5
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 (2013) 1433 – 1437 1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşı doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.058 ScienceDirect 3rd World Conference on Learning, Teaching and Educational Leadership (WCLTA-2012) Positive interdependence in collaborative learning Marjan Laal * Tehran University of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Sina Hospital, Tehran, Iran Abstract In a collaborative setting, the success of one person is dependent on the success of the group; this is referred to as positive interdependence. All members should rely on one another to achieve the goal and need to believe that they are linked together to succeed. Positive interdependence is the belief of anyone in the group that there is value in working together and that the results of both individual learning and working products would be better when they are done in collaboration. This article aimed to describe the basic concept of collaborative learning and also to present diverse forms of structuring positive interdependence in a collaborative setting. Keywords: Collaborative, learning, elements, positive interdependence, types; 1. Introduction Positive Interdependence (PI) is a basic element of Collaborative Learning (CL) and working. But before describing PI in a collaborative setting, we should know exactly what CL is. It is through understanding the concept of CL, that we can truly use this learning style to our benefit (Annett, 1997). There are three ways to take action in relation to the actions of the others; it means one's actions may: assist the success of others, block the success of others, have no effect on the success or failure of others (Johnsons, & Johnson, 2009; Johnson, & Johnson, 1999a; Johnson, & Johnson, 1994). * Corresponding author name: Marjan Laal, MD., Tel.: +98-216-675-7001-3 E-mail address: [email protected] Available online at www.sciencedirect.com © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşı

Positive Interdependence in Collaborative Learning

  • Upload
    marjan

  • View
    218

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Positive Interdependence in Collaborative Learning

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1433 – 1437

1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşıdoi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.058

ScienceDirect

3rd World Conference on Learning, Teaching and Educational Leadership (WCLTA-2012)

Positive interdependence in collaborative learning

Marjan Laal *

Tehran University of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Sina Hospital, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In a collaborative setting, the success of one person is dependent on the success of the group; this is referred to as positive interdependence. All members should rely on one another to achieve the goal and need to believe that they are linked together to succeed. Positive interdependence is the belief of anyone in the group that there is value in working together and that the results of both individual learning and working products would be better when they are done in collaboration. This article aimed to describe the basic concept of collaborative learning and also to present diverse forms of structuring positive interdependence in a collaborative setting.

Keywords: Collaborative, learning, elements, positive interdependence, types;

1. Introduction

Positive Interdependence (PI) is a basic element of Collaborative Learning (CL) and working. But before describing PI in a collaborative setting, we should know exactly what CL is. It is through understanding the concept of CL, that we can truly use this learning style to our benefit (Annett, 1997). There are three ways to take action in relation to the actions of the others; it means one's actions may: ∞ assist the success of others, ∞ block the success of others, ∞ have no effect on the success or failure of others (Johnsons, & Johnson, 2009; Johnson, & Johnson, 1999a;

Johnson, & Johnson, 1994).

* Corresponding author name: Marjan Laal, MD., Tel.: +98-216-675-7001-3 E-mail address: [email protected]

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşı

Page 2: Positive Interdependence in Collaborative Learning

1434 Marjan Laal / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1433 – 1437

The concept of CL has been widely researched and advocated. CL is an instruction method in which individuals work with one another to achieve a common goal. They are responsible for their learning as well as the learning of others, and the success of one promotes others to be successful (Gokhale, 1995).

Laal et al. (2012) cited Klemm (1994) that CL occurs when small groups of students aid each other in learning. It is sometimes misunderstood. It is not simply having students to talk to each other, either face-to-face or in a computer conference, while doing individually. Of course CL is not having one or a few students do all the work, while the others put their names to the report.

Woods and Chen (2010) cited Johnsons (1990, 1994), that a learning exercise just qualifies as CL when the following essential elements are met: ∞ Clearly perceived PI, ∞ Considerable promotive interaction, ∞ Individual accountability and personal responsibility to achieve the group’s goals, ∞ Frequent use of the relevant social skills, ∞ Frequent and regular group processing.

This article presents the concept of the PI and diverse forms of structuring it in a collaborative setting.

2. Material and method

This review article seeks to present a description of the topic. This article begins with explaining of what CL is, goes on with the essential elements characterizing CL, while its particular focus is on the topic. Key issues were identified through review of literature on CL and through review of literature on its basic elements, exclusively PI.

