Recent Dissertations Related to Cooperative Learning

Cruz, H. T. (2002). The effects of multimedia cooperative learning instructional materials on teacher use and student satisfaction with cooperative learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.

 This field study project determined the impact of utilizing Multimedia Cooperative Learning Instructional Materials (MCLIM) in the teacher training process. Teacher use of cooperative learning strategies and student satisfaction with cooperative learning experiences were investigated. The following research questions were the focus of this study: (1) Does the use of MCLIM in the teacher training process enhance the use of cooperative learning in post-secondary vocational classrooms? (2) Does the use of MCLIM in the teacher training process reduce teachers' level of concern with using cooperative learning strategies in the classroom? (3) Does the use of MCLIM in the teacher training process, and by teachers using cooperative learning strategies, result in higher student satisfaction levels with the cooperative learning instruction they receive? The significance of this study is the translation of theoretical concepts and framework related to cooperative learning into daily practice facilitating group learning in vocational classrooms. This study tested the value of instructional materials that were developed as a direct result of knowledge gained in the researcher's doctoral program and through professional use of cooperating learning of the researcher. The methodology for this study consisted of quantitative research methods. Its primary design was quasi-experimental. This design was used because of the researcher's lack of complete control over the variables in the study. The best design for this study would have been experimental design. A pretest-posttest control group design was used because of the nature of the study. An analysis of covariance in which the posttest means are compared using pretest scores as a covariant were used as a method of controlling pre test bias. Both groups were pre and post tested using the Stages of Concern questionnaire and Levels of Use questionnaire. The Classroom Life Measures was given to the students in focus classes. In an effort to answer the research questions posed by this study, the researcher taught two one-credit (10 hour) seminars on cooperative learning at Milwaukee Area Technical College (MATC) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Thirty vocational educators from the site and a nearby technical college were recruited to participate in the seminars. They self-selected into a control and experimental group. The control group received the traditional method of instruction without MCLIM, and the experimental group was instructed with the use of MCLIM.

 Gilliam, J. H. (2002). The impact of cooperative learning and course learning environment factors on learning outcomes and overall excellence in the community college classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University.

 This quantitative study explored the impact of the cooperative learning instructional method on 12 course learning environment factors, learning outcomes, and overall excellence of instruction and courses in a small rural comprehensive community college. This study also investigated the relationship of the 12 course learning environment factors on learning outcomes and overall excellence of instruction and courses. The IDEA Center student rating form (IDEA Center, 1998b) was used to measure these variables. The Questionnaire on the Use of Cooperative Learning (Cooperative Learning Center, 1991) was used to identify courses integrating cooperative learning and those not integrating cooperative learning for comparison on several variables. All students enrolled in courses in regular schedule academic credit courses were used in the study. Over 3000 student ratings were collected for analysis. A quasi-experimental representative design proposed that an experimental group (students in courses taught cooperatively) and a comparison group (students in courses not taught cooperatively) be compared on course learning environment factors, learning outcomes and overall excellence of instruction and courses. Students in courses taught cooperatively rated the course and instruction significantly higher than in courses not taught cooperatively on 10 of 12 course learning environment factors and learning outcomes. The impact of cooperative learning on the overall excellence of instruction and courses was also statistically significant but marginal. The findings of the impact of course learning environment factors on learning outcomes and overall excellence of instruction and courses were very significant. Correlation and multiple regression statistical procedures were used to analyze the data. This study was significant not only because of the depth and scope of the study on cooperative learning in a community college, but also because of the investigation of how course learning environment factors impacted student ratings of learning outcomes and the overall excellence of instruction and courses.

 Gwynn Paquette, C. (2002). Construction of competency with cooperative learning by pre-service teachers as observed in supervisory conversations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universite de Sherbrooke.

 In this qualitative study, using a socio-constructivist framework, I explored an aspect of learning to teach, describing the process by which a group of pre-service teachers construct their understanding of and develop ease with an unfamiliar teaching approach during student teaching. The research design included elements of ethnographic study in that the study involved prolonged contact with the participants. In addition I took a heuristic outlook in that as researcher/supervisor, I also participated actively in the process of learning and in the analysis of what occurred. I both acted as informant about the new teaching approach as well as coach for planning and for activity adjustment after in-class observation. As a result, I was able to highlight those elements of the learning environment and the mechanisms and relationships which contribute to or hinder the learning process. The cooperative learning approach was selected for the study since it seemed to provide an opportunity for varied activities which would respond to different student needs, it is recommended in present School Reform documents and it is not widely used in the high schools in the study area. The participants in the study had to build their knowledge of the approach from scratch for they had not been exposed to cooperative learning during their high school years and their university program barely touched on it. Nonetheless, the participants were able to develop their competence with the approach by using support and ideas from many sources: Their students proved to be the touchstone for their persistence with cooperative learning. Supervisory conversations were occasions for construction of knowledge, for shared reflection and for solution finding. Peers modelled successful activities, shared ideas and problem solved together. The cooperating teachers provided knowledge of their students and management suggestions. Thus the construction process was mastered by the learner who called upon all available resources to help him build his understanding and bolster his endeavours.

