Action Research Project: How Does Cooperative Learning Affect Student Engagement During Group Work in Grade 3 and 4?

Vandevorst Cooperative Learning
Action Research Project

__________________________________________________________________
How does cooperative learning affect student engagement

during group work in grade 3 and 4?
Dominique Vandevorst
Mentor: Denise Lucas
Marygrove College
02\18\2013
Abstract
Students in my combined grade three and four class often work in small groups. The class is
part of a small private International Baccalaureate school in the South of Norway. Due to the
different learning needs and characters of the students it is difficult for all students to be
equally engaged and actively involved in group work. Often one or two group members do
all the work and complete the tasks while the other members are disengaged, distracted or
unfocused. This study sets out to incorporate cooperative learning strategies during group
work over a 12 week trial period to see if cooperative learning would have a positive effect on
students engagement. By using different cooperative learning strategies students were
encouraged to take a more equal part, ownership and responsibility during group work.

Looking back
When looking back over the last number of weeks I am surprised by how far I have come in
the action research planning process. I would never have thought seven weeks ago that I
would be handing in a study proposal to the Marygrove institutional review board with various
data collection tools and a research question formulated. I have learned a great deal about
looking at myself as a teacher and the students in the class and identifying something that is
difficult or not going well in class. I have learned to formulate this difficulty into a research
question which I can investigate further through putting together a research study. Using an
action research study will allow me to implement new strategies and collect data to see how
well the new strategies will work and whether there is a positive or negative outcome. It will
give me concrete evidence either for or against implementing cooperative learning within the
classroom that I can share with the wider staff community. I am much more familiar with the
various steps I need to go through to set up an action research study, creating a focus for the
study, identifying variables, creating data collection tools that are valid and reliable and being
aware of ethical regulations in terms of confidentiality and student safety.
I am really curious to see how the action research study will impact the learning environment
in the class. My hopes are that this study will have a positive influence on students
engagement especially those that have previously struggled with working in groups. I hope
that by using cooperative learning within the lessons students will strengthen their social and
academic skills and become engaged members of their group.

Introduction
I am a grade three and four homeroom teacher and I have been teaching for two years. I
teach in a small private International Baccalaureate school in Norway. The language of
instruction is English while all students are taught Norwegian as a second language from first
grade through to tenth grade. There are 130 students at our school between the age of six
and sixteen. The teachers and administration staff come from 14 different countries. Most
teachers have been teaching for a good number of years however not all of them are familiar
with or use differentiating strategies in class particularly in the middle years. My Primary
Years Coordinator has a very good understanding of differentiated learning and the most up
to date educational strategies to be used in class.
I have previously done some small scale quantitative and qualitative research but have never
done any action research in an educational setting. I am familiar with the ethics of research
and how I need the follow the codes of ethical conduct as set out by the American
Psychological Association. I am aware that educational action research is different from
traditional research in that teacher researchers are not only acting as researchers but, as
Mills (2000) puts forward, hope to be change agents who have the power and authority to
bring about change in their classrooms (pg. 35).
The class that I teach is a combined grade three and four with 20 students from all over the
world. Many students have dual nationality and were born in a different country than Norway.
Many students have a parent that works for one of the international companies situated in
Arendal in the South of Norway. Arendal is a small town with 40 000 inhabitants. One
student has an independent educational plan (IEP) and quite a few students have difficulty
concentrating and staying on task for any length of time but because they are not
significantly behind grade level are not referred further to the educational psychological

services. One boy in particular has impulsive body movement and poor spatial awareness
but fortunately manages to take on board key elements of lessons.
Six out of eleven boys and one girl in class struggle to take an equal part in group work or
pair share work. They get distracted quickly and let other students, mainly the girls, do the
main work. The boys find it difficult to engage with the group which means they do not
complete their work or do not work to their ability. I have therefore thought many times how
to make group work more effective, attractive and engaging for all students. I would like to
see all students engaged in their learning and take an equal part in discussions and be
listened to respectively and thoughtfully. There must be some way of engaging all students
in class in exciting, deep, higher level thinking discussions.
My personal biases include the belief that some boys and girls will not respond to
cooperative strategies due to their learning needs regardless of what different theories say. I
feel I have already tried several different strategies for helping students focus and engaging
them more actively in group work and some have worked temporarily and some not at all.
For example only recently I introduced a unit on ancient civilizations by having some boxes
filled with soil with several pictures and items of ancient civilizations. This represented an
archeological dig. Students had to carefully scrape away the soil to discover the artifacts
underneath. All students were keen and engaged in the task until all pictures had been dug
up and they had to discuss what they had found with their group and write down their
thoughts. Within minutes several of the students were off task and lost interest in working
with their group. This bias could affect the action research study as this is a negative mind
set and perhaps when introducing different cooperative learning strategies and principles my
negative mindset could be transferred to the students which could influence their willingness
to try the new strategies.

