INDIVIDUAL VERSUS CO-OPERATIVE LEARNING
Abstract
Co-operative learning is in lay man’s language referred to
as group work. This is a method of study in which students are allowed to work
as members of teams or groups so as to come up with collaborative responses to
classroom tasks. Individual learning on the other hand, refers to the
educational process in which every learner is expected to perform their
educational tasks singly with guidance from their tutors where necessary. In
the process of learning co-operatively, learners are expected to air their
perspectives and mindsets as well as listen and respond to those of the other
learners in their groups. Marcus (2009) asserts that the difference between
co-operative learning and group work is evidenced in the manner in which the
learners are located into groups, the division of responsibilities to each
group member, the illumination of both personal and group responsibility and
the set objectives that the academic task is expected to attain.
This essay is a classroom-based investigative analysis
whose purpose is to disambiguate which learning practice is most effective in
enhancing the learning of learners; whether the individual learning practice or
learning in groups. After an introduction of the essay’s subject matter-
individual versus co-operative learning- there will follow a critical
literature review of writings and deliberations on the same topic from credible
sources. This will be followed by a description of research investigations
conducted in the classroom context and the outcome of the studies will be
discussed to assess its implications for the contemporary educationists. At the
end of the essay a summative conclusion of the main points will be drafted
followed by a bibliography of the texts cited in the essay.
In the modern day there has occurred an increased interest
in the accessibility of learners to quality education. Despite the fact that it
is not an easy feat to identify and effectively apply dynamics of quality
learning, scientific research over the years has ascertained that one of the
most significant issues that educationists need to appreciate is the fact that
there are many discrepancies that exist between learners and their ability to
learn. Despite the fact that student learning differences emanate from a
variety of factors, the educationist is vested with the responsibility of
identifying and applying effective teach and learning mechanisms that will
allow all different learners in a classroom to benefit from the education
process. The science and mathematics subjects, for example, are very
fundamental subjects in the life of learners in the contemporary day. Their
significance is even more pronounced due to the fact that technology and
scientific research, which requires proficiency in mathematics and scientific
subjects, has been accorded more preeminence that it has for centuries.
As a consequence, it
is the responsibility of educationists to apply the best possible learning
strategies to ensure that learners understand the subjects as accurately as
possible so that they can portray the desirable outcomes, not only in their
educational course work but also in the outside world after school. The
students’ comprehension of these subjects is determined to a high degree by the
teaching and learning procedures that are utilized by educationalists. The
modern day educationalists are constantly assessing and reanalyzing their
teaching methodologies so as to make sure that they are effective enough in the
transmission of relevant knowledge to the learners, and in a manner that they
can easily comprehend.
Despite the fact that learners may find it very complex to
apply effective strategies when it comes to learning in groups, it is important
for educationists to determine accurately which method of pedagogy has is the
most beneficial in producing the required outcome from the learning process. In
the determination of which learning practice is best suited to produce the
required learning outcomes, two methods were used. In the first instance, half
of the learners in a mathematics class were authorized to work singly in the
accomplishment of their classroom tasks while the other half was authorized to
engage in team or group discussions in the accomplishment of the same classroom
task. After the exercise, the performances of the learners in subsequent test
outcomes were investigated. The second investigation was conducted to ascertain
whether or not there are any empirical differences in learning outcomes between
the leaner who learn individually and those that utilize ability groups in the
co-operative learning process.
According to Lavel (2009) co-operative learning refers to
the procedures of learning in which learners are divided into small teams so
that they can support each other in the collaborative accomplishment of
classroom tasks rather that working singly and in competition. Despite the fact
the in the modern educational sector co-operative learning has gained a lot of
importance, many pedagogists are faced with the predicament of which the best learner
grouping strategies are. Placement predictors in a mathematics class are very
important. More often than not, ability grouping, especially in mathematics and
science classes, has had very successful results, both for the learners and
their educationists. Marcus (2009) asserts that the difference between
co-operative learning and group work is evidenced in the manner in which the
learners are located into groups, the division of responsibilities to each
group member, the illumination of both personal and group responsibility and
the set objectives that the academic task is expected to attain.
There are a variety of techniques that can be applied in
the procedures of learner grouping in classroom learning. The learners can be
placed in homogeneous or heterogeneous groups. According to Robinson (2009), the
homogeneous groups are those in which students of the same learning
capabilities are categorized together. This kind of grouping,
also commonly referred to as ‘tracking’,
has been in application in the educational facilities of the US for a very long
time. The heterogeneous ability learning groups are more frequently applied
than the homogeneous learning ability groups due to the fact that the latter is
perceived as propagating divisions amongst the students as a consequence of
their cognitive, societal and financial status.
