Effects Of The Learning Together Model Education Essay

effectuate Of The eruditeness unneurotic prototype Education EssayCHAPTER 11.1 insertioncooperative words accomplishment has been proclaimed as an effective biddingal approaching in promoting the cognitive and linguistic study of gypers of side as a siemens run-in (ESL) or face as a Foreign Language (EFL) (Kagan, 1995 Kessler, 1992 McGroarty, 1989, 1993). These look intoers, among others, have established the hypothetic relevance of accommodating knowledge (CL) in arc gage diction (L2) education ground on the premise that CL provides maximum opportunities for essenceful in mark and output in a highly synergistic and auxiliary environment. CL in any case integrates language and content argument, and its varied applications argon in harmony with the pedagogical implications of the input, sociableization, and inter vigorous theories of L2 acquisition.This is beca hire CL enhances the motivation and psycho neighborly adjustment of L2 learners (Cohen, 1994 Do rnyei, 1994, 1997). According to Olsen and Kagan (1992), CL amplifications fundamental fundamental interaction among learners as they restate, expand, and elaborate their ideas in devote to convey and/or clarify mean meaning. This interaction is important because it contributes to gains in L2 acquisition (Long Porter, 1985 Pica, Young, Doughty, 1987) and in pedantic operation (Bejarano, 1987 Ghaith Yaghi, 1998 Kagan, 1989). Further much than, it has been established that CL enables learners to process information beyond the level of sensory(a) run intoing by offering redundancy and multiple venues of information door way of life and tasks (Olsen Kagan, 1992 Webb, 1989).Likewise, CL may be especi eithery useful for ESL/EFL learners based on the assumption that it provides a variety of flexible ways for organizing focussing and integrating language and content instruction into various discourse and instructional con text editions (Olsen, 1989). In amplification, C L encourages active participation in genuine conversations and collaborative problem-solving activities in a develop climate of personal and pedantic support. It besides empowers learners and provides them with self-reliance and envision to organize and regulate their own learning (Clifford, 1999 Thomson, 1998)As joint encyclopedism advances into the nations assortrooms, the benefits of nurture strategies increase greatly. information strategies suggested in Diversified T to each oneing, though strong in themselves, gain more power as we put the steps into the hands of bookmans. For many learners, active participation is the key to mastery. In the past, teachers have done most of the action with students passively observing. Now, after conservatively patterning the steps of a strategy, teachers throw out direct the activities to small hosts of students. When students take actively involved in the learning process, the quest(a) occur1. motive increases/boredom decr eases2. Mastery improves for kinesthetic learners3. Responsibility of learning sacs to the students1.2 Background of the seek ProblemThe social and schooldays scope of the present turn over is a bilingual environment where Bahasa Malaysia, the native language, is predominately used in the media and for daily converse and English is taught as second language, rated for their educational and cultural significance. However, ESL instruction in the context of the present study remains competitive in nature and does not provide opportunities for active learning and meaningful intercourse among learners because learners are evaluate to perform better than their classmates in order to wee higher grades and deliver the goodss the approval and success. in that respect is a hold to examine the theoretical relevance and might of cooperative learning as an instructional approach in a bilingual and handed-down school context such(prenominal) as this one based on the assumption tha t it would encourage active learning and meaningful interaction in the target language of English among learners.1.3 Statement of the ProblemIt has been said that students learn to read by indication and to write by writing. If, in fact, this is true, it is reasonable to assume that students develop feelings of outlay by experiencing small daily successes. Success in school, particularly in reading, has a strong impact on students feelings of worth and accomplishment.on-key reading requires both the magnate to break down the code and the ability to understand the meaning intended by the writer. Collaboration is call for betwixt leftover and right brain visual skills in order to be a strong reader. Fortunately, students who are weak in either champaign can be assisted by using specific strategies conjunctive learning is a philosophical shift from the teacher as firsthand transporter of information to teacher as facilitator. Student works unneurotic in pigeonholings of di ckens to five as they teach one another, problem settle and develop appropriate social skills. co-op learning provides a way for students who are weak in academic skills to actively get into in the learning opportunity by contributing their own strengths and by receiving confederate assistance. However, research