THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING METHOD ON LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT AND OPINION OF THE SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS TOWARDS SCIENCE SUBJECT, BHUTAN

Tshewang Rabgay

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to find the effect of using cooperative learning method on learning achievement and opinion towards science subject of the seventh grade students at Samtse Lower Secondary School in Bhutan. The subjects of the study comprised 82 seventh grade students. The study was an experimental research and pretest-posttest using control and experimental group was adopted. The research instruments were achievement test, opinion questionnaire, observation form and lesson plans. Data from test scores, students’ opinion and lesson observations were analyzed by calculating mean, standard deviation and p-value using paired samples t-test.

The results of test score analysis showed that the pretest means of the two groups were not different but the posttest mean of the experimental group (11.27) was significantly higher than that of control group (16.01). Students’ opinion analysis results showed that the means of interest (2.92), understanding (2.99) and satisfaction (2.81) in the pre-survey increased to high level of opinion on post-survey (interest 3.83, understanding 3.84, and satisfaction 3.78). The level of difficulty of the subject decreased from high in the pre-survey (3.87) to low in the post survey (2.45). The results suggested that there was positive change in opinion as a result of inclusion of cooperative learning.

Key words: Cooperative Learning method, Science, Learning Achievement, Education, Bhutan.

1. Introduction

            In spite of the emerging innovative teaching methods, traditional teaching is a dominant teaching method in teaching science in Bhutan (Sherab, 2008). The drawbacks of teacher centered learning has led to poor understanding of concepts and has resulted in poor learning achievements in science tests (Tenzin, et al, 2009). Besides, students have negative opinion towards learning science. They have low level of interest, understanding, satisfaction and perceive science as a difficult subject.

          Over the past decades cooperative learning method has emerged as a leading new approach to classroom instruction. Researchers have revealed that students learning through cooperative groups have higher academic test scores, higher self esteem, greater number of positive social skills and greater comprehension of content and skills they study (Johnson and Johnson, 1994). So, cooperative learning method would be an alternative to traditional teaching in Bhutan. However, not many studies have been done to determine the effect of cooperative learning method in Bhutanese teaching-learning context. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: 1. To study the effect of cooperative learning method on the learning achievement of seventh grade students studying science. 2. To study the effect of cooperative learning method on students’ opinion towards seventh grade science.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Cooperative learning

Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other's learning (Johnson and Johnson, 1994). Kagan (1989), defined cooperative learning as a teaching arrangement that refers to small, heterogeneous groups of students working together to achieve a common goal.

           

            2.2 Theories underlying cooperative learning

            (i) The Vygotskian Perspective

            The Vygotskian perspective related to cooperative leaning is Zone of proximal development and it formed the theoretical bases for cooperative learning (Doolittle, 1995). Vygotsky believed that the process of the cognitive development is dependent on social interaction and that social learning actually led to cognitive development. This phenomenon was called the Zone of Proximal Development.  

           

            (ii) The Piagetian Perspective

              Piaget believed the cognitive performance in children is directly associated with the cognitive development stage they were in. Piaget believed that learning involve the participation of the learner. Knowledge was not merely transmitted verbally but must be constructed and reconstructed by the learner (Sigel, 1977).

(iii) Bandura’s social learning theory

            The social learning theory of Bandura (1977) emphasized the importance of observing and modeling the behaviors, attitudes, and emotional reactions of others. Social learning theory explained human behavior in terms of continuous reciprocal interaction between cognitive, behavioral, and environmental influences.

           

            (iv) Constructivism

            Being student-centered by nature, cooperative learning owed much credit to Constructivism (Liang, 2002). Constructivism is a philosophy of learning that was founded on the premise that learning was an active, contextualized process of constructing knowledge rather than acquiring it (Piaget, 1973 and Papert, 1980).

(v) Dale’s cone of learning

According to Edger Dale (1946), retention rates arw the highest with teamwork which included (a) discussion groups: 50%, (b) practice by doing: 75% and (c) teaching others/immediate use of learning: 90%. As a sharp contrast, the retention rate of the traditional ways of individual and passive learning like lecturing (5%), reading (10%), and demonstration (30%) lasted no more than 30 percent.

2.3 Principles of cooperative learning

     According to Johnson and Johnson (1994) there are five principles of cooperative learning (i) Positive interdependence (ii) Face-to-Face promotive interaction (iii) Individual accountability (iv) Interpersonal and small group skills (v) Group processing.

           

            (i) Positive interdependence

            Johnson and Johnson (1987) stated that the heart of cooperative learning is positive interdependence.  Students in cooperative group depend on each other for ideas, resources and moral support for the success of the group. They work on a common goal and they must think that they are linked to each other (Johnson and Johnson, 1989).

(ii) Face-to-face promotive interaction

            It requires children to discuss, share ideas, views and materials, providing and getting feedbacks, encourage to keep one another highly motivated to complete that task they are assigned (Johnson and Johnson, 1987).

           

            (iii) Individual accountability

           Students in cooperative learning are responsible for their own and group’s learning. Having small sized group enhances group accountability because each member will be accountable for learning (Johnson and Johnson, 1989).

           

            (iv) Interpersonal and small group skills

Students in cooperative groups practice and develop teamwork skills like leadership, decision making, trust-building, communication and conflict management (Johnson and Johnson, 1989).

