Abstract
In this study, the performance and attitudes toward instruction of learners working individually on a computer-based sex education lesson were compared with those of learners working cooperatively in dyads. A tatal of 60 eighth-graders received treatments that either required individual work or encouraged cooperation with a partner. Results indicated that students who worked cooperatively significantly outperformed those who worked individually. On an attitude measure, interactions were detected between instructional method and gender, as well as among instructional method, gender, and ability. High-ability males and females reported comparable attitudes toward each instructional method, but ratings for low-ability students were differentiated according to instructional method: Low-ability males responded most favorably, while low-ability females responded least favorably to individualized methods, and low-ability females responded most favorably and low-ability males least favorably to cooperative methods.
References
Aronson, E. (1978).The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Carrier, C. A., & Sales, G. C. (1987). Pair versus individual work on the acquisition of concepts in a computer-based instructional lesson.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14, 11–17.
Clement, F. (1981). Affective considerations in computer-based education.Educational Technology, 21(4), 28–32.
Cox, D. A., & Berger, C. F. (1985). The importance of group size in the use of problem-solving skills on a microcomputer.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1, 459–468.
Dalton, D. W., & Hannafin, M. J. (1985). Examining the effects of varied computer-based reinforcement on self esteem and attitudes.Association for Educational Data Systems Journal, 18, 172–182.
Dickson, W. P., & Vereen, M. A. (1983). Two students at one computer.Theory Into Practice, 22, 296–300.
Durnin, R. G. (1985).Computer-based education: A study of student interaction and achievement in small group and individual settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate School.
Hannafin, M. J., Dalton, D. W., & Hooper S. (1987). Computers in education: 10 myths and 10 needs.Educational Technology, 27(10), 8–14.
Hooper, S., & Hannafin, M. J. (1988). Cooperative CBI: The effects of heterogeneous versus homogeneous grouping on the learning of progressively complex concepts.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4, 413–424.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1978). Social interdependence in the classroom: Cooperation, competition, individualism.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12(1).
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). The internal dynamics of cooperative learning groups. In R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. H. Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R. Schmuck (Eds.),Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. New York: Plenum Press.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1986). Computer-assisted cooperative learning.Educational Technology, 26, 12–18.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Maruyama, G. (1983). Interdependence and interpersonal attraction among heterogeneous and homogeneous individuals: A theoretical foundation and a meta-analysis of the research.Review of Educational Research, 53, 5–54.
Johnson, R. T., Johnson, D. W., & Stanne, M. B. (1985). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 668–677.
Johnson, R. T., Johnson, D. W., & Stanne, M. B. (1986). Comparison of computer-assisted cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning.American Educational Research Journal, 23, 382–392.
Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47–62.
Jonassen, D. (1982). Aptitude vs. content treatment interactions: Implications for instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 5(4), 15–27.
Kulik, J., Bangert, R., & Williams, G. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students.Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 19–26.
Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Bangert-Drowns, R. (1985). The importance of outcomes: A reply to Clark.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4(2), 381–87.
Lipinski, J. M., Nida, R. E., Shade, D. D., & Watson, J. A. (1986). The effects of microcomputers on young children: An examination of free-play choices, sex differences and social interaction.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(2), 147–168.
Menis, Y., Snyder, M., & Ben-Kohav, E. (1980). Improving achievement in algebra by means of the computer.Educational Technology, 20(8), 19–22.
Mevarech, Z. R., Stern, D., & Levita, I. (1987). To cooperate or not to cooperate in CAI: That is the question.Journal of Educational Research, 80, 164–167.
Moskowitz, J. M., Malvin, J. H., Schaeffer, G. A., & Schaps, E. (1983). Evaluation of a cooperative learning strategy.American Educational Research Journal, 20, 687–696.
Nijhof, W., & Kommers, P. (1985). An analysis of cooperation in relation to cognitive controversy. In R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. H. Lazarowitz, C. Webb, and R. Schmuck (Eds.),Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. New York: Plenum Press.
Peterson, P. L., & Janicki, T. (1979). Individual characteristics and children's learning in large group and small group approaches.Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 453–473.
Peterson, P. L., Janicki, T., & Swing, S. R. (1981). Ability × treatment interaction effects on children's learning in large group and small group approaches.American Educational Research Journal, 18, 453–473.
Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groups: Recent methods and effects on achievement, attitudes, and ethnic relations.Review of Educational Research, 50, 241–271.
Sharan, S., Ackerman, Z., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (1980). Academic achievement of elementary education school children in small groups.Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 125–129.
Silverstein, M. A. (1985). Social interaction analysis of elementary school students and a videodisc system in an educational environment: A progress report. In M. Simonson & M. Treimer (Eds.),Proceedings of Selected Research Paper Presentations, Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communication and Technology.
Simpson, J. (1986). Computers and collaborative work among students.Educational Technology, 26(10), 37–44.
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning.Review of Educational Research, 50, 315–342.
Slavin, R. E. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement?Psychological Bulletin, 94, 429–445.
Slavin, R. E. (1984). Students motivating students to excel: Cooperative incentive tasks and student achievement.The Elementary School Journal, 85(1), 53–64.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Mastery learning reconsidered.Review of Educational Research, 57, 175–213.
Slavin, R. E., & Karweit, N. (1981). Cognitive and affective outcomes of an intensive student team learning experience.Journal of Experimental Education, 50, 29–35.
Slavin, R. E., & Karweit, N. (1984). Mastery learning and student teams: A factorial experiment in urban general mathematics classes.American Educational Research Journal, 22, 351–367.
Swing, S. R., & Peterson, P. L. (1982). The relationship of student ability and small group interaction to student achievement.American Educational Research Journal, 19, 259–274.
Talmage, H., Pascarella, E. T., & Ford, S. (1984). The influence of cooperative learning strategies on teacher practices, student perceptions of the learning environment, and academic achievement.American Educational Research Journal, 21, 163–180.
Vereen, M. A. (1983).Microcomputer experience and student interaction in small groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Wisconsin.
Webb, N. M. (1980). A process-outcome analysis of learning in group and individual settings.Educational Psychologist, 15, 69–83.
Webb, N. M. (1982a). Group composition, group interaction, and achievement in cooperative small groups.Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 475–484.
Webb, N. M. (1982b). Peer interaction and learning in cooperative small groups.Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 642–655.
Webb, N. M. (1984). Microcomputer learning in small groups: Cognitive requirements and group processes.Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1076–1088.
Webb, N. M. (1985a). Student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. H. Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R. Schmuck (Eds.),Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. New York: Plenum Press.
Webb, N. M. (1985b). Cognitive requirements of learning computer programming in group and individual settings.Association for Educational Data Systems Journal, 18(3), 183–194.
Webb, N. M. (1985c). The role of gender in computer programming learning processes.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1(4), 441–457.
Webb, N. M., Ender, P., & Lewis, S. (1986). Problem-solving strategies and group processes in small groups learning computer programming.American Educational Research Journal, 23, 243–261.
Yeuh, J., & Alessi, S. M. (1988). The effects of reward structure and group ability composition on cooperative computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15, 18–22.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dalton, D.W., Hannafin, M.J. & Hooper, S. Effects of individual and cooperative computer-assisted instruction on student performance and attitudes. ETR&D 37, 15–24 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298287
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298287