Journal of Teacher Action Research 1 JTAR...Social interdependence theory derives from the...

JournalofTeacherActionResearch1

JournalofTeacherActionResearch-Volume6,Issue1,2019,practicalteacherresearch.com,ISSN#2332-2233

©JTAR.AllRightsReserved

JTAR EDITORS

JTAR JournalofTeacherActionResearchVolume6,Issue1,2019

ExaminingtheInstructionalDesignofInteractiveandCollaborativeLearning 4OpportunitiesRachelKarchmer-KleinElizabethSoslauJannSuttonComparingCooperativeLearningStrategiesinAssessmentInstruction 21JosephA.MayoDoesMindfulnessStrengthenSelf-efficacyinFirstGradeStudents? 32KristenL.LoganErikK.Laursen“Letthepeoplesing!”-ActionResearchExploringTeachers’MusicalConfidence 44WhenEngagingLearnersin‘SingingWellbeing’DaphneRicksonJoAtkinsonDianneReynoldsRobertLeggUsingFirstAuthor©WritingCurriculumwithStudentswithAutismSpectrum 63DisorderKristieAsaro-SaddlerJessicaColes

JTAR AbouttheJournal

Foundedin2013,theJournalofTeacherActionResearch(ISSN:2332-2233)isapeer-reviewedonlinejournalindexedwithEBSCOthatseekspracticalresearchthatcanbeimplementedinPre-Kindergarten

throughPost-Secondaryclassrooms.Theprimaryfunctionofthisjournalistoprovideclassroomteachersandresearchersameansforsharingclassroompractices.

Thejournalacceptsarticlesforpeer-reviewthatdescribeclassroompracticewhichpositivelyimpactsstudentlearning.Wedefineteacheractionresearchasteachers(atalllevels)studyingtheirpracticeand/ortheirstudents'learninginamethodicalwayinordertoinformclassroompractice.Articlessubmittedtothejournalshoulddemonstrateanactionresearchfocuswithintenttoimprovethe

author’spractice.

EditorialTeam

Co-EditorsGilbertNaizer,Ph.D. AprilSanders,Ph.D.

TexasA&MUniversity-Commerce SpringHillCollege

AssociateEditorsLauraIsbell,Ph.D. TamiMorton,Ph.D. SusanWilliams

TexasA&MUniversity-Commerce TexasA&MUniversity-CommerceTexasA&MUniversity-Commerce

ProductionEditorandWebmasterChaseYoung,Ph.D.

SamHoustonStateUniversity

www.practicalteacherresearch.com

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 21

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

COMPARINGCOOPERATIVELEARNINGSTRATEGIESINASSESSMENTINSTRUCTIONJosephA.Mayo

GordonStateCollege

AbstractAsafollow-uptoapriorexploratoryinvestigationofcooperativelearninginteachingassessmentto

early-childhood-educationmajors,thepresentstudysystematicallycomparesthepedagogicalefficacyoftwo

variantsofcooperativelearning.Inthefirstcooperativelearningcondition,studentsreprisedthesimulated

classroompracticeevidencedintheCooperativeAssessmentPortfolio(CAP)assignmentusedintheprevious

study.Inthesecondcondition,studentscompletedaCooperativeAssessmentCaseAnalysis(CACA)

assignmentwithdistinguishingfeaturesofcase-basedlearning.Onallquantitativeandqualitativemeasures,

resultsfavoredtheCAPoverCACAassignment.Findingsarediscussedinlightofsocialconstructivistpedagogy

andfuturedirectionsforresearch.

Keywords:cooperativelearning,socialconstructivism,constructivistpedagogy,educationalassessment,earlychildhoodeducation,post-secondaryclassroomresearch,actionresearch