           

            (v) Group processing

           Students in cooperative groups discuss how well they have achieved the goal, describe what member actions are helpful and unhelpful and make decision about how to continue or change (Johnson & Johnson, 1989).

2.4 Related research            

Several studies have examined the effects of cooperative learning methods on student learning. Humphreys, Johnson, and Johnson (1982) compared cooperative, competitive, and individualistic strategies in science classes and found that students who were taught by cooperative methods learned and retained significantly more information than students taught by the other two methods. Sherman and Thomas (1986) found similar results in a study involving high school general mathematics classes taught by cooperative and individualistic methods.  Wodarski, Adelson, Todd, and Wodarski (1980) found significant gains between the pretest and posttest scores in teaching nutrition.

Johnson and Ahlgren (1976) examined the relationships between students' attitudes toward cooperation, competition, and their attitudes toward education. The.results of the study indicated that student cooperativeness, and not competitiveness, was positively related to being motivated to learn. Humphreys, Johnson, and Johnson (1982) also found that students studying physical science in a cooperative learning treatment group rated their learning experience more positively than did students in competitive and individualistic treatment groups. Tjosvold, Marine, and Johnson (1977) found that cooperative learning strategies promoted positive attitudes toward both didactic and inquiry methods of teaching science, and students taught by cooperative strategies believed they had learned more from the lesson than did students taught by competitive strategies.

3. Research Methodology

3.1 Research design: The study was an experimental research and pretest-posttest design using two groups was adopted.

3.2 Subjects of the study: Subjects of the study comprised 82 seventh grade students of Samtse Lower Secondary School. They were divided into two groups-control and experimental.

3.3 Research instruments: Four research instruments were used:1. Achievement test 2. Opinion questionnaire 3. Lesson observation form and 4. Lesson plans.

3.4 Validity and reliability: A panel of experts assessed the instruments for validity. They were pilot tested for reliability. The Chronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for the questionnaire was 0.83 and for the test the KR-21 coefficient was 0.75.

3.5 Experiment procedure: Pretest was administered to the two groups. To study the opinion, a pre-survey questionnaire was administered to the experimental group. The two groups were then taught the same topic ‘Sunlight’ using seven lessons. The control group was taught with traditional or lecture method while the experimental group was taught using cooperative learning techniques i.e. jigsaw, STAD, roundtable, team-pair-solo and group investigation. Two science teachers observed the lesson in the experimental group to study the extent to which the lessons were characterized by cooperative learning environment. At the end a post test was administered to both groups and the post-survey opinion questionnaire was administered to the experimental group.

4. Data Analysis and Findings

The data was analyzed in three parts 1. Test score analysis, by comparing the scores of the two groups in terms of mean, standard deviation and p-value using paired samples t-test. 2. Opinion analysis, by comparing the opinion of two groups in terms of mean, standard deviation and p-value using paired samples t-test. 3. Lesson observation analysis using mean and standard deviation.

The results of test score analysis showed that the pretest means of the control group (8.63) and experimental group (8.70) were not different but on posttest the mean of the experimental group (11.27) was significantly higher than that of control group (16.01).

Students’ opinion analysis results showed that the pre-survey means of interest (2.92), understanding (2.99) and satisfaction (2.81) in learning science increased to high level of opinion (interest 3.83, understanding 3.83, and satisfaction 3.78). The level of difficulty of the subject decreased from high in the pre-survey (3.87) to low in the post survey (2.45). The results indicated that students’ level of interest, understanding, satisfaction increased and perceived learning science as a less difficult subject as a result of inclusion of cooperative learning.

The results of lesson observation analysis showed that teacher observers strongly agreed that cooperative groups were characterized by positive interdependence (mean 4.6: strongly agree) and individual accountability (4.52: strongly agree). Teachers agreed that students showed face to face interaction (4.14: agree), interpersonal and small group skills and group processing (3.77: agree) during cooperative group activities. In sum, it indicated that the lessons were carried out in cooperative learning environment.

5. Conclusion

The study drew two major conclusions:     

1. Cooperative learning increased the learning achievement of seventh grade science students.        

2. Students’ level of interest, understanding, satisfaction increased and students perceived learning science as a less difficult subject as a result of cooperative learning.

6. Discussion

The study had two major findings. The first was that cooperative learning method increased seventh grade students’ learning achievement. The second was that students’ level of interest, understanding, satisfaction increased and perceived learning science as less difficult subject as a result of cooperative learning.

            The first finding was consistent with the findings of Humphrey, Johnson and Johnson (1982) that students studying physical science by cooperative learning method learned, retained and scored better than students taught by competitive and individualistic methods. The finding was also congruent with Wodarski, Adelson, Todd, and Wodarski’s (1980) findings that there were significant gains between the pretest and posttest scores in teaching nutrition using cooperative learning method.

            A possible reason to account for such significant gain could be because of the socially oriented lessons taught and learned through small group interactions (Vygotsky, 1978). As students interacted, they shared their ideas and point of views, give and receive support from each member and help each other dig below the superficial level of understanding of the material they were learning (Johnson and Johnson, 1990).  Teacher observers noted these behaviors during the lesson and commented:

“...The classroom environment was completely different. Normally, students hardly talk but this time we have seen even the quietest student in the class actively interacting with the group members....” (Teacher B)

Such interaction among group members could have lead to clear understanding of concepts and retain them in memory. According to Dale (1946) student retain 50% of what they learn through discussions and 90% of what they learn by teaching their peers. This mechanism of cooperative learning could have led to gain in test scores.