My second bias is that I wonder if I am willing to check my own teaching strategies and
change them for the better if need be and depending on research results. We have to cover
so much throughout a term that I am worried I will not be able to put in practice effectively
and consistently any of the strategies I will come across during my research. This might
influence the effect of any new cooperative learning strategies depending on my enthusiasm,
thoroughness and consistency when doing the study.
A third bias is whether colleagues are willing to take on board the study and if there are any
positive outcomes from the study will they be willing to work together with me to put them in
place more permanently. Even though I am the homeroom teacher there are several other
teachers working with the grade three and four class. The strategies would probably only
have long-term effects on students focus if all teachers put in place the same strategies.
My concern is mainly time: time to organize the action research, time to gather data and time
to follow up on the action research. Another concern I have is am I on the right track with my
research and have I formulated a good question that will allow for enough data to be
collected to make the study valid and reliable.
My ethical concerns are that even though I will make sure no names will be mentioned
throughout the research study and within the research paper, it will be easy to identify certain
students due to their particular behavior in class and their particular needs. Since we are a
small school any other educator or parent reading the paper would probably recognize the
students involved. I wonder how to prevent this and if this is actually possible without
interfering with data to such an extent that the data has been changed significantly. I also
wonder whether I should explain to the students as well as to the parents that they will be
involved in an action research study or not. This could potentially influence the data collected
as some students would work harder and others would maybe try and upset the group to
look cool if they knew that I was collecting evidence during the lessons.
The area I will be focusing on during this project is what the effect of cooperative learning
strategies will be on students engagement during group work. I feel that by narrowing down
the research study to students engagement during group work I will hopefully see benefits
with regards to focus and understanding as well in the long run. Focus and engagement
hang closely together as students who are engaged in their work will naturally be focused on
what they are doing.
I plan to study the effect of cooperative learning strategies, within my grade 3 and 4
classroom, on students engagement so that I may better understand how to effectively use
group work in my classroom.
How does cooperative learning affect student engagement during group work?

Review of literature:
Coffey, H. (2006). Cooperative learning. Retrieved Learn NC January 26, 2013 from
http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/4653?ref=search
Duplass (2006, as cited in Coffey, 2006) puts forward the following key elements of
cooperative learning: teacher supervision whereby the teacher monitors group activity to
make sure students do not veer too far off task and is available to answer and guide
discussion if necessary. Heterogeneous groups: groups are created according to diversity in
ability levels and backgrounds. Positive interdependence: teacher and students set up group
goals. Face to face interaction: students use verbal and nonverbal communication to solve
problems and explain information. Individual accountability: through student roles students
are accountable for their tasks and assisting the rest of the group in meeting learning goals.
Social skills: teacher and students establish rules to make sure all students are respectful
and utilize time wisely during group interaction. Group processing: students engage in
reflection on group work and activity. Evaluation: both individual and group evaluation and
assessment.
This gives me a clear framework within which to set up cooperative learning in the
classroom. It will help me get started and something to evaluate the different strategies I will
use against.
Darling-Hammond, L et al. (2008). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for
understanding. Jossey-Bass, SF. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from
http://www.edutopia.org/inquiry-project-learning-research.

Cooperative learning includes a variety of educational approaches involving joint effort by
learners (Darling-Hammond et al, 2008). Learning centers on the students own exploration
or application of the curriculum not simply on the teachers presentation of it. Cooperative
learning requires the group or class to become a community of learners that takes
responsibility for their learning, motivation and behavior. According to Darling-Hammond et
al (2008) significant evidence has shown that where collaborative learning is done well and
followed through, students become self-motivated and much less reliant on the teacher.
Students are engaged in their own learning and have a greater understanding of how to be
team players. They go on to say that cooperative group work benefits students in both social
and behavioral areas, including improvement in student self-concept, social interaction, time
on task, and positive feelings toward peers. This is what I am hoping to achieve with the
action research study since I have quite a few students who struggle with exactly these
areas. According to research done and presented in this article urban and minority students
for example benefited even more from cooperative group work and I wonder if this will then
also apply to students who have attention and focus difficulties.
When putting together successful cooperative learning groups, teachers need to pay careful
attention to the work process and interaction among students (Darling-Hammond et al,
2008). Slavin (as in Darling-Hammond et al, 2008) argues that it is not enough to simply tell
students to work together. They need to have reasons to take each other and their work
seriously. He developed a model that focuses on external motivators such as rewards and
individual accountability as he found that this produced stronger learning outcomes for the
group. Specific roles can be assigned to encourage equal participation, such as recorder,
reporter, materials manager, resource manager, communication facilitator and harmonizer.
Through assigning roles and carefully designing activities diverse talents and
interdependence among group members can be created.

While reading this article I feel I am getting closer to the practical side of cooperative learning
and how to bring it into the classroom. I can see that planning is the key in setting up
effective cooperative learning strategies.
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2008). Cooperative learning. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from
http://www.co-operation.org/?page_id=65
This article explains that the way in which students interact is a neglected aspect of
instruction. Johnson and Johnson (2008) put forward here that the way teachers structure
student-student interaction can show how well students are learning and how students feel
about school, teachers, each other and themselves. Johnson and Johnson (2008) put
forward that learning is a social process that occurs through interpersonal interaction within
a cooperative context. Individuals, working together, construct shared understandings and
knowledge.
Johnson and Johnson (2008) distinguish between formal cooperative learning, informal
cooperative learning and cooperative base groups. During formal cooperative learning
students work together for one class period or over several weeks to achieve shared learning
outcomes and complete together specific tasks and assignments (Johnson, Johnson, &
Holubec, 2008). During informal cooperative learning students work together to achieve a
joint learning goal in temporary ad-hoc groups that can last from a few minutes to one lesson
(Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 2008). For example during an informative film informal
cooperative learning can be used to focus students attention on material to be learned, help
set expectations for that lesson, summarize what was learned and provide closure for a
particular instructional session. Cooperative base groups are long-term, heterogeneous
cooperative learning groups with stable membership (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 2008).
Cooperative base groups ensure that all group members are making academic progress,

