Yıl 2018, Cilt 2 , Sayı 1, Sayfalar 32 - 46 2018-06-29

The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement

Aşkın BAYDAR [1] , Ufuk ŞİMŞEK [2]


The aim of this study is to compare two cooperative learning methods, jigsaw and student teams achievement divisions (STAD), in terms of their effects on social studies pre-service teachers’ academic achievement. The study group of the research consisted of 40 students who attended teaching principles and methods course at Artvin Çoruh University College of Education Department of Social Science Education. Data was collected during 12 weeks implementation and with Academic Success Test (AST) which was developed by the researcher and was analyzed with independent samples t-test and one way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The findings of the research show that STAD is more effective than jigsaw on social studies pre-service teachers’ academic achievement. Research also includes the recommendations for future applications.

Cooperative learning, jigsaw, STAD, academic achievement, teacher education
  • Acar, A. (2006). İşbirliğine dayalı öğrenme yönteminin ortaöğretim coğrafya dersi yerleşme konusunun öğretilmesinde başarıya etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi. Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Alkaya, F. (2006). Eleştirel düşünme becerilerini temel alan fen bilgisi öğretiminin öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Hatay.
  • Amornsinlaphachai, P. (2014). Designing a learning model using the STAD technique with a suggestion system to decrease learners’ weakness. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 431-435.
  • Arslan, A. (2012). Sözcük türleri öğretminde Jigsaw tekniğinin etkisi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 32 (1), 157-168.
  • Ascher, C. (1986). Cooperative Learning in the Urban Classroom. Clearinghouse on Urban Education, New York.
  • Avşar, Z., & Alkış, S. (2007). The effect of cooperative learning “Jigsaw I” technique on student success in social studies course. Elementary Education Online, 6 (2), 197-203.
  • Bayrakçeken, S., Doymuş, K., ve Doğan, A. (2013). İşbirlikli öğrenme modeli ve uygulanması. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
  • Bilgin, T. (2004). İlköğretim yedinci sınıf matematik dersinde (çokgenler konusunda) öğrenci takımları başarı bölümleri tekniğinin kullanımı ve uygulama sonuçları. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (1), 19-28.
  • Brooks, A. (2009). Regular college preparatory students’ perceptions of the student teams achievement divisions approach in an academic college preparatory biology class. Doctoral dissertation. Walden University, Minneapolis.
  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London and New York: Falmer.
  • Coke, P. K. (2005). " Practicing What We Preach: An Argument for Cooperative Learning Opportunities for Elementary and Secondary Educators". Education, 126 (2), 392-398.
  • Conring, J. M. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning on mathematic achievement in second graders. Doctoral Thesis. Walden University, Minneapolis.
  • Efe, M. (2011). İşbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin, öğrenci takımları başarı bölümleri veküme destekli bireyselleştirme tekniklerinin ilköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin matematik dersi "istatistik ve olasılık" ünitesindeki başarılarına, tutumlarına ve motivasyonlarına etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Hatay.
  • Ergin, M. (2007). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji konularının öğretiminde işbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin öğrenci başarısı ve tutumlarına etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya.
  • Evcim, H., & İpek, Ö. F. (2013). Effects of Jigsaw II on academic achievement in English prep classes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1651-1659.
  • Fies, C. (2008). Online Jigsaw Science Inquiry for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24 (3), 85-92.
  • Gelici, Ö., Bilgin, İ. (2007). İşbirlikli öğrenme tekniklerinin öğrencilerin cebir öğrenme alanındaki başarı, tutum ve eleştirel düşünme becerilerine etkileri. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12 (1), 9-32.
  • Gençosman, T. (2011). Fen ve teknoloji öğretiminde kullanılan öğrenci takımları başarı bölümleri tekniğinin öğrencilerin öz-yeterlilik, sınav kaygısı, akademik başarı ve hatırda tutma düzeylerine etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Antalya.
  • Hannafin, M. J., and Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions oftechnology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional science, 25 (3), 167-202.
  • Holliday, D. C. (1995). The effects of the cooperative learning strategy Jigsaw II on academic achievement and cross-race relationships in a secondary social studies classroom. Doctoral dissertation. The University of Southern Mississippi.
  • Huang, Y. M., Liao, Y. W., Huang, S. H., & Chen, H. C. (2014). Jigsaw-based CooperativeLearning Approach to Improve Learning Outcomes for Mobile Situated Learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17 (1), 128-140.
  • Ibraheem, T. L. (2011). Effects of two modes of student teams–achievement division strategies on senior secondary school students’ learning outcomes in chemicalkinetics. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching 12(2), 1-21.
  • Jalilifar, A. (2010). The effect of cooperative learning techniques on college students’ reading comprehension. System, 38(1), 96-108.