Another reason to account for the gain in test score could be due to the less threatening classroom environment. Students in the experimental group experienced more freedom to express their ideas and enjoy the lesson than did control group where teacher dominated the class. Teacher observer noted the change in learning atmosphere and commented:

“...The teacher did not impose any hard rules that would intimidate the students. He was rather approachable, friendly and caring. In such less threatening class, students seemed to learn better and enjoy the learning experience...” (Teacher A)

According to Johnson and Johnson (1990), when students interact, shared ideas and point of views, give and receive support from each member and help each other, it enables them dig below the superficial level of understanding of the material they are learning.

Other reasons to account for such gains could be because of the equal opportunity for success in cooperative learning. Students in a group learnt in the spirit of ‘Sink or swim together (Johnson and Johnson, 1990) and they made sure that each member has understood the material they were learning. This was evident as teacher observers agreed to statements such as ‘Students made sure that all members in the group had learnt’.  

Moreover, several learning theories also account for the high learning achievement. Since cooperative leaning has its root in theories of child-centered learning, theories such as Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of social learning which contends that student learning depend on social interaction; constructivism which states that student construct their own knowledge and their learning increases depending on their involvement; and Edger Dale’s (1948) learning theory which states that student retain information better when they learn through group discussion and teaching peers, support the finding. 

The second finding of the study that students’ level of interest, understanding, satisfaction increased and  perceived learning science as a less difficult subject, was consistent with the findings of Humphreys, Johnson, and Johnson (1982) who found that students studying physical science in a cooperative learning treatment group rated their learning experience more positively than did students in competitive and individualistic treatment groups. It was also consistent with the study of Tjosvold, Marine, and Johnson (1977) who found that students taught by cooperative strategies believed they had learned more enjoyably than did students taught by competitive strategies.

Some possible reasons to account for such change in opinion could be due to the less threatening and enjoyable learning environment where students could freely express their ideas and point of views, give and receive support from each member and help each other dig below the superficial level of understanding of the material they were learning. According to Slavin (1995), such learning environment ultimately helps students in psychological wellbeing and increases the level of interest. 

Another reason to account for such positive change in opinion could be due to the pleasure and satisfaction students derived from having understood the concepts they learnt. It was evident from students’ high ratings to statements such as ‘I learn science concepts by understanding not by memorization’, ‘I am satisfied with what I learn in science class’, ‘Each science class makes me happier’. 

The fun and enjoyable learning atmosphere can also be attributed to students’ increased level of interest and satisfaction. The researcher planned quizzes, tests and games at the end of each group activity to make the lesson interesting. For example, in a lesson using STAD, students first learned a concept in group and a test was done but without seeking help from peers. The individual scores were added up and the total points scored became the score for the group. The group securing the highest point was rewarded. Students found this activity of cooperative learning so interesting that even the next lesson had to be conducted using STAD. It indicated that among the five techniques, children liked STAD the most.

 Besides the two findings, a notable point in the observation analysis was that the mean of fourth principle of cooperative learning, interpersonal and small group skills, was lower than that of other principles. The possible reason for such low mean could be because students were not experienced in working in cooperative groups. Although group exercises were conducted before the treatment to make the students familiar among themselves and socialize with each other, the short period of time the researcher used for this session might not have been enough for them to be familiar enough and work with interpersonal and small group skills.

Currently cooperative learning has been found effective in many countries like Australia, Russia, Singapore, New Guinea, Ireland and Lebanon, The U.S.A, Canada, Germany, England, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, Turkey, Panama, Singapore, Hungary, etc. Since this study also found cooperative to be effective in teaching grade seven science in Bhutan, it can be claimed that cooperative learning is not culture bound and it can well be used in Bhutan as an alternative to traditional teaching.

However, some limitations of the study may be noted. Firstly, the subjects of the study were only two classes of the seventh grade students. Secondly the experiment was conducted within a very short period of time, just over a month and only 14 lessons were used. Thirdly, the study was conducted in a semi-urban school and the results might not be generalized to urban and rural schools where teaching-learning context is quite different. These factors limit the generalizability of the findings.

7. Recommendations

7.1 Recommendation for practice: The study recommended teachers in Bhutan to use cooperative learning method as an alternative teaching method to teach science.

7.2 Recommendation for further research: 1. To study the effectiveness of cooperative learning method in other subjects and other levels of education. 2. This study used variety of cooperative learning structures like team jigsaw, STAD, group investigation, roundtable method, team pair solo, etc. Researches may be conducted to study the effectiveness of each of these techniques. 

References

Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977.

Dale, E. Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching. New York: The Dryden Press, 1946.

Doolittle, P.E. Understanding Cooperative Learning Through Vygotsky’s Zone of Development. Southeastern Louisiana University, Colombia, 1995.

Eggen, P.D., and Kauchak, P.D. Strategies and Models for Teaching. U.S.A: Pearson, 2006.

Humphreys, B., Johnson, R.T., and Johnson, D.W. “Effects of Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning on Students' Achievement in Science Class.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1982: 351-356.

