Ed 6630 Inquiry Project Paper

Running head: COOPERATIVE LEARNING IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION 1
Cooperative Learning in Mathematics Education

by
Ashley Wood
200206357

A paper submitted to the Faculty of Education
in conformity with the requirements for
Ed 6630

Memorial University of Newfoundland
St. Johns, NL, Canada
June 22, 2014

COOPERATIVE LEARNING IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION 2

Cooperative Learning in Mathematics Education
Encouraging students to develop high levels of learning in mathematics is a top priority
for many educators of any grade level. Teachers strive to create a classroom environment where
students are engaged, attentive, and actively involved in the learning process by incorporating
new resources and different pedagogical practices. Unfortunately, many of our current students
are progressing through the educational system with a lack of basic math skills and the
perception that mathematics is a subject contained only within the walls of a classroom. This
perspective, coupled with negative student attitudes and low motivation levels towards
mathematics learning may leave many educators feeling less confident in their teaching abilities,
causing them to rely on traditional, teacher-centered lessons which focus on explicitly taught
rules and strategies. Understanding new instructional approaches which can increase student
achievement and promote high levels of motivation may help increase positive attitudes towards
learning new mathematical concepts, which may in turn help better prepare our students for the
real world.
The following paper seeks to discover more about cooperative learning and how this
instructional practice can be utilized to help increase motivation and student achievement in
mathematics. In doing so, current achievement trends among the students in our province will be
analyzed along with the need to move away from a heavy reliance on traditional math lessons.
Defining cooperative learning, identifying the benefits which come from this collaborative
teaching method, and discussing several cooperative learning strategies will be examined in
relation to the effect they have on student performance and motivation. Lastly, identifying
challenges which can come from the implementation of cooperative learning along with various
recommendations and teacher implications are discussed in a manner which encourages all

educators to try this positive pedagogical approach. This research will show that cooperative
learning is a valuable teaching tool which encourages knowledge acquisition and a love of
mathematics learning among our students, making it an ideal strategy to incorporate into any
classroom.
Current Achievement Trends in Mathematics
As a grade six math teacher, I see many students enter into my classroom who lack
motivation or who have a very negative attitude towards mathematics. Whats even more
alarming is the fact that many of these students are also lacking basic mathematical skills, which
impedes their development of strong mental math and mathematical reasoning abilities. It can be
unnerving to learn that this seems to be a trend among the achievement levels of the grade six
students across our province. Analyzing the elementary mathematics provincial assessment data
indicates startling results. On the four process strands assessed during the 2008 mathematics
CRT (reasoning, communication, connections and representations, and problem solving) roughly
half of our students were achieving below a level 3 on the scoring rubric, where a level 3 would
indicate a good understanding (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, 2012). In 2009, a
startling 60% of our grade six students were not yet meeting the outcomes in the number
operations strand of our mathematics curriculum, and although there have been significant gains
over the last number of years, the most current data for 2012 indicates that only 54% of our
students are demonstrating a proficiency in number operations (Government of Newfoundland
and Labrador, 2012).
These results correlate with the Program for International Assessment (PISA) given to
Canadian students by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in

2012. This assessment measures the performance of Canadas youth in mathematics, which was
given to 21 000 15 year old students across the country from 900 schools. The results of this
assessment indicated that Canada as a whole is performing quite well in mathematics, as only
nine of 65 countries in total outperformed our country (Brochu, Deussing, Houme, & Chuy,
2012). Closer inspection of the results however reveals that not all provinces fared in a similar
manner. Newfoundland and Labrador preformed below the Canadian average in all areas of the
paper-based mathematics component, and of the ten provinces which participated in the
assessment, Prince Edward Island was the only one which scored lower results than our
province. Unfortunately, our results may indicate a movement in mathematics achievement
which is slowly catching up with the rest of our country, as there is a clear trend showing a
decrease [among the] average score(s) in most provinces, as well as an increase in the number of
countries outperforming Canada (Brochu et al., 2012, p.31). These results prove to be alarming
for many educators, indicating a need to reflect on specific classroom practices that may help
explain and account for these deficiencies.
Moving Away from Traditional Modes of Learning
Why are so many of our students underperforming in mathematics during a time when
various forms of technology and other educational resources are readily available? The answer
may come in part from the type of instructional strategies educators avail of in order to teach
mathematical concepts and strategies. Traditional modes of mathematics instruction involve
direct teacher-centered lessons, in which the teacher stands at the board and transfers knowledge
to students through explicit instructions and endless examples. While this type of instructional
approach may have a place in the classroom, consistently teaching mathematics in this manner
may have some effect on the meaningful learning taking place. According to Schoenfeld (1988),