Introduction

Recentdecadeshavewitnessedanincreaseinactive-learningpedagogiesincollegeclassrooms(Fink,2004).Cooperativelearningcontinuestoholdaprominentplaceinthischangingclassroomlandscape(e.g.,Davidson&Major,2014;Gillies,2016;Healy,Doran,&McCutcheon,2018;Love,Dietrich,Fitzgerald,&Gordon,2014).Amongthemostresearchedofalltopicsintheteachingliterature,asignificantbodyofevidencesupportscooperativelearningasameansforstudentstooptimizetheirownlearningwhilefacilitatingtheacademicperformanceoftheirclassmates(Johnson,Johnson,&Holubec,2008).Asastructuredapplicationofcollaborativelearning,themeritsofcooperativelearningatthecollegelevelcanbeclassifiedundertwobroadcategories:academicandsocioemotional(Jones&Jones,2008).Morespecifically,cooperativelearningencourageshigher-orderreasoning,goal-setting,idea-generation,group-to-individuallearningtransfer,promotiveinteraction,positiveinterdependence,andinterpersonalcompetence(Johnson,Johnson,&Smith,2014;Mayo,2010;Williams,2007).Cooperativelearning,astheunderlyingpedagogicalbasisforthepresentstudy,haslongstandingtheoreticalrootswithintheconstructivisttradition.SocialinterdependencetheoryderivesfromtheconfluenceofKurtKoffka’s(1935/1999),KurtLewin’s(1935,1948),andMortonDeutsch’s(1949)shared

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 22

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

recognitionofgroupsasdynamicinitiatorsofvaryinglevelsofinterdependenceamongindividualgroupmembers.Vygotsky(1962/1986)builtuponthisperspectivewithhissocioculturaltheoryofdevelopment.AccordingtoVygotsky,thereisinterplaybetweencognitiveprocessesandsocialactivitiessuchthatsocialinteractionbecomesessentialtoactiveknowledgeconstructiononanintrapersonallevel.Inpractice,cooperativelearningbringstogetherthebasicelementsofthesetheoreticalstances.Groupsofstudentsworktogethertolearn,whileeachindividualbecomespersonallyaccountableforhisorherownlearningwithinthegroupcontext(Brame&Biel,2015).

LiteratureReview

BackgroundandPurposeofthePresentStudy.Inapriorexploratoryinvestigation,Iaskedgroupsofstudentstocompleteanend-of-semesterproject,calledtheCooperativeAssessmentPortfolio,injunior-levelassessmentclassesforearly-childhood-education(ECE)majors(Mayo,2013).ThestudyfocusedontheextenttowhichthisassignmentservedasaformativelearningtoolforECEcandidatesinsuccessfullydesigningteacher-developedstrategiesforassessingthelearningofyoungchildren.Students’performanceontheassignmentdemonstratedassessmentproficiencyasappliedtosimulatedclassroompractice.Moreover,students’surveyedperceptionstowardcompletingtheassignmentpointedtoitseffectivenessinbothpromotingmasteryofacademiccontentandfosteringproductivegroupinteraction.TheobservedsuccessoftheCooperativeAssessmentPortfoliointhispilotstudyservedasaspringboardformyundertakingthepresentinvestigation.

Thepurposeofthecurrentstudyistosystematicallycomparethepedagogicalefficacyoftwogroup-basedassignmentsusingcase-basedlearning(CBL):theCooperativeAssessmentPortfolio(CAP)examinedintheaforementionedpreliminaryinvestigationandtheCooperativeAssessmentCaseAnalysis(CACA).CBLtypicallyincorporatescollaborative-learningprocessesthatpermitstudentstosolveproblemsandreflectontheirexperiences(Hmelo-Silver,2004).TheprimarypurposeofCBListoteachstudentstoapplytheoreticalknowledge(Ching,2014).Inthecontextofteachereducation,themannerinwhichCBLaccomplishestheseintersectingeducationalaimscanbesummarizedasfollows:

[CBL]providesgenerativecontextsforprospectiveandcertifiedteacherstoworktogetherinsmallcollaborativegroups.Together,theyanalyzeproblems,discussoptions,andmakeinformeddecisionstosolveproblemsbasedonauthenticteachingsituationswithreal,multifacetedchallenges(DeSimone,2014,p.17).

Withinthegroup-centeredandapplied-theoreticalfocusofCBL,boththeCAPandCACAassignmentsareaimedatpermittingstudentsvariedopportunitiestodemonstrateaworkingunderstandingofthefactorsunderlyingwell-conceivedteacher-developedassessmentstrategies.WiththeCAPassignment,studentsengageinsimulatedclassroompracticebycreatingtheirownclassroomassessments.Incontrast,studentscompletingtheCACAassignmentcritiquealready-createdclassroomassessmentsasanexerciseinprofessionaldecision-making.