Johnson, D., and Johnson, R. Learning Together and Alone, Cooperative, Competitive and Individualistic Learning, Needham Heights, MA: Prentice-Hall, 1994.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Holubec, E. J. Structuring Cooperative Learning: Lesson Plans for Teachers. Edina, MN:  Interaction Book, 1987.   

Johnson, D.W., and Ahlgren, A. “Relationship Between Student Attitudes About Cooperation and Competition and Attitudes Towards Schooling.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 1976.

Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R.T. Leading the Cooperative School. Edina, MN: Interaction, 1989. 

Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R.T. “Social Skills for Successful Group Work.” Educational Leadership, 47(4), 1990: 29-33.

Kagan, S. Cooperative Learning Resources for Teachers. San Juan Capistrano, CA:Resources for Teacher, 1989. 

Liang, T. “Implementing Cooperative Learning in EFL Teaching: Process and     Effects.” Unpublished doctoral thesis, National Taiwan Normal University,   2002.

Papert, S. Mindstorm, Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic books, 1980.

Piaget, J. To Understand is to Invent. New York: Grossman, 1973. 

Sherab, K. “Bhutanese Teachers’ Pedagogical Orientation in the Primary Classes (PP-VI): A Factor on Quality of Education.” 11-30, 2009. [Online] Availableat:http://www.pce.edu.bt/cerd/Quality%20of%20Education%20II.pdf,21 March 2012.

Sigel, I. E., and Cocking R. R. Cognitive Development from Childhood to Adolescence: A Constructivist Perspective. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977. 

Sherman, L.W., and Thomas, M. “Mathematics Achievement in Cooperative Goal-Structured High School Classrooms.” Journal of Educational Research, 1986.

Slavin, R. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice, 2^nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1995.

Tenzin, W., Johnson, D., and Ramachandran, K. “A Needs Assessment of Science Education in Bhutan.” 2008. [Online] Available at: http://portal.unesco.org/geography/en/files/11198/12396892105Final_Report.pdf/Final%2BReport.pdf, 14 March 2012.

Tjosvold, D., Marine, P., and Johnson, D.W. “The Effect of Cooperation and Competition on Students Reactions to Inquiry and Didactic Science Teaching.”

1977. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(4), 281-288..

Vygotsky, L. S. Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological        Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978. 

Wodarski, L.A., Adelson, C.L., Todd, M.T., and Wodarski, J.S. “Teaching Nutrition Teams-Games-Tournaments.” Journal of Nutrition Education, 1980.

A Son This TIme

My wife gave birth to our third child, a son this time. Now I am a proud father of three.

The baby is eight days old and this post is overdue. I should have done it the very next day after the birth but I couldn't. I will have no answer to my boy if in future he asks me 'Daddy Why did you delay?' I would only have to beg for his apologies. 

I announced it on facebook though. Many comments flooded in. Most of them said that I now have a "complete family". 

I am glad that I have a mixed gender in my family. All that nine months I wondered the sex of the child. Friends would say in jest that if I have a daughter yet again, I would have 'Bum Sum' which is an amount enough to liquidate my loan. While my wife who believes in superstitions, dreams and omens would tell about her dream to me every morning. She said she recurrently saw girl stuffs like flowers, necklace, kira which made me anxious.

In the labor room, my wife writhed in pain for 3 hours and I could just stand by her helplessly holding her hand. Nurses were running numerous errands on doctor's order. All that while I was so worried about my wife that I became oblivious of what was happening around. At 2:20 am she gave birth. I released all the air I held in my lungs but for  sometime I couldn't calm my nerve and I found myself disoriented in the room. I even forgot to ask the sex of the baby. It was only after six minutes that a nurse shook to tell that I have a boy. 

The next day we were discharged.

I haven't given a name for my boy yet. I am waiting for Moenlam Chenmo in samtse to commence. His Holiness The Je Khenpo will preside over the ceremony. I will ask for a name from His Holiness. Till he gets a name I will simply call him 'Son' and I would like to leave him some message and I hope he will read it one day in future.

Son,

You have come as a gift. Your coming to the world just added joy and happiness to our family. 

Your two sisters are excited. They just love staying by you and caressing you. They don't even go out with friends. You have become their new company. 

As I write this, your mother is lying tiredly asleep beside you. But she is woken up even by the slightest movement of your body to feed you. 

I gave you your first bathe. You may wonder if I am good enough to give you bathe. Son, it was me who gave even your two sisters their first bathe. As I ran my hands across your body, I could feel your tender body. You are so delicate. But you are active though. You nearly jumped out of my hands into the water after a jerky stretch of your tiny legs. You give us so much event in the house. We are just so happy. Everybody just loves and cares you. Many well wishers have come and gone. They have wished you a happy prosperous life. I thank them on behalf of you.

Son, we hope you will grow up to be a good human. You know, the world is ever becoming a bad place to live in. People are competing with each other. You just can't trust even your closest friend or neighbor. They would always deceive you. We live in a very unhealthy society. If a person finds fortune and succeeds, there are myriads who will maliciously pull the person down. 

Whatever may be the characteristic of our society, I want you to live by moral principles. I don't want you to be carried away by the brunt of the unhealthy social character. I want you to live a modest life. I wan't you to be kind to people around you. I want you to grow up to be someone people would love to stay by and talk to. I want you to live a life driven by righteousness and integrity. In a society of 100 people, it is not wrong to be the last man standing right than following the rest 99 who are wrong.   