teachers can trivialize mathematics and deprive students of the opportunity to understand and
use what they have studied by presenting meaningless math examples which are presented and
solved out of context (p.147). Unfortunately, many of our more traditional practices present
mathematical concepts in this disjointed view, which may lead to a superficial understanding of
the subject.
Moving away from a heavy reliance on traditional pedagogical teaching approaches may
help our students succeed in becoming competent mathematics learners in and outside of the
classroom. This presents new challenges however, as many teachers enter into the profession
with contemporary beliefs about how they should teach, but when faced with typical classroom
constraints they tend to refer back to more traditional classroom practices (apkova, 2014).
Trying to find a balance between promoting deep levels of learning among students while
dealing with time and resource restrictions can be difficult, however it is necessary for the
promotion of mathematically competent learners, as students develop their understanding of
mathematics from their classroom experience with it (Schoenfeld, 1988). Educators need to
become comfortable with new teaching methods that encourage a deeper mathematical
understanding that can be transferred and used outside of the classroom, which is why
cooperative learning has gained popularity as a pedagogical practice that helps promote
knowledge acquisition through cooperation and collaboration.
Defining Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning can be traced back to its roots in Vygotskys social constructivism
theory. Vygotsky believed that social interaction and collaboration are integral components of
the learning process as students internalize information more effectively when they interact with

others, leading to deeper levels of understanding (Powell & Kalina, 2009). One aspect of the
social constructivist theory suggests that students will learn more effectively during their zone of
proximal development, which is a zone where comprehension occurs with the help of other
individuals. This help can come in the form of scaffolding, which is a type of assisted
instructional process that supports the zone of proximal development, allowing students to get to
the next level of understanding in the learning process (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Social
constructivism relies heavily on the idea that students learn best when we give them the
opportunity to discuss, interact, and collaborate with other learners. It is through this social
process that meaningful learning occurs as students create connections between what they
already know to the new concepts they become introduced to in class.
Taking the social constructivist theory into account, cooperative learning defines a type
of instructional practice used to enhance the understanding of students in the classroom. Simply
stated, cooperative learning occurs when students work together towards a common goal on
academic tasks (Nattiv, 1994; Hancock, 2004; Ifamuyiwa & Akinsola, 2008). In this student-
centered approach to learning, every individual is responsible for their own level of
comprehension as it is necessary for the groups success (Naseem & Bano, 2011). Group rewards
and individual accountability are an essential component of this learning process as it prevents
high achievers from dominating the work and forces students to take responsibility for their own
mastery of the material (Whicker, Nunnery, & Bol, 1997). In the mathematics classroom,
cooperative learning occurs when students interact and work together in a collaborative and
social manner on assigned mathematical tasks while the teacher monitors the groups and
intervenes only when it is necessary to improve the mathematical abilities of students (Tarim,
2009). In defining cooperative learning, it is important to note that not all group work completed

in the classroom can necessarily be labeled as being cooperative in the social constructivist
sense. A defining characteristic of cooperative learning implies that students are interacting in an
academic manner which promotes the learning of each other; simply sitting next to other peers
and participating in ongoing discussions dos not mean that cooperative learning is occurring
(Tarim, 2009).
Cooperative learning groups are generally heterogeneous in nature, which serves to help
the learning process as students use their unique background experiences and previous
knowledge to enhance the learning of the full group. In order for this interactive learning
approach to work, there are five essential elements which are discussed throughout the relevant
research which helps ensure these mixed-ability groups are being effective in facilitating their
own learning. Groups need to have positive interdependence among members, face to face
interactions, individual accountability, appropriate social skills, and group processing abilities
(Naseem & Bano, 2011; Hsiung, 2012). Learning will not occur as effectively if students are
placed together in groups without these interactive skills needed to promote the learning process.
Students need to learn to rely on each other when assistance is needed while groups are working.
The role of the teacher becomes very subdued in a cooperative learning environment after the
initial work of composing the groups and assigning the task has finished. In effective cooperative
learning environments, teachers become coaches, facilitators , and even spectators after the
lesson has been implemented, as teachers who set up a good cooperative lesson teach children
to teach themselves and each other (Naseem & Bano, 2011, p. 84). There is a shift in
dependency in a cooperative learning environment, students learn from each other instead of
directly from the teacher.