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 23

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

InspiteofCBL’swidespreaduseinteachereducation,therehasbeenrelativelylittlepublishedresearchonCBL-reliantinstructionalmethodologiesoroutcomesrelateddirectlytoteacherpreparation(Goeke,2008).Thepresentstudyaimstoaddtothisareaofresearch.Italsoseekstomakeanoriginalcontributiontotheteachereducationliteraturethroughsystematiccomparisonoftwocooperative-learningassignmentsintheframeworkofteachingECEassessment.

Methodology

Participants.Participantswere96ECEbaccalaureatecandidatesenrolledinfourequivalent-enrolledsectionsofajunior-levelcourseinECEassessmentforwhichIservedasinstructor.Classes,whichweretaughtatapublicstatecollegeinthesoutheasternUnitedStates,occurredinanacceleratedfour-weeksummersemester(twohoursofinstructionperday,fivedaysaweek).Twoclasssectionswereofferedineachoftwoconsecutivesummerterms.

Theparticipantpoolconsistedof87femalesand9males.Theracialdemographicwasapproximately85%Caucasian,13%African-American,and2%multiracial.Participantsrangedinagefrom21to43years(M=23.98).Roughly60%ofparticipantswerefirst-generationundergraduates,withnearlytwothirdsholdingafull-orpart-timejobwhileenrolledinthecourse.Allparticipantshadcompletedtwosemestersofclassroomfieldexperienceinpre-kindergartenthroughfifthgradebeforetakingthecourse.

Design.Iusedanindependent,two-group,quasi-experimentaldesigninwhichintactclasseswereassignedtooneoftwoconditions.Inoneconditionthattookplaceovertheinitialsummerofthestudy,50studentscompletedtheCAPinfulfillmentoftheirterm-lengthprojectrequirement.Inanothercondition,46studentscompletedtheCACAastheirterm-lengthprojectinthesecondsummeroftheinvestigation.Therewerenoappreciabledifferencesbetweenconditionsonthebasisofage,gender,orGPA.Additionally,Iheldcoursecontent,testingformat,andotherrelevantinstructionalvariablesconstantbetweenconditions.

CourseDescription.Thelearningobjectivesofthecoursewerebroadlyinclusiveasrelatestoearly-childhoodassessmenttopics;however,theprincipalfocusofthepresentstudywasstudents’understandinganddevelopmentofappropriatestrategiesforassessingthelearningofyoungchildrenfrompre-kindergartenthroughgradefive.Thisprimaryfocus—whichwascanvassedinboththeCAPandCACAassignments—includeddecidingaccuratelywhattoassessandhowtoassessit,withemphasisonthecognitivedomainoftherevisedversionofBloom’staxonomyofeducationalobjectives(Krathwohl,2002).Italsoencompassedthedetectionandpreventionofbiaswhenassessingchildrenwithspecialneedsandchildrenfromculturallyandlinguisticallydifferentbackgrounds.

Iadministeredaunitexamatmidtermineachofthetwoconditions.Thisexamcontained50conceptuallyappliedmultiple-choicequestionsfromthenon-principalfocalareasofthecourse,includingtheoriesembeddedinassessmentpractices,testvalidityandreliability,interpretingstandardizedtests,andapplyingpropertest-preparationpracticestowardhigh-

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 24

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

stakesstandardizedtesting.Attheconclusionofthesemester,Iadministeredasecondunitexamtostudentsineachconditionthatservedasthecurrentinvestigation’sdependentmeasureforcomparativestatisticaltesting.Thissecondexamalsoconsistedof50conceptuallyappliedmultiple-choicequestions,butthesequestionspertainedtothechieffocalpointsofthestudythatwereaddressedinboththeCAPandCACAassignments.Inordertominimizethepossibilityofexperimentereffectsincomposingthesecondexam,Iselectedallmultiple-choicequestionsfromconceptuallybasedtest-bankitems.Consistentwithconsiderationssurroundingbothtestsecurityandalternate-formreliability,Imatchedquestionsonbothcontentandlevelofdifficultyintheprocessofselectingitemsforinclusiononfourdifferent-but-comparableexamversions(oneforeachofthefourparticipatingclasssections).