3. Results

A goal structure specifies the type of interdependence among individuals as they strive to accomplish their goals. Interdependence may be positive (cooperation), negative (competition), or none (individualistic efforts) (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998).

PI is the heart of collaboration tasks. Johnson, Johnson and Holubec (1998, p. 4-7) define PI as: “Positive interdependence is linking students together so one cannot succeed unless all group members succeed. Group members have to know that they sink or swim together.” In a CL condition, each individual member has a unique contribution to the common effort and each member’s effort is necessary and required for the success of the group. All members are united around a common goal. In CL, members should believe that they succeed only when the group succeeds. PI in a CL setting is the belief that the group members upgrade or downgrade together.

PI is pivotal for group practice to qualify a collaborative state (Deutsch, 1949). We can call group practices are collaborative only when PI is among group members: the belief of sinking or swimming together while they are committed to reach a common goal. The success of a member is bound to the success of the group (Collazos, 2003).

As Johnsons (1994) noted, in collaborative conditions students have duel responsibilities: learning of the assigned subject while being certain of the group learning. In a CL situation, many kinds of PI take place. Many studies (Hwong et al., 1993; Johnson et al., 1991; Johnson et al., 1990; Lew et al., 1986; Mesch, Johnson, & Johnson, 1988; Mesch et al., 1986) have been carried out to investigate different types of PI in a collaborative situation. These PIs are as follows: ∞ Positive goal interdependence, ∞ Positive reward interdependence, ∞ Positive resource interdependence, ∞ Positive role interdependence, ∞ Positive identity interdependence,

Page 3: Positive Interdependence in Collaborative Learning

1435 Marjan Laal / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1433 – 1437

∞ Environmental interdependence, ∞ Positive fantasy interdependence, ∞ Positive task interdependence, ∞ Positive outside enemy interdependence.

PIs in a collaboration setting lead individuals to realize that their performances depend on the whole group, not on individuals. These mutual interdependences lead group members to be influenced by each other. If one takes an action, no need for others to do so (Johnson, & Johnson, 1999a). These PIs are further discussed in the following.

4. Discussion

Positive goal interdependence is the belief that each team member can reach his or her goals only when the goals of the group are met (Weldon, & Weingart, 1993). Positive goal interdependence makes the group united around a common goal. Learning the assigned material and making sure that all members in the group learn the assigned material, is the concept of goal interdependence in CL, as Johnson, Johnson and Holubec (1998, p. 4-8) noted.

A mutual reward is given for successful group work and members' efforts to achieve it, which is positive celebration/reward interdependence. It also might be structured by giving some forms of shared grades. For instance, besides their individual scores on an exam, students receive a certain number of points if all group members score at or above a certain grade (Johnson, & Johnson, 1999b; Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998; Meach et al., 1986).

Before any discussion in group, working on the full component of the information leads to the better academic performance (Kwaku, & Jan, 2011). Each individual has only a part of the information, resources, or materials needed for his or her task. Therefore, the resources should be combined in order to accomplish the shared goal. This is positive resource interdependence.

Each member is assigned complementary. Combined roles and responsibilities are required for the group to fulfill a common task. Positive role interdependence is met when particular roles are assigned to group members. These roles can be rotary to give all team members the opportunity to experience (Johnson, & Johnson, 1999b; Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1998).

Positive identity interdependence makes unity and cohesion, increasing friendship and affinity through a shared identity expressed upon a common logo, motto, name, flag or song (Johnson, & Johnson, 1999b; Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1998).

Environmental interdependence means a physical environment that unifies the members of a group in which they work (Johnson, & Johnson, 1999b; Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1998).

Positive fantasy interdependence takes place by giving an imaginary task to the students that requires members to assume they are in a life threatening situation and their collaboration is needed to survive (Raybon, 2004).

Positive task interdependence is the organizing of the group works in a sequential pattern. When the actions of one group member have to be accomplished, the next team member can proceed with his/her responsibilities (Johnson, & Johnson, 1999b; Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1998).

Positive outside enemy interdependence is by putting groups in competition with each other. Group members feel interdependent as they do their best to win the competition (Raybon, 2004). Various PIs take place in learning in collaboration.

In education, collaboration is intended to promote the most effective teaching possible for the greatest number of students (Pugach, & Johnson, 1995).

