challenging and rewarding undertaking. In this program, and Research, edited by Shlomo Sharan. New small groups of children work with varied resource mate- York: Praeger, 1990: 231-260. rials on different problem-solving tasks. The program employs Edward De Avila's bilingual Cooperative learning is a major strand of the ongoing "Finding Out/Descubrimiento" program to help children Child Development Plan (CDP) that Solomon and his roles. and use each other as resources, play specific group associates have provided to children in three elementary accept responsibility for completing individual work- schools in a suburban San Francisco district since 1982. sheets. Cohen finds the program's complex instruction a The program aims to enhance children's "prosocial" promising alternative for children entering school with- development through a comprehensive, long-term pro- knowledge and out the usual "middle-class repertoire of gram supported by school policies and parental in- behaviors." volvement. Despite cooperative learning's proven track record. Assisted by CDP staff, parents, and school adminis- Cohen has mixed feelings about its growing popularity, trators, teachers have tried to create a caring milieu by since it is neither a "quick cure" nor an easily imple- encouraging helping activities, promoting social values mented strategy. She feels that group learning's survival and understanding through literature and other media, will require newly developed curriculum materials, suc- instituting a system of developmental discipline stressing cessful treatment of status problems within groups, and intrinsic motivation, and employing cooperative learning the presence of "collegial relationships and strong orga- techniques consistent with explicit social, academic, and nizational support," developmental goals. Cohen finds paper-and-pencil tasks, and traditional The CDP project has concentrated on a longitudinal materials that stress right answers, precise direc- cohort of children entering kindergarten in 1982 and has tions, and convenfional academic skills, unsuitable for ues, and that academic progress was unimpeded. Hcw- provided intensive assistance to teachers in program ever, the classroom gains of the program students did not schools. Evaluation research has closely followed extend to small-group playground interactionsa major children's progress from kindergarten through fourth disappointment for researchers. grade, both in program schools and in a comparison group According to the authors, the CDP program would of three elementary schools in the same district that did have been even more successful if teachers had been not receive the program. trained at a "whole-school" level and had been given more A broad range of student outcomes was assessed each time to learn the program before implementing it. The year through interviews, questionnaires, and observa- research team is planning to extend CDP to fifth and sixth tions. Results showed that the program positively influ- graders in the same district, and to another district serving enced students' interpersonal behavior in the classroom, predominantly working- and middle-class students. social problem solving, and concern for democratic val- L.-3 The Principals' Creed ,77. Oa Ire`ei the reasons why we chose to be principals ... our In plain English ... Of* o nano,. row. il [WI commitment to children, to educational excellence, to fairness ... and to o wow. Iwawa YE Yr. mod WNW. Os/ AN. 71 dos our country. Affirmed by NAESP and disseminated throughout the W. 1.1 Wow WNW www profession. Now available in a handsome print, featuring embossed Nalwoft *Nail Whir pd././. 611.16 .16 hrIn. - 4800 Om calligraphy, hand-set typography, and gold foil stamping on heavy woven maim. now wwwwww to wool ars 111 mod to Ye" Owli paper. Ready to be framed and displayed proudly on your office wall. mod ...owl nano VI.. 01 widow.. so. Wm.. hoWoh 4.4 WI woo. Ammon. Iwo. WI $24.95 (member discount: 25%). 1 awwwww Add $2.50 for shipping and handling. own.. ao rot wwn Ow wwwww we Oro ...I (Allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.) erre ad new... ww11 row. w Wdird Send check or purchase order to: 4. temp 41 damp co ON wwwio Own. oho *ME,. Sam. nen dm. Am. NAESP Educational Products 1 oml lookni 1615 Duke Street Alexandria, Virginia 22314 NOM So WWwW Ammon 0 1.1 0.0 IMM=IMIM $2.50; bulk orders (10 Research Roundup is published three times during the school year by the National Association of Elementary School Principals. Single copies: .... when ordering. Checks payabk to NAESP must accompany order. Send to or more): $2.00 ea. Virginia residents add 4.5% sales tax. Specify date and title of issue Educational Products. NAESP. 1615 Duke Street. Alexandria, Virginia 22314. Cooperative Learning NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS 1615 Duke Street Nonprofit Org. Alexandria, Virginia 22314 U.S. Postage PAID Research Roundup, Vol. 8. No. 2, Winter 1992 Washington. D.C. (ISSN 8755-2590) Permit #8009 5