indicates that the strong student who helps the weak one actually benefits more.1.4 conceptual poserThis research is to mildew the effectuate of the Learning in concert Model of Cooperative Learning on English as a Second Language in knowledge Comprehension acquisition and Academic self-pride to improve students scores on reading comprehension bear witnesss at heart a particular primary quill school setting.The observational radical of students from the upper primary level is the sampling for comparison in the form of quantitative and qualitative instruments. Before and after acquirements provide be taken into consideration for analysis.During the pre visitat ion a specifically design seek will be habituated for the purpose of the present study is administered to all participants 1 week previous to the treatment. This test is based on a reading text and include 12 items that measured participants verbal comprehension of ideas in a flash stated in the passage and higher order comprehension that required inference and interpretation. Finally, the homogeneous set up test is administered to the participants in the halt and data-based congregations at the endpoint of the treatment. This test is a domain-referenced test that covered the learning outcomes and competencies targeted during the period of investigation.The express test is based on a selection reading text that is previously read by the participants and include nine multiple-choice, three gip answers, and octet sentence-completion items that measured the outcomes and competencies under investigation.Outcomes of the tests, the questionnaires, the feedback on the technique s and observation of the self-esteem of the sample will be taken into consideration for further evaluation. The conceptual mannequin of this research as belowFigure 1 Conceptual Framework of researchPRETESTCLASS BCLASS AEKSPERIMENTALGROUP restrainGROUPPOST- TESTQuestionnaires(Self-Esteem)STUDENTSTUDENTFMFMRESULTMurid)1.5 Purpose of the ResearchThe purpose of this research is to determine the effects of the Learning Together Model of Cooperative Learning on English as a Second Language in development Comprehension Achievement and Academic Self-Esteem to improve students scores on reading comprehension tests in spite of appearance a particular primary school setting. ESL learners found reading for information easy in their first language but more difficult in a second or foreign language. learning comprehension tests caused disturbance and a sense of trouble for students who did not have the skills to cope with the tests. edition in a second language was not easy but taking te sts made it heretofore more difficult.1.5.1 Research ObjectivesThis research intends to find the following objectivesTo examine whether the Learning Together CL illustration more effective than established class instruction in promoting the ESL reading comprehension achievement.To examine whether the Learning Together CL exemplar more effective than conventional class in promoting achievement at heart male and female students.To examine whether the Learning Together CL good example more effective than conventional in increase the entertain for the observational assort.To examine whether Conventional Method can increase the students interest among the control radical students.1.5.2 Research QuestionsSpecifically, the study address the following questionsa) Is the Learning Together CL model more effective than conventional instruction in promoting the ESL reading achievement?b) Is the Learning Together CL model more effective than conventional in promoting achievement within m ale and female students?c) Is the Learning Together CL model more effective in increase the interest for the students in experimental conference?d) Is Conventional Method can increase the students interest among the control group student?1.5.3 Hypothesis Nulla) at that place is no meaning(a) residual in achievement mean score on post test of students in experimental group compare to students in control group.b) There is no significant difference of achievement score in English Lesson within male and female students who had been taught using Learning Together Model.c) There is no significant difference in interest for the students in experimental group using the Learning Together Model.d) There is no significant mean score in English Reading Comprehension test in Interest for the Control root Students Using Conventional Method.1.6 logical implication of the ResearchIts clear that reading comprehension is a decomposable cognitive process that depends upon a number of ingredient s all working together in a synchronous, even automatic way. Vocabulary clearly plays a sarcastic role in understanding what has been read. The reader must also be intentional and thoughtful while reading, monitoring the words and their meaning as reading progresses. And the reader must apply reading comprehension strategies as ways to be sure that what is being read matches their expectations and builds on their increment body of knowledge that is being stored for immediate or future reference.. In conventional classrooms, ESL students receive less teacher and peer communion and communication at a start out linguistic and cognitive