Educationists are perceived as preferring homogeneous
groups to the heterogeneous ones due to the fact that these groups allow for
the tutors to assist the slow low ability learners which the high ability
student proceed at their own speed. Nevertheless,
Bryson (2007) asserts that this technique of grouping learners does not benefit
them much. The heterogeneous kind of grouping, on the other hand, is that in
which the students of divergent learning abilities and aptitudes are grouped together.
Critics of the homogenous learning ability groups argue that this kind of
grouping is more detrimental than beneficial to the learning process since it
encourages a culture of academic tracking in which the learners, specifically
the low ability ones, feel marginalized and disgraced die to their inability to
learn as fast or grasp academic concepts as easily. Singer (2007) asserts that
in such instances, learners placed in the low ability groups feel as if they
are branded as stupid and rather than work hard to improve their academic
performance, they withdraw into self created cocoons and become uncooperative
in terms of participation and involvement in classroom activities. On the other
hand, the learners in the high ability learning groups may cultivate the vice
of arrogance and superiority complex which cause them to look down upon their
classmates in the low ability learning group.
According to Slavin (1995) there are a variety of benefits
that learners stand to enjoy when they are allowed to study in co-operative
groups rather than individually. There is empirical proof that the application
of co-operative techniques in learning has a lot of benefits for the students
of differing learning abilities. In addition to this, the ability groups in co-operative
learning allow the low ability learners, who usually feel intimidated by the
high ability learners in normal classroom situations, a forum in which they can
learn at their own pace and participate fully in the learning process. While
students may find some learning tasks very easy to comprehend and comfortably
work them out on their own, the more complex classroom tasks in subjects such
as literature, sciences and mathematics require that the learners be grouped
into teams where they can learn from each other and share their divergent views
and methodologies. As a matter of fact, Bryson (2007) asserts that it is not
uncommon for learners to understand educational concepts better when they are
explained to them by their peers rather than when described by their tutors in
the classroom situation.
Robinson (2009) mentions another benefit of co-operative
learning as being the role played by the motivational theory in ability groups.
According to this theory, the ability learning groups are motivated by the
desire to successfully accomplish group goals as well as the rewards and
incentives expected in the event that one group outshines the other in the
accomplishment of particular classroom tasks. Due to the fact that a group
cannot perform exemplarily without the individual group members first being
successful, co-operative learning is perceived as increasing the academic
achievement, self confidence and esteem of the individual learners. As a
corollary, educationists have the duty to motivate the learners by presenting
them with both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards so as to elicit more creativity
and enthusiasm towards learning from the students. In addition to this, for the
group work or co-operative learning units to bear the desired results the
educationists ought to design the classroom tasks in such a manner that they
are suitable to the different learning abilities of the students; such
classroom tasks should be neither too complex since they will demoralize the
learners, nor too simple as the learners will lack the challenge they need to
exert themselves into the achievement of educational objectives.
Singer (2009) asserts that the co-operative technique of
learning is advantageous to the learners since it allows for the processes of
developmental perspective as described by Vygotsky and Piaget. This theory
implies that, provided that the learners in a learning group are in a similar
or closely related level of proximal development, the student get more from the
educational process as a result of engaging in interactive learning processes
with each other.
On
the other hand, there are scholars and academicians who feel that it is
irrelevant whether the learners are left to learn individually or grouped into
co-operative learning units. In fact, the co-operative method of learning is
perceived as having some inherent disadvantages for the learners. Bryson (2007)
claims that studies conducted over the years depict very little if any,
improvements in the quality of education and attainment of set educational
objectives by the learners whether they are grouped into heterogeneous of
homogeneous groups. On the contrary, rather than attribute positive changes to student
grouping, any transformation in learner educational accomplishments and
depiction of the desired educational outcome is perceived as being dependent on
the alterations that are conducted on educational curriculum and teaching
methodologies. There are several hindrances that are quoted as being
impediments to the successfully application of co-operative learning
techniques. Firstly, the co-operative technique of learning requires for the
students in a group to air their views, mindsets and perspectives on the
academic task at hand as well as listen and respond to those of the other
students in the group. This process is perceived as consuming a lot of learning
time which could have been used to move forward with the subject course
outline. Since the process necessitates for an active oral and auditory
engagement by all the group members, learners who are introverted or soft
spoken may be disadvantaged and their contributions overlooked.
According to Robinson (2009), the another detractor in the
application of co-operative learning techniques is the fact that this form of
learning, as evidenced in the student grouping according to ability, seems to
illuminate and accentuate the existent social inequalities amongst the
different learners; as a consequence, ranks are formed amongst the learners and
this may cause the cultivation of superiority complexes among the high
achievers and inferiority complexes in the low achiever; this tends to be more
pronounced when the co-operative learning techniques are applied by the
utilization of homogeneous learner groups. In addition to this, if not duly
supervised the learners working in co-operative groups may lose focus and
deviate from the learning objectives of the groups by engaging in social or
non-curricular deliberations instead of the relevant educational content.
