Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Two conditions were compared to study how the social grouping versus curricular revision components of cooperative learning affect participants' classroom performance. Participants were from an eighth-grade English class with 22 peers without disabilities and 2 students with moderate to severe disabilities. The first condition, a typical cooperative learning arrangement, combined the social grouping of participants and revision of course materials. The second condition presented participants with the revised curriculum but removed the social grouping component. Dependent variables included the percentage of time participants were actively engaged in class activities, weekly pre-/posttest scores on the classroom curriculum, and the frequency and duration of social interactions between students with severe disabilities and their peers. Results indicated that the active engagement of participants did not differ across conditions. A second consistent finding was that peers without disabilities showed greater improvement on posttests when they were presented with the revised curriculum minus the social grouping component. Results of a social validity assessment, however, indicated that general and special educators perceived that peers without disabilities preferred the condition with the social grouping component. Finally, results indicated that 1 of the 2 students with disabilities had higher quality social interactions in the condition that combined social grouping and the revised curriculum.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baer, D. M. , Wolf, M. M. , & Risley, T. R. (1987). Some still-current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 313–328.

Block, J. H. (1974). Schools, society, and mastery learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Bloom, B. J. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cosden, M. A. , & Haring, T. G. (1992). Cooperative learning in the classroom: Contingencies, group interactions, and students with special needs. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2, 53–71.

Cushing, L. S. , & Kennedy, C. H. (1997). Academic effects on students without disabilities who serve as a peer support for students with disabilities in general education classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 139–142.

Dugan, E. , Kamps, D. , Leonard, B. , Watkins, N. , Rheinberger, A. , & Stackhaus, J. (1995). Effects of cooperative learning groups during social studies for students with autism and fourth-grade peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 175–188.

Fryxell, D. , Kennedy, C. H. , & Shukla, S. (1996). Social Interaction Checklist (SIC): A tool for assessing social interactions and social support behaviors. Nashville, TN: Pea-body College of Vanderbilt University.

Gardner, D. P. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Greenwood, C. R. , Carta, J. J. , Kamps, D. M. , & Arreaga-Mayer, C. (1990). Teacher versus peer-mediated instruction. In H. Foot , M. Morgan , & R. Schute (Eds.), Children helping children (pp. 177–205). New York: Wiley.

10.

Johnson, D. W. , & Johnson, R. T. (1982a). Effects of cooperative and individualistic instruction on the achievement of handicapped, regular, and gifted students. Journal of Social Psychology, 116, 227–283.

11.

Johnson, D. W. , & Johnson, R. T. (1982b). The effects of cooperative and individualistic instruction on handicapped students. Journal of Social Psychology, 118, 257–268.

12.

Johnson, D. W. , & Johnson, R. T. (1984). Building acceptance of differences between handicapped and nonhandicapped students: The effects of cooperative and individualistic instruction. Journal of Social Psychology, 122, 257–267.

13.

Johnson, D. W. , & Johnson, R. T. (1986). Learning together and alone (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

14.

Johnson, D. W. , Johnson, R. T. , Holubec, E. , & Roy, P. (1984). Circles of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

15.

Kamps, D. M. , Barbetta, P. M. , Leonard, B. R. , & Delquadri, J. (1994). Classwide peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 49–61.

16.

Keller, F. S. (1968). “Good-bye, teacher…” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 79–89.

17.

Kennedy, C. H. (1992). Trends in the measurement of social validity. The Behavior Analyst, 15, 147–156.

18.

Kennedy, C. H. , Cushing, L. S. , & Itkonen, T. (1997). General education participation improves the social participation of students with severe disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7, 167–189.

19.

Lloyd, J. W. , Crowley, E. P. , Kohler, F. W. , & Strain, P. S. (1988). Redefining the applied research agenda: Cooperative learning, pre-referral, teacher consultation, and peer-mediated interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 43–52.

20.

Lloyd, J. W. , Eberhardt, M. J. , & Drake, G. P. (1996). Group versus individual reinforcement contingencies within the context of group study conditions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 189–200.

21.

Miles, M. B. , & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

22.

Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groups: Recent methods and effects on achievement, attitudes, and ethnic relations. Review of Educational Research, 50, 241–271.

23.

Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

24.

Slavin, R. E. , Leavey, M. B. , & Madden, N. A. (1984). Combining cooperative learning and individualized instruction: Effects on student mathematics achievement, attitudes, and behaviors. Elementary School Journal, 84, 409–422.

25.

Slavin, R. E. , Madden, N. A. , & Leavey, M. B. (1984a). Effects of cooperative learning and individualized instruction on mainstreamed students. Exceptional Children, 50, 434–443.

26.

Slavin, R. E. , Madden, N. A. , & Leavey, M. B. (1984b). Effects of team assisted individualization on the mathematics achievement of academically handicapped students and nonhandicapped students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 813–819.

27.

Tateyama-Sniezek, K. (1990). Cooperative learning: Does it improve the academic achievement of students with handicaps?. Exceptional Children, 56, 426–437.

28.

U.S. Department of Education . (1994). Goals 2000: A world-class education for every child. Washington, DC: Author.

29.

Welsh, T. M. , Miller, K. L. , & Altus, D. E. (1994). Programming for survival: A meeting system that survives 8 years later. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 423–434.

Disentangling the Effects of Curricular Revision and Social Grouping Within Cooperative Learning Arrangements

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References