Welcoming you to the earth,

Apa, Mummy, Baby and Chungku

Samtse's Sunday Market Is Seeing Change

Sunday market, an open air market, in Samtse, is seeing change. Over the past few years the number of Bhutanese farmers selling vegetables in the market has been increasing. They are mostly from Tendu, Sipsoo, Ghumauney, Sauraney, Sukrutey, Dorokha and Mechetar. They sell homegrown vegetables, fruits, wild vegetables, poultry and dairy products. And the good thing about their farm produce is that they are organic and fresh.

In the past all that people of Samtse could buy were inorganic vegetables sold by Indian vendors. But, now with the number of Bhutanese farmers burgeoning, the Sunday market now offers people more variety of vegetables to choose from. People can often surprise their stomachs with organic vegetables and fruits.

Initially there were just a handful of them and they would appear innocent and timid among confident and seasoned Indian vendors. Gradually the number grew and today, their number is almost equal to the number of Indian vendors. They are now more confident vendors. The small ground in the center of the pea-size town is half filled with Indian vendors and half with Bhutanese farmers. 

On Sunday, shoppers first thronging around local vegetable vendors. The vegetables are sold like hot cakes. It doesn't take long to finish selling them. By afternoon they would be finished. The crowd concentration then shifts to the Indian vendors. 

With the money they get from selling their produces, the farmers take home oil, salt, rice, slippers, shoes, books, pencils, umbrellas, etc. While for some it is simply business. These farmers are helping our money from flowing out.

Cooperative Learning: A Teaching Technique That Would Bring A Shift In Teaching Trend From Teacher-Centered Learning To Learner-Centered Learning.

Nowadays, there is a significant shift in pedagogy trends worldwide from teacher centered method in which instruction is managed and controlled by the teacher who holds power and responsibility in class, to a more student-centered method which allows learners to become more active in the learning process. However, many countries in the world still practice traditional teaching methods in spite of the emerging innovative teaching methods.  Bhutan is no exception. Traditional teaching is still a dominant teaching method. Instruction is facilitated in conventional ways: the use of textbook learning, rote learning, spoon-feeding technique, rote memorization, and learning is limited to the two covers of the books and the four walls of the room. The prevalence of such practice is evident from the results of many recent studies. For example a study conducted by REC in 2009 to study classroom practice in schools stated the following findings:

 

·Teaching consists of one-way talk by the teacher to convey textbook content without being able to get the students to comprehend and demonstrate learning.

·Classroom instruction shows predominance of one-way talk by the teacher and writing on the chalk board with lesser evidence of student-centric activities.

·There is lesser evidence of active dialogue between the students and teachers.

Such learning atmosphere has many drawbacks. Students become passive learners. They do not get opportunity to engage in active interaction with teacher and among themselves which keeps them from asking questions and sharing ideas. Their doubts, opinions and questions remain to themselves. They do not get enough opportunities to engage actively in the learning process and have less experience in learning themselves.  They rely on teachers to decide what, when and how to learn. They also lack social skills like communication, leadership and decision making. This generally leads to poor understanding of concepts.. These drawbacks of teacher centered learning has lead to low test scores. Besides, students develop negative opinion towards learning. Students also feel that the concepts they learn have no practical value in their life and have low level of learning satisfaction.

The existence of such a trend is a setback in the growth of education system. Today there is public hue and cry over deterioration of the quality of education. One of the factors attributing to deterioration of the quality would be the prevalence of teacher-centered learning. Time has changed. Today our children need different skills and knowledge to be able to live successfully. These skills are aptly called “twenty first century skills.”  The need to provide new skills and knowledge calls for changes in teaching practice and the onus is on all stakeholders and more importantly on teachers. Teachers cannot afford to stick to traditional teaching methods. It is time we come out of the box and be of age. We need to be seriously innovative and practice innovative teaching techniques.

Over the past decades cooperative learning method has emerged as a leading new approach to classroom instruction. Researchers like Roger and David Johnson, Robert Slavin, Spencer Kagan, Cooper, Graves and Graves conducted hundreds of studies to study the effectiveness of cooperative learning in diverse school setting and over wide range of content areas and revealed that students learning through cooperative group tasks have higher academic test scores, higher self esteem, greater number of positive social skills and greater comprehension of content and skills they study. Further, Johnson and Johnson (1989) stated that cooperative learning is an alternative to competitive-individualistic structures and traditional classroom teaching methods. Since cooperative learning has its root in learning theories that places learners in the center, such as Vygotsky’s theory and Piaget’s theory, it is child centered by nature. Cooperative learning represents a shift in educational paradigm from teacher-centered learning to more child-centered learning. So, cooperative learning method would best be an alternative teaching method to traditional teaching in Bhutan.

What is cooperative learning? Examining dictionary, to cooperate means to work or act together for a common purpose. The educational meaning of cooperation is ‘an approach to teaching and learning in which classrooms are organized so that students work together in small groups to achieve a common goal.’ Johnson and Johnson (aka Johnson brothers) proponents of cooperative learning method defined cooperative learning as ‘the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other's learning.’ Cooperative learning requires cooperative interaction and negotiation of meaning among heterogeneous members engaged in tasks in which each group members have both something to contribute to and learn from other members. Kagan, also a leading researcher in cooperative learning defined cooperative learning as ‘a teaching arrangement that refers to small, heterogeneous groups of students working together to achieve a common goal.’ Artz and Newman (1990) defined cooperative learning as ‘small groups of learners working together to solve a problem, complete a task or accomplish a common goal.’