Benefits of Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning has many different benefits which makes it a worthwhile
instructional approach to implement in the mathematics classroom. One of the most valuable
benefits of cooperative learning is the level of motivation it instills in students working on
mathematical concepts. Research studies have shown that the implementation of cooperative
learning in the classroom motivates students to spend more time on academic tasks (Naseem &
Bano, 2011; Hsiung, 2012). It also increases motivation to learn, enhances students enjoyment
of school and classes, and has been linked as a contributing factor to the improvement in
attendance among students (Whicker, Nunnery, & Bol, 1997). Likewise, cooperative learning
motivates students to encourage one another to achieve success on group assignments, drives
students to help one another succeed, and motivates learners to interact with the academic task
and with each other in a positive manner (Ifamuyiwa & Akinsola, 2008). This increase in student
motivation can have a profound effect on classroom behaviours. Students who stop working or
shut down when encountering an unknown problem independently are motivated in a
cooperative learning group to persist in the problem solving to ensure the groups success. This
can help motivate students to stay on task longer than if they were working alone.
Another benefit of cooperative learning is the positive impact it can have on
mathematical achievement levels. Throughout the relevant research, studies have shown positive
mathematics achievement scores in cooperative learning classrooms, many indicating a
significant achievement increase when compared to experimental learning groups (Whicker,
Nunnery, & Bol, 1997). This positive relationship between cooperative learning and student
achievement is not limited to a specific age group either; the effects on academic achievement
through cooperative learning have been noted in studies conducted on preschool learners up to

high school students and even on post-secondary learning groups (Tarim, 2009; Whicker,
Nunnery, & Bol, 1997; Hancock, 2004). One of the most commonly referenced reasons that
explain this positive connection between cooperative learning and mathematics achievement is
the shift in dependency which occurs from the classroom teacher to other group members.
Students become responsible for teaching each other in cooperative learning environments,
which requires them to explain the information they understand on the new concepts introduced
in class. As suggested by Webb, Franks, De, Chan, Freund, Shein, and Melkonian (2009), when
explaining the material necessary for task completion, students participate in the opportunity to
reorganize and clarify material, identify misconceptions, fill in missing gaps in their own
understanding, internalize new knowledge, and develop new perspectives and understanding
(p.50). When students are required to discuss academic tasks they need to take in the new
information, relate it to their existing understandings, and then explain it in a manner which
helps other students understand the material. This can lead to a better understanding of the work
being presented.
Besides the positive influences cooperative learning has on motivation and achievement,
this interactive instructional strategy has several other benefits which come from its highly social
nature. Cooperative learning helps to nurture an inclusive classroom environment as it helps
strengthen relationships among students, increasing their acceptance of the differences which
occur among learners (Whicker, Nunnery, & Bol, 1997). When students are required to
collaborate and work together towards common goals they get the opportunity to interact with
students who they may have otherwise chosen not to socialize with. Increasing the interactions
occurring in the classroom helps students appreciate and see the value in differences which may
be present among learners. As suggested by Powell and Kalina (2009), to embrace diversity,