hold each other accountable for their learning and provide support, encouragement and
assistance in completing tasks.
In order to implement cooperative learning within the classroom I feel I should start by
modeling informal cooperative learning. Once the students understand the process of
cooperative learning I could progress to formal cooperative learning and ultimately to
cooperative base groups. This would create a classroom where students are continuously
active members of the group, engaged and focused on their learning and helping each other
to gain a deeper understanding of the learning outcomes.
One of the main findings from their research was that the more cooperative learning
experiences students are involved in, the more mature their cognitive and moral decision
making and the more they will tend to take other peoples perspectives in account when
making decisions (Johnson and Johnson, 2008). This would be a link to my topic for the
action research study as I am investigating whether cooperative learning will have an effect
on engagement, focus and understanding.
Johnson, Johnson and Holubec. (ASCD, 1994.) Research summary collaborative learning.
Retrieved January 20, 2013, from
http://www.journeytoexcellence.org.uk/resourcesandcpd/research/summaries/rscollab
orativelearning.asp
This article explains what cooperative learning is: 'cooperative learning is the use of small
groups through which students work together to accomplish shared goals and to maximize
their own and others potential (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec, ASCD, 1994).

To be cooperative is to reach the full potential of the whole group. Within this article five
defining characteristics of cooperative learning are discussed: positive interdependence
through shared goals, individual and group accountability for producing high quality work,
promotive interaction to produce joint products, appropriate use of social skills and group
processing.
The key outcomes identified through extensive research into benefits of cooperative learning
are increased effort, positive relationships and improved psychological health. According to
this article the rationale for using cooperative learning is that learning is fundamentally a
social activity, people are social beings and classrooms operating as communities reach
better results while students gain valuable future skills and competencies.
Another point brought up here is that teachers have a different role within a cooperative
learning classroom, they are less controlling. Students are the crew and drive their learning
whereas the teacher acts as a guide and ensures that students work and learn together
effectively.
Some very important points are brought up in this article that I was only vaguely aware of
before. If cooperative learning is implemented correctly it should bring about a community of
learners and should strengthen students engagement and accountability something I have
been trying to put in place within our classroom. However I am still wondering about those
students who cannot focus during group work. What do I need to do to help them gain those
key outcomes that Johnson and Johnson identified?
Kagan, S. Kagan. 2003). Structures: Research and rationale. San Clemente, CA: Kagan
Publishing. Kagan Online Magazine. Retrieved January 19, 2013
www.KaganOnline.com
According to Kagan (2003) Cooperative learning is one of the most extensively researched
educational innovations of all time. There are approximately one thousand research studies
which document its effectiveness on quite a range of outcome variables. Kagan (2003)
investigated that during group work in which students are allowed to interact in an
unstructured way, group work usually produces very unequal participation and often does not
include individual accountability, a dimension which is essential for producing consistent
achievement gains for all students. He went on to design the Kagan Structures to meet the
highest standards of cooperative learning and maximize simultaneous interaction.
According to Kagan (2003) cooperative learning theory posits that students learn best when
they can encourage and tutor each other, when they are held individually accountable, when
they all participate about equally, and when there is a great deal of active, interactive
engagement.
Kagan puts forward that teachers respond positively to the use of Kagan Structures or
cooperative learning strategies. Teachers have reported positive outcomes such as
increased student achievement, improved social skills and relations and improved classroom
climate. He also writes that teachers themselves have been positively influenced by the
impact using cooperative learning strategies has in the classroom.
What I found particularly interesting in this article was that Kagan links cooperative learning
to multiple intelligences theory (Gardner, 1983, 1993 as cited in Kagan, 2001). According to
this theory each student has a unique pattern of intelligences and students learn best when
they can use their preferred intelligence or intelligences. Kagan goes on to say that he
developed his structures or cooperative learning strategies with this theory in mind and that
whichever structure is being used some specific intelligence will be engaged, developed or
stretched. So by using different strategies students will better understand their own unique

pattern and others. They learn to recognize their own and others strengths and weaknesses
and can use this knowledge to benefit the group and each student within the group has the
opportunity to be successful.
Kagan, S. (Fall/Winter 2008). The instructional revolution. Kagan Online Magazine. San
Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing.
Kagan (2008) gives three examples of how to put in place cooperative learning strategies in
the classroom: Rally Robin, Timed Pair Share, and Sage-N-Scribe. Elsewhere he adds other
examples such as through team interviews, jot thoughts, round robin and numbered heads
together. According to Kagan (2008) students are engaged during all of these structures. He
argues that in the same amount of time it would normally take a teacher using the traditional
method of calling on and responding to one or two students, the teacher can instead have
every student in class give several answers. This is so true, often when I ask the class a
question the same three students will raise their hands and answer with thoughtful
comments. The students who struggle with staying focused and engaged during traditional
ways of teaching have usually switched off as soon as I ask the class the question. The
meta-communication with cooperative learning is that it is an inclusive structure whereby
everyone has ideas to contribute and everyone should have the opportunity to express their
ideas. Kagan (2008), Tomlinson (2004), Slavin (2009) and others have shown that
cooperative learning theory advocates that students learn best when they can encourage
and tutor each other, when they are individually held accountable, when they participate
equally and when there is a great deal of active, interactive engagement.
This article gives practical advice and examples of some of the strategies that can be used to
incorporate cooperative learning. Kagan (2008) gives reasons why the strategies work and
how they work. I can include these various strategies in the study to see whether they will