level than in cooperative learning classrooms. One of the main advantages of group work for second language learners is that it offers students the chance to hear more language and more intricate language during interaction. In discussion with others, students may hear more mazy language from their peers than from the teacher in conventional class discussion. Consequently, at to the lowest degree some of the input will be at an appropriate level. In one study, students participating in group-based investigation made more high-ranking cognitive gains than those who took part in peer-tutoring or whole-class manners (Holt, 1993).Most observational research indicates that the deliverer is the teacher 60 to 70 % of the quantify during teacher-centered interaction. In comparison, in cooperative learning, one quaternityth to one half of the students can speak at any given time, depending on whether pair work or group work is being used (McGroarty, 1993). This is important to language learning because it give students more opportunities to practice using language skills. In addition to increasing the number of opportunities available for communicative expression, cooperative learning systems promote use of a wide range of communicative functions. This is important to language learning to expose students to a variety of langua ge skills. Through teacher modeling and pre program line exercises, students are given specific instructions in such skills as paraphrasing the ideas of others, asking for explanations, summarizing, clarifying, indicating agreement or disagreement, and interrupting politely, all verbal skills, which are beneficial to the language acquisition process.1.7 Limitations of the ResearchSome problems which may arose when research is conducted. They areThe outcomes may only cover the sample and may not necessarily be concluded all the groups in the general. However, samples with similarities of culture, undercoat and also environmental factors may result in similarities of outcomes and problems.Differences in approaches and styles of the teachers, the interest of the students, the studying environment and other factors also need to be addressed in order to have more valid and reliable results.Reading techniques are focused on the reading comprehension and could not be generalized for othe r aspects of the language.1.8 translation of TermsDefinition of ReadingTrue reading requires both the ability to break down the code and the ability to understand the meaning intended by the writer. Collaboration is required betwixt left and right brain visual skills in order to be a strong reader. Fortunately, students who are weak in either area can be assisted by using specific strategies.Reading Comprehension Its clear that reading comprehension is a complex cognitive process that depends upon a number of ingredients all working together in a synchronous, even automatic way. Vocabulary clearly plays a captious role in understanding what has been read. The reader must also be intentional and thoughtful while reading, monitoring the words and their meaning as reading progresses. And the reader must apply reading comprehension strategies as ways to be sure that what is being read matches their expectations and builds on their growth body of knowledge that is being stored for im mediate or future reference.Definition of Cooperative LearningCooperative learning is a philosophical shift from the teacher as primary conveyor of information to teacher as facilitator. Student works together in groups of two to five as they teach one another, problem solve and develop appropriate social skills. Cooperative learning provides a way for students who are weak in academic skills to actively go in in the learning opportunity by contributing their own strengths and by receiving peer assistance. However, research indicates that the strong student who helps the weak one actually benefits more.1.9 SummaryThe research is an attempt to check over the effects of the Learning Together Model of Cooperative Learning on English as a Second Language in Reading Comprehension Achievement and Academic Self-Esteem. Reading comprehension is a complex cognitive process that depends upon a number of ingredients all working together in a synchronous, even automatic way. Vocabulary clearl y plays a vital role in understanding what has been read. The reader must also be intentional and thoughtful while reading, monitoring the words and their meaning as reading progresses. Cooperative Learning advances into the nations classrooms, the benefits of reading strategies increase greatly. Reading strategies suggested in Diversified Teaching, though strong in themselves, gain more power as we put the steps into the hands of students.Effects of the Learning Together Model of Cooperative Learning on English as a Second Language in Reading Comprehension Achievement and Academic Self-EsteemCHAPTER 2Literature Review2.1 Introduction Cooperative Learning(CL)Currently, CL is perceived as a generic term for a number of instructional techniques and mathematical functions that address conceptual learning and social development. It encompasses the following instructional models the Structural Approach (Kagan, 1989), Group investigation (Sharan Sharan, 1992), Student squad up Learn ing (Aronson, Blaney, tonushan, Sikes, Snapp, 1978 Slavin, 1995), Curriculum Packages (Slavin, Leavey, Madden, 1986), and Learning Together (Johnson, Johnson, Holubec, 1991, 1992, 1994).The Structural Approach is based on using content-free ways of managing classroom interaction called organises. Structures are relatively easy to implement and can be categorized into squad and class building, communication, mastery, and critical thinking structures. One example of a structure is Numbered Heads Together. Kagan (1989) describes the procedure of Numbered Heads Together as followsStep 1 Students number off within squads.Step 2 The teacher asks a high consensus question.Step 3 Students put their heads together to make sure everyone on the team knows the answer.Step 4 The teacher calls a number at random, and students with that number annul their hands to be called upon to answer the question and earn points for their teams.Group Investigation divides work among team members, who complete specific tasks and then reconvene to slump a group presentation. Student Team Learning includes the Jigsaw method and its variations and the Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) method. The Jigsaw method has five major components reading, adroit group discussion, team report, testing, and team recognition. Meanwhile, STAD is organized around the components of teacher presentation, team study, individual(a) quizzes, individual improvement scoring, and team recognition. The main difference betwixt Jigsaw and STAD is that Jigsaw is well suited for teaching real in a narrative form such as a legend or chapter, whereas STAD is useful in teaching materials that require single correct answers such as language rules and mechanics. Curriculum Packages are specific programs for teaching math and language and include the Cooperative Integrated Reading and penning program.The Learning Together model organizes instruction according to the principles of positive mutualness , individual accountability, promotive face-to-face interaction, social and collaborative skills, and group processing. Specifically, positive interdependence means that the success of students is linked with the success of their team members and may be structured finished mutual goals, joint recognizes, shared resources, complementary roles, and a common team identity. Individual accountability means that the performance of each member is assessed and results are given to the team and the individual so that team members cannot get a free ride on the efforts of their teammates.Yet, team members distillery help, share, encourage, and support each others efforts to succeed through promotive interaction within their groups. Furthermore, they use and develop their interpersonal and small-group skills of leadership, decision making, trust building, and conflict management. Finally, the team members perform group processing to reflect how well the team is mathematical process and how its effectiveness may be improved. As such, the main difference between the Learning Together and other CL models is that this model is less decided and less prescriptive than the Structural and the Student Team Learning models that betroth specific steps in lesson think and some what prepackaged curricula, lessons, and strategies in a prescribed manner (Johnson Johnson, 1998, p. 226). Rather, the Learning Together model provides a conceptual framework for teachers to plan and tailor cooperative learning instruction according to their circumstances, student needs, and school contexts. (For further description of the various CL models, see Kluge, McGuire, Johnson, Johnson, 1999.)2.2 Review of Previous StudiesPrevious research involving students who spoke English as a first language and who learned content in English has suggested that CL may encourage higher self-esteem and lower feelings of hallucination at school (Johnson, 1979). For instance, Norem-Hebeisen and Johnson (1981 ) account that self-esteem was positively cerebrate with cooperative relationships among 821 White, middledle-class secondary school students in a mid western suburban American community. These investigators further account that competitive and laissez-faire(a) patterns of social interdependence reflected lower self-esteem and greater concerns regarding success and social approval.However, Johnson, Johnson, Scott, and Ramolae (1985) found no significant differences between the Learning Together CL model and individualistic and competitive forms of instruction in improving the self-esteem of 154 fifth- and sixth-grade students of science in suburban Minnesota. Along similar lines, Oickle (1980) studied the effects of team reward and individual reward structures on the English achievement and self-esteem of 1,031 students from diverse communities enrolled in four American middle schools.This researcher reported positive effects in favor of the team reward structure in promoting achievement in the four schools and in improving self-esteem in only one of the schools. Similarly, Madden and Slavin (1983), who studied the development of self-esteem among regular and special needs elementary school children in Baltimore, Maryland, reported