🌳Цифровой садик

Search

SearchSearch

Four Main Models of Cooperative Learning Examined

Dec 21, 20244 min read

Four Main Models of Cooperative Learning Examined

  • I don’t like giving marks to children based on their individual performance.
    • In my opinion, marks are generally useless. However, on the other hand, I need to introduce another incentive that challenges students to participate in the lesson and communicate with others.
    • The cooperative learning model is one of the few tools that allow for this.
    • The reward structure actually reduces performance by weakening the connection between the outcome of the activity and the activity itself. Yet, at the same time, this model increases performance due to interpersonal rewards, such as behavior and norms of the group that favor a shared pool of ideas and skills. This opens up the possibility of delivering the greatest possible result, using the unique strengths of each individual and compensating for weaknesses.
    • The help among group members is absolutely crucial in achieving the goal.
  • Individuality is not important; the general result of the group is what plays a crucial role and allows for the best possible interaction. There is a catch: not everyone in the group is willing to share their expertise, which also needs to be taken into account and adjusted.
  • The bulk of research focuses on four main techniques:
    • Teams-Games-Tournaments.
      • 4 to 5 students in a group.
      • Instructional tournament. Teams are given worksheets with academic material.
        • Members of the team prepare each other, quiz, and try.
        • After that, teams must demonstrate their prowess in the tournament that is usually held once a week.
          • Interesting, can I organize anything inside a 45-minute lesson?
        • Out of 5 members, only three members are allowed to participate in the competition.
        • After it’s finished, the teacher compiles a newsletter where strengths and areas of growth are highlighted and delivered in the form of feedback.
    • Team-Achievement Divisions.
      • Boring, in my opinion. The same 4 to 5 member groups, but instead of the tournament, students solve quizzes, and the results are compared to the top performers.
        • As far as I can understand, the procedure is called “achievement divisions”.
        • I don’t get the exact procedure, especially a part with bumping.
    • Jigsaw. ^dfb113
      • The groups get material that is broken into pieces. E.g., if a biography is given to the group, it’s broken into early years, late years, career, schooling, first accomplishments, and so forth.
      • Students study respective parts that they were assigned.
      • I would change the tact of the work. I would give different groups different parts with the need to conduct additional research, and after the job is done, organize peer-to-peer learning.
      • Each group delivers their aspects to the topic in a representative manner, which later is transferred onto the board.
      • There is Jigsaw 2.0, where students read the same material but focus on different elements.
        • After that, students rotate and students who have the same topic meet each other and reciprocally teach each other, then return to their groups and share insights.
    • Small-group teaching.
      • Learning happens through inquiry, discussion, and data gathering.
      • Students pick a subtopic in the general topic defined by the teacher.
        • E.g., For the topic of time management, subtopics could be procrastination, to-do management, tool selection, habits, etc.
        • For reading, it might be pre-text stage, text stage which has multiple subtopics itself, and post-stage, from this we can get ourselves into strategies and many other things.
        • Basically, as far as I can see, it could be the groundwork for a civic science project that I have in mind.
      • The moment the subtopic is picked, students split even more, taking roles.
        • Researcher: provides preliminary research work, then passes material for further investigations to…
        • Reader: whose job is to find nuggets of crucial information that covers the subtopic.
        • Presenter: someone who compiles materials and readies a presentation.
        • I think it’s too much work; maybe we can split the process into three stages, where each role is acted at a particular time.
          • Like the first 20 minutes of research followed by 20 minutes of discussion.
          • Darn. The whole process will take hours and hours if conducted in one go.

BIO

Keywords:

Related:

Reference:

Graph View

Backlinks