students must interact socially (p.245). As cooperative learning tasks are generally
heterogeneous in nature, students have the opportunity to complete work in a manner which
caters to their strengths and different learning styles. The adaptive nature of these tasks can be
opened up to all students including those who have special needs, which helps promote an
atmosphere of acceptance and appreciation in the classroom.
Additionally, there are many other indirect benefits of cooperative learning which helps
increase its value as a mathematical teaching method. Cooperative learning helps to promote
leadership among students as dependency on the teacher decreases. It also helps in the promotion
of important social skills such as sharing, cooperation, and teamwork (Naseem & Bano, 2011).
Regularly participating in cooperative learning tasks also has a positive effect on a students self-
esteem and confidence levels, increasing positive attitudes towards school while decreasing the
anxiety some students feel towards work completion in the classroom (Tarim, 2009). There are
also economic benefits to implementing cooperative learning in the classroom; allowing students
to work in groups permits a class to complete the same quality of work using less materials and
equipment than if students were required to complete the same work independently (Naseem &
Bano, 2011). These diverse benefits are products of a classroom where students are actively
working together to enhance each others learning. Although a teacher may implement a
cooperative learning activity for a specific reason, many unseen qualities emerge from positive
and productive student interactions.
Cooperative Learning Strategies
There are a variety of different ways cooperative learning can be used in the mathematics
classroom. One method, as described by Whicker, Nunnery, and Bol (1997), relies on group

rewards and individual accountability. The Student Teams-Achievement Divisions (STAD)
method encourages competition between groups while concurrently promoting cooperation
within groups. This approach involves awarding teams points based on the performance of
individual group members. This helps to ensure that all members learn and interact with the
concepts and strategies being learned. A teams score is based on its members continued
improvement on assessment tasks, and points are given based on the percentage of increase of a
students grade from one assessment piece to the next. This gives all students the opportunity to
contribute a maximum amount of points to their team. As reported by Majoka, Dad, and
Mahmood (2010) in their study of incorporating STAD as a learning strategy in the mathematics
classroom, students participated in a higher level of engagement resulting in higher mathematical
achievements using this approach when compared with students who received traditional
methods of instruction. This cooperative learning strategy can easily be integrated into the math
classroom on a regular basis using various forms of assessment as the basis for each cooperative
task. A teacher can give points to the teams whose group members continued to demonstrate an
improvement on pre-assessments, formative assessment tasks, and summative learning activities,
which can be developed from any area of the mathematics curriculum.
Another cooperative learning method which combines group goals with individual
accountability is called Team Assisted Individualization, or TAI for short. Tarim and Akdeniz
(2008) explain how this strategy works, starting with the introduction of a new concept or
strategy which is taught to the whole class by the teacher over the course of one or two periods.
Students are then given a task, in the form of a worksheet or a question set, to complete
individually within their groups. After each section of the task is completed, students compare
their answers with each other, and then cross-reference with a provided answer key. If all the

questions were answered correctly, students can move on to a different task. If any answers were
wrong, the student seeks help or clarification from group members, and if necessary, the teacher.
When a student has correctly completed a task, they can take a checkout which is a type of quiz
containing questions relating to the topic being studied. This is completed individually, and then
checked by group members. If 80% of the checkout was completed correctly, the student could
complete a final test individually. A score of less than 80% requires teacher assistance to help
clear up any misunderstandings about the material, and then another checkout quiz is
administered before being allowed to complete the final test. This cooperative learning method is
an appealing choice for the mathematics classroom for a number of different reasons. Not only
does the relevant research indicate a positive relationship between TAI and mathematics
achievement, teachers prefer this instructional strategy because it can easily be used in any strand
of the mathematics curriculum as it is an adaptable learning method thats easy to initiate and
maintain (Tarim & Akdeniz, 2008).
Student-Team Mastery Learning (STML) is yet another cooperative learning strategy
used by mathematics teachers. This method starts by students working cooperatively in small
groups on a task which is contingent on the collaboration of group members. Students are then
individually tested in a formative manner to determine strengths and weaknesses in their
learning. Supplemental activities are then given to groups based on the formative assessment
results, where it is expected that higher-achieving students will help other group members master
the given tasks (Mevarech, 1985). This learning strategy takes root from Blooms work on
mastery learning, which relies on formative assessment and regular feedback, used together to
help enhance a students learning by identifying specific strengths and needs (Guskey, 2010). As
determined throughout relevant research, STML positively affects the mathematical development