A common feature in all the definitions is that students work in small groups. However, cooperative learning is more than just small group activities. It must be well structured. Simply placing students in groups and telling them to work together does not produce a cooperative effect by itself. A cooperative lesson must be well structured and characterized by the five components or principles (1) positive interdependence (2) individual accountability (3) face-to-face interaction (4) social skills and (5) group processing. It must be ensured that lessons include these five components.

(i) Positive interdependence: The heart of cooperative learning is positive interdependence.  Students in cooperative group depend on each other for ideas, resources and moral support for the success of the group. They work on a common goal and they must think that they are linked to each other.

(ii) Face-to-face interaction: It requires children to discuss, share ideas, views and materials, providing and getting feedbacks, encourage to keep one another highly motivated to complete that task they are assigned.

(iii) Individual accountability: Students in cooperative learning are responsible for their own and group’s learning. Having small sized group enhances group accountability because each member will be accountable for learning.

(iv) Interpersonal and small group skills: Students in cooperative groups practice and develop teamwork skills like leadership, decision making, trust-building, communication and conflict management.

(v) Group processing: Students in cooperative groups discuss how well they have achieved the goal, describe what member actions are helpful and unhelpful and make decision about how to continue or change.

When using cooperative learning, it wouldn’t be interesting to have students sit and work in cooperative groups over and over. To make lessons using cooperative learning interesting teachers should use variety of cooperative learning structures. Dr. Spencer Kagan designed some 250+ cooperative learning structures. The following are few:

Team Jigsaw, Roundrobin, STAD (Student Team Achievement Division), Team-Pair-Solo, Circle the Saint.....
The choice of these structures depends on the learning objectives, nature of learners, learning situation, nature of subject in question. 

Assessment is an integral aspect of teaching-learning process. Many teachers in Bhutan overlook or skip this essential aspect. What do we assess in cooperative learning? Well! In cooperative learning we basically assess three things; Individual success, group success and cooperative skills. The assessment could be done by instructor, individual/self evaluation and peers.

Individual success: Individual success can be evaluated by asking students to fill out answers to a worksheet as they progress through an activity; by having them record, analyze, and submit data; or by having them take a quiz. Some activities are structured so that each student turns in a product, such as a report or a poster that can be individually graded

Group success: Group success can be evaluated according to how well the group accomplished its assigned task. Was the task completed? Were the results accurate? If not, were errors explained and accounted for? Criteria such as these provide a framework for group evaluation.

Cooperative skills: Cooperative skills are evaluated based on teacher’s observations of students’ behavior in their group. Evaluating students’ use of cooperative skills will motivate students to use them. Teachers should use a formal observation checklist as he/she monitors students at work and log the frequency with which group members exhibit cooperative skills or disruptive behavior.

It is my hope that this exposition will give teachers an insight into cooperative learning so that they could use it or try it out. And I must mention at the outset that cooperative learning, when tried for first time, may not seem to work as smoothly. Teachers and students may find awkward to be in cooperative learning atmosphere. But that’s obvious because anything new comes in with some uneasiness. Moreover, teachers and students have deep rooted believe in teacher centered learning which would make them perceive CL as alien. But the effect of it would come only with consistent usage. It would need sometime for teachers and students to get acquainted to it.

When asked if cooperative learning method would really work in Bhutanese classrooms, many fellow teachers were skeptical. They said that an alien teaching method wouldn’t work in Bhutanese classrooms. Even if it did, they said, would be time consuming and would not facilitate the coverage of syllabus. Some speculated that CL would only be suitable in LSS and PSS. They also opined that cooperative learning would bring chaos and disharmony in the classroom.

Well! Let me make few things clear. Cooperative learning has been used in diverse cultural and social setting around the world. It has been used in places affected by war, racism, segregation, religion conflict, etc. It has also been used in diverse socio-economic settings, in underdeveloped, developing and developed countries. It’s been used for teaching children of diverse age level, ranging from as young as kindergarten to adulthood. In any case, CL has been found to be an effective teaching method. It has been found to increase test scores, learning satisfaction, and understanding. Students were also found to be enjoying positive learning experiences. 

In Bhutan, cooperative learning has already been pilot tested in many schools. The Singaporean Govt. in collaboration with REC piloted cooperative learning in many schools called ‘Beacon schools’ and in many grade levels. The project found positive results. It was found to be effective in raising students’ test scores, learning satisfaction and level of understanding. Even one of my researches, a personal undertaking, revealed similar results. As for syllabus coverage, cooperative learning has also been found to be effective in covering wide range of content while not compromising the level of understanding. Certain cooperative learning structures like team Jigsaw, STAD, etc has been found to be effective in covering a wide range of content in a short timeframe.

Thus, I request teachers in Bhutan to use cooperative learning and start to be an agent of bringing a shift in teaching trend form teacher centered learning to child centered learning. Let us not be hidebound in our practice. Modern era calls for new approaches to teaching and learning and we must tune our actions to the tide of the modern wind.

References

Humphreys, B., Johnson, R.T., and Johnson, D.W. “Effects of Cooperative,

Competitive, and Individualistic Learning on Students' Achievement in Science Class.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1982: 351-356.

