CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the study

The traditional lecture is the predominant means through which all classes are taught in higher
education institution (Siegfreid et al; 1996). Despite the popularity of lectures, alternative
teaching pedagogies that employ active learning through cooperative groups have received
increasing attention in different discipline education in recent years. In contrast to passive
learning pedagogies such as lectures, active learning requires the student to be actively engaged
in the learning process. 'Active learning through cooperative groups' is a fairly broad concept by
which heterogeneous students should be actively engaged in-class exercises or experiments,
writing assignments, or case studies (Becker and Watts, 1995).

Cooperative learning is generally defined as a teaching arrangement in which small,

heterogeneous groups of students work together to achieve a common goal. Now a day’s
cooperative learning is emerged as the leading approach to classroom instruction. One important
reason for its advocacy is that students completing cooperative learning group tasks tend to have
higher academic test scores, higher self-esteem, greater numbers of positive social skills, fewer
stereotypes of individuals of other races or ethnic groups, and greater comprehension of the
content and skills they are studying (Johnson and Holubec, 1993; Slavin, 1991; Stahl and
VanSickle, 1992).

Although such teaching pedagogies are very important to achieve higher academic score, to
develop a higher self esteem, and to develop a positive social skills but most of the time students
are not interested to this teaching pedagogies. The major reason is that lack of awareness about
the aim of teaching methodology and lack of agreement between cooperative group members.

In the first semester, first year management group one students were planning to achieve a very
good academic score. But out of 64 total students only 5 (five) of students on average of first
semester plan succeed above plan and 10 (ten) of students score equal to plan, the rest 39
students not succeed or below plan.
The aim of this action research was improving student’s performance by increasing their
attitudes towards cooperative learning. In addition, this action research also looks at students’
perception for active learning of cooperative learning.

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1.2.1 General objective

 Improving first year management students’ performance by increasing their participation
and perception towards cooperative learning.

1.2.2 Specific objectives

 To increase students academic performance for the course of human resource
management.
 To assess student’s perception towards cooperative learning.
 To identify factors that cause for cooperative learning attitudinal problems.
 CHAPTER TWO

LITRATURE REVIEW

2.1 Definition of Learning

Learning is a process of knowledge construction, based on the constructivist model (Taber,
2001). For meaningful learning to occur, connections need to be clear between what is being
taught and what one already knows. Piaget suggests that learning occurs through a process of
assimilating and accommodating new information into existing organized knowledge (Taber,
2001).

Prior knowledge is the foundation and framework for successful learning and application of new
material. Prior knowledge is the cognitive structure a learner possesses at any given time. Taber
(2001) explains this cognitive structure as the set of facts, concepts, propositions, theories, and
raw perceptual data that learners have available to them at any point in time and the manner in
which it is arranged. According to the Schema Theory, prior knowledge is an organized and
elaborate network of abstract mental structures that represent one understands of the world
(Davis, 1991).

So learning is successful if prior knowledge exists. To access prior knowledge, teachers need to
know their students’ culture, language, and previous academic and life experiences to bring them
to able to build onto what they already know. Learning is meaningful when students see
connections between what they know and the applications they can make to new experiences.
When students realize how much they know and how new information can be relevant to their
lives, they can become motivated to set their own academic goals.

Learning is successful in environments in which students are at the center and in which what
students know is valued; it is for this reason that the major themes in this literature review are
student/learner centered classroom environments and reciprocal teaching.

2.2 Cooperative learning

Cooperative learning approach has been around in the past. Over the last decade, cooperative
learning has emerged as the leading approach to classroom instruction (Ranjani, 2013).
Cooperative learning is generally defined as a teaching arrangement in which small,
heterogeneous groups of students work together to achieve a common goal.
Now a day’s cooperative learning is emerged as the leading approach to classroom instruction.
One important reason for its advocacy is that students completing cooperative learning group
tasks tend to have higher academic test scores, higher self-esteem, greater numbers of positive
social skills, fewer stereotypes of individuals of other races or ethnic groups, and greater
comprehension of the content and skills they are studying (Johnson and Holubec, 1993; Slavin,
1991; Stahl and VanSickle, 1992).
Essential Elements of Cooperative Learning

Academic learning success for each individual and all members of the group is one feature that
separates cooperative learning groups from other group tasks (Slavin 1990). In order for a lesson
to be cooperative, five basic elements are essential and need to be included (Johnson & Johnson,
1989; Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1993). The five essential elements are Positive
Interdependence, Individual Accountability, Face-To-Face Promotive Interaction, Social Skills,
and Group Processing (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). These strategies can be used to enhance
student learning. Cooperative learning can be used to improve academic achievement,
motivation and promote teamwork among students.

