Proposal view
| Proposal Type: | Individual Paper |
|---|---|
| Domain: | Learning and Social Interaction |
| SIG: | Social Interaction in Learning and Instruction |
| Type | Submitted Paper |
| Equipment |
PC and projector |
| Paper Details |
|---|
| Title | A Study of Pupils’ Science Learning Behavior in Heterogeneous/Homogeneous Groups |
|---|---|
| Abstract | The purpose of the study was to understand pupils’ learning behavior in heterogeneous/homogeneous groups. This study proceeded in a primary school at a satellite town and lasted for eight months. Thirty-six forth-grade pupils of two classes participated in this study, and students with high/low ability were removed from his/her group in different stages. Classroom observation with the checklist, named: “the Checklist of Groupworks in Science Learning” was conducted. After analyzing the data qualitatively and quantitatively, it was found that the low-ability students had better performance in homogeneous group than in heterogeneous group (p < .001). But high-ability students showed the similar behavior in homogeneous group and in mid-heterogeneous group with lower ability (p > .05). In addition, some of the low-ability students would engage in group activities and cooperate with others in homogeneous group, but some of the high-ability students who used to be the leaders in heterogeneous groups showed off-task behavior in homogeneous group. It showed that the learning behavior of a student was indeed influenced by group members. Besides, it was also found that whatever the group was heterogeneous or not, the interaction structure of groups became stable swiftly after removing students. It is worth noting that the interaction structure of each group is quite similar, that is, only 1-3 members are engaging in group tasks, other members are just idle around. It implies that the group interaction is influenced by a wider and deeper belief/value of culture, which needs more studies and discussion. |
| Summary | Introduction In the past two decades, science education research has begun to address some of the sociocultural issues (Lemke, 2001). From the social constructivism point of view, many researchers and science teachers suggest that schools should provide pupils with more opportunities to negotiate, compromise, and appreciate each other’s opinions heterogeneous groups (Alexopoulou & Driver, 1996; Hogan, 1998; Pizzini & Shepardson, 1992; Woodruff & Meyer, 1997). However, some studies revealed that low-ability students have less opportunity to be engaged in groups; moreover, even though they have the chance to be engaged in groups, the low-ability students could still be marginalized through the works assignment. That is to say, although heterogeneous grouping plays a very import role for cooperative learning, we still know little about the relation between group heterogeneity and students’ learning behavior. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to understand pupils’ learning behavior in various heterogeneity groups. Method This study proceeded in a primary school at a satellite town in Taiwan and lasted for eight months. Thirty-six forth-grade pupils of two classes participated in this study. There were five groups in each class, and there were 5-6 members of each group. Four groups belonged to two classes were observed and video-taped in this study. All the group discussion was transcribed word by word. The research was designed as three stages, and each of the stages lasted for two months. The procedure of this study showed as Fig 1. In order to record and analyze pupils’ learning behavior in groups, a checklist named the Checklist of Groupworks in Science Learning (CGSL) (Chiang, 2004) was conducted in this study. There were 38 items of CGSL, and each of the items indicated one behavior which was common during group learning. After one group activity, such as one topic of discussion or one experiment was finished, the observers recorded the point according to the frequency of pupils’ behavior of each item, and sum up total 38 items. Results and Discussion After removing a low-ability student from each group, the low-ability students had better performance in homogeneous group than in heterogeneous group (p < .001). But after removing a high-ability student from each group, the high-ability students showed the similar behavior in homogeneous group and in mid-heterogeneous group with lower ability (p > .05). Nevertheless, when the only high ability student in MG-L was incompetent in conducting the assigned tasks, the middle- and low-ability students would have the opportunity to do the tasks and cooperate with the high-ability student to finish the assigned tasks. In addition, some of the low-ability students would engage in group activities and cooperate with others in homogeneous group, but some of the high-ability students who used to be the leaders in heterogeneous groups showed off-task behavior in homogeneous group. It reveals that the learning behavior of a student is indeed influenced by other group members. When we claims that one student plays a specific role in a group, such as a leader, a cognition facilitator, or a non-contributor, we tend to believe that it is due to the student’s personal characteristic and ignore the social influence upon an individual. Thus, when a student does not involve in the group activities or discussions, we usually jump to the conclusion that this is because he/she does not keep his/her mind on learning or lack of social skills. However, if we regard for the importance of the social influence, we would find out that the reason why some students are not willing to join in the group activities might be because the proceeding of the activities are dominated by the high-ability students. Consequently, the low-ability students have little access to the experiment equipment and are easy to be scolded. Thus, when the social environment is changed, the low-ability students who are originally proceeding with off-task work could switch back to involve in the group activities, while the high-ability students who are originally dominated the activities might turn themselves to have off-task behavior. Finally, our research also reveals that whatever the group heterogeneity is, the group interaction structure becomes stable swiftly within only two or three activities. Besides, the interaction structure of each group is quite similar, that is, only 1-3 members are engaging in group tasks, other members are just idle around. It implies that the group interaction is influenced by a wider and deeper belief/value of culture, which needs more studies and discussion. When we try to explore students’ science learning in groups, social and cultural influence, such as social status, power, and the tacit knowledge of social rules, should not be neglected. Reference Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in pairs and fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099-1114. Chiang, C. L. (2004, March). Students’ perception of the importance of groupworks and the frequency they are engaged in. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada. Hogan, K. (1998). Sociocognitive roles in science group discourse. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego. Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296-316. Pizzini, E. L., & Shepardson, D. P. (1992). A comparison of the classroom dynamics of a problem-solving and traditional laboratory model of instruction using path analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(3), 243-258. Woodruff, E., & Meyer, K. (1997). Explanations from intra- and inter- group discourse: Students building knowledge in the science classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 25-39. |
| Keywords | Social aspects of learning Social interaction Student behavior/attitude |
| Appendices | procedure map.doc |
| Authors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Surname | Institution | Country | EARLI Number | Presenting | |
| Chia-Ling | Chiang | National Univ. of Tainan | Taiwan | clchiang@mail.nutn.edu.tw | * | |
| I-Che | Chung | Cishan Elementary School | Taiwan | rairdol@mail2000.com.tw | ||