Johnson, D., and Johnson, R. Learning Together and Alone, Cooperative, 

        Competitive and Individualistic Learning, Needham Heights, MA: 

        Prentice-Hall, 1994.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Holubec, E. J. Structuring Cooperative 

        Learning:Lesson Plans for Teachers. Edina, MN:  Interaction Book,     

        1987.   

Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R.T. Leading the Cooperative School. Edina, MN:

Interaction, 1989. 

Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R.T. “Social Skills for Successful Group Work.”         Educational Leadership, 47(4), 1990: 29-33.

Kagan, S. Cooperative Learning Resources for Teachers. San Juan Capistrano, 

        CA:Resources for Teacher, 1989. 

Royal Education Council and iDiscoveri Educaion, (2009). The Quality of 

        School Education in Bhutan: Reality and Opportunities. Bhutan.

Sherab, K. Bhutanese Teachers’ Pedagogical Orientation in the Primary 

        Classes (PP-VI): A Factor on Quality of Education. 11-30, 2009.

Slavin, R.  Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice, 2^nd ed. 

        Boston:Allyn and Bacon, 1995.

Vygotsky, L. S. Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological  

       Processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978. 

A fairy tale

(The following piece is written by Shanti Limbu, a twelfth grader student of Samtse Higher Secondary school. She has a deep passion for writing. In this article she writes about how she bumped into a friend in a library and how common goals can bring people together. The story or perhaps a personal anecdote centers around friendship and sacrifice. I sincerely thank her for graciously contributing this creative piece of writing for my blog.) 

 Shanti Limbu

Do you believe in fairy tales? I never did but I do now. I was unaware of the circumstances that were going to turn my world topsy-turvy. I always knew my life was not the life of Cinderella or Snow White and no prince Charming would come to rescue me. But somewhere deep inside my heart the hope never died. I got his e-mail again and every time I looked at it I was overwhelmed with the hope that a God mother would come into my life and shift the course of it.

“You are wasting my money in all those rubbish you are writing, switch off the light!”, aunt Sonam ordered as usual. I stopped writing before I was announced any punishment for it. I gave a quick scan through the piece I had written. Satisfied I took a deep breath, chanted some prayers and switched off the light. The darkness would have stopped me from jotting down my imagination but it always failed to interrupt the whirlpool of the amazing ideas circling around my mind. I always knew that I had long way to go and sturdy voyage to complete.  I was confident  that I would be a great writer  but  was also in no doubt that it will never come true as long as I was in the house where everything I had was not mine.

“Yuck! The breakfast is gross Pelden”, yelled my cousin sister Kelzang. It was nothing new, the usual morning salutation. Every morning I had to wake up at 4:00 a.m and prepare breakfast, pack lunch for my ungrateful sisters and receive so cunning comments. Every day I woke up with the expectation that they would appreciate me or at least spare me one day from their excruciating remarks. But every day was the same though I left no stones unturned and tried to make it up to them. And the fact remained the same, there was nothing I could do, so I ignored the compliment as usual and headed towards the school.

Going to school was the best thing happening in my life. I enjoyed every lesson and second that I spent at Samtse Higher Secondary School. The class X ‘A’ was my home as my class mates always gave me that warm welcoming feeling which I never got at the house where I stayed and the worst thing was that I  will never ever get. I always thought it was what destiny had decided for me and what I actually deserved but it was not, until that day I realized that destiny had something else reserved for me.

Everyone was gathered at the notice board when I reached at school. I made my way towards the board and was jubilant to see a way to get rid of the house which never became my home and a family who never considered me a part of it. There was it the essay writing competition organized by the Tashi Company for the inauguration of their new book store and the winning prize was the scholarship to study in Ugyen Academy (U.A). I was optimistic that I had the potential to win the competition so I started collecting as much articles as I could from the library and the deadline was only a week away.

“’You can win’ by Shiv Khera, it’s a great book and definitely of your use for the competition”, he handed me the book. I glanced at the book and then at him, we exchanged smiles and introduced each other. He asked me to recommend him some books and we too sooner than I expected became good friends. We used to come to the library in every recess and prepare for the competition. Yoezer was a year senior to me, a very bright student and of course had more knowledge than I had. But I had full confidence that I would give him a tough competition.  

There was only two days left for the submission of the essay. Yoezer wanted me to give my views on his essay but he somehow forgot to bring it to the school, so we went to his house to collect it.

It was a medium sized house encircled by variety of flowers and a beautiful kitchen garden alongside a small canopy in front of the house. Everything looked so complete and welcoming that to my surprise I was getting keyed up to meet with the people inside the house. Then a small toddler came running towards Yoezer from the house. It was a bit unexpected that the kid jumped high to reach his arms and hug him. Everything happened so quickly that he couldn’t prepare himself for it and they both fell down hard on the ground but Yoezer someway managed to save the kid from getting hurt. “What do you think you are doing with my son ha?” a woman in her mid thirties came shouting from the house and snatched away the boy from Yoezer’s hands. “You killed your mother and now you are trying to bring that misfortune to my child? Stay away from my son!” she ended the warning by pointing an index finger towards him and rushed back to the house. Yoezer was hardly holding back his tears; he stood where he was for a moment trembling and headed in the opposite direction of the house leading to the path to my house. Petrified by the whole scene I couldn't move for a while and quickly followed him as soon as I was back to my sense.