greater general self-esteem effects for STAD but no differences in academic and social self-esteem between STAD and the control group. Conversely, Allen and vanguard Sickle (1984) reported no differences between STAD and the control group in improving the general self-esteem of 51 ninth-grade students after 6 weeks of experimentation in rural Georgia. Finally, while some researchers found that the Jigsaw method had positive effects in improving students general self-esteem (e.g., Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, Aronson, Sikes, 1977), Gonzales (1979) reported no such effects.In the context of ESL/EFL, previous research suggests that CL promotes positive attitudes among learners (Gunderson Johnson, 1980), intrinsic motivation and satisfaction (Clement, Dornyei, Noels, 1994 Szostek, 1994 Ushioda, 1996), and active pursuit of group goals (Nichols Miller, 1994). It also leads to gains in social support for academic excellence (Daniels, 1994), antepast of successful task fulfillment (Douglas, 1983), and increased self-confidence and less anxiety (Deci Ryan, 1985). More recently, Ghaith and Yaghi (1998) reported that the STAD method is more effective than individualistic instruction in improving the acquisition of L2 rules and mechanics. Likewise, Calderon, Hertz-Lazarowitz, and Slavin (1998) reported that a bilingual Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition intervention improved third-grade achievement during regeneration from Spanish to English in comparison with control classes that used traditional textbook reading methods. Similarly, Bejarano, Levine, Olshtain, and Steiner (1997) reported that small-group cooperative practice of modified interaction and social interaction strategies improve EF L learners communicative competence.In like manner, Thomson (1998), in her study of a group of third-year Australian university students in a Japanese language class, found that cooperation among teachers and students increased interaction opportunities among learners and promoted autonomous learning. Finally, Ghaith (2002) reported that the Learning Together CL model positively correlates with a supportive L2 climate and with learners perceptions of fairness of grading and academic achievement. The aforementioned studies underscore the value and voltage of CL in the L2 classroom. However, there is still a need to investigate the efficacy of various CL models in promoting gains in the cognitive and non-cognitive domains of ESL/EFL instruction across different languages and cultures.2.3 SummaryConsequently, the present study set out to investigate the effects of the Learning Together CL model on the achievement, academic self-esteem, and feelings of alienation among ESL learners stu dying in a web site characterized by competitive schooling and limited opportunities for meaningful social interaction in English, the target language.Effects of the Learning Together Model of Cooperative Learning on English as a Second Language in Reading Comprehension Achievement and Academic Self-EsteemCHAPTER 3Research Methodology3.1 Study DesignThe study employed a pre test-post test control group design and focused on the variables of academic self-esteem and alienation from school as well as achievement based on the proposition that interacting positively with other people to achieve common goals tends to increase academic self-esteem and to decrease school alienation (Johnson, Johnson, Stanne, 2000). Academic self-esteem and psychosocial adjustment at school are of critical importance because they enable learners to withstand the disappointments of life, be confident decision makers, and at last be happy and productive individuals(Slavin, 1995). Likewise, the Learning Tog ether CL model was selected as the form of intervention in the present study because it encompasses all the CL elements of heterogeneous grouping, positive interdependence, individual accountability, social and collaborative skills, and group processing.Furthermore, there is at present a need to examine the efficacy of this model inThe context of teaching ESL in general, and in the context of the present study in particular, due to the scarcity of previous research.3.2 Populations and assayParticipants in the study are 60 upper primary students from a primary school in Kulim. The learners are from families with low to medium socioeconomic and educational backgrounds enrolled in the primary school in Kulim. There are 34 males and 26 females, and their ages ranged from 11 to 12 years. The participants will be selected from the primary school and will be randomly assigned to control and experimental groups the study will last for 10 weeks. The experimental group included 30 participan ts who will study together in seven teams of four members each according to the dynamics of the Learning Together CL model as described in the Study section. Meanwhile, the 30 participants in the control group will study the same material according to procedures in their textbooks.FIGURE 2 Populations and SampleMaleFemaleExperimental Group1614Control Group18123.3 Research InstrumentsAcademic self-esteem was defined in the context of the present study as the self perception of one as being a