have an effect in my classroom on engagement especially for those students that struggle
with focus and participating.
Kagan, S. (2010). Disengagement: Achievement gaps, discipline, and dropout treating the
disease, not just the symptoms. Kagan Online Magazine. Kagan Publishing, San
Clemente, CA.
Studies done by Kagan (2010) support findings that cooperative learning improve amongst
other things: academic achievement among students, especially for low achieving students,
social skills and relational skills such as empathy, diversity skills, leadership skills, caring,
sharing, helping, and feeling cared about. Cooperative learning improves self-esteem
among students including academic and peer self esteem and improves class climate and
positive attitude towards content, teachers and peers. It encourages higher-level thinking
such as questioning, analyzing and synthesizing diverse viewpoints and data.
Brain research has shown that students brains during cooperative learning are more
engaged in learning (Carter, 1999 and Rilling, Giutman, Zeh, Pagnoni, Berns & Kilts, 2002,
as in Kagan, 2010). Kagan (2010) links cooperative learning to brain based learning and
multiple intelligence. PET scans reveal that brains of students are far more engaged when
explaining ideas to a partner than when just listening or simply responding to a teacher.
During cooperative learning PET scans have shown that there is widespread activity in the
brain as compared to localized brain activity during independent silent reading. Other brain
research shows that cooperation stimulates the reward tracks in the brain whereby the brain
literally lights up during cooperative learning which shows why students find cooperative
work rewarding and engaging. I can see that by using cooperative learning strategies I
would be able to encourage students with different multiple intelligences to take a more
active part in the classroom. It would help some of my students to stay focused and

engaged as they know they will have to take responsibility for teaching and encouraging
peers. By taking into account students different learner profiles it seems cooperative
learning provides an opportunity for all students to have an equal part. Kagan (2010) refers
to increased awareness and understanding of multiple intelligence instructional strategies
and their impact on students engagement and inclusiveness within the classroom. Using
multiple intelligence instruction means that educators will differentiate instruction in order to
tailor curriculum so each student is taught in engaging ways.
Reading this article I can see that I need to vary the cooperative learning strategies within the
class as this will encourage as many students as possible to take an active part in their
learning. The more cooperative learning strategies I use the more learner profiles or
intelligence patterns will be active and used within a group setting.
Kaufman, J., Robinson, S., Bellah, K.A., Akers, C., Haase-Wittler, P., Martindale, L.,
(September 2008). Engaging students with brain-based learning. Retrieved January
29, 2013 from www.acteonline.org
This article confirms my thinking that the more parts of the brain are activated the more
engaged students will be in their learning. Kaufman et al (2008) argue that teachers need to
make more use of the brains natural learning tendencies in their teaching methods and
teaching methods should complement the way the brain functions. Research has shown that
meaningful learning occurs when teachers move away from an information delivery approach
to a learner-centered approach. Kaufman et al (2008) say that to become learner-centered
teachers need to adjust the focal point within the classroom from teaching to creating
powerful learning environments whereby students can experience their education. According
to Kaufmann et al (2008) through active learning and sharing their learning with students in
class students create meaning and find relevance in what they are learning.
Another interesting point from this article is that part of brain-based learning is recognizing
students different learning styles, implementing variability in ones teaching style, recognizing
that multiple and concrete experiences are essential for meaningful learning and providing
ways whereby students can consolidate learning through conscious and unconscious
processing with others. Kaufman et al (2008) say that students should be given
opportunities to reflect on their experiences, make connections and share their thinking with
others. The teachers are the facilitators during this process and should encourage
discussions and consolidation of ideas. This will allow students to learn from one another and
recognize and remember the learning experiences.
This links in well with the cooperative learning style whereby students share their thinking
through various strategies with their peers. My understanding is that by making their thinking
visible through actively being engaged in group work the brain will remember learning more
clearly and easily. I also think that by allowing students to share in multiple ways and being
part of a group should help them to be more engaged in what they are doing as according to
this research the brain is more actively engaged and stimulated.
Performance Learning Systems (2007) Incorporate cooperative learning in your classroom.

Performance learning systems. Retrieved January 23, 2013 from
http://www.plsweb.com/Products-Resources/Newsletter/Newsletter-Archives/January2007
Research has shown that teachers can nurture effective helping in cooperative learning
groups through creating positive norms for a group, designing learning tasks that support
learning and understanding, through modeling appropriate and expected behavior and by
monitoring progress (Webb, Farivar, & Mastergeorge, 2002, as cited in PLS, 2007).
This article puts together some research that has shown that through cooperative learning
students achieve success because they are able spend more time on task and that
cooperative learning activities are beneficial across all grade levels and all subject areas.
It confirms again what other articles have mentioned that cooperative learning is more than
group work. Here in this article it is explained as a teaching strategy designed to imitate
real-life learning and problem solving by combining teamwork with individual and group
accountability.
The article gives some practical ideas of how to make cooperative learning meaningful to
students and how to help them understand what cooperative learning is as this will more
likely help students reap the benefits of meeting the learning goal. The article points out that
students need to understand what behaviors are expected so that they can truly engage in
cooperative learning. It is important to spend time practicing these behaviors. A learning
strategy to learn appropriate behavior would be to use the acronym PALS: participate, attend,
listen and stay on task. Rather than giving the students a list of rules and definitions the
students should come up with definitions for each letter. By taking time to lay the
groundwork for cooperative learning students will more quickly adopt a working model of
cooperative learning in class.
Shindler, J. (2009). Transformative classroom management. Retrieved January 23, 2013

from http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/jshindl/cm/Chapter12CooperativeLearningfinal.htm
Shindler (2009) put forward that traditional group work only scratches the surface of what is
possible rather than when students learn within a cooperative context. This is what I have

