JSSR-Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD)

Journal of Social Studies Research: Student Teams Achievement Divi... http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3823/is_199804/ai_n8783828/print

1 of 5 4/29/08 2:49 PM

FindArticles > Journal of Social Studies Research > Spring 1998 > Article > Print friendly

Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in a twelfth grade classroom: Effect on student achievement and

attitude

Armstrong, Scott

Abstract

Little research has been conducted on cooperative learning techniques used in the upper secondary school classroom. One

cooperative technique, Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD), was used to determine if twelfth grade advanced placement

students who were given instruction by the STAD method over a seven week period would score higher on a posttest than those

students who were taught the same material by traditional methods. Quantitative results showed no significant difference between

the adjusted means for the two groups. Additionally, a measure of student attitude was administered to determine if students

taught through the STAD technique had an improved attitude toward social studies. No significant difference between the group

means on attitude occurred. Yet, teacher and student surveys administered to the treatment group at the conclusion of the study

indicated a liking for the STAD method of instruction. STAD was found to be easily adapted to the block scheduled secondary

social studies class.

Previous Research

Over the last thirty years a great deal of research has been done on cooperative learning in the classroom. An examination of the

literature on cooperative learning strategies supports the usefulness of these strategies to improve student performance for almost

any desired educational outcome. For example, research has shown that well structured cooperative learning techniques in the

classroom improve academic achievement, race relations, gender relations, self esteem, liking of class and student attendance

(Johnson & Johnson,1987; Newman & Thompson,1987; Sharan,1980; Slaving 1980, 1982, 1990, 1995; Stahl & VanSicle, 1992).

According to Slavin (1982),student seem to enjoy classrooms that employ these techniques.

According to Newman and Thompson (1987) and Slavin (1995), most of the research on cooperative learning has taken place at the

elementary level, even though cooperative learning techniques were developed initially for college and adult education (Palmer &

Johnson, 1989). Few studies have been conducted at the secondary level and even less research has been initiated in the upper

secondary social studies class. Therefore, there is a need to study cooperative learning strategies in the upper secondary classroom.

The cooperative learning techniques used in this study was the Student Achievement Dividions' (STAD) method developed by Robert

Slavin (1986). STAD has been described as the simplest of a group of cooperative learning techniques referred to as STudent Team

Learning Methods. In the STAD approach students are assigned to four or five member teams reflecting a heterogeneous grouping

of high, average, and low achieveing students of diverse ethnic backgrounds and different genders. Each week, the teacher

introduces new material through a lecture, class discussion, or some form of a teacher presentation. Team members then

collaborate on worksheets designed to expand and reinforce the material taught by the teacher. Team members may (a) work on

the worksheets in pairs, (b) take turns quizzing each other, (c) discuss problems as a group, or (d) use whatever strategies they wich

to learn the assigned material. Each team will then receive answer sheets, making clear to the students that their task is to learn

the concepts not simply fill out the worksheets. Team members are instructed that their task is not complete until all team

members understand the assigned material.

Following this team practice, students take individual quizzes on the assigned material. Teammates are notpermitted to help one

another on these quizzes. The quizzes are graded by the teacher and individual scores are then calculated into team scores by the

teacher. The amount each student contributes to the team score is related to a comparison between the student's prior average or

base score. If the student's quiz score is higher than the base score, then that student will contribute positively to the team score.

This scoring methods rewards students for improvement (Slavin, 1986). The use of improvement points has been shown to increase

student academic performance even without teams (Slaving,1986), and it is an important component of student team learning

(Slavin, 1986; 1995).


2 of 5 4/29/08 2:49 PM

Team scores are recorded and weekly recognition and rewards are awarded to winning teams and improving students

(Slavin,1986). One of the attractive features os STAD is that it is relatively easy for teachers to use. The teacher (a) assigns the

students to teams, (b) allows the teams time to study together, (c) gives the students a regular quiz, and(d) calculates improvement

and team scores.

Slaving (1986) reviewed eight studies that evaluated STAD. In six of the eight studies, learning had increased significantly over

traditional methods. In the two remaining studies there was not significant effect. These studies had all been administered below

the tenth grade level.

Newman and Thompson (1987) reported that STAD was the most successful cooperative learning technique at increasing student

academic achievement, but the bulk of the research on STAD had been conducted at the elementary level and in subject areas other

than social studies. Slavin ( 1995) reported on 29 studies that examined the effectiveness of STAD. He reported that STAD

consistently had positive effects on learning. Generally, STAD positively affected (c) cross race relations, (b) attitude toward school

and class, (c) peer support, (d) locus of control, (e) time on task, (f) peer relationships and, (g) cooperation. However, Slaving found

that few studies examined the effects of STAD on the 7-12 grade levels.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of STAD upon academic achievement and student attitude towards social

studies of upper level secondary social studies students. The following research questions were proposed:

1. Will upper secondary social studies students who are given instruction by the STAD cooperative learnin technique score higher

on a posttest than students taught the same material by traditional methods? H: There will be a significant difference between

treatment (STAD) and comparison groups (traditional) on the criterion variable of academic achievement while holding pretest

academic achievement constant.