“You know Pelden, winning the competition is my only way to a better life and I need to accomplish that by hook or by crook” he said to me with tears in his eyes and so much confidence in his voice that it kind of freaked me out as it was also my only way out to a better life. Then we walked quietly for some time and he narrated me the whole story of how his mother died as soon as he was born and his father started blaming him for the tragedy. The story did not end there, his father decided to remarry and very soon he was not any more his father but only a husband to his wife. Even I had the same story of how my parents died in a car accident and I landed up in my uncle’s house where I was not more than just a slave to my masters. But that was not important at the time because my parents never betrayed me. Both of us had the same destination, the same opportunity to reach it and I truly hoped that the deserving person would win.

I checked and rechecked and again corrected some grammatical mistakes, after reading about seven times I was certain that I would win because it was so authentic and the best piece I had ever written and perhaps I would ever write. It is said that it takes both rain and sunshine to form a rainbow but every day of my life was foggy so I had to create the rainbow myself, within me and I was sure that I was successful in creating one. The day I had desperately waited for finally arrived and I went straight to the staff-room to submit my essay. As everyone was asked to submit it together I looked for Yoezer but he was nowhere to be found. I asked Karma, his closest friend cum neighbor, for where he was about in the most important day of his life. We were frank enough for him to tell me the actual truth of his absence. He told me that Yoezer and his father had a huge fight after his step mother complained to his father of not completing the assigned work because he was busy writing. “This morning he told me, when I went to his house, that they had a long argument and his father finally ended it by tearing his essay, his dream and his only way to escape”. He took a deep breath in and after almost about half a minute released it ending the conversation by saying “Poor Yoezer, he always used to look for the chance to get rid of his family and when he finally found it”, he stopped for a moment to gather the courage to continue and said heavy heartedly, “anyway he wishes you the best.”. He went away with his gloomy face which was reflected out of the real concern he felt for his friend. It was really heartbreaking for me to know all that but anyway my strongest competitor was out of my way. I was enjoying the feeling of victory already.

Even after six months it brought smile on my face thinking that I actually thought that for a second. I looked at the message he sent me from U.A which said, “I never believed in fairy tales but you made me believe in it. You actually came into my life like those charming prince, charming princess in my case, and rescued me from the worthless life and made it worth living. Thank you for sacrificing the honor that you deserved. Sorry that I couldn't thank you personally. I had no courage to come in front of you and tell you to take back the honor that was yours or had the guts to thank you for giving me your rights. I can’t ask you to forgive me for my selfishness but definitely would like to thank you for making me realize that miracles do happen and fairy tales do exist. You truly came to my life as a god mother who filled my world with happiness with your magic wand.”

I distinctly remember how I wrote his name in my essay and submitted. I looked for him the whole week to tell him that his dream will come true but he never showed up. After that he had his common exam and I got busy with my boards. The winner was announced in the BBS during the vacation and I was really glad to hear his name. I was so proud of myself not only because I could trust myself to become a writer one day but also to know what I have done, changed somebody’s life.

My life is as same as it was before, the same school, the same house and the same routine. But I have changed, my beliefs have changed, the person who I was no longer exists, the one who always wanted to run away. I have evolved into a better person. I have started believing in fairy tales, may be because I have made someone believe in it. But I also have learned that sometimes we have to be the God mother and look for other Cinderellas rather than every time considering our self as one. We need to believe in miracles and one day God mother will definitely spin her magic wand and send a prince charming to rescue us.

Shanti Limbu

'Did you understand?'

Teacher explains a subject for several minutes
At the end of the explanation
Teacher: Did you understand?
Students: Yes sir/madam
Teacher: Goood!!
Teacher goes on to explain the next topic
Teacher: Did you understand?
Students: Yes sir/madam
Teacher: Very goood!
Bell rings
Teacher: Thats all for today
Students: Thank you sir

This is what happens in a typical Bhutanese classroom. This question 'Did you understand?', it ails the teaching-learning process. If you go to any Bhutanese classroom, you will not be surprised to find many teachers frequently punctuating their lecture by 'Did you understand?' question or 'Understood?' the shorter version of it. The question is used to assess students learning. But do these questions make up a good assessment? Going by definition assessment means to collect relevant information that may be relied on for making a decision. But these question elicits just 'yes' 'no' response from students and it does not help teachers fetch enough information to reach to a decision on whether students have learnt effectively or not. Thus, it is a blunt way of doing assessment. The entire assessment process gets substituted by this single question.

What is even more surprising is to find even the so called experienced and seasoned teachers using these questions. The prevalence of 'Did you understand?' and 'Understood?' among teachers indicates that despite of the emergence of many assessment techniques our teachers have still not thought out of the box and not come of age. 

Assessment is an integral process in teaching-learning process. It help us give a clear picture of whether learning objectives have been fulfilled and the state of students progress and learning. It help us identify gaps and lapses based on which we can plan remedies. Its a "process" and any process has to be well planned. We cant afford the whole process to be merely substituted by 'Did you understand?' or 'Understood'.There are myriads of assessment method and tools. The kind of assessment method and tools to be used depends on the learning objectives, nature of the subject, the nature of the learning situation, and the nature of learners. It is my wish that our teachers replace 'Did you understand?' or 'Understood' by proper assessment methods and tools and discard the trend of using 'Did you understand?' and 'Understood?'.