experienced so far in the classroom. During tasks where students work together often the
same students produce very little work and contribute a minimal amount of ideas. I have
usually presented group tasks in a traditional group work format expecting students to have
the innate ability to participate equally, to focus on the task at hand and to come away with a
deeper understanding of what they are inquiring into.
Shindler (2004, as in Shindler, 2009) also puts forward that cooperative learning has the
potential to meet more learning style needs more of the time than individualized direct
instruction. During cooperative learning students learn interpersonal and collaboration skills
that are vital for later professional success. It has the potential to produce a level of
engagement that other forms of learning cannot (Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain 2003, as in
Shindler, 2009). Cooperative learning strengthens several transformative goals including
conflict resolution skills, empathy, being an effective team member and collective problemsolving (Watson & Battistich, 2006, as in Shindler, 2009). From what I understand about
cooperative learning so far it is the students through doing the learning and understanding
themselves, going through the planning, storming and forming stages during cooperative
learning that they gain experience on a small scale of what it will be like later on in the work
place. I can see that several students struggle at present with cooperating and participating
equally, sharing the work load and showing respect for each others ideas. This has perhaps
been due to the traditional group format sometimes presented in the class.
According to Shindler (2009) cooperative learning has shown amongst other things to have a
positive effect on student learning when compared to individual or competitive conditions
(Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain 2003 as in Shindler, 2009).
Shindler (2009) refers to three factors: locus of control, acceptance and belonging, mastery
orientation, that form the foundation for a psychology of success and how cooperative
learning meets these three factors. During cooperative learning students have greater

control over and responsibility for their learning outcomes. They work in teams to meet goals
and need each other to be successful. The process during cooperative learning is the
primary goal rather than the end result. What students put into the effort and the focus on
what is possible rather than preoccupation with a fear of failure.
Slavin, R.E. (2009). Cooperative learning. In G. McCulloch & D. Crook (Eds.) International
Encyclopedia of Education. Abington, UK: Routledge. Retrieved January 20, 2013
from http://www.successforall.org/SuccessForAll/media/PDFs/CL--What-MakesGroupwork-work.pdf.
I found this a very informative and valid piece of research. Slavin (2009) sets out to explain
cooperative learning and what is important when implementing this in the classroom. He
gives numerous examples of cooperative learning research studies done in schools which
have shown a significant impact on students learning and has shown to improve affective
outcomes. Positive outcomes depend on two key elements: group goals and individual
accountability. By setting group goals students know they are working to a common goal or
to gain a reward or recognition while the success of the group depends on the individual
learning of each member of the group.
Slavin points out that there are many forms of cooperative learning but all of them involve
having students work in small groups or teams to help one another learn academic material.
Students have the opportunity to discuss information presented by the teacher or to find and
discover information within their group. According to research students love working in
cooperative groups and are more accepting of others different from themselves.
Something I found interesting is how Slavin (2009) links cooperative to learning in the 21st
Century. He says that learning environments for the 21st century must be ones in which

students are actively engaged with learning tasks and with each other. Today, teachers are in
competition with television, computer games, and all sorts of engaging technology, and the
expectation that children will learn passively is becoming increasingly unrealistic. Cooperative learning offers a proven, practical means of creating exciting social and engaging
classroom environments to help students to master traditional skills and knowledge as well
as develop the creative and interactive skills needed in todays economy and society.
Slavin (2009) concludes that 30 years after much of the foundational research was
completed, cooperative learning remains at the edge of school policy. Slavin makes a
distinction between structured forms of cooperative learning that have proven to be effective
but are not used as often as more informal forms which are used on an ad hoc basis. He
hopes that the continually growing evidence base for cooperative learning will lead to a
greater focus on cooperative learning strategies within education.
Tomlinson, C. (2004). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms (2nd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Cooperative learning strategies or structures provide educators with the tools to cater for
multiple intelligence instruction and taking in to account students variety of learning profiles
(Tomlinson, 2004). Tomlinson links cooperative learning to differentiation. Cooperative
learning groups are heterogeneous groups consisting of students at different ability levels
who can complement each other. This book is helpful as it gives practical advice for how to
include students at different ability levels and how to be aware of their learner profile.
Cooperative learning groups if implemented properly would give students of all ability an
opportunity to contribute and engage due to common goals, to gain understanding through
peer learning and to focus due to accountability.
While reading through the various research materials on cooperative learning I have come to
realize how important the teachers role is in creating a cooperative learning environment. I
have little experience so far of using cooperative learning strategies in class. My initial
thoughts were that cooperative learning is a fairly new concept however when I started my
literature review I was surprised by how much research has been done and how long
cooperative learning has been around. Doing the literature review and starting to use my
skills as a researcher have helped me gain a much better picture of what cooperative
learning means and how it can be used in the classroom. Doing internet searches and book
reviews have shown me how many resources and useful materials there are out there for me
to access and effectively use in my own work as an educator.
To implement effective cooperative learning in my classroom does not look easy and requires
time to plan, to develop group structures that help individuals work well together in a group
and time to organize activities that support cooperative work and introduce and model
cooperative learning strategies in class. I have been encouraged through doing the literature
review and reading through the significant evidence that shows cooperative learning has a
positive effect on students engagement, focus and understanding. It has made me realize
what I can do to make the classroom a community of learners for all students. I look forward
to starting to implement various cooperative strategies and studying the results on focus,
engagement and understanding.