2. Will upper secondary social studies students who are given instruction by the STAD cooperative learning technique demonstrate

a better attitude towards social studies class? H: There will be a significant difference between the treatment (STAD) and

comparison groups (traditional) on the criterion variable of student attitude towards their social studies class.

Procedure

Sample

The sample consisted of a convenient sampling of 47 students in two twelfth grade advanced placement American Government

classes located in a suburban setting in south Mississippi. The treatment goup contained 17 students while the comparison group

contained 30 students. Both groups were predominantly white with a good mix of male and female students.

Treatment

Both treatment and comparison groups were taught by the same classroom teacher, a veteran with several years of teaching

experience, during the fall of 1997. The teacher had been the recipient of numerous teaching awards for excellence. The teacher was

trained on implementation of the STAD technique prior to the study. After treatment and comparison groups were assigned, the

students in both groups were pretested on their knowledge of course content to be covered during the seven-week study period.

Pretest scores were used to provide baseline data with which to compare posttest scores to determine if the STAD cooperative

learning techniques was effective in improving achievement. The pretest scores as well as previous social studies grades for both

groups were analyzed to ensure academic equality between the treatment and comparison groups. Following the pretest, the

seventeen students in the treatment group were divided into groups of four or five members. The students ere assigned to groups in

such a manner as to reflect a heterogeneous mixture of academic ability, gender, and race. These treatment groups were trained in

cooperative group skills prior to the seven-week treatment period. The teacher delivered the treatment groups' instruction in the

course through the STAD technique, using teacher presentation, team practice, individual quiz, and team reward format.

The comparison group was instructed through more traditional methods such as lecture, class discussion and individual practice.

Both treatment and comparison groups received instruction for ninety-six minute class periods occurring on alternate school days


3 of 5 4/29/08 2:49 PM

throughout the seven-week period. Each group received instruction on the same course content over the identical amount of

instructional time. Lesson plans for both groups were developed by the teacher and investigators.

At the end of the seventh week of treatment, posttest means for the two groups were compared to determine whether the students

taughtby the STAD cooperative learning technique would score significantly higher than students taught by traditional methods.

Students in both groups were also administered an attitudinal instrument to measure their attitude towards social studies class.

In addition, student and teacher surveys were completed to gather qualitative data based on the study.

Instruments

A teacher made 30 item multiple choice pretest was administered to both groups on the same day prior to the beginning of the

treatment period. The same instrument was used as a posttest with additional short answer and essay questions. All test items

were selected from the test bank which accompanied the textbook used for the unit of study and were criterion referenced to the

school district's curriculum. The achievement test was validated by two experts (other teachers) who had nothing to do with the

study.

The Estes Attitudinal Scale was administered to measure student attitude toward the class. The instrument contained seventy-five

questions evaluating student attitude toward five subject areas. This instrument used a five point Likert scale ranging from

"strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." The Estes Attitude Scale had a reported consistency and reliablility with coefficients

ranging from .76 to .93. The construct validity was examined by assessing extrinsic measures and intrinsic measures. The results

indicated both convergent and discriminative validity of individual interests were met (Estes, Estes & Richards, 1985).

Results

An analysis of covariance and analysis of variance procedures were used to analyze the data. The specific hypotheses addressed in

this study were:

1) There will be a significant difference between treatment (STAD) and comparison groups (traditional) on the criterion variable

of academic achievement while holding pretest academic achievement constant;

2) There will be a significant difference between the treatment (STAD) and comparison groups (traditional) on the criterion

variable of student attitude towards their social studies class.

Contrary to the first hypothesis, this study produced no significant difference between the achievement level of those taught by

traditional methods and those instructed by the STAD technique LF(1,44)=.122,p=.728) [see table 1]. Both treatment and

comparison groups improved approximately ten points on the posttest (see table 2). This may mean that taught by the STAD

technique and those taught by traditional methods E(1,45)=.029, II=.865)[see table 3].

Qualitative instruments in the form of student and teacher surveys were also administered to provide further insight into the

dynamics of the study. When treatment students were asked if they enjoyed working in groups during the study 94% answered

positively. They commented that, "team work made studying easier; and discussing work with peers made it easier to remember

important pointx" Seventysix percent reported that working in groups helped them learn course content and 71% reported that the

team competition component of the technique made class more interesting. When treatment students were asked if they would

prefer to use STAD to cover the next unit of study, 88% responded positively state that the technique, "made class more fun," and

"made it easier to understand the work."