Page 4: Positive Interdependence in Collaborative Learning

1436 Marjan Laal / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1433 – 1437

5. Conclusion

PI is the heart of collaborative activities that define collaboration and transform group work into teamwork. PI is a pivotal aspect of CL that has been stressed by many experts. In a collaboration practice, nine types of PIs can take place: 1. positive goal interdependence, 2. Positive reward interdependence, 3. Positive resource interdependence, 4. Positive role interdependence, 5. Positive identity interdependence, 6. Environment interdependence, 7. Positive fantasy interdependence, 8. Positive task interdependence, and; 9. Positive outside enemy interdependence.

In a CL situation, individuals work together toward a shared goal. They work together to increase their own learning as well as each other’s learning. They strive for the success of group. They benefit from a subject that benefits the group. Common success is celebrated. Rewards are viewed to be endless. The group performance is evaluated by comparing to the specified criteria.

RReferences

Annett, N. (1997, Oct. 5). Collaborative learning: definitions, benefits, applications and dangers in the writing center. University of Richmond, Virginia, USA. Retrieved Oct. 5, 2012, from: writing2.richmond.edu/training/fall97/nanne/collaboration.html.

Deutsch, M. (1949). An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group process. J. of Human Relations, 2(3), 199–231.

Gokhale, A.A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology education. 7(1), Retrieved Oct. 5, 2012, from: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v7n1/gokhale.jte-v7n1.html.

Hwong, N., Caswell, A., Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, H. (1993). Effects of cooperative and individualistic learning on prospective elementary teachers’ music achievement and attitudes. Journal of Social Psychology, 133(1), 58-64.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, H., Stanne, M., & Garibaldi, A. (1990). Impact of group processing on achievement in cooperative groups. Journal of Social Psychology, 130 (4), 507-16.

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2009). An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning. Journal of Educational researcher, 38(5), 365-379.

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1999a). Human Relations: Valuing Diversity. Edina, MN, USA: Interaction Book Company Publishing. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1999b). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.).

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall Publishing. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1990). Using cooperative learning in math. In N., Davidson (ed.), Cooperative Learning In Mathematics

(pp.103-125). Menlo Park, California, USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Ortiz, A., & Stanne, M. (1991). Impact of positive goal and resource interdependence on achievement,

interaction, and attitudes. Journal of General Psychology, 118(4); 341-47. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. (1998). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN, USA:

Interaction Book Company Publishing. Johnson, R.T., & Johnson, D.W. (1994). An overview of cooperative learning, In J., Thousand, A., Villa, & A., Nevin (Eds.), Creativity and

Collaborative Learning. Baltimore, Maryland, USA: Brookes Publishing. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E. J. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom (pp. 4-7). Boston, MA, USA: Allyn and Bacon

Publishing. Johnson D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Indiana University, Edina, MN, USA:

Interaction Book Company Publishing. Klemm, W.R. (1994). Using a Formal Collaborative Learning Paradigm for Veterinary Medical Education. Journal of Veterinary Medical

Education, 21(1), 2-6. Kwaku, S.F., & Jan, E. (2011). Investigating the impact of positive resource interdependence and individual accountability on students'

academic performance in cooperative learning. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9 (1), 73-94. Laal, M., Laal, M., & Khattami-Kermanshahi, Zh.(2012). 21st century learning; learning in collaboration. Journal of Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1696 – 1701. Lew, M., Mesch, D., Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1986). Positive interdependence, academic and collaborative-skills group

contingencies, and isolated students. American Educational Research Journal, 23 (3), 476-88. Mesch, D., Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R. (1988). Impact of positive interdependence and academic group contingencies on achievement.

Journal of Social Psychology, 128 (3), 345-52. Meach, D., Lew, M., Johnson, D.W., & Johnson , R.T. (1986). Isolated teenagers, cooperative learning and the training of social skills.

Journal of Psychology, 120 (4), 328-334. Pugach, M.C., & Johnson, L.J. (1995). Collaborative practitioners collaborative school (p.178). Denver, Colorado, USA: Love Company

Publishing.

Page 5: Positive Interdependence in Collaborative Learning

1437 Marjan Laal / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 1433 – 1437

Raybon, J., (2004, April). The effects of positive role interdependence between small groups on achievement, learner satisfaction with distance, web-based discussions, and delayed assessment of knowledge and skills. Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations. Paper

1881. Retrieved Oct. 5, 2012, from: http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/1881. Weldon, E., & Weingart, L.R. (1993). Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (4), 307–334. Woods, D.M., & Chen, K.C. (2010). Evaluation techniques for cooperative learning. International Journal of Management & Information

Systems, 14(1), 1-6.