Research process
I plan to study the effect of cooperative learning strategies, within my grade 3 and 4
classroom, on students engagement so that I may better understand how to effectively use
group work in my classroom.
Research question:
How does cooperative learning affect student engagement during group work?

Data collection
The research question I had posed was: how does cooperative learning affect student
engagement during group work in grade three and four. I decided to use four different
independent data collecting methods including both quantitative and qualitative data
collection techniques to minimize bias during the research project and during data collection
(Mills, 2011). If there are similarities between the data gathered from the different data
collection tools, then this will likely show a valid affirmation of the effect of cooperative
learning on engagement of students during lessons (Sagor, 1992). The quantitative data
collection tools I used were a teacher observational check list and a Likert scale evaluation
form. The qualitative data collection tools I used in this research project were pre- and postattitude surveys\questionnaires and teacher observational field notes.
The pre- and post-attitude surveys took the form of a questionnaire with short questions to be
given at the start of the action research and again at the end (Appendix B). For the students
that needed extra assistance during the writing process an assistant helped write down their
answers and thoughts. This data collection tool helped me to gather information from the
class in a fairly short time. Doing the pre-attitude survey at the start of the action research
project helped me to gather pre-existing knowledge and set the stage for the study (Mills,
2000). The survey gave an overall indication of students understanding and personal
experience of group work, their preferred way of learning in class and how much they
thought they contributed to group work explaining in short sentences why. This survey was
given at the beginning and again at the end of the action research study to see whether there
was a change in understanding and experiencing group work after cooperative learning
strategies had been implemented.
Students had not used cooperative learning before on a regular and formal basis when doing
the survey initially and this should be visible in the way they answered the questions. There

could be a positive difference in the answers given at the end of the study after
implementation of cooperative learning strategies during group work giving an indication that
cooperative learning strategies engaged students more during group work. The post-attitude
survey allowed students to reflect on the cooperative group work tasks and process they had
been through and allowed me to see whether their attitudes and engagement had changed
or not towards group work.
The second method of data collection I used was through note taking, both narrative and
descriptive (Appendix C). I observed and took notes during cooperative group work in class
once a week. At times I asked the classroom assistant to observe and write down her
observations as well. Observation through field notes allowed me to evaluate my own and
the students performance during cooperative learning (Sagor, 1992). By using observation
as a data collection tool I had another window that gave me a view on my cooperative
learning lesson and students response to the cooperative learning strategies used.
According to Miller (2000) teachers are active participant observers of their teaching practice
(pg. 75). During their teaching they are observers as well as participants and are actively
engaged in what goes on in the classroom. Using active participation observation helps
teachers to observe the outcome of their teaching and using that to influence future lessons.
Miller (2000) adds that using this form of data collection is a familiar and not overly time
consuming data collection tool for teachers. I kept track of my observations by using field
notes which included anecdotal records, what stood out during group work, contradictions or
paradoxes and what was going well. Field notes included observations of students, their
participation in groups, how much or how little they took part and their use of the cooperative
learning strategies. I used a format adapted from Grundman (2002) for collecting my notes
and thoughts after each lesson as adapted.
The third data collection method used was the Likert scale: student engagement was
measured after each cooperative learning lesson using a Likert scale data collection tool

(Appendix D). Likert scales according to Miller (2000) are often used to measure the impact
a new learning tool has on students attitudes. A Likert scale asks students to respond to a
series of statements by circling words varying from strongly agree to strongly disagree to
show what students felt or thought about a particular lesson. Students were given a Likert
scale with statements after each cooperative learning lesson where students identified how
well they felt they did during the cooperative learning. I added a group Likert scale to hold
students accountable for their answers: students filled out a Likert scale for themselves and a
group scale which helped me to check whether there were correlations between group and
self-observations. I believed that using this type of data collection tool gave me plenty of
information from the students perspective on group work and their opinion about the
implementation of cooperative learning strategies and whether this changed their
engagement with the learning tasks. By using a Likert scale students did not have to write
elaborate comments. Filling out the Likert scale did not take much time at the end of the
lesson, it did not provide any difficulties for students who had difficulty writing as the
statements had been written in easily understandable and readable format.
The final data collection method used was the observational check list: (adapted from
Grundman, 2002, Appendix E). According to Sagor (1992) observational check lists are a
data collection tool for capturing everyday life. The use of checklists requires less work than
note taking but still allows for rich data collection for analyses. This data was readily
available during cooperative group work during classroom time and by using a check list I
could more accurately and quickly observe students and identify issues in the class. Using
the rating scale for each group and each member in each group allowed me to collect my
observations effectively and neatly together. It also helped me to measure each group
objectively and along the same criteria. This tool went hand in hand with my active
participation observation and captures the richness and texture of everyday life of schools
and classrooms (Sagor, 1992, pg. 32). During the action research study I found that I would

add notes to the observational check list rather than make separate field notes as it was
quicker and easier to add them to the observational list.
Data analysis
Over a twelve week period during spring term of school I collected research data using the
four different data collection tools. Each week I set up a cooperative lesson during a 90
minute lesson block to gather data. The third and four grade class consisted of twenty
students, eleven boys and nine girls. Unfortunately one boy was diagnosed with cancer at
the start of the study and was absent from school for the rest of term. Therefore there were
usually four groups of four students and one group of three students. They were always
grouped according to learner profile and learning strengths and challenges. This way each
group represented a heterogeneous group of boys and girls.
I used different cooperative learning strategies and implemented cooperative learning
principles throughout the research period such as jigsaw, sage and scribe, one stray and
timed pair share. At the start of the research study students were asked to fill out a survey
and again at the end of the research study to find out how they liked to work in class and
why. During the twelve week period the tasks were explained and students were guided
through the cooperative learning lesson each week. Students would fill out a self-evaluation
form at the end of the lesson and a group evaluation form based on the Likert scale data
collection tool. I would fill out an observational check list throughout the lesson and add field
notes throughout the lesson and afterwards.
The lessons were different from week to week and included reading comprehension, ancient
civilizations inquiry tasks, communication games, fact and opinion research and writing,
readers theatre persuasive choral reading, ecosystems inquiry tasks.

