Thomas Adam Johnsonict-design.org[ARTICLE BELOW]
1. What are some of important issues discussed in the article? (5 points)
•
The study is an examination of the effectiveness of individual learning versuscollaborative learning in respect to drill-and-practice versus critical thinking
•
The demographic was concise and specific
•
The employment of methods was ‘chalk and talk’ and test-oriented
•
Considering the factors the author did, the testing was fair and probably suitablefor this demographic
•
No significant difference in learning between individuals versus groups in ‘drilland practice’ results
•
Significant difference in learning between individuals versus groups in criticalthinking results
•
Results agreed with the learning theories proposed by proponents of collaborativelearning
•
The peer support system makes it possible for the learner to internalize bothexternal knowledge and critical thinking skills and to convert them into tools for intellectual functioning.
•
Participants in groups felt it was easier to assimilate material and stimulate acritical thinking process; reduced anxiety with problem-solving, often throughhumour; but felt negatively about the group structure because some felt they wereoften explaining material which wasted a lot of their own learning time.
•
If the purpose of instruction is to enhance critical- thinking and problem- solvingskills, then collaborative learning is more beneficial.
•
For collaborative learning to be effective, the instructor must view teaching as a process of developing and enhancing students' ability to learn.
•
Future research studies need to investigate the effect of different variables in thecollaborative learning process.
2. Do you agree with the overall theme of the article? Why do you say so? (5 points)
I find it hard to disagree with the findings of this article. It demonstrates a scientificstudy prepared in order to support or refute the findings, statements, theories or hypothesis of the proponents of collaborative learning. By lack of another discourse, Iam to at least be neutral and at most agree with the overall theme of this article and theway that it is presented.Anuradha A. Gokhale sets out to prove or disprove a theory. He follows a regimented process in doing so. He supports all of his claims with substantiation and proof that iscompared to empirical evidence. Essentially, this article delineates Bloom’s Taxonomy(Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation) throughits strategies and methods of application.
Thomas Adam Johnsonict-design.orgBecause of the nature of it being so factual, it is hard to argue with the findings. Theargument could, however be with the basis upon how the findings were gathered; who heused as his demographic; what kind of pretest and posttests were given; why they werenot parallel; whether more or less people used in this type of study would skew theresults; what gender, age and race he used and what ratios; how the tests wereadministered; what predisposition to specific learning and testing styles the subjects had;and many other factors. But for the purpose of this study, and to try not to be tooargumentative this article justifies its purpose. Since “the criterion of the scientific statusof a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability” (Karl Popper, 1982.) this proves the article’s dissertation to be justifiable. We need to reflect that it does not haveto be perfectly accurate to be scientifically useful.
3. Suggest an alternative viewpoint to tackle the issues discussed in the article. (10points)
There were a number of issues that came to mind when I read through the findings of thisarticle:
•
I might use a parallel pre and posttest as a gauge as well in this testing process.This might give a more rounded understanding of what is happening with theresults of the tests. This parallel testing would coincide with, not replace, thetesting that is already set in place.
•
I might consider other ratios for scoring versus 50% individual – 50% group.Though these numbers seem fair at first glance, they seem to me as too simplifiedand rounded. They do not account for someone who is low-level getting a higher mark then they should and someone who is a high-level getting a lower mark thenthey might otherwise. To combat this issue, I might allow for and have weightingwithin the groups themselves as a component for grading criterion, which wouldalso cover a critique about poor accountability
•
Alpha-types can cause problems: These people can often have a negative impacton group learning. They may try to take the role of the leader when the rest of thegroup does not want, respect or agree with what they are saying or doing. Thiscan be demoralizing to the whole group and may cause unnecessary de-motivation. Therefore group dynamics are also a major factor when consideringwhether or not to apply collaborative learning techniques. The teacher needs to be well aware of what is happening in the group and needs to reflect again toaccountability. As discussed in class, the use of systems of accountability can beemployed (e.g. Use numbers from a deck of cards that are handed out todetermine how many questions a group member is allowed or should reply to)
•
Gender is a major consideration with regard to collaborative learning.
Research shows that in science, and perhaps in other areas of the curriculum as well, group learning may be LESS equitable for girls than autonomous learning.Group learning may reinforce stereotypes, biases, and views of science and math
Thomas Adam Johnsonict-design.org
as a male domain. Male students may discredit females, and the classroom maybecome a microcosm of the "old boy" network that has frequently discouraged women and minorities from participating in certain curricular activities.
(Cohen1986; Sadker et al. 1991; Linn and Burbules 1993)
•
Race and geographical demographic or upbringing must also play a significantrole in a collaborative learning environment for two reasons: the student may not be used to learning in a collaborative environment, the student may feel an act of oppression in such a group NOTE: to combat both Gender and Racial issues it may be worthy of argument toseparate groups to avoid diversity (all female or all racial minorities) While this maystruggle against one issue, it may bring rise to another, which is the usefulness of adiverse learning group which gives students new perspectives in regards to getting better at critical thinking and problem solving (synthesis, analysis and evaluation)While these are some causes for concern with Collaborative Learning, by no means am Istating that it should not be used in practice. As with many other methods of teachingand in order to appeal to the interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences of learners, I dosuggest that Collaborative Learning is used in conjunction with many other types of learning motifs.
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Reflections and Debates against Anuradha A. Gokhale's Article "Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking" ict-design.org
614
Reads
0
Readcasts
0
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