Knight-Giuliani, L. F. (2002). The benefits of student-student interaction among adult students in the English as a second language classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey.

 Much of the literature on classroom interaction in the adult English as a Second Language (ESL) classroom has focused on the teacher-student relationship and, specifically, on how the teacher can promote learning. Although studies of teacher designed cooperative learning groups have shown that learning occurs when students work together in small groups, there are few studies that have looked at student-initiated student-student interactions that are not structured by the teacher. In focusing on the student-initiated student-student interactions that occurred in two university-level ESL classrooms, and the helping behaviors they represented, this study began to address the gap in the second language learning literature. To investigate the student-initiated helping behaviors that occurred in the two ESL classrooms observed, the researcher used an ethnographic approach, observing both classes as a passive observer. Any interactions among students that were not governed by the teacher and appeared to represent helping behaviors were noted and later analyzed. In addition, both informal and formal interviews were conducted with those students who volunteered. Three kinds of helping behaviors used among the students in both classes were identified in the field notes. In the analysis stage, these categories were described and labeled as language helping behaviors, cultural helping behaviors, and general helping behaviors. For each kind of behavior, examples of student dialogues and vignettes were presented. Using the data obtained from the informal and formal interviews, it was hypothesized that student learning did result from student-initiated student-student interactions that contained helping behaviors. However, learning could not be proven to have occurred and was hypothesized to have occurred based on the students' own interpretations of their helping interactions. As a result, the main contribution of this study was in providing a set of categorizations of the helping behaviors that adult ESL students use to help each other while they are in class. In conclusion, by provoking thinking, this study offers innovative suggestions for ESL teachers who wish to promote positive student-student interactions in their own classrooms. In addition, this study has provided a foundation on which to base future research on student-initiated student-student interactions.

 Sadler, K. C. (2002). The effectiveness of cooperative learning as an instructional strategy to increase biological literacy and academic achievement in a large, non-majors college biology class. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tennessee State University.

 Cooperative learning may be defined as an active learning strategy in which students work together to create their knowledge interdependently to maximize their own and each other's learning (Aronson, Blaney, Stephens, Sikes, & Snapp, 1978; Johnson & Johnson, 1978; Kagan, 1988; Sharan & Sharan, 1976; Slavin, 1977). Six non-majors biology lecture classes (N = 349) at a moderate sized southern university in the Fall 2002 semester participated in the study. One lecture class integrated daily cooperative group learning strategies throughout the semester; the other five classes were a continuum of direct lecture instructional practices. The data collected to ascertain biological literacy was obtained using the Biology Self-Efficacy Scale (BSES) and the Texas high school Biology-End-of-Course Exam (BECE, Spring 2001) administered in a pre- and posttest design. The data on student achievement was determined by the final course grade as reported by the lecture instructor. Differential means were analyzed with a One-Way ANOVA. Comparing the cooperative with the direct lecture classes, there was a significant difference between the differential means of BSES Factor 3, application of biological concepts and BECE overall knowledge. There was no significant difference between BSES Factor 1, methods of biology, and Factor 2, generalization to other sciences or BECE process and content questions. There was no significant difference in academic achievement. Although the cooperative lecture class reported greater confidence in applying biology to other areas and overall biology knowledge, this study's results were not consistent with primary through postsecondary research related to cooperative learning, biological literacy, and academic achievement.

 Wicklund, D. M. (2002). Individual learning versus cooperative learning in a university spreadsheet applications class. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.

 This study investigated whether individual learners or cooperative learners perform more effectively and efficiently in a university spreadsheet applications class. Even though there is documented evidence that cooperative learning may produce positive results across a wide range of students and curriculums, there is little research documenting cooperative learning at the college level (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991b). Further, there was no research documenting cooperative learning with spreadsheet applications with university or college students. The major questions the study sought to answer were four research hypotheses: (1) there is a difference in individual learners and cooperative learners performances, (2) there is a difference in the teacher assistance time required for individual learners and cooperative learners, (3) there is a difference in the computer time required to complete assignments for individual learners and cooperative learners, and (4) there is a difference in the documentation study time used by individual learners and cooperative learners. This study used a design that compared the posttest and self-reported data of an experimental group, which used a cooperative learning method to learn spreadsheet applications, with the data for the control group, which used an individualized method to learn spreadsheet applications. The treatment was randomly assigned to intact classes. The SAM test was used for the performance measurement. There was significant difference between the experimental section and the control section for student time spent on the computer completing assignments. The cooperative group of students spent less time on the computer. The results of this study suggest one can expect a cooperative learning approach will reduce students’ time on the computer compared to traditional individual focused classes. This is consistent with Olivas' (1991) results.