capable, competent, and successful student (Johnson Johnson, 1996, p. 67) and measured by a five-item Likert subscale adapted from Johnson and Johnson (1996). Likewise, an eleven-item Likert subscale also adapted from measured school alienation Johnson and Johnson (1996)In addition, an achievement pre test specifically designed for the purpose of the present study is administered to all participants 1 week prior to the treatment. This test is based on a reading text and included 12 items that me asured participants literal comprehension of ideas directly stated in the passage and higher order comprehension that required inference and interpretation. Finally, the same post test is administered to the participants in the control and experimental groups at the conclusion of the treatment. This test is a domain-referenced test that covered the learning outcomes and competencies targeted during the period of investigation. These outcomes and competencies included utilizing context Clues (syntactic and semantic) and using reading strategies such as previewing, skimming, and scanning to achieve literal and higher order comprehension of printed discourse.The post test is based on a selection reading text that is previously read by the participants and included nine multiple-choice, three short-answers, and eight sentence-completion items that measured the outcomes and competencies under investigation. The content validity of the test was established by the researcher, the program c oordinator, and the teacher who implemented the study, using a specification remit as suggested by Sax (1980). Consequently, it is determined that four items measured literal comprehension, eleven items measured higher order skills, and five items measured the use of context clues to aid comprehension.3.4 Procedure for Data CollectionThe study consisted of two human bodys. The first shape involve a teacher who agreed to participate in the study by applying the elements of the Learning Together CL model (heterogeneous grouping, positive interdependence, individual accountability, social skills, group processing) in her teaching of ESL. This phase focused on specifying academic and collaborative skills objectives, dividing students into groups, arranging the room, assigning roles, and planning materials. Furthermore, the participating teacher will receive training in explaining academic tasks, structuring positive goal interdependence, individual accountability, and intergroup coop eration. The teacher will also learn how to specify and monitor learners desired behaviors and enable students to process and evaluate how the group functioned. The purpose of this first phase was to maximize experiment fidelity through careful training of the teacher-experimenter who would implement the second phase of the study.The second phase of implementation involved working with the program coordinator and the teacher who agreed to participate in the study in order to determine the content and learning outcomes and competencies to be achieved during the period of investigation. In addition, detailed lesson plans were designed in order to teach the same content and skills to the experimental and control groups. The lesson plans for the experimental group were based on a checklist of teachers roles and lesson templates designed by Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec (1987) . Specifically, the plans included lesson summaries, instructional objectives, and a list of materials needed as well as specifications of time required, group size, assignment to groups and roles, and arranging the room. The lesson plans also included an explanation of tasks, procedures to structure positive interdependence and individual accountability, and criteria for success.In addition, the plans specified the social skills and expected behaviors, and included procedures for group monitoring and processing to see how well the group functions. Meanwhile, the lesson plans for the control group focused on reading the same material according to the instructional procedures (activities) suggested in their textbook. These procedures were organized into three stages of lesson planning opening, instruction and participation, and closure. These stages provided opportunities for working on various language objectives in the written and literal domains in an integrated matter, using a wide variety of instructional techniques such as whole-class brainstorming, discussion, question and answer, comp rehension checks, crossword puzzles, and graphic organizers. some(prenominal) the experimental and control group lesson plans addressed the same instructional objectives and will be based on the same reading selections and exercises. However, the experimental plans provided opportunities for small-group interaction and for sharing resources among team members. There was also an emphasis on social and collaborative skills and on developing team spirit and collegiality. Conversely, students in the control group worked individually and shared their answers with the class. As previously noted, one of the teachers who had authorized training in Phase 1 of the study had agreed to participate in Phase 2. In order to avoid any potential bias in the implementa