InstructionalProcedures(CAPCondition).IntheCAPcondition,theinitialthreeweeksofthesemesterconsistedofin-depthclassroominstructionovertheentiregamutofassessmenttopics(bothprincipalandnon-principalfocalpointsasdescribedunderCourseDescription).Throughoutthefinalweekofthesemester,studentsworkedinclasswithinpre-assignedgroupsoffourorfiveindividualstocompletetheCAPassignmentwithslightproceduralmodificationsfromthepreviouspreliminaryinvestigation(Mayo,2013).Thesemodifications,whichincludedeliminatingaffectiveassessmentandplacinggreateremphasisonabsence-of-biasinassessment,werepredicatedlargelyoninstructivestudentfeedbackfrompriorsummativecourseevaluations.Onceassignedtotheircorrespondinggroups,studentsmetpreliminarilytoselectindividualstoserveintheflexibleandrotatingcapacitiesoffacilitator,recorder,andotherdefinedroles.

IncompletingtheCAPassignment,eachgroupselectedthegradelevel(s),subjectarea(s),andspecifictopic(s)toincorporateintotheportfolio.Eachgroupalsoestablishedacollaborativedivisionoflaborinwhicheachmemberwasexposedtoarepresentativesamplingofeveryassessmentstrategyoutlinedbelow:

1. selected-responseassessment[20binary-choice(true-false)items;10multiplebinary-choiceitemsintwosetsof5;20multiple-choiceitems;and10matchingquestionsintwosetsof5]

2. constructed-responseassessment(20short-answeritemsandtwodifferentessayitemswithanaccompanyinganalyticscoringrubricforeach)

3. performanceassessment(oneconceptmap,case-studyanalysis,analogicalreasoningproject,andautobiographicaland/orbiographicaljournalingassignment,withaconcomitantanalyticscoringrubricforeachassignment)

4. portfolioassessment(fivehypotheticalworksamplesrelatedtotargetedskillsand/orknowledgeforprospectivestudentstomaster,alongwithasingleanalyticrubriconwhichallworksamplescouldbescored)

Studentscomposedanswerkeysforallselected-responseandshort-answerconstructed-responseitems.Forconstructed-responseessays,performanceassessment,andtheportfolio-assessmentitems,studentsdesignedprototypicalresponsesuponwhichtheybasedtheirassociatedscoringrubrics.

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 25

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

Alongwithdemonstratedmasteryofeachassessmentstrategy,theevaluativecriteriaforscoringeachgroup’sassignmentincludedanappliedunderstandingofBloom’staxonomy(knowledgeandcognitive-processdimensions)andabsence-of-biasinassessmentplusevidenceofacollaborativedivisionoflabor.Iratedstudentsonallevaluativecriteriaexceptforcollaborativedivisionoflabor,whichwasreservedsolelyforstudentsincorrespondinggroupstoevaluate.Onthedivision-of-laborscore,studentsineachgroupratedoneanotherintermsofindividualcontributionstothegroup(e.g.,effort,cooperation,anddedicationtoteamwork),withthegroup’saverageperpersonusedforindividualscoringpurposes.PeerratingsoccurredonaLikertscalerangingfrom1=unsatisfactoryto5=exceptional.Iaffordedadditionalopportunityforstudentstooffertheirevaluativecomments.Ikeptallpeerratingsanonymoustootherstudents.

TheCAPassignmentcountedforonethirdofthefinalcourseaverage.Incalculatingeachstudent’sgradeforthisassignment,Iweightedallofthefollowingeightevaluativecriteriaequallyincalculatingthecumulativegradeforeachstudent:(1)Bloom’sknowledgeandcognitive-processdimensionspercontentstandard;(2)absence-of-biasinassessment;(3)averagewithin-grouppeerratingperrespectivestudent;(4)selected-responseassessment;(5)constructed-responseassessment(shortanswer);(6)constructed-responseassessment(essay);(7)performanceassessment;and(8)portfolioassessment.Inassigninggradesforeachevaluativecriterion,Ireliedonanumerical-ratingsystemwithsimilaranchorsasthestudents’peerratings(1=unsatisfactoryto5=exceptional).Icollapsedallevaluativecriteriaontoagradingsummarysheet,whichalsoincludedspaceforaconcisesynopsisofmyevaluativecommentsandaschemeforconvertingrubricpoint-totalstograde-levelpercentages.Forclarification,Idistributedandreviewedthecontentofthissummarysheetduringthefirstclassmeeting.Oncegradingwascompleted,Ireturnedthesesheetstorespectivestudentsattheendofthesemester.