of students (Mevarech, 1985), making it an appealing choice to use in the mathematics
classroom. This versatile and easy to use approach to learning combines formative assessment
tasks with peer tutoring activities which can help solidify mathematical concepts and strategies
for students of all abilities, leading to an increase of confidence and efficacy beliefs towards
learning.
There are several other less formal methods that employ cooperative learning, which can
easily be implemented into a math class of any grade level. Naseem and Bano (2011) list and
describe several activities which can be easily adapted to help students learn a range of
mathematical concepts and procedures. These methods demonstrate how easy it can be to
incorporate interactive and social learning opportunities into lessons without a large amount of
preparation or materials. One such example, called jigsaw, requires students to first learn some
unique material which they then come back to teach to other group members. This would be a
great approach to use when students are required to learn various strategies or procedures around
a central topic, such as is the case with multiplication or division. Other examples include think-
pair-share tasks, which happens when students think about a question on their own at first, then
with a partner, and finally with other pairs or groups. A reverse method termed team-pair-solo
asks students to solve problems with a team at first, then with just a peer, and lastly on their own.
This method is used to build confidence and efficacy as students tackle more difficult material
with the help of other group members, helping them progress to a point where they can
understand difficult work on their own. Another simple approach which encourages
collaboration and cooperative group work is called numbered heads together. This strategy
involves groups of four students who are given the numbers one, two, three, or four. Questions
are given to the group as a whole, and students work together towards the correct answer. The

teacher then calls out a number, and all students given that number within the class have to share
their groups answer (Naseem & Bano, 2011). This strategy, like others, is effective in
developing a good understanding of mathematical concepts while promoting higher levels of
confidence as students work together towards the enhancement of their problem solving skills.
The Challenges of Cooperative Learning
Although the relevant research has indicated a multitude of advantages in various aspects
of the educational environment supporting cooperative learning, there are some drawbacks which
teachers should become aware of in order to realistically prepare for the incorporation of this
learning approach into the classroom. Knowing what problems may occur can help educators
take on a proactive approach which can help implement cooperative learning into the classroom
in a seamless manner. One such drawback, as indicated by Whicker, Nunnery and Bol (1997),
involves a level of passivity which can occur among lower-achieving students. Regardless of the
amount of cooperation and individual accountability encouraged by the teacher and other group
members, some students do not work well with other peers in a manner which encourages
effective leaning. These students prefer to take a passive role during academic tasks, which may
come from low self-efficacy beliefs due to past failures or from pressure from higher-ability
students to complete tasks quickly (Ross, 1995). These factors may lead students to question
their level of ability as they may feel they are being directly compared to their classmates when
they are required to work together for the successful completion of various tasks. This may
encourage some students to become reclusive rather than to take on a leadership role.
Another commonly known challenge of cooperative learning includes a students peer
orientation, which Hancock (2004) describes as the extent that a person prefers to work on

various tasks alone or with others. Sometimes students from any ability range prefer to complete
tasks or assigned work on their own rather than in a group. There are many people who have a
predisposition towards working independently rather than working with other learners. Since
students perform best when they are allowed to learn in their preferred manner (Hancock,
2004, p. 160), forcing these students to work with other peers towards common educational goals
would not be beneficial for anyone involved, as they may start to develop negative attitudes
towards learning and mathematics. These students need to be able to complete academic tasks in
their preferential manner; however teachers can start off small by slowly introducing them to the
benefits of cooperative learning which could then possibly open them up to the idea of social
interactions which encourage classroom learning. Pressuring a student to work in a group when
they clearly prefer to work alone can severely limit the amount of learning taking place, and can
instead create a hostile and unenjoyable classroom environment which depletes the purpose of
cooperative learning.
Another challenge which can occur during the implementation of cooperative learning
can result from a lack of feedback coming from educators. This type of instructional approach
does require the teacher to take a step back from having a leading role in the learning process,
however a severe lack of group intervention can lead to a limited amount of feedback-corrective
procedures, which may encourage students to learn incorrect material or develop misconceptions
towards the academic task (Mevarech, 1985). Cooperative learning groups are generally
heterogeneous in nature, however even high ability group members can become confused about a
new mathematical concept or strategy introduced in class. If this confusion is not corrected or if
inaccurate assumptions are not challenged, students can continue to engage in the learning
process developing incorrect knowledge. It is essential that teachers are proactive in finding a

