Souvignier Elmar, Kronenberger Julia
University of Frankfurt/M., Institute of Educational Psychology, Senckenberganlage 15, D-60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Br J Educ Psychol. 2007 Dec;77(Pt 4):755-71. doi: 10.1348/000709906X173297.
There is much support for using cooperative methods, since important instructional aspects, such as elaboration of new information, can easily be realized by methods like 'jigsaw'. However, the impact of providing students with additional help like a questioning training and potential limitations of the method concerning the (minimum) age of the students have rarely been investigated.
The study investigated the effects of cooperative methods at elementary school level. Three conditions of instruction were compared: jigsaw, jigsaw with a supplementary questioning training and teacher-guided instruction.
Nine third grade classes from three schools with 208 students participated in the study. In each school, all the three instructional conditions were realized in three different classes.
All classes studied three units on geometry and one unit on astronomy using the assigned instructional method. Each learning unit comprised six lessons. For each unit, an achievement test was administered as pre-test, post-test and delayed test.
In the math units, no differences between the three conditions could be detected. In the astronomy unit, students benefited more from teacher-guided instruction. Differential analyses revealed that 'experts' learned more than students in teacher-guided instruction, whereas 'novices' were outperformed by the students in the control classes.
Even third graders used the jigsaw method with satisfactory learning results. The modest impact of the questioning training and the low learning gains of the cooperative classes in the astronomy unit as well as high discrepancies between learning outcomes of experts and novices show that explicit instruction of explaining skills in combination with well-structured material are key issues in using the jigsaw method with younger students.
使用合作学习方法有诸多支持依据,因为重要的教学环节,比如新信息的阐述,通过像“拼图法”这样的方法能够轻易实现。然而,为学生提供诸如提问训练等额外帮助的影响以及该方法在学生(最低)年龄方面的潜在局限性却鲜有研究。
本研究调查了小学阶段合作学习方法的效果。比较了三种教学条件:拼图法、附带提问训练的拼图法以及教师指导教学法。
来自三所学校的九个三年级班级共208名学生参与了研究。在每所学校,三种教学条件在三个不同班级中实施。
所有班级使用指定的教学方法学习三个几何单元和一个天文单元。每个学习单元包含六节课。对于每个单元,分别进行前测、后测和延迟测试。
在数学单元中,未检测到三种教学条件之间存在差异。在天文单元中,学生从教师指导教学中受益更多。差异分析表明,“专家”组比教师指导教学组的学生学得更多,而“新手”组的表现不如对照组的学生。
即使是三年级学生使用拼图法也能取得令人满意的学习效果。提问训练的影响不大,合作学习班级在天文单元的学习收获较低,以及专家和新手学习成果之间的巨大差异表明,结合结构良好的材料对解释技能进行明确教学是对年幼学生使用拼图法的关键问题。