Successful Cooperative Learning Training: A Case Study in Initial Teacher Education (ITE)
Author(s):
Clare McAlister (presenting / submitting) Sonia Casal (presenting)
Conference:
ECER 2012
Format:
Paper

Session Information

10 SES 02 B, Parallel Paper Session

Parallel Paper Session

Time:
2012-09-18
15:15-16:45
Room:
ESI 1 - Aula 35
Chair:
Donald Gray

Contribution

Cooperative learning has been described as a worldwide phenomenon which is being increasingly used across Europe.  It can be defined as ‘the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximise their own and each other’s learning’ (Johnson et al., 1990: 4) and can be used across all subject areas and stages of schooling. ‘…One of the ‘best practices’ in education’, as Sapon-Shevin (2004: 3) comes to describe it.

However, implementing cooperative learning successfully –fostering open communication between teachers and students, promoting investigation, problem-solving and reasoning - takes skill and understanding of the theory that supports practice. Teacher competence in delivering it well, thus, has been identified as an essential feature in its systematic implementation (Webb, 1988; Oortwijn et al., 2007).

The first problem one encounters when implementing cooperative learning successfully stems from ITE itself. Schelfhout et al. (2006) stress the fact that teacher education institutions tend to tutor in a teaching-focused way and that the theoretical knowledge absorbed during ITE may not include a practical use, believing that student teachers will put theory into practice from what they learn in lectures and from what they see on placement.  It is a model based on transmission rather than on transaction or transformation (Sharan, 2010: 306). Moreover, there are perceptions that some teacher education institutions ‘are not always inclined to teach the latest innovative thoughts about learning and instruction’ (Schelfhout et al., 2006: 877).

A second hurdle in teacher education derives from pre-existing conceptions of student teachers about learning and teaching in general and cooperative learning in particular, which may interfere with the new ideas they are presented with. This may be a consequence of the situation mentioned above, as their classes in schools and at university were generally more teacher-focused (Schelfhout et al., 2006: 879).

A third area of concern is that, since cooperative learning presents a significant shift in practice for some teachers, even experienced teachers need follow up support.  As Foote et al (2004) and Helbert (2009) point out: on the one hand, student teachers can be assigned to a school placement that provides no support or guidance on how to implement cooperative learning.  On the other hand, student teachers trained in cooperative learning tend to use a variety of techniques immediately after training but, as the school year progresses, this number decreases to one or two, possibly due to this lack of support.  

This research, carried out in Scotland, aims to highlight the ingredients of a successful ITE course on cooperative learning. Our hypothesis is that if it is desired that student teachers use cooperative learning techniques in their school settings regularly, it is essential to take these three factors into consideration: 1) use a learning-based approach rather than a teaching-based approach on ITE; 2) change student teachers previous conceptions gradually and 3) provide them with support.

Method

This proposal describes a case study that aimed to provide a deeper understanding of the participants’ responses to the Option course in ITE. Following Delli Carpini (2009) and Lyman and Davidson (2004), who argue that modelling cooperative learning is essential at the pre-service stage for teachers, this case study implemented explicit modelling and experiential learning with support throughout the course engaging participants in cooperative learning activities. Although a small sample, this study is directed by the work of Flyvberg (2006) with data generated by insiders who possess an intimate knowledge of their areas of practice. This makes the findings subject to criteria appropriate to naturalistic investigation (Lincoln and Gruba 1986). Questionnaires were used to gather a considerable amount of data in a limited time (Cohen, Manion and Morrison 2004) and were issued before, after and when on teaching placement. Through these instruments the researchers’ aim was to gather data around the following research questions: does explicit modelling of cooperative learning with experiential learning really assist student teachers in implementing this pedagogy; did student teachers’ perceptions change as a result of the Option and was there any change in student teachers’ confidence as a result of participation in the Option.

Expected Outcomes

This case study analysed whether the three factors presented above (1) learning-based approach through explicit modelling rather than a teaching-based approach on ITE; 2) modification of student teachers’ previous conceptions of cooperative learning and 3) provision of support) had any influence in the successful implementation of cooperative learning by student teachers. The findings from this case study strongly suggest that experiential learning through explicit tutor modelling and support in relation to the above-mentioned areas had a positive impact on the participating student teachers, who felt more confident in implementing cooperative learning when on school placement and more willing to take risks in their classroom practice. The participating student teachers identified developments in their classroom practice as they saw progress in their ability to deliver effective cooperative learning lessons and this has important implications for how cooperative learning training takes place in the early stages of a teacher’s career. Further studies need to be completed to assess the best model of training and how this is being managed broadly in Europe. The next stage of this study will track participants as they progress into their first year of classroom practice and will assess effective means of follow up support.

References

Cohen, L., L. Manion and K. Morrison. 2004. Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge Falmer. DelliCarpini, M. 2009. Enhanced cooperative learning in TESOL teacher education. ELT Journal, 63/1: 42-50. Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12/2:219-245. Foote, C.J., P.J. Vermette, J. Wilson-Bridgman, T.J. Sheeran, R. Erwin and M. Murray. 2004. Preparing Secondary Teachers to Use Cooperative Learning Strategies. In Teaching Cooperative Learning – The Challenge for Teacher Education. eds Cohen, E.G., Brody, C.M.and Sapon-Shevin, M. Albany: State University of New York. Helbert, J. 2009. Scottish Continuing International Professional Development (SCIPD) Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson and E.H. Holubec. 1990. Circles of Learning – cooperation in the classroom. Minnesota: Interaction Book Company. Lincoln, Y.S. and E.G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. California: Sage. Lyman, F. and N. Davidson. 2004. Cooperative Learning in Preservice Teacher Education at the University of Maryland. In Cooperative Learning – The Challenge for Teacher Education . eds Cohen, E.G., C.M. Brody and M. Sapon-Shevin. Albany: State University of New York. Oortwijn, M.B., M. Boekaerts, P. Vedder and J.W. Strijbos. 2007 Helping Behaviours during cooperative learning and learning gains: The role of the teacher and of pupils’ prior knowledge and ethnic background. Learning and Instruction 18: 146-159. Sapon-Shevin, M. 2004. Introduction in E.G. Cohen, C.M. Brody & M. Sapon-Shevin (Eds) (2004) Teaching Cooperative Learning – The Challenge for Teacher Education Albany: State University of New York. Sharan, Y. 2010. Cooperative Learning for Academic and Social Gains: valued pedagogy, problematic practice. European Journal of Education, 45/2: 300-313. Schelfhout et al, 2006. Educating for learning-focused teaching in teacher training: the need to link learning conent with practice experiences within an inductive approach. Teaching and Teacher Education 22: 874-897 Webb, N.M. 1988. Peer Interaction and Learning with Computers in Small Groups. Computers in Human Behaviour, 3: 193-209.

Author Information

Clare McAlister (presenting / submitting)
University of Strathclyde
HASS
Glasgow
Sonia Casal (presenting)
Universidad Pablo de Olavide
Sevilla

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.