balance between explicit teaching and passivity in the classroom, which can limit the need for
group remediation.
Conclusion
The purpose of this research paper was to explore cooperative learning in mathematics in
relation to the effect it can have on student achievement and motivation. By discussing problems
associated with traditional modes of teaching and current mathematical achievement trends, it is
clear that there is a present need for teachers to explore contemporary pedagogical approaches to
help increase mathematical proficiency among our students. Cooperative learning is an excellent
instructional method to use in all grade levels as it helps increase motivation and positive
mathematical attitudes, while concurrently promoting deeper levels of learning which can lead to
higher performance levels in math. As with any instructional approach, there are several
challenges associated with cooperative learning that teachers need to be familiar with in order to
adapt preventative measures which can help in the facilitation of a meaningful learning
environment where students are helping each other learn. Becoming proactive towards these
challenges and maintaining a positive attitude towards cooperative and collaborative learning
tasks can help our students gain a productive and valuable educational experience, which is a
goal many educators seek to attain on a daily basis.
Recommendations and Teacher Implications
Becoming knowledgeable about the positive aspects of cooperative learning, identifying
strategies that can help with the implementation of this interactive learning approach, and being
able to identify possible problematic areas in order to create a genuine and efficient learning
environment is a large task for educators to undertake. There are several recommendations

apparent within the relevant research on cooperative learning which can help ensure a more
smooth transition into a classroom which regularly uses social interactions to promote learning.
One such recommendation, as suggested by Nattiv (1994), would be to explicitly teach students
in cooperative learning groups how to help one another and how to ask for and receive help (p.
296). We sometimes take for granted the fact that many students have never been specifically
taught how to work in groups in a manner which helps promote deep understanding for all
involved learners. Teaching students various behaviours and strategies that they can use to assist
one another in the learning process can help them become more independent learners who shift
their dependency from the teacher to other group members. This would require a large amount of
start-up time as instructions, time to practice, and specific feedback would need to be given
before students would be expected to demonstrate a proficiency in the expectant behaviours
which help encourage learning. This will mean that teachers may need to exhibit patience in
order to observe the direct advantages of group learning (Whicker, Nunnery, & Bol, 1997;
Hsiung, 2012), however taking this time at the beginning of the year and revisiting these
strategies regularly can help facilitate efficient learning groups in an environment where all
students can achieve a level of success.
Creating a careful balance between taking on a passive teaching role and giving students
a large amount of regular feedback is another recommendation which can help ensure the
effectiveness of cooperative learning in mathematics. Students should be able to engage in a
deep level of learning with their peers in an effective manner after an initial start-up time,
however teachers need to be careful not to become passive observers of the learning taking place.
Students need to hear regular feedback concerning their performance as a group member. Ross
(1995) suggests that when students receive feedback on their performance during cooperative

learning activities, lower-ability students become more willing to seek out help, teacher
dependency requests decline, and students adapt their behaviour to become more specific to the
needs of the group. Without regular feedback, students may not be able to assess the
effectiveness of the learning taking place among group members. This can negatively affect the
learning occurring in cooperative groups, which can lead to misunderstandings and confusion
around mathematical concepts. Teachers need to make sure that they use careful and consistent
observations to help identify both the strengths and needs of the groupings in their classroom.
Using these observations to guide directive and explicit feedback which includes suggestions for
improvement and reminders of high expectations can help give students a clearer understanding
of what it means to be part of an effective cooperative environment (Ross, 1995).
Lastly, taking the time and dedication needed to promote a warm and welcoming
classroom atmosphere will be necessary for cooperative learning to work. Teachers need to make
sure they encourage a climate where students feel safe and supported in the learning process.
Students need to feel like they are able to take risks with their learning, where mistakes are met
with constructive feedback to grow and learn from instead of being a source of embarrassment
and ridicule. As suggested by Powell and Kalina (2009), learning occurs when students are
challenged and comfortable. In order to promote this type of environment teachers need to
develop a sense of trust and openness with students to encourage lesson engagement and
attentiveness. Consistently communicating, practising, and revisiting the notion that the
classroom is a safe place to experience unknown activities which promote learning will be
necessary in order for students to step out of their comfort zones to try new activities. We need to
challenge our students to expand what they know about themselves as learners in order to find
new and successful ways to promote deeper learning in mathematics. This will be a large step

towards the implementation of an instructional approach which focuses on student understanding
instead of rote procedures and memorization. In following this route we can help develop
confidence among our students which may help improve motivation and positive mathematical
attitudes, while concurrently promoting life-long learners.


