1974
DOI: 10.3102/00346543044002213
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Instructional Goal Structure: Cooperative, Competitive, or Individualistic

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
150
0
8

Year Published

1977
1977
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 365 publications
(162 citation statements)
references
References 90 publications
4
150
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…The compromise was that students would frame in small groups, where they would receive peer support but also have substantial personal responsibility for the task. This decision was supported by suggestions in the literature that such cooperative learning structures facilitate achievement in problem-solving tasks, increase student involvement, and improve attitudes toward instruction (Johnson & Johnson, 1974;Slavin, 1980Slavin, , 1983. Several studies suggest that in complex learning activities such as studying texts, the use of cooperative groups results in higher achievement and greater retention of content area information when compared with individualistic competitive structures (Johnson, Maruyama, Johnson, Nelson, & Skon, 1981;Slavin, 1980Slavin, , 1983.…”
Section: Introduction To Rounds 2-4mentioning
confidence: 54%
“…The compromise was that students would frame in small groups, where they would receive peer support but also have substantial personal responsibility for the task. This decision was supported by suggestions in the literature that such cooperative learning structures facilitate achievement in problem-solving tasks, increase student involvement, and improve attitudes toward instruction (Johnson & Johnson, 1974;Slavin, 1980Slavin, , 1983. Several studies suggest that in complex learning activities such as studying texts, the use of cooperative groups results in higher achievement and greater retention of content area information when compared with individualistic competitive structures (Johnson, Maruyama, Johnson, Nelson, & Skon, 1981;Slavin, 1980Slavin, , 1983.…”
Section: Introduction To Rounds 2-4mentioning
confidence: 54%
“…Moreover, learning and motivation are influenced by whether students study cooperatively rather than alone (Johnson & Johnson, 1974;Sharan, 1980;Slavin, 1983). Similarly, these performances might be adversely affected by grading practices.…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many research studies characterize the positive effects of face-to-face interaction in cooperative classrooms. Such effects comprise providing group members with effective assistance (Johnson & Johnson 1981, Webb & Cullian, 1983, exchanging information and materials (Crawford & Haaland, 1972;Johnson & Johnson, 1974), providing group members with feedback for improving the subsequent performance of their assigned tasks and responsibilities (Ryan, 1982), challenging each other's conclusions (Johnson & Johnson, 2007), advocating the exertion of effort to achieve mutual goals (Wicklund & Brehm 1976), influencing each other's efforts to achieve the group's goals (Crombag, 1966), acting in trusting and trustworthy ways (Johnson & Noonan, 1972), being motivated to strive for mutual benefit (Deutsch 1949;, and exploring different points of view .…”
Section: Definition Of Cooperative Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%