The International Handbook of Collaborative Learning
DOI: 10.4324/9780203837290.ch20
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Group Investigation Approach to Cooperative Learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
123
0
34

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 128 publications
(160 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
3
123
0
34
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides, students in Tan et al's study also commented that group investigation required more of their time than did traditional whole-class instruction, so they had insufficient time to study for their other class tests and to revise for the forthcoming examinations. As a result, although most of the earlier studies on group investigation (Lazarowitz & Karsenty, 1990;Shachar & Sharan, 1994;Sharan & Hertz-Lazarowitz, 1980;Sharan & Shachar, 1988;Sharan & Shaulov, 1990;Sharan et al, 1985) yielded significant differences between the two methods of classroom instructions, Tan et al's group investigation study failed to work with Singaporean students. Lee, Ng and Phang (1999) reported that their study was not well conducted because of two main difficulties.…”
Section: Why Did CL Fail In the Asian Context? Some Views From The Rementioning
confidence: 41%
“…Besides, students in Tan et al's study also commented that group investigation required more of their time than did traditional whole-class instruction, so they had insufficient time to study for their other class tests and to revise for the forthcoming examinations. As a result, although most of the earlier studies on group investigation (Lazarowitz & Karsenty, 1990;Shachar & Sharan, 1994;Sharan & Hertz-Lazarowitz, 1980;Sharan & Shachar, 1988;Sharan & Shaulov, 1990;Sharan et al, 1985) yielded significant differences between the two methods of classroom instructions, Tan et al's group investigation study failed to work with Singaporean students. Lee, Ng and Phang (1999) reported that their study was not well conducted because of two main difficulties.…”
Section: Why Did CL Fail In the Asian Context? Some Views From The Rementioning
confidence: 41%
“…For instance, Curtis and Lawson (2001) wanted to examine student interaction in computer conferences from a collaborative learning perspective. Therefore, they referred to the extensive body of literature on collaborative and cooperative learning, including three decades of research by Johnson and Johnson (1979;1989;1992a;1992b;1994a;1994b;1996) books by Slavin (1991) and Sharon and Sharon (1992), and several metaanalyses (Johnson, Johnson, & Stanne, 2000;Johnson, Johnson, & Maruyama, 1983). Within this body of literature, they found a mature theory of collaborative learning, syntactical and operational definitions of the construct, and indicators that required only minor modification before they could be used in their QCA coding scheme.…”
Section: Identifying Behaviours That Represent the Constructmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…El profesor proporcionaba un abanico de posibilidades, acordes con los intereses y niveles de los estudiantes. Una vez que los alumnos hubieron elegido uno de los temas propuestos, el profesor les proporcionó, como guía experto en la materia, un vocabulario básico referido al tema de investigación, a modo de punto de partida inicial para la búsqueda de información por los alumnos (Sharan & Sharan, 1992;Cohen, 1994).…”
Section: Fase Inicial: Delimitación De La Temática Y Organización Delunclassified