CACACondition.IntheCACAcondition,thefirstthreeweeksofthesemesterinvolvedthesameclassroominstructionasoccurringintheCAPcondition.SimilartotheCAPcondition,studentsworkedinclassduringthefinalweekofthesemester—inpre-assignedgroupsoffourorfive—tocompletetheCACAassignment.AsintheCAPcondition,studentsintheCACAconditionmetbrieflyaftergroupswereassignedtochooseindividualstoactinvariousflexibleandrotatingroleswithineachgroup.

IntheCACAcondition,Iaskedeachgrouptowritecritiquesofaseriesoffictitiousreferencecasesthatreflectedalloftheteacher-developedassessmentstrategiescanvassedintheCAPassignment:selected-response,constructed-response(shortanswer),constructed-response(essay),performance,andportfolioassessment.IncompletingtheCACAassignment,IalsorequiredstudentstoaddressthesameconsiderationsasthoseobservedintheCAPcondition,includingBloom’sknowledgeandcognitive-processdimensions,absence-of-biasinassessment,andacollaborativedivisionoflaborwithineachgroup.

Idesignedallcasesasnarrativeexperiential-learningexercisesbasedontheprincipalfocalpointsofassessmentcanvassedinthecourse.Casesoriginatedfromtwosources.Thefirstsourceinvolvedmyowninstructor-createdcasesthatincludedvarioustypesoferrorsinassessmentpractice.Thesecondsourcederivedfromappropriatelyreferencedadaptations

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 26

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

ofcasescenariosappearingasappliedassessmentexerciseswithinleadingtextbooks,workbooks,andotherpublicationswithintherealmofeducationalassessment.Insomesituations,thesecasesalreadyincorporatedoneormoreerrorsthatstudentscouldidentifyanddiscussintheirCACAassignments.Inotherinstances,assessmentblunderswerenotpresent.Ineitherevent,Imodifiedcasecontent—rangingfrommoderatelyforerror-inclusivecasestoextensivelyforcorrectcaseapplications—suchthaterrorsofomissionand/orcommissionwereintroduced.Asimple,illustrativeexampleofaconstructed-response(shortanswer)itemforsecond-gradersappearsnext.Thislanguage-artsitem—whichincludesinitalicsabriefdiscussionoftheaccompanyingassessmenterror—isadaptedfromextended-applicationsexercisesappearingattheconclusionofPopham’s(2014)classroom-assessmenttextbook:

Theselettersareallvowels:A,E,O,andU.Whatistheonemissingvowel?____________

Althoughtheintendedcorrectansweris“I,”“Y”and“W”areoccasionallyacceptedasvowels.Therefore,thisitemviolatesoneofthebasictenetsofdevelopingsoundshort-answeritems,namely,theintendedcorrectresponsemustbeunique.

Iusedthesamepeer-andinstructor-ratingscalesandproceduresintheCACAconditionthathadbeenusedintheCAPcondition.IincorporatedallevaluativeinformationintothesamegradingsummarysheetthathadbeenutilizedintheCAPcondition.Onceagain,IdistributedandreviewedthisgradingsheetatthestartofthesemesterandthenreturnedittostudentsafterIhadcompletedgradingatthesemester’sconclusion.AswiththeCAPassignment,theCACAassignmentwasalsoworthonethirdofthefinalcourseaverage.

Results

ComparativeStatisticalTesting.Asdescribedinmethodology,thedependentmeasurewasstudents’scoresontheend-of-semesterunitexamthataddressedmaterialrelatedtothemajorcontentconcentrationsinthecourse(teacher-developedassessmentsinconjunctionwithbothBloom’staxonomyofthecognitivedomainandabsenceofbiasinassessment).ThemeansandstandarddeviationsforstudentscoresineachconditionareCACA(M=80.92,SD=10.36)andCAP(M=84.88,SD=8.65).Iusedindependent-groupst-testingtocomparestudentscoresintheCACAconditionwiththoseintheCAPcondition.ResultsshowthatstudentperformanceintheCAPlearningconditiondifferedsignificantlyfromperformanceintheCACAcondition,t(94)=2.04,p<.05.

QuestionnaireData.Igaugedstudents’perceptionsofcompletingcorrespondingassignmentsintheCACAandCAPAconditionswithananonymous10-itemquestionnairethatcombineda5-pointLikertratingscale(notatalleffective=1tohighlyeffective=5)withseveralquestionsaboutrespectiveassignmentstowhichstudentsrespondednarratively.Iaskedstudentstoratenumericallytheexperienceofcompletingtheassignmentinquestionintermsofhoweffectivelyitaccomplishedatotalof10educationalobjectives.Ialsoaskedstudentstocommentnarrativelyonwhattheylikedbestandleastabouttherespectiveassignments,alongwithwhethertheywouldrecommendthatassignmenttootherstudents.Students’numericalratingsareshowninTable1.