  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Holubee, E. J., and Roy, P. (1984). Circles of learning. Cooperation in the classroom. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, St., Alexandria.
  • Jurhill, D. A. (2011). Propelling Students into Active Grammar Participation. US Department of Education Educational Resources Information Center.
  • Kagan, S. (1989). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 47 (4), 12-15.
  • Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Leming, J. S., (1985) Cooperative Learning in Social Studies Education: What Does the Research Say?, US Department of Education Educational Resources Information Center.
  • Muhammad, Z. (2010). Effects of cooperative learning intervention on mathematics achievement outcomes and attitudes of non-science college majors. Doctoral dissertation. Southern University and A & M College.
  • Neuman, W. L. (2013). Toplumsal araştırma yöntemleri. (Çev. S. Özge). Ankara: Yayın Odası.
  • Öner, Ü. (2007). İlköğretim 7. sınıf sosyal bilgiler dersi tarih konularının öğretiminde işbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin öğrenci başarısına etkisi. Yüksek lisans tezi. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Elazığ.
  • Özsarı, T. (2009). İlköğretim 4. sınıf öğrencileri üzerinde işbirlikli öğrenmenin matematik başarısı üzerine etkisi: Probleme dayalı öğrenme (PDÖ) ve öğrenci takımları-başarı bölümleri (ÖTBB). Yüksek lisans tezi. Ege Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • Ross, M. C., Seaborn, A. W., &Wilson, E. K. (2002). Is cooperative learning avaluable instructional method for teaching social studies to urban african american students? Paper presented at the National Association of African American Studies, Baton Rouge, LA.
  • Sherman, L. W. (1991). Cooperative Learning in Post Secondary Education: Implications from Social Psychology for Active Learning Experiences. American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
  • Slagle, D. R. (2009). The Use of the Cooperative Learning Strategy STAD to PromoteAcademic Achievement In a High School Social Studies Class. Master thesis. Defiance College.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1977). Student Teams and Achievement Divisions: Effects on AcademicPerformance, Mutual Attraction, and Attitudes. Johns Hopkins University.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1978). Using Student Team Learning. The Johns Hopkins Team Learning Project. Johns Hopkins University.
  • Slavin, R., & Karweit, N.L. (1979). An extended cooperative learning experiencein elementary school. US Department of Education Educational ResourcesInformation Center.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1980). Student Team Learning. US Department of Education Educational Resources Information Center.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1988). Student team learning: An overview and practical guide. US Department of Education Educational Resources Information Center.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1991). Student team learning: A practical guide to cooperative learning. National Education Association Professional Library.
  • Sönmez, S. (2005). İşbirliğine dayalı öğrenme yöntemi, birleştirme tekniği ile bilgisayar okur-yazarlığı öğretiminin akademik başarıya ve kalıcılığa etkisi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.
  • Sönmez, V. ve Alacapınar, F. G. (2011). Örneklendirilmiş bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Şimşek, U., Örten, H., Topkaya, Y., Yılar, B. (2014). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının işbirlikli öğrenme teknikleri hakkındaki görüşleri, Turkish Journal of Social Research 18 (1), 231-257.
  • Şimşek, Ü. (2007). Çözeltiler ve kimyasal denge konularında uygulanan Jigsaw ve birlikte öğrenme tekniklerinin öğrencilerin maddenin tanecikli yapıda öğrenmeleri ve akademik başarıları üzerine etkisi. Doktora tezi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzurum.
  • Tarım, K., & Akdeniz, F. (2008). The effects of cooperative learning on Turkish elementary students’ mathematics achievement and attitude towards mathematics using TAI and STAD methods. Educational studies in Mathematics, 67 (1), 77-91.
  • Tiantong, M., & Teemuangsai, S. (2013). Student team achievement divisions (STAD) technique through the moodle to enhance learning achievement. International Education Studies, 6(4), p85.
  • Turgut, M. F., Baykul, Y. (2012). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
  • Vaughan, W. (2002). Effects of Cooperative Learning on Achievement and Attitude AmongStudents of Color. The Journal of Educational Research.95 (6) 359-364.
  • Wang, R. S. (2006). The effects of Jigsaw cooperative learning on motivation to learn Englishat Chung-wa Institute of Technology, Taiwan. Doctoral dissertation. Florida International University, Miami.Webb, M. D. (1992). The effects of the Jigsaw cooperative learning technique on racial attitudes and academic achievement. Master thesis. California State University, Fresno.
  • Yıldırım-Kayabaş, S. G. (2007). İşbirliğine dayalı ve bireysel bilgisayar destekli öğretimin öğrencilerin başarısına ve öğrenilenlerin kalıcılığına etkisinin karşılaştırılması. Yüksek lisans tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Zakaria, E. and Iksan, Z. (2007). Promoting cooperative learning in science and mathematics education: A Malaysian perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3 (1), 35-39.
  • Zetty, N. (1992). A comparison of the STAD and Jigsaw cooperative learning methods in a college-level microcomputer applications course. Doctoral dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown.
Birincil Dil en
Konular Eğitim, Bilimsel Disiplinler
Bölüm Research Articles
Yazarlar