Challenges and effects in implementing cooperative learning in a classroom

The main challenge faced in cooperative and collaborative learning is group conflict. Students
need to learn to work together. It is not always something that comes naturally. Also, teachers
who haven't previously used cooperative or collaborative learning might also need to get used to
the noise level in the classroom, which is raised during these activities. Some teachers may also
feel that cooperative learning takes too much planning time and might also take longer to cover
the required portion of the curriculum. With all these challenges studies have shown that once a
teacher starts to use this tool, they continue to use it and make it the foundation for their
teaching.

One fear many instructors have about cooperative learning is that when students' grades are
affected by the achievement of their group-mates, the students will believe that the grading
practices are unfair (Hwong et al., 1993). When positive outcome interdependence is structured
within learning groups, achievement is greater than when students work individualistically on
their own. Studies done by Hulya and Kamile (2007) on a group of fifth graders showed that
cooperative and individual concept mapping conditions promoted the use of effective learning
strategies more than traditional teaching.

Cooperative learning and student achievement

Cooperative learning, when instituted and successfully practiced, creates a microcosm of equity
in a group. When striving to teach students to create, monitor, and evaluate the equity in their
cooperative group, teachers teach them how to begin to create a just society. Cooperation thus is
humanity’s strongest asset and hope (Cohen et al., 2004).

Cooperative learning is a great tool that can be used to improve student achievement in any
classroom. It also fosters tolerance and acceptance in the community, which improves quality of
everybody's life. Multiple researches have shown that cooperative learning strategies can be
utilized to promote deeper understanding. Educators can use various strategies of cooperative
learning along with their instructional techniques to enhance learning in a classroom. This will
result in higher student achievement.
 CHAPTER THREE

ACTION RESEARCH METHDOLOGY

3.1 Design
Experimental research design which is characterized by much greater control over the research
environment and in this case some variables are manipulated to observe their effect on other
variables (Kothari, 2004) use in this action research. The whole members of the class use for the
study due to need to assess the impact of cooperative learning on students result on the course
called Human Resource Management. To analyze the collected feedback of the students SPSS
(Statistical package for social science) use and present by tabulation bare chart and percentage.

3.2 Participants
The participants of this action research will be first year Management Department, Group One
students who were taking Human Resource Management course in this semester academic year
of 2010. The total numbers of the students are 54, from which 30 are male and the remaining of
24 are females. There are 9 cooperative learning groups that have 6 members in each
groups/teams and lead by one group/team leader. The groups/teams arranged based on
alphabetical sequence of students name and group/team leader select from the group/team
according to the best GPA result of previous semester of this academic year. The students who
included in this study have a mix of abilities, gender, race and come from all region of the
country. The teacher in the study has an experience in the field of teaching from two up to seven
years.

3.3 Description of the Instrument

To assess the role of cooperative learning on students results, one test provide to students as per
module on the course selected to study and arrange group discussion and give group assignment
based on first semester cooperative learning groups in which groups leader selected based on
students university entrance results.

Students first semester cooperative grade plan and department report are review to assess their
first semester cooperative learning contribution on students performance.
Questionnaires has been prepared and distributed to the students after they took final
examination on the subject to reflect their view on the change they bring after the group arranged
based on first semester cumulative results.

3.4. Study variables

As the title of action research indicates there is influence based relationship between students
result and cooperative learning. Generally there are two variables. These are:

Independent Variable: cooperative learning

Dependent Variable: student result

 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 54 students were found in 2010 E.C first year group one management student. Out of
which 24 were female and 30 were male. Among those students A number were scored greater
than 50% the rest B number were below pass mark on the course of human resources
management. The following table shows the grade summary of first year group one management
student for the course human resource management.

Table 1: Comparison of student’s management student for the course human resource
management

Grade letters No. of students Percent

A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D
Fx

Student’s achievement of their plan

In the first semester, our first year management students were planning to achieve a very good
academic score. But out of 64 of first year management students only 15 of students succeed
their plan. Out of which 5 score above plan and 10 of students score equal to plan, the rest 49 of
students not succeed or below plan.
Similarly in the second semester most of Management student for the course human resource
management were planned to achieve a very good result. Among 64 of group one management
student 11 were scored above plan and 19 of students score equal to plan, the rest 34 of students
not succeed or below plan (Table 2).

Table 4.1: Comparison of achievements of plan result in first semester and second semester

Students achievement First semester Second semester

Above plan 5 11
Equal to plan 10 19
Below plan 49 34
Sources: planned grade summary, 2007 E.C

Employed Assessment Methods

About 4 types of assessment methods were employed to evaluate student’s performance for the
course human resource management (Figure 4.1). These were group assignments, tests,
presentations and final examination.

group assignment
10%

presentation
10% final exam
50%

tests
30%

Figure 4.1: Assessment methods Source: course outline, 2010 E.C

Student’s perception towards cooperative learning

As we know cooperative learning is a teaching arrangement in which small, heterogeneous
groups of students work together to achieve a common goal. However, as we observe and assess
most of the time students are not interested by this teaching pedagogy especially in the first
semester. But as the result indicated that student’s perceptions improved in this semester.