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 27

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

Table1:Students’NumericalRatingsoftheCooperativeAssessmentCaseAnalysis(CACA)andCooperativeAssessmentPortfolio(CAP)Assignments

QuestionnaireItem MSD

CACA(n=46)

MSD

CAP(n=50)

Thinkingbeyondtheclassroom 3.83 .70

4.72 .61

Fosteringparticipationinlearning 3.66 .48

4.58 .42

Increasingpracticalrelevanceofinformation 3.74 .62

4.88 .31

Facilitatingunderstandingofcoursecontent 4.01 .39

4.56 .51

Increasingmotivationtolearn 3.45 .80

4.27 .54

Promotingintellectualchallenge 3.62 .53

4.44 .46

Stimulatinginterestinthesubjectmatter 3.36 .75

4.31 .49

Distinguishingbetweenvariedassessments 3.71 .43

4.67 .63

Recognizingtheimportanceofabsence-of-bias 3.50 .72

4.39 .58

ApplyingBloom’sTaxonomy(cognitivedomain) 3.55 .68

4.78 .42

Questionnaireratingscoincidedwiththeresultsofcomparativestatisticaltesting.StudentspreferredtheCAPtotheCACAassignmentacrossallsurveyedmeasures.Students’narrativecommentswerealsoconsistentwiththeirnumericalratings.Althoughapproximately60%ofrespondentsintheCACAconditioncommentedaboutthecooperativecase-analysisassignment’sgeneralutilityinbolsteringunderstandingofthetargetedcoursecontent,onlyabouthalfthatnumbersaidthattheywouldrecommendittootherstudents.Incontrast,morethan90%ofrespondentsintheCAPconditionassertedthattheywouldrecommendthecooperativeportfolioassignmenttootherstudents.InresponsetowhatstudentslikedbestabouttheCAPassignment,thevastmajoritystatedthatitprovidedvaluablehands-onexperiencethatshouldlaterbenefitthemintheirfutureteachingresponsibilities.Manyof

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 28

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

theserespondentsalsoremarkedthattheyhadneverrealizedhowmuchtimeandenergywentintocreatinggoodteacher-developedassessments.Notunexpectedly,themajorcriticismofbothassignmentswastheperceivedworkloadassociatedwiththeircompletion.StudentsintheCAPconditionvoicedthiscriticismmostoften;however,manyofthesesamerespondentsqualifiedtheirconcernbynotingthattheendproductwasbothpersonallygratifyingandworththeconcertedeffort.

Discussion

Withinthebroadcontextofunderstandingandapplyingvariedtypesofteacher-developedassessments,thepresentresultsshowthattheCACAassignmentdidnotcompareasfavorablyastheCAPcounterpartonthejointmeasuresofcomparativestatisticaltestingandanalysisofsurveyedattitudinaldata.Thecorereasonwhythisoccurredmightrelatetofundamentaldifferencesintheunderlyingfoundationsofthesetwotypesofcooperativelearning.

TheCACAandCAPassignmentsarevariantformsofsocialconstructivistpedagogy(Mayo,2010)thatencouragesmallgroupsofstudentstoworktogethertocreatesharedunderstanding.Inthesetypesofassignments,studentscollaboratetoproduce,notreproduceknowledge(Millis,2002).TheCACAassignmentalignswiththelongstandingtraditionofusingcase-basedlearninginnumerousundergraduatedisciplinesasameansoflinkingknowledgeandpracticethroughdevelopingstudents’criticalthinkingandappliedreasoningskills.(e.g.,Allchin,2013;Floyd&Bodur,2005;Heitzmann,2008;Kaddoura,2011;Mayo,2002,2004;Pariseau&Kezim,2007).BoththeCACAandCAPassignmentsqualifyasproblem-centeredapproachesthatadvocateforauthenticapplicationsofcoursecontentintheframeworkofactiveandinteractivelearning.Yettheseassignmentstakedifferingroutestotheseeducationaloutcomes.Asmentionedbrieflyintheliteraturereview,theCACAassignmentusescasestudiestointroducepracticalexamplesandanalogouscontextsforanalysis,critique,andvicariouslearningandpracticeinprofessionaldecision-making.Ontheotherhand,theCAPassignmentreliesonactualsimulatedclassroompracticethatoffersstudentsampleopportunitiestocreatetheirownassessmentstodemonstrateappliedunderstandingofsoundprinciplesoftestconstruction.Ofthetwoapproaches,then,theCAPismoreinherentlyactiveinpractice.Thisconclusionisnotonlysupportedbyrelatedpedagogicalfindingsinotheracademicdisciplines(e.g.,Jeffries,2005),butitalsoupheldinthepresentstudybystudents’perceptionsoftheCAPassignmentasfosteringdemonstrablygreaterparticipationinlearningthantheCACAassignment(seeTable1).