Educationists can easily resolve this detractor by
conducting constant assessments of the groups and readjusting the group
members. The learners who portray praiseworthy improvements can be moved to
groups of higher learning abilities. Learners of high abilities who do not take
the groups seriously or those that do not exert their full potential in the
performance of classroom tasks in the group may be transferred to groups with a
higher number of low ability learners. Despite the fact that co-operative
learning has been affirmed as being very time consuming when compared to
individual learning, students involved in such learning processes tend to gain
more from the educational process than the learners who study individually.
In the determination of which learning practice was the
most effective in producing the desired learning outcomes, Bryson (2007)
conducted a study in which half of the learners in a mathematics class were
authorized to conduct their classroom
tasks individually while the other half was allowed to consult with each other
and perform the tasks as a group. In order to ascertain whether indeed there
were differences in the conceptualization of educational matter depending on
whether a learner accomplished classroom tasks individually or as a member of a
group, it was necessary to compare the performance of the two groups of
learners through a thorough analysis of their personal or group scores in both
the pre and pro-tests. Despite the fact that the result of this first study did
not reveal any significant differences between the academic accomplishments of
the students working individually or those working in groups, Bryson (2007)
concluded that the learners who worked solo were more predisposed to acquire
better grades than those in a group; this is because students working
individually took time to describe and explain their answers and formulae in
greater detail than the learners in the groups.
According to Robinson (2009), another study was conducted to investigate
the differences in student academic achievement between learners who learnt
individually and those that were involved in co-operative learning processes.
The study was conducted fifty one times on post-secondary first graders in
mathematics and reading classes. In the study, both the homogeneous and
heterogeneous groups were investigated. The results of the research indicated
that the learners involved in co-operative learning processes tend to benefit
more from the educational opportunities than did the learners who learnt
individually; another discovery made by this research was that the students of
low learning abilities benefitted more from co-operative learning than did the
average and high academic performers.
The implications of these research findings necessitate
that in their application of co-operative learning techniques, whether in homo
or heterogeneous learning groups, educationists need to enhance the
effectiveness of the process by adjusting the teaching and learning regulations
so that they are adaptive to the diverse educational needs of the students. As
stated by Bryson (2007), future research on the efficacy of co-operative
learning as contrasted with individual learning in the improvement of scholarly
performance ought to include the contribution of other factors of co-operative
learning such as the associations between students in a group, the expected
rewards on accomplishment of group task as well as different academic abilities
of the students in any learning group.
In conclusion, the modern times have witnessed an increased
interest in the accessibility of learners to quality education. Despite the
fact that it is not an easy feat to identify and effectively apply dynamics of
quality learning, scientific research over the years has ascertained that one
of the most significant issues that educationists need to appreciate is the
fact that there are many discrepancies that exist between learners and their
ability to learn. There are indeed a variety of benefits that have been
illuminated as emanating from the educational process of co-operative learning
rather than individual learning. The ability groups in co-operative learning
processes bring together a variety of dynamics that are very important in the
learning process. These include the encouragement of participation by all students
in the learning activities due to the fact that learning groups are less
intimidating than whole class scenarios; the utilization suitable teaching and
learning methodologies by educationists, according to the levels of the
students, so as to make sure that all learners benefit as much as possible from
the learning process and the presentation of a forum in which the associations
between teachers and their students are amplified.
As opposed to individual learning, co-operative learning
processes encourage a positive interdependence between the learners, face to
face interactions as well as an opportunity for the students to practice their
interpersonal skills. These are very invaluable features in any learning
environment and they enhance the chances of learners benefiting from the
educational opportunities that they are presented with.
Bibliography
Bryson, E. J. (2007): ‘Effectiveness of Working Individually Versus
Cooperative Groups:
A Classroom-Based Research Project’ Masters in Science
Education Program, University of Pennsylvania
Lavelle, D.
(2009): ‘Heterogeneous and Homogeneous Grouping: The Debate Continues’
Marcus,
R. (2009): ‘Observations on Cooperative-Learning Group Assignments’ Department
of
Philosophy, Hamilton College
Robinson,
J. P. (2009): ‘Essays on the Effectiveness of Policies and Practices for
Reducing
Cognitive Gaps between Linguistic Groups and Socioeconomic Groups’
ProQuest
Schullery, N. M. and Stephen E. S. (2006): ‘Are Heterogeneous or
Homogeneous Groups More
Beneficial to Students?’ Journal of Management Education
30.4: 542-556
Singer,
A.J. (2009): ‘Social Studies for Secondary Schools’ (3rd Ed) New
York, NY:
Routledge Group
Slavin, R.E. (1995): ‘Research on Cooperative Learning And Achievement:
What We Know,
What We Need To
Know’ Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk
