For interdependence to exist, there must be more than one person or entity involved, and the persons or entities must have dynamic impact on each other. It should be noted that the authors of this chapter David and Roger Johnson coined the term social interdependence theory to describe their expanded version of the theory of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic efforts.
Deutsch believed that social interdependence theory included more than cooperative, competitive, and individualistic processes, so he reserved the term for a future yet undefined theory.
In his theory of cooperation and competition, Deutsch posits that cooperation is created by positive goal interdependence , which exists when group members perceive that they can reach their goals if and only if the other group members also reach their goals [ 14 , 15 ]. Competition is created by negative goal interdependence , which exists when group members perceive that they can obtain their goals if and only if the other group members fail to obtain their goals.
Individualistic efforts are creative by no goal interdependence , which exists when individuals perceive that reaching their goal is independent from other individuals attaining their goals. Positive goal interdependence tends to result in promotive interaction, negative goal interdependence tends to result in oppositional interaction, and no goal interdependence results in an absence of interaction.
The relationship between the cooperation and competition and the interaction pattern each elicits tends to be bidirectional.
Each may cause the other. Four types of cooperative learning have been derived from cooperation and competition theory [ 1 ]. Formal cooperative learning may be implemented to teach specific content, informal cooperative learning may be implemented to ensure active cognitive processing of information during direct teaching, cooperative base groups may be implemented to provide long-term support and assistance, and constructive controversy may be implemented to create academic, intellectual conflicts to enhance achievement and creative problem solving.
Instructors can structure any course requirement or assignment in any curriculum or subject area for any age student cooperatively. To structure formal cooperative learning the instructor: Makes a series of decisions about how to structure the learning groups what size groups, how students are assigned to groups, what roles to assign, how to arrange materials, and how to arrange the room.
The instructor also specifies the objectives for the lesson one academic and one social skills. Teaches the academic content students are expected to master and apply. Monitors the functioning of the learning groups and intervenes to a teach needed social skills and b provide needed academic assistance.
Uses the preset criteria for excellent to evaluate student performance. The instructor then ensures that groups process how effectively members worked together. During direct teaching, such as a lecture, demonstration, or video, the teacher structures informal cooperative learning groups. Students engage in three-to-five minute focused discussions before and after the direct teaching and three-to-five minute turn-to-your-partner discussions interspersed throughout the direct teaching.
Informal cooperative learning can create a mood conducive to learning, focus student attention on the material to be learned, set expectations as to what will be covered in a class session, ensure that students cognitively process the material being taught, and provide closure to an instructional session.
During direct teaching the instructor needs to ensure that students do the intellectual work of explaining what they are learning, conceptually organizing the material, summarizing it, and integrating it into existing conceptual frameworks.
Cooperative base groups are long-term, heterogeneous cooperative learning groups with stable membership in which students provide one another with support, encouragement, and assistance to make academic progress by attending class, completing assignments, learning assigned material [ 1 ]. The use of base groups tends to improve attendance, personalizes the work required and the school experience, and improves the quality and quantity of learning.
Base groups have permanent membership and provide the long-term caring peer relationships necessary to help students developed in healthy ways cognitively and socially as well as influence members to exert effort in striving to achieve.
Base groups formally meet to provide help and assistance to each other, verify that each member is completing assignments and progressing satisfactory through the academic program, and discuss the academic progress of each member. It is especially important to have base groups in large classes or schools and when the subject matter is complex and difficult. Constructive controversy involves the discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of proposed actions aimed at synthesizing novel and creative solutions.
It also involves dissent and argumentation [ 20 ]. Dissent may be defined as differing in opinion or conclusion, especially from the majority. Argumentation is a social process in which two or more individuals engage in a dialog where arguments are constructed, presented, and critiqued.
The theory underlying constructive controversy states that the way conflict is structured within situations determines how individuals interact with each other, which in turn determines the quality of the outcomes [ 12 , 19 ]. Intellectual conflict maybe structured along a continuum, with concurrence seeking at one end and constructive controversy at the other. The process of concurrence seeking involves avoiding open disagreement to conform to the majority opinion and reach a public consensus.
The process of controversy involves utilizing the conflict among positions to achieve a synthesis or a creative integration of the various positions. The outcomes generated by the process of controversy tend to include higher quality decision making and achievement, greater creativity, higher cognitive and moral reasoning, greater motivation to improve understanding, more positive relationships and social support, and more democratic values.
The conditions mediating the effects of the controversy process include a cooperative context, heterogeneity among members, skilled disagreement, and rational argument. When used in combination, cooperative formal, informal, base groups, and constructive controversy provide an overall structure for school learning. Cooperative efforts result in numerous outcomes that may be subsumed into three broad categories: effort to achieve, positive interpersonal relationships, and psychological adjustment.
The social interdependence research has considerable generalizability as a research participants have varied as to economic class, age, gender, and culture, b research tasks and measures of the dependent variables have varied widely, and c many different researchers with markedly different orientations working in different settings and in different decades have conducted the studies.
We now have over studies on cooperative, competitive, and individualistic efforts from which we can derive effect sizes. This is far more evidence than exists for most other aspects of human interaction. Simply put, cooperative learning is when partners or small groups of students with differing abilities work together to accomplish a common goal. Of course, there is a ton more to it than that including positive interdependence, specific roles within the group or partnership, and embedded social skills.
Each cooperative learning strategy highlights students abilities and ensures the success of the group by building in ways for students to scaffold for one another. When executed well, cooperative learning strategies leave students with a pumped up self-esteem and confidence in their team.
You can read more about the key benefits of cooperative learning here. Truly, there is no wrong cooperative learning strategy to start with. When I throwback to my grad school days I think about how we were taught strategies. Bergmann, J. Google Scholar. Flipped Learning For Elementary Instruction.
Berrett, D. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Betihavas, V. Nurse Educ. Today 38, 15— Bhagat, K. The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept learning in high school. Bishop, J. Blake, B. Developmental psychology: incorporating Piaget's and Vygotsky's theories in classrooms.
Cross Discipl. Bonwell, C. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Chen, L. Students' perspectives of using cooperative learning in a flipped statistics classroom. Cole, M.
Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Dirlikli, M. Cooperative learning in turkey: a content analysis of theses. Dockett, S. Young children's construction of knowledge. Early Childhood Doolittle, P. Vygotsky's zone of proximal development as a theoretical foundation for cooperative learning.
Excellence Coll. Erbil, D. Cooperative learning as a democratic learning method. Childhood Educ. Eryilmaz, M. Individual flipped learning and cooperative flipped learning: their effects on students' performance, social, and computer anxiety. Felder, R. CrossRef Full Text.
Flynn, A. Foldnes, N. The flipped classroom and cooperative learning: evidence from a randomised experiment. Active Learn. Higher Educ. Fox, W. Student perspectives of independent and collaborative learning in a flipped foundational engineering course.
Gopalan, C. Embracing the flipped classroom: the planning and execution of a faculty workshop. Guo, S. Hao, Y. Exploring undergraduates' perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Hattie, J. London: Routledge.
Hayashi, Y. Huang, Y. The effects of a flipped English classroom intervention on students' information and communication technology and English reading comprehension. Jensen, J. Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning.
Jo, J. A comparative study on gamification of the flipped classroom in engineering education to enhance the effects of learning. Johnson, D. Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Learning together and alone: overview and meta-analysis. Asia Pac. An educational psychology success story: social interdependence theory and cooperative learning.
The Nuts and Bolts of Cooperative Learning. Pedersen and A. Kanjug, I. Keyser, M. Active learning and cooperative learning: understanding the difference and using both styles effectively. Khanova, J. Student experiences across multiple flipped courses in a single curriculum. Abstract Ankara: Pegem , Kong, S. Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: an experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy.
Kyndt, E. A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Lai, C. A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students' learning performance in a mathematics course. Little, C. The flipped classroom in further education: literature review and case study. Post Compuls.
Long, T. Use of the flipped classroom instructional model in higher education: instructors' perspectives. In defense of Piaget's theory: a reply to 10 common criticisms. Maciejewski, W. Flipping the calculus classroom: an evaluative study. IMA 35, — McLaughlin, J. Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. Milman, N. The flipped classroom strategy: what is it and how can it best be used.
Moll, L. Vygotsky and Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1— Munir, M. Flipped classroom with cooperative learning as a cornerstone. Ojose, B. Applying Piaget's theory of cognitive development to mathematics instruction. Piaget, J. On the Development of Memory and Identity, 2nd Edn. Porcaro, P. Curriculum design of a flipped classroom to enhance haematology learning. Prince, M. Does active learning work? A review of the research. Puntambekar, S. Social interdependence is one of the most fundamental and ubiquitous aspects of being a human being and it affects all aspects of our lives Deutsch, , Theorizing on social interdependence began in the early s, when one of the founders of the Gestalt School of Psychology see 5.
One of his colleagues, Kurt Lewin, refined Koffka's notions in the s and s while stating that: a The essence of a group is the interdependence among members created by common goals , which results in the group's being a "dynamic whole," so that a change in the state of any member or subgroup changes the state of any other member or subgroup; and b an intrinsic state of tension within group members motivates movement toward the accomplishment of the desired common goals.
For interdependence to exist, there must be more than one person or entity involved, and the persons or entities must have impact on each other in that a change in the state of one causes a change in the state of the others. From the work of Lewin's students and colleagues, such as Ovisankian, Lissner, Mahler, and Lewis, it may be concluded that it is the drive for goal accomplishment that motivates cooperative and competitive behavior. In the late s, one of Lewin's graduate students, Morton Deutsch, extended Lewin's reasoning about social interdependence and formulated a theory of cooperation and competition Deutsch, , Deutsch conceptualized three types of social interdependence: positive, negative, and none.
Deutsch's basic premise was that the type of interdependence structured in a situation determines how individuals interact with each other, which, in turn, largely determines outcomes.
Positive interdependence tends to result in promotive interaction; negative interdependence tends to result in oppositional or contrient interaction; and no interdependence results in an absence of interaction.
0コメント