Transcript Research Proposal Presentation - Ms. Rosa`s E

Topic: The effects of cooperative
learning groups versus individual work
on spelling test achievement in the 2nd
and 3rd grade.
By: Norma Rosa
Howard University
Fall 2008
Introduction
• Why cooperative learning and spelling
achievement?
– Saw a lack of cooperative learning activities being
provided in the classroom
– Saw that many students were struggling on spelling
tests despite the hw assigned to them each night
Review of Literature
What is cooperative learning and why is it used?
• Cooperative learning is defined as “students
working together in a group small enough that
everyone can participate on a collective task that
has been clearly assigned” (Cohen, 1994).
• In addition to boosting academic achievement,
cooperative learning groups are used in some
instances to boost motivation, improve social
skills, and increase self-efficacy (Emmer, 2002).
Literature Continued…
What is needed to make CL groups most efficient in the
classroom?
• One necessity that many of the articles agreed upon was
that teachers must instruct the students on how to
conduct themselves in a cooperative learning group and
clearly define the expectations of the assignment
(Emmer, 2002).
• Additionally, one study showed that students who were a
part of an ineffective cooperative learning group were
more likely to cite the teacher as a reason for their
ineffectiveness (Hijzen, 2007).
– The teacher’s role at this time is to monitor for understanding,
offer support when needed, and to make sure to present tasks
that are challenging and ensure critical thinking (Gillies, 2008)
Literature Continued…
Are CL groups effective with special needs and gifted
populations?
• Cooperative learning groups are advocated for use
within both regular education classrooms as well as
classrooms with special education students (Fore, 2006).
• One study stated that gifted students showed gains in
reading achievement when placed in heterogeneous
groups as well as homogeneous (Mellser, 1999).
• Contrastingly, another study showed that gifted students
actually feel better about working in homogeneous
groups because it is more stimulating and challenging
than when working with less-capable peers (Matthews,
1992).
Literature Continued…
Are CL groups effective for urban populations?
• One study done of elementary school African
American males revealed that they felt they
learned best through cooperative learning
groups with limited teacher interaction (WilsonJones, 2004).
• Another study done in Bermuda revealed that
students of color showed gains in achievement
and attitudes toward math when using CL
methods. (Vaughan, 2002).
Statement of Hypothesis
• It is hypothesized that students who complete
spelling enrichment tasks in cooperative learning
groups will improve more significantly on
spelling tests than students who work
individually.
Methodology: Participants
• Urban elementary school in Northeastern
Washington, DC.
• Majority of students in the school are of low
SES.
• Study will include one (1) combination 2nd/3rd
grade classroom
– 25 students: Twelve 2nd graders/ Thirteen 3rd graders
– All but one student is African American
Methodology: Instruments
• Spelling enrichment tasks
– Created by cooperative teacher and researcher
• Observations
– Researcher will observe interactions, behaviors,
progress, etc. of students during tasks
• End of intervention student survey
– Created by researcher to assess students’ feelings on
enrichment tasks and feelings toward working in
groups or as individuals
Methodology: Design
• Study will begin with the assignment of students to work
in either groups or individuals.
– Assignments will be made using a random table of numbers.
• To act as a basis of comparison, the average scores of
students’ previous spelling tests will be determined
before the intervention takes place.
• Students will then experience the intervention for a
period of 4 weeks. After each week, an assessment will
be administered.
• Finally, an average of these four assessments will be
determined.
• Additionally, students will complete an enrichment
activities student survey.
Pre-Study
Mean scores from
previous spelling
tests without
cooperative
groups
Treatment
4 week
intervention (4
assessments)
Individual work:
Control
Cooperative
group work:
Experimental
Assessment
Average of four
weekly spelling
tests
after the onset of
the spelling
intervention
Post-Study
Enrichment
Activities
Student Survey
Methodology: Procedure
• Both students in groups and those working as
individuals will work on the same enrichment
tasks at the same time.
– Interventions will run for 30-45 minutes once per
week for a total of four weeks.
• Throughout the week, students will continue to
complete their spelling homework.
• At the end of each week, students will be
assessed on the 20 high frequency words of the
week.
Spelling Enrichment Tasks
1.
The researcher and/or teacher will call out a word from the spelling
list and have the students locate the correct word in their flash
cards. This will allow students to use their knowledge of phonics to
identify the correct words even if they can’t quite spell them on
their own yet. The students who are in groups will have to hold up
one flash card which they have all agreed is correct whereas the
individuals will have to choose on their own.
2.
Students will create flash cards of each word in their spelling list.
Students in the groups will quiz each other using the flash cards
and work together to memorize the correct spelling. As for the
individuals, they will do the same only by themselves.
3.
Students will be asked to identify the number of letters in each
word and then break that into the number of vowels and
consonants in each word.
Methodology: Data Analysis
• The statistical method that will be used to
compare the previous test scores with the posttreatment scores will be an analysis of
covariance (ANCOVA).
• Additionally, survey results will be reported
according to the major themes presented in
them.
Methodology: Time Schedule
• The study will begin during the second week of
my student teaching which is tentatively
scheduled for January 2009.
• The intervention will last four weeks and analysis
of the data will be completed promptly after.
Final results will be reported within 6-8 weeks of
the start of the study.
References
•
Cohen, E. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.
Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
•
Emmer, E., & Gerwels, M. (2002). Cooperative learning in elementary classrooms:
Teaching practices and lesson characteristics. Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 75-91.
•
Fore, I., Riser, S., & Boon, R. (2006). Implications of cooperative learning and educational
reform for students with mild disabilities. Reading Improvement, 43(1), 3-12.
•
Gillies, R. M., and Boyle, M. (2008). Teachers' discourse cooperative learning and their
perceptions of this pedagogical practice. Teaching and teacher education, 24, 1333-1348.
•
Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., and Vedderm P. (2007). Exploring the links between students'
engagement in cooperative learning, their goal preferences and appraisals of instructional
conditions in the classroom.
Learning and instruction, 17, 673-687.
Ref. Cont.
•
Matthews, M. (1992). Gifted students talk about cooperative learning. Educational
Leadership, 50(2), 48-50.
•
Melser, N. (1999). Gifted students and cooperative learning: A study of grouping strategies.
Roeper Review, 21(4), 315.
•
Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology. New York: Routledge.
•
Slavin, Robert. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we
know, what we need to know. Contemporary educational psychology, 21, 43-69.
•
Stevens, R. & Slavin, R. (1995). The cooperative elementary school: Effects on students’
achievement, attitudes, and social relationships. American Educational Research Journal,
32(2), 321-351.
Ref. Cont.
•
Vaughan, W. (2002). Effects of Cooperative Learning on Achievement and Attitude Among
Students of Color. Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 359.
•
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the
development of children. New York: Scientific American Books.
•
Wilson-Jones, L., & Caston, M. (2004, December). Cooperative Learning on Academic
Achievement in Elementary African American Males. Journal of Instructional Psychology,
31(4), 280-283.