Student Interactions With One Another Chapter 7—Good & Brophy

1. Student Interactions With One AnotherChapter 7—Good & Brophy Summary by: Matt Dean

2. Issues Concerned with Educational Equity • Primary motive behind desegregation and mainstreaming. • Desegregation—hope is to reduce differences in achievement across racial lines and to produce racial tolerance and harmony. • Within class grouping tends to resegregate students. • Cooperative learning approaches have been shown to improve racial attitudes and behavior (Slavin).

3. Equity • Inclusion • Public Law 94-142—least restrictive environment & IEPs. • Research shows that the same methods that are effective with normal students are also effective with “special” students. (Crawford)

4. Tracking • Grouping by ability—more common in elementary schools. • Grouping by curriculum—more common in high schools—usually known as tracking. • Research has shown that its effects on achievement are mixed and weak (Gamoran, Kulick & Kulick, Mosteller, Light, & Sachs, Oakes, Slavin) • Low tracks often become the dumping grounds for low achievers.

5. Tracking • Negative Effects • Social labeling, teacher attitude, and expectation effects (Gamoran, Oakes, Page) • Teachers spend less time preparing for low track classes, & introduce less content. Instruction tends to focus on rote memorization and oral recitation. • Undesirable peer structures are created in low-track classes • There is often a lack of student academic leaders in low track classes. Many students in these classes tend to be behavior problems. • Assignment to tracks tends to be permanent. • Minimizes contact between students of differing achievement levels. • Minimizes contact between students of different social classes, races, and ethnicities. (Gamoran)

6. Tracking • Research suggests that tracking offers little or no advantage as a way to increase student achievement and that it has several important negative effects on social outcomes. • Should be delayed as long as possible; limited to subjects where differences in skills are clear detriments to whole class instruction • Others have recommended that teachers should be rotated between tracks and that incentives should be given to encourage students to move to higher tracks. • Joplin plan may be used if some homogenous grouping is needed.

7. Action Research on Tracking Students who do not prefer tracked classes. N=29 N=121 Students who prefer tracking. Pie chart imported from SPSS software.

8. Within-Class Ability Grouping • Used very often in reading and math instruction in elementary grades. • Studies show that the effect size for such grouping is near zero. • Criticisms are similar to those against tracking. • Good and Brophy Guidelines for grouping: • Grouping should lead to more effective instruction; group assignments should be flexible; group scheduling and instructional practices should be flexible; limit the degree to which group membership determines students’ other school experiences; extra instruction should be provided to low ability groups.

9. Review of Original Research on Within Class Ability Grouping • Weinstein (1975)—Explored the effects of within class ability grouping techniques in reading. • Found that teachers treat members of different reading groups differentially and that such grouping tends to widen the achievement gaps between groups.

10. Cooperative Learning • Promotes social construction of knowledge. • Can be used for many instructional purposes. • The Learning Together Model of Cooperative Learning (Johnson & Johnson) • Suggested elements • Positive interdependence • Face to Face student interaction • Individual accountability • Instruction in appropriate interpersonal and small group skills.

11. Cooperative Learning • Other forms • Jigsaw approach (Aronson) • Teams-Games-Tournaments (Devries & Slavin) • Student Teams—Achievement Divisions (STAD) (Slavin) • Jigsaw II (Slavin) • Think/Pair Share • Controlled Conflict and Controversy in Small Groups (Johnson & Johnson)

12. Cooperative Learning • Research Findings • Effects on achievement appear to be related to specific group reward structures (Slavin) • Individual accountability requirements increase achievement (Slavin) • Promotes friendships, and prosocial interactions among students who differ in achievement, gender, race, and/or ethnicity.

13. Cooperative Learning • Additional Research Findings • Giving explanations to other students is positively correlated with achievement (Graesser & Person) • Quality of interaction can be enhanced through training (Good & Brophy) • Some student combinations work better than others.

14. Possible Disadvantages of Cooperative Learning Techniques • Misconceptions are reinforced. • Students become dependent on their peers. • Focus is more on the product than the process. • Students value group processes more than academic learning. • Students receive differential attention and status. • Some students believe they are not able to contribute. • Some students may learn that they do not need to contribute. • Group accountability may mediate failure-avoiding and success-enhancing behavior.

15. Original Research on Cooperative Learning • Lou, Spence, Poulson, Chambers, d’Apollonia (1996)—Conducted a meta-analysis of recent research on cooperative learning. • From a set of 145 effect sizes, found that the average achievement effect size was .17, favoring small-group learning. • From a set of 20 effect sizes which compared heterogeneous and homogenous grouping techniques, the effect size was .12, in favor of homogenous grouping.

16. Original Research on Cooperative Learning • Allen (1991)—Conducted a meta-analysis of research on Ability grouping. Conclusions included: • Gifted students show positive academic effects from some forms of homogenous grouping. • Average and low ability students may also benefit. • Evidence does not support the contention that tracking harms academic achievement. • Student attitudes are improved by grouping in certain subjects. • It is unclear whether grouping has any effect on self-esteem of students in the general population.

17. Original Research on Cooperative Learning • Johnson & Johnson (1985)—Research the use of cooperative learning techniques for the study of controversial topics. • Found that this condition led to increased verbal rehearsal and exchange of assigned materials. Also found that controversy promotes an active search for additional information and greater attitudinal changes.

18. Student Tutoring • Cross age tutoring has been shown to improve both student achievement and attitudes (Cohen; Kulik & Kulik) • Has also been shown to have positive effects on the tutor. • 5th and 6th grade tutors have been shown to be as effective as college age tutors (for elementary students) (Thomas) • Peer tutoring