Table 4.2: Student’s perception towards cooperative learning

Student’s perception towards

No. of respondents (%) of respondents
cooperative learning

Poor 48 75

Good 12 18.75

Very good 4 6.25

Results from the questionnaire revealed that 75% of the respondents has poor perception this
pedagogy and the remaining 25% have better perceptions. This implies students were not that
much interested to use and participate in cooperative learning.

Major causes for the attitudinal problem towards cooperative learning

Table 4.3: Major causes for the attitudinal problem towards cooperative learning

Major causes No. of respondents (%) of respondents

Lack of awareness on the aim 40 62.5

of cooperative learning

Considered as a political input

Time consumer 24 37.50

Source: Questionnaire 2007 E.C

As revealed from (Table 3), student’s perception towards cooperative learning in first semester
was not good. The main reasons for their attitudinal problems towards cooperative learning, as
revealed from (Table 4) 62.5 % respondents identified that lack of awareness on the aim of
cooperative learning takes the highest proportion, followed by they believed it takes their time
without any importance. So they considered as cooperative learning is a time consuming
teaching pedagogy.

Improvement of cooperative learning perceptions

According to respondents the main reasons for the improvement of their perception in second
semester were the cooperative learning group redesign and the group leader selected by
considering of first semester academic results of students. Such kind of arrangement encourages
the group members to work with leader who has a better result compared to themselves. But in
first semester cooperative learning group leaders arrange based on university entrance results.

The other reasons what respondents underline was that the cooperative learning advisor assigned
by the department based on the second semester course offering to the target group. This means
their advisor is who hold course and teach them. This helps them to contact their advisors in any
academic issues when they need him/her.

Proper orientation on the aim of cooperative learning that given by advisor and encouragable
meeting the department and college were the other reasons that respondent’s reflects.

Outcome of cooperative learning

Table 4.4: Outcome of cooperative learning

Outcomes of cooperative learning No. of respondents Percentage

Better academic scores 34 53.12

Higher self-esteem and make me 20 31.25

programmed

Building positive social skills 10 15.63

Source: Questionnaire 2007 E.C

Even though respondents were experienced poor perceptions and not beneficial from cooperative
learning in first semester; the change what they have in the second semester enable them to enjoy
the following benefits.

As the above table shows better academic score was the main outcomes of cooperative learning
that 53% of the respondents identified. Improving self esteem and make me programmed and,
building positive social skills were took the rest proportion, respectively.
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

STRATEGY

5.1 Conclusion

The following main conclusions drive from result and discussion part. These are:
 As the result shows, poor perception of students toward cooperative learning were lead to
ineffective implementation of the program and hinder and lead to poor results of students.
 Selection of cooperative learning group`s leaders was one of the determinant factors to
better application of cooperative learning.
 Arrangement of cooperative learning groups need serious attention as the result indicates
it determines student’s participations in it.
 To alleviate poor perception of student toward cooperative learning, department should
provide orientation about it.
 Selection of group leader should be applied based on communicative students’ results and
by valuing communication skills.
 Cooperative learning group should be arranged each semester as per the performance of
the group and continuous follow up should be implementing on the groups.
 REFERENCES

 Becker, W. E. and Watts, M. (1995) 'Teaching Tools: Teaching Methods in

Undergraduate Economics', Economic Inquiry, October, pp. 692-700.
 Cohen, E. G., Brody, C. M., Shevin, M. S. (2004). Teaching cooperative earning: the
challenge for teacher education. SUNY Press.
 Davis, P.M., (1991). Cognition and Learning: Merrill/Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
 Hwong, N., Caswell, A., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1993, February). Effects of

Cooperative and Individualistic from Academic Search Premier Database

 Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and
research. Edina, MN: Interaction.
 Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., and Hulbuock, B. G. (1993). Learning with Technology: A

Siegfried, J. J., Saunders, P., Stinar, E. and Zhang, H. (1996) 'Teaching Tools: How is
Introductory Economics Taught in America'? Economic Inquiry, January, pp.182-92.

 Slavin, R. E. (1991). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Allyn &
Bacon. Boston.
 Stahl, R. J. (1994). The essential elements of cooperative learning in the classroom. ERIC
Digest.
 Taber, K. (2001). The Mismatch between Assumed Prior Knowledge and the Lerner’s to
Ethno Linguistic Minorities. Summer Institute of Linguistics, Dalla, TX.