Conclusion

Overall,theresultsofthepresentstudyvalidatethemeritsofcooperativelearninginECEassessmentinstructionthatemphasizessimulatedclassroompracticeasavehicleforpromotingwhatHmeloandGuzdial(1996)describedmorethantwodecadesagoasknowledge-building-for-action.Additionalresearch,involvingassignmentssimilarinnaturebutperhapsdifferentinscopetotheterm-lengthCAPassignment,mightshowifthese

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 29

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

findingsalsoapplytoassessmentinstructioninmiddle-gradesorsecondaryeducationprograms.Anotherpotentiallyinvitingdirectionforfutureresearchonpre-servicestudents’assessmentinstructionmightinvolveasystematicexaminationofthepedagogicalefficacyofahybridcooperative-learningapproachthatintegrateskeyelementsofboththeCAPandCACAassignmentsfromthecurrentinvestigation.Asaproposedexample,studentsmightbeginwithcarefullyplannedcaseanalysesasawaytoscaffoldlearningexperiences(seeHmelo&Guzdial,1996)inpreparationforlatersimulatedclassroompractice.

AbouttheAuthor

JosephA.Mayo,Ed.D.iscurrentlyaProfessorofPsychologyatGordonStateCollegeinBarnesville,Georgia,whohasbeenteachingandconductingclassroom-centeredresearchinhighereducationforoverthreedecades.Hisprimaryresearchinterestiseffectiveundergraduateteachingstrategieswithanemphasisonconstructivistclassroomapplications.Heistherecipientofbothstatewideandnationalawardsforhisongoingcontributionstothescholarshipofteachingandlearning.Email:joe_m@gordonstate.edu

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 30

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

References

Allchin,D.(2013).Problem-andcase-basedlearninginscience:Anintroductiontodistinctions,values,and outcomes.TheAmericanSocietyforCellBiology:LifeSciences,12,364-372.Brame,C.J.,&Biel,R.(2015).Settingupandfacilitatinggroupwork:Usingcooperativelearninggroups effectively.Availableat:http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/setting-up-and-facilitating-group- work-using-cooperative-learning-groups-effectively/.Ching,C.P.(2014).Linkingtheorytopractice.Acase-basedapproachinteachereducation.Socialand BehavioralSciences,123,280-288.Davidson,N.,&Major,C.H.(2014).Boundarycrossing:Cooperativelearning,collaborativelearning,and problem-basedlearning.JournalonExcellenceinCollegeTeaching,25,7-55.DeSimone,C.(2014).Problem-basedlearninginteachereducation:Trajectoriesofchange.International JournalofHumanitiesandSocialScience,4,17-29.Deutsch,M.(1949).Atheoryofcooperationandcompetition.HumanRelations,2,129–151.Fink,L.D.(2004).Beyondsmallgroups:Harnessingtheextraordinarypoweroflearning.InL.K.Michaelson,A. B.Knight,&L.D.Fink.Team-basedlearning:Atransformativeuseofsmallgroupsincollegeteaching (pp.3-26).Sterling,VA:StylusPublishing.Floyd,D.M.,&Bodur,Y.(2005).Usingcasestudyanalysisandcasewritingtostructureclinicalexperiencesina teachereducationprogram.TheEducationalForum,70,48-60.Gillies,R.M.(2016).Cooperativelearning:Reviewofresearchandpractice.AustralianJournalofTecher Education,41(3).Availableat:http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3Goeke,J.L.(2008).Apreliminaryinvestigationofprospectiveteachers’reasoningaboutcasestudieswith expertcommentary.TeacherEducationandSpecialEducation:TheJournaloftheTeacherEducation DivisionoftheCouncilforExceptionalChildren,31,21-35.Healy,M.,Doran,J.,&McCutcheon,M.(2018).Cooperativelearningoutcomesfromcumulativeexperiences ofgroupwork:Differencesinstudentperceptions.AccountingEducation,27(3),286-308.Heitzmann,R.(2008).Casestudyinstructioninteachereducation:Opportunitytodevelopstudents’critical thinking,schoolsmartsanddecisionmaking.Education,128,523-541.Hmelo,C.E.,&Guzdial,M.(1996).Ofblackandglassboxes:Scaffoldingforlearninganddoing.InD.C.Edelson &E.A.Domeshek(Eds.),ProceedingsofICLS96,AACE,Charlottesville,VA,pp.128–134.Hmelo-Silver,C.E.(2004).Problem-basedlearning:Whatandhowdostudentslearn?EducationalPsychology Review,16,235-266.Jeffries,P.R.(2005).Aframeworkfordesigning,implementing,andevaluatingsimulationsusedasteaching strategiesinnursing.NursingEducationPerspectives,26,96–103.Johnson,D.W.,Johnson,R.T.,&Holubec,E.J.(2008).Cooperationintheclassroom(8thed.).Edina,MN: InteractionBookCompany.Johnson,D.W.,Johnson,R.T.,andSmith,K.A.(2014).Cooperativelearning:Improvinguniversityinstructionby basingpracticeonvalidatedtheory.JournalonExcellenceinCollegeTeaching,25,85-118.