This was a small scale research study over a short period of time and therefore there are
many discrepancies in terms of validity of data and data analysis. However the various
graphs show interesting results and allow for some thoughtful observations and conclusions.
Appendix A
Figure 1. Data collection Matrix for action research study
Research
Question
How does
cooperative
learning affect
student
engagement
during
groupwork in
grade 3 and 4?
Data source
1
Student
survey
Data source
2
Data source
3
Field notes
Data source
4
Likert scale
Observation
al check list

Appendix B
1. Student pre- and post-attitude survey which will be given at the start and end of the
action research study. This will take the form of a questionnaire. The questions are
short and easy to read for all students in grade 3 and 4 class that I am working with.
For the students that need extra assistance during the writing process an assistant
will help write down their answers and thoughts. By using this data collection tool I
will be able to gather information from the whole class in a short amount of time.
Surveys can be used to gather pre-existing knowledge (Mills, 2000). The survey will
give an overall indication of students understanding and experience of group work at
the beginning of the action research study and again at the end of the study to see
whether there is a change in understanding and experiencing group work after
cooperative learning strategies have been implemented. Students have not used
cooperative learning before when doing the survey initially and this should be visible
in the way they answer the questions. There should then be a positive difference in
the answers given at the end of the study after implementation of cooperative
learning strategies during group work.
Student pre-study survey:
Name:
Date:
What is my preferred learning in class?

Alone
Group
Pair
How do I feel about working in a group?

Enjoyable
Easy Frustrating Difficult
Why? ___________________________________________
________________________________________________
How much do I think I contribute to group work?

Nothing
Little
Enough
Lots
What do I usually do when I am working in a group?

____________________________________________________________
______________________________________
If I had a choice I would work:

Alone
Group
Pair
Why? ____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
If I had to work in a group I would
_________________________________________________
The best thing about working in a group is
_________________________________________________
The hardest thing about working in a group is
_________________________________________________
Student post-study survey:
Name:
Date:
What is my preferred learning in class?

Alone
Group
Pair
How do I feel about working in a group?

Enjoyable
Easy Frustrating Difficult
Why? ___________________________________________
________________________________________________
How much do I think I contribute to group work?

Nothing
Little
Enough
Lots
What do I usually do when I am working in a group?

____________________________________________________________
______________________________________
If I had a choice I would work:

Alone
Group
Pair
Why? ____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
If I had to work in a group I would
_________________________________________________
The best thing about working in a group is
_________________________________________________
The hardest thing about working in a group is
_________________________________________________

Appendix C
2. Active participation observation through note taking, both narrative and descriptive,
and photographic evidence collection. As the teacher I will observe and take notes
during cooperative group work. I will also ask the classroom assistant to observe and
write down her observations. I will keep track of notes, anecdotes and observations
through using an online recording format: http://www.penmia.com. Observation
through photo taking and field notes allows me to evaluate my own and the students
performance during cooperative learning (Sagor, 1992). By using observation as a
data collection tool I will have another window that will give me a view on my
cooperative learning lesson and students response to the cooperative learning
strategies used. According to Miller (2000) teachers are active participant observers
of their teaching practice (pg. 75). During their teaching they are observers as well
as participants and are actively engaged in what goes on in the classroom. Using
active participation observation helps teachers to observe the outcome of their
teaching and using that to influence future lessons. Miller (2000) adds that using this
form of data collection is a familiar and not overly time consuming data collection tool
for teachers.
I will keep track of my observations by using field notes which will include anecdotal
records, what stands out during group work, contradictions or paradoxes and what is
going well. Field notes will include observations of students and their participation in
groups and their use of the cooperative learning strategies.
I will use the following format for collecting my notes and thoughts after each lesson
as adapted from Grundman (2002):
COOPERATIVE LEARNING FIELD NOTES:
Date: _________________________ Week: ________________________

Lesson Topic:
________________________________________________________________________
Describe Critical or Interesting happenings:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________
Successes: ______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Problems: ________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
My Thoughts:_____________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Ideas to Improve Future Cooperative Learning Lessons: ______________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Appendix D
3. Likert scale: student engagement will be measured after each cooperative learning
lesson using a Likert scale data collection tool. Likert scales according to Miller
(2000) are often used to measure the impact a new learning tool has on students
attitudes. A Likert scale asks students to respond to a series of statements by circling
words varying from strongly agree to strongly disagree to show what students felt or
thought about a particular lesson. Students will be given a Likert scale with
statements after each cooperative learning lesson where students can identify how
well they felt they did during the cooperative learning. I have added a group Likert
scale to hold students accountable for their answers: students will fill out a Likert
scale for themselves and a group scale which will help me to check whether there are
correlations between group and self observations. I believe that using this type of
data collection tool will give me plenty of information from the students perspective
on group work and their opinion about the implementation of cooperative learning
strategies. By using a Likert scale students do not have to write elaborate comments.
Filling out the Likert scale does not take much time to fill out at the end of the lesson,
it does not provide any difficulties for students who have difficulty writing and the
statements have been written in easily understandable and readable format.
Student self evaluation
Stro
ngly
disagree
I feel good about the work I

did in my group today.
I got along well with the
group today.
I am proud of my ability to
cope with difficulties in the
group today.
When I felt uncomfortable in
Disag
ree
Undec
ided
Ag
ree
ngly
Stro
agree

the group, I knew how to handle
it.
I can tell group members are
glad to have me in the group.
I am proud of my relationship
with my group today.
I am confident that I handled
my part in the group without
constant assistance today.
I feel like I made useful
contributions to the group today.
I can tell that my group
members respected me today.
I played an active part in my
group today.
Any additional comments
Group evaluation
Stro
ngly
disagree
Our group did well today.

