As part of the instructions, students were encouraged to discuss "why" they thought as they did regarding solutions to the problems.
The pretest and posttest were not parallel forms of the same test. Also, majority of the research in collaborative learning has been done in non-technical disciplines.
Hence, it was concluded that pretest differences among treatment groups were not significant. Fifty percent of the test grade was based on how that particular group performed on the test.
Forty- five participants reported that they had no formal education or work experience in dc circuits either in high school or in college. Initially, the author delivered a common lecture to both treatment groups.
Google Scholar Kollar, I. When designing the critical- thinking items it was ensured that they would require extensive thinking.
Next, the collaborative learning structure was explained to the students.
It began with factual questions asking for the units of electrical quantities. There were two sections of the class.Conversely, in larger groups it is difficult to ensure that all members participate. Next, one section was randomly assigned to the "individual learning group" while the other section was assigned to the "collaborative learning group". The questions that followed required analysis of the information, synthesis of concepts, and evaluation of the solution. The pretest consisted of 12 items, two items belonging to each classification of Bloom's Taxonomy. After the task was explained, group members pulled chairs into close circles and started working on the worksheet. Google Scholar Kollar, I. Google Scholar Johnson, D. The participants were then given a posttest that comprised of both drill- and- practice items and critical- thinking items. This result is presented in Table 1. This study used a group size of four. The same worksheet was given to both treatment groups. Individual Learning In individual learning, the academic task was first explained to the students. Table 1.
According to Johnson and Johnsonthere is persuasive evidence that cooperative teams achieve at higher levels of thought and retain information longer than students who work quietly as individuals.
Google Scholar Johnson, D. Gokhale The concept of collaborative learning, the grouping and pairing of students for the purpose of achieving an academic goal, has been widely researched and advocated throughout the professional literature.Next, one section was randomly assigned to the "individual learning group" while the other section was assigned to the "collaborative learning group". Treatment The treatment comprised of two parts: lecture and worksheet. The present research was designed to study the effectiveness of collaborative learning as it relates to learning outcomes at the college level, for students in technology. A t- test on the data showed that this difference was significant at the 0. The mean of the posttest scores for the participants in the group that studied collaboratively Methodology The independent variable in this study was method of instruction, a variable with two categories: individual learning and collaborative learning. The same worksheet was given to both treatment groups. Thus, there were six groups of four students each. Group Selection and Size Groups can be formed using self- selection, random assignment, or criterion- based selection.