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 31

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume6,Issue1,Fall2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

Jones,K.A.,&Jones,J.L.(2008).Makingcooperativelearningworkinthecollegeclassroom:Anapplicationof the“fivepillars”ofcooperativelearningtopost-secondaryinstruction.JournalofEffectiveTeaching, 8,61-76.Kaddoura,M.A.(2011).Criticalthinkingskillsofnursingstudentsinlecture-basedteachingandcase-based learning,InternationalJournalfortheScholarshipofTeachingandLearning,5(2),Article20.Available at:http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/ij-sotl/vol5/iss2/20Koffka,K.(1999).Principlesofgestaltpsychology.London:Routledge.(Originalworkpublished1935)Krathwohl,D.R.(2002).ArevisionofBloom’staxonomy:Anoverview.TheoryintoPractice,41,212-218.Lewin,K.(1935)Adynamictheoryofpersonality.NewYork:McGraw-Hill.Lewin,K.(1948)Resolvingsocialconflicts:Selectedpapersongroupdynamics.GW.Lewin(Ed.).NewYork: Harper&Row.Love,A.G.,Dietrich,A.,Fitzgerald,J.,&Gordon,D.(2014).Integratingcollaborativelearninginsideandoutside theclassroom.JournalonExcellenceinCollegeTeaching,25,177-196.Mayo,J.A.(2002).Case-basedinstruction:Atechniqueforincreasingconceptualapplicationinintroductory psychology.JournalofConstructivistPsychology,15,65-74.Mayo,J.A.(2004).Usingcase-basedinstructiontobridgethegapbetweentheoryandpracticeinpsychology ofadjustment.JournalofConstructivistPsychology,17,137-146.Mayo,J.A.(2010).Constructingundergraduatepsychologycurricula:Promotingauthenticlearningand assessmentintheteachingofpsychology.Washington,D.C.:AmericanPsychologicalAssociation.Mayo,J.A.(2013).Sociallyconstructedknowledge:Usingcooperativelearninginassessmentinstruction. PedagogyandtheHumanSciences,3(1),52-64.Available at:http://scolarworks.merrimack.edu8/phs/vol3/iss1/4Millis,B.J.(2002,October).Enhancinglearning—andmore!—throughcooperativelearning.Manhattan,KS:

TheIDEACenter.[IDEAPaperNo.38]Pariseau,S.E.&Kezim,B.(2007).Theeffectofusingcasestudiesinbusinessstatistics.JournalofEducationfor Business,83,27-31.Popham,W.J.(2014).Classroomassessment:Whatteachersneedtoknow(7thed.).UpperSaddleRiver,NJ: Pearson.Vygotsky,L.S.(1986).Thoughtandlanguage.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.(Originalworkpublished1962)Williams,R.B.(2007).Cooperativelearning:Astandardforhighachievement.ThousandOaks,CA:Corwin Press.