Yazar: Aşkın BAYDAR (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: Artvin Coruh University Education Faculty
Ülke: Turkey


Yazar: Ufuk ŞİMŞEK
Kurum: Atatürk Üniversity, Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty, Chemistry Education, Erzurum, Turkey
Ülke: Turkey


Tarihler

Yayımlanma Tarihi : 29 Haziran 2018

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { serd408813, journal = {Studies in Educational Research and Development}, issn = {}, eissn = {2618-6063}, address = {serd@artvin.edu.tr}, publisher = {Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi}, year = {2018}, volume = {2}, pages = {32 - 46}, doi = {}, title = {The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement}, key = {cite}, author = {Baydar, Aşkın and Şimşek, Ufuk} }
APA Baydar, A , Şimşek, U . (2018). The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement . Studies in Educational Research and Development , 2 (1) , 32-46 . Retrieved from http://serd.artvin.edu.tr/tr/pub/issue/38027/408813
MLA Baydar, A , Şimşek, U . "The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement" . Studies in Educational Research and Development 2 (2018 ): 32-46 <http://serd.artvin.edu.tr/tr/pub/issue/38027/408813>
Chicago Baydar, A , Şimşek, U . "The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement". Studies in Educational Research and Development 2 (2018 ): 32-46
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement AU - Aşkın Baydar , Ufuk Şimşek Y1 - 2018 PY - 2018 N1 - DO - T2 - Studies in Educational Research and Development JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 32 EP - 46 VL - 2 IS - 1 SN - -2618-6063 M3 - UR - Y2 - 2018 ER -
EndNote %0 Studies in Educational Research and Development The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement %A Aşkın Baydar , Ufuk Şimşek %T The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement %D 2018 %J Studies in Educational Research and Development %P -2618-6063 %V 2 %N 1 %R %U
ISNAD Baydar, Aşkın , Şimşek, Ufuk . "The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement". Studies in Educational Research and Development 2 / 1 (Haziran 2018): 32-46 .
AMA Baydar A , Şimşek U . The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement. SERD. 2018; 2(1): 32-46.
Vancouver Baydar A , Şimşek U . The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement. Studies in Educational Research and Development. 2018; 2(1): 32-46.
IEEE A. Baydar ve U. Şimşek , "The impact of Jigsaw and STAD on social studies pre-service teachers' academic achievement", Studies in Educational Research and Development, c. 2, sayı. 1, ss. 32-46, Haz. 2018