The group got along well
today.
The group coped well with
difficulties in the group today.
The group knew how to handle
uncomfortable situations today.
Group members felt happy
and active in the group today.
The group was able to work
without constant assistance from
a teacher today.
The group was able to finish
the assigned tasks today.
The group showed respect to
each other today.
Everyone played an active
part in the group today.
Additional comments
Disag
ree
Undec
ided
Ag
ree
ngly
Stro
agree

Appendix E
4. Observational check list: (adapted from Grundman, 2002)
According to Sagor (1992) observational check lists are a data collection tool for
capturing everyday life. The use of checklists requires less work than note taking but
still allows for rich data collection for analyses. This data is readily available during
classroom time and by using a check list I can more accurately observe students in
the class. Using the rating scale for each group and each member in each group
allows me to collect my observations effectively and neatly together. It will also help
me to measure each group objectively and along the same criteria. This tool will go
hand in hand with my active participation observation and captures the richness and
texture of everyday life of schools and classrooms (Sagor, 1992, pg. 32).
Teacher observation form: Date:_____________________________________
Group:___________________________________________________________
Rating Scale: (1 = Inadequate, 2 = Poor, 3 = Good, 4 = Excellent, NA = Not Applicable for
Date of Observation)
Student 1
Stayed on
task
Showed
interest in
group activity
by sitting close
to group
members and
making eye
contact with
members.
Did not
become
frustrated or
stop trying if
activity was
difficult.
Performed
assigned role
Understood
instructions and
was able to
begin activity.
Contribute
Student 2
Student 3
Student 4

d ideas
Contributed
one or two
opinions orally
during group
activity.
Waited for
teammates to
finish speaking
before
contributing
opinions.
Helped
group mates
Listened to
teammates
ideas by
making eye
contact and not
interrupting
others.
Encouraged
teammates by
giving positive
feedback or
words of
encouragement
.
Respected
teammates by
using kind
words (please,
thank you,
etc).
Volunteered
to help
teammates if
necessary.
Asked for
help when
needed
Asked team
mates for help
Asked
teacher for help

References:
Coffey, H. (2006). Cooperative learning. Retrieved Learn NC January 26, 2013 from
http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/4653?ref=search
Darling-Hammond, L et al. (2008). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for
understanding. Jossey-Bass, SF. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from
http://www.edutopia.org/inquiry-project-learning-research.
Grundman, J. (2002). Cooperative learning in an English as second language classroom.

Hamline University Saint Paul, Minnesota.
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2008). Cooperative learning. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from
http://www.co-operation.org/?page_id=65
Johnson, Johnson and Holubec. (ASCD, 1994) Research summary collaborative learning.
Retrieved January 20, 2013, from
http://www.journeytoexcellence.org.uk/resourcesandcpd/research/summaries/rscollab
orativelearning.asp
Kagan, S. (Fall/Winter 2008). The instructional revolution. Kagan Online Magazine. San
Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing.
Kagan, S. (2010). Disengagement: achievement gaps, discipline, and dropout treating the
disease, not just the symptoms. Kagan Online Magazine. Kagan Publishing, San
Clemente, CA.
Kagan, S. Kagan (2003). Structures: Research and rationale. San Clemente, CA: Kagan

Publishing. Kagan Online Magazine. Retrieved January 19, 2013
www.KaganOnline.com
Kaufman, J., Robinson, S., Bellah, K.A., Akers, C., Haase-Wittler, P., Martindale, L.,
(September 2008). Engaging students with brain-based learning. Retrieved January
29, 2013 from www.acteonline.org
Mills, G. E. (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle
River, N.J: Merrill (Pearson).
Performance Learning Systems (2007) Incorporate cooperative learning in your classroom.

Performance learning systems. Retrieved January 23, 2013 from
http://www.plsweb.com/Products-Resources/Newsletter/Newsletter-Archives/January2007
Sagor, R. (1992). How to conduct collaborative action research. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Shindler, J. (2009). Transformative classroom management. Retrieved January 23, 2013

from http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/jshindl/cm/Chapter12CooperativeLearningfinal.htm
Slavin, R.E. (2009). Cooperative learning. In G. McCulloch & D. Crook (Eds.) International
Encyclopedia of Education. Abington, UK: Routledge. Retrieved January 20, 2013
from http://www.successforall.org/SuccessForAll/media/PDFs/CL--What-MakesGroupwork-work.pdf.
Tomlinson, C. (2004). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms (2nd ed.).

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Action Research Project: How Does Cooperative Learning Affect Student Engagement During Group Work in Grade 3 and 4?

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Action Research Project: How Does Cooperative Learning Affect Student Engagement During Group Work in Grade 3 and 4?

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Vandevorst Cooperative Learning