Cooperative learning revisited

The endeavor to teach academic skills known as cooperative learningis of interest to behavioral educators due to its record of effectiveness, its use of behavioral procedures, and its relatively widespread adoption by regular educators. All forms of cooperative learning emphasize operations that encourage students to work together to achieve commonly held goals rather than competing with or ignoring the efforts of others. Despite the apparent soundness of the approach, the present commentary raises several issues. First, it states that some cooperative learning proponents fail to describe the behavioral processes underlying the approach. Second, it is pointed out that it is unclear whether cooperative learning is an independent or dependent variable. Given that cooperative learning applies group contingencies to academic behavior, the question is raised as to whether group contingencies do, in fact, produce desirable social interactions, and whether group contingencies are appropriate for academic behaviors. A concern is also raised as to whether the spontaneous peer tutoring generated by cooperative learning compares favorably with planned peer tutoring. Finally, it is claimed that the minor variations from academic group contingencies that cooperative learning proponents have introduced do not require identifying a new process.     

A systems analysis of the behaviors of schooling

Summary and conclusions Thus, the existing nonsystematic system, and the various vested interests associated with it, targets groups of students rather than individuals. Prior to the advent of a science of schooling, the tutorial approach associated with the privileged or ruling classes did not seem feasible for educating the masses, simply because there was no adequate science of behavior for the individual. Even after that science showed promise for pedagogy, there was still no systems-wide science for applying what was known to groups and organizations in which the individual was pivotal. In order to determine whether behavioral conceptions of schooling work on a larger scale, we must experimentally test whether or not thoroughgoing applications are feasible to educate the masses individually. Findings from 8this research can be used to design and modify systems of schooling that are measurably effective, workable year in and year out, automatically self-correcting, and beneficial to all of the parties involved. CABAS has demonstrated how such a system can work on a small scale; other attempts may show us how to make a large scale system work. We have not yet seen what man can make of man (Skinner, 1971, p. 215).     

Latent Structure of the Sources of Mathematics Self-Efficacy

General social cognitive theory and its career-specific elaborations posit four primary sources through which self-efficacy beliefs are acquired and modified: personal performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and physiological states and reactions. We present two studies exploring the dimensionality of these sources within the context of career-relevant mathematics activities. In Study 1, 295 college students completed measures of the source variables. Testing two- through five-factor models, we found strongest support for a four-factor latent structure of the efficacy sources. In Study 2, involving 481 high school students, a five-factor model fit the data well. We also found evidence of a higher order factor structure in both samples. Several directions for further research on the sources of efficacy information are considered, along with implications for career and academic interventions.     

Intuitive Perceptions of Decision-making Strategy: Naive Assessors' Concepts of Integrative Complexity

Although there are measurable differences in integrative complexity among solutions that individuals generate in dealing with problems, it is uncertain to what extent people comprehend, recognize, and have preferences among different levels of complexity. Integrative complexity is a function of differentiation (the perception of several attributes within, or perspectives about, a topic) and integration (combining the differentiated characteristics in an interactive or synthesizing solution). The current paper reports two experiments dealing with how university students perceive, interpret, and choose among solutions differing in complexity. Experiment 1 showed that subjects accurately rated the complexity of described solutions differing along the continuum, but that their assessment of their own responses differed from the results of expert scoring. Their self-estimated complexity was highly correlated with their preferences, and preferred complexity was reliably higher than either expert- or self-assessed complexity of subject-generated solutions. Subjects were able to hypothesize quite accurately about environmental and endogenous factors likely to affect complexity. Experiment 2 found that in response to problem scenarios, solutions selected as being potentially most effective were consistently more complex than solutions that participants considered themselves most likely to use. The idea of complexity seems to be intuitively recognizable and understandable by untrained subjects: They can and do distinguish among problem solutions (self-generated or presented) that vary on that dimension, and are able to assess accurately the effects of relevant variables. Such subjects also share the bias shown by experts in favour of the superiority of more complex approaches.