Peer Interaction in Reading comprehension Instruction

Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan; Brown, Ann L.; Martin, Scott M.

doi:