References
Brochu, P., Deussing, M.A., Houme, K, & Chuy, M. (2013). Measuring up: Canadian results of
the OECD PISA study. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. Retrieved from
http://cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/318/PISA2012_CanadianRep
ort_EN_Web.pdf

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Education (2012). CRT results 4
year trend. K-12 School Profile System. Retrieved from http://www.education.gov.nl.ca/

Guskey, T. R. (2010). Lessons of mastery learning. Educational Leadership, 68(2), 52-57.
Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com

Hancock, D. (2004). Cooperative learning and peer orientation effects on motivation and
achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 97(3), 159-166.
doi:10.3200/JOER.97.3.159-168

Hsiung, C.M. (2012). The effectiveness of cooperative learning. Journal of Engineering
Education, 101(1), 119-137. Retrieved from http://www.jee.org

Ifamuyiwa, S. A., & Akinsola, M. K. (2008). Improving senior secondary school students'
attitude towards mathematics through self and cooperative-instructional
strategies. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science &
Technology, 39(5), 569-585. doi:10.1080/00207390801986874

Majoka, M., Dad, M., & Mahmood, T. (2010). Student team achievement division (STAD) as an
active learning strategy: Empirical evidence from mathematics classroom. Journal of
Education & Sociology, (4), 16-20. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com

Mevarech, Z. R. (1985). The effects of cooperative mastery learning strategies on mathematics
achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 78(3), 72-377. Retrieved from
http://web.ebscohost.com

Naseem, S., & Bano, R. (2011). Cooperative learning: An instructional strategy. Technolearn:
An International Journal of Educational Technology, 1(1), 79-85. Retrieved from


Nattiv, A. (1994). Helping behaviors and math achievement gain of students using cooperative
learning. Elementary School Journal, 94(3), 285. Retrieved from

Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for
an effective classroom. Education,130(2), 241-250. Retrieved from

Ross, J. A. (1995). Effects of feedback on student behavior in cooperative learning groups in a
grade 7 math class. Elementary School Journal, 96(2), 125. Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.

apkova, A. (2014). The relationships between the traditional beliefs and practice of
mathematics teachers and their students achievements in doing mathematics tasks.
Problems Of Education In The 21St Century, 58, 127-143. Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: the disasters of well-taught
mathematics courses.Educational Psychologist, 23145-166.
doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2302_5

Tarim, K., & Akdeniz, F. (2008). The effects of cooperative learning on Turkish elementary
students' mathematics achievement and attitude towards mathematics using TAI and
STAD methods. Educational Studies In Mathematics, 67(1), 77-91. doi:10.1007/s10649-
007-9088-y

Tarim, K. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning on preschoolers mathematics problem-
solving ability. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(3), 325-340.
doi:10.1007/s10649-009-9197-x

Webb, N., Franke, M., De, T., Chan, A., Freund, D., Shein, P., & Melkonian, D. (2009). 'Explain
to your partner': teachers' instructional practices and students' dialogue in small groups.
Cambridge Journal Of Education, 39(1), 49-70. doi:10.1080/03057640802701986

Whicker, K. M., Bol, L., & Nunnery, J. A. (1997). Cooperative learning in the secondary
mathematics classroom. Journal Of Educational Research, 91, 42-48.
doi:10.1080/00220679709597519

Ed 6630 Inquiry Project Paper

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Ed 6630 Inquiry Project Paper

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Running head: COOPERATIVE LEARNING IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION 1

Cooperative Learning in Mathematics Education

Potrebbero piacerti anche