The teacher survey produced similar positive results. The teacher commented that the technique was an excellent presentation

method for delivering course content and for encouraging students to work towards shared goals. She related that the STAD

technique was easy to implement and administer and was particularly suited for a block schedule timetable (fewer classes with

larger amounts of time during the day). She found few weaknesses in the technique and felt that it would be successful in other

courses, with different ability levels and in other secondary grade levels.

Discussion


4 of 5 4/29/08 2:49 PM

The previous discussion of the results of the data analysis supports the conclusion that the use of STAD in the upper secondary

social studies classroom had no statistically significant effect on the academic achievement and attitude towards social studies

class. However, teacher comments and results of student surveys seem to differ from these findings. STudents commented that

using STAD in the social studies classroom made learning fun and the content easier to understand. The teacher felt that, from her

observations, the treatment students were enjoying class more than the comparison group and were taking a more active role in

the class. Assuming that these observation were true then the application of STAD in the classroom had positive effects which the

statistical techniques used to measure the effects of this study did not detect.

These findings are important because it demonstrates that STAD can be as effective a teaching strategy for upper secondary social

studies students as delivering course instruction by traditional methods. In addition, it reveals that students of higher ability are

not adversely affected by working in heterogeneous groups as some parents and teachers contend. Critics tend to claim that high

achieving or grade conscious students often outperform their groups, while other group members contribute less to learning while

benefiting from others effort and knowledge. The results of this study help allay this misconception. This study supports the

research (Newman & Thompson, 1987; Slaving, 1995; Stahl & VanSickle, 1992) that well structured cooperative learning

techniques which contain the five basic elements of effective cooperative learning (i.e., positive interdependence, face to face

interaction, individual accountablility, effective social skills, and reflective group process) can ensure that all group members

participate in the learning process actively and quitable.

It is also important to note that STAD is easily adapted to the block scheduled secondary social studies class. In a block schedule

students take fewer classes in a semester but for longer periods of instruction. For example, in this study both the treatment and

comparison group's classes were scheduled for 96 minute blocks of instruction which took place on alternate days. The teacher

commented that the STAD method used was a very effective strategy for the block scheduled class. The teacher was able to deliver a

presentation in the form of a lecture of class discussion, have students work in groups, review their work, and evaluate students

work durig the same blocked class period.

Observation of the class revealed a high level of motivation by the students to complete the tasks and be prepared for the quiz at the

end of class.

One of the major drawbacks of the study was the relatively small sample size and narrow focus. Future studies should involve a

larger number of subjects selected from a more diverse pool of students in a wider range of courses. The fact that his study focused

on advanced progress American Government students proved that cooperative learning could be an effective teaching technique at

this advanced level, however, further research is needed to substantiate these findings.

Even though cooperative small group learning is tone of the most researched teaching strategies being used in schools today, much

more research must be done to determine its effectivness in the upper grades.

References

Estes, T.H., Estes, JJ., & Richards, H.C. (1975). Estes attitude scales: To measure attitude toward school subjects the secondary

form. (available from Thomas H. Estes, University of Virginia, Charlotteville, Virginia).

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1987). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperation. Competition and Individualism. Second

edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theorv and Research. Edina, MN: Interaction Books.

Newman, F.M. & Thompson, J. (1987). Effects of Cooperadv in nA hi vementin Secondary Schools: A Summary of Research.

Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

Palmer, J. & Johnson, J.T. (1989). Jigsaw in college classroom: Effect on student achievement and impact on student evaluations of

teacher performance. Journal of Social Studies Research, 13, 34-37.

Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groups: recent methods and effects on achievements, attitudes, and ethnic


5 of 5 4/29/08 2:49 PM

relations. Review of Educational Research M 241-271.

Slavin, RE. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50, 315-342. Slavin, R.E. (1982). Cooperative Learning:

Student Teams. Washington, DC: National Education Association

Slavin, R.E. (1986). Student team learning: An overview and practical guide. Washington, DC: Professional Library National

Education Association.

Slavin, R.E. (1990). Cooperative Learning: Theory. Research and Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Slavin, R.E. ( 1995).

Cooperative Learning: Theory Research and Practice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Stahl, RJ. and VanSickle, RL. (1992), Cooperative learning in the Social Studies Classroom: An Invitation to Social Study.

Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.

Scott Armstrong Jesse Palmer

University of Southern Mississippi

Copyright Kansas State University, College of Education Spring 1998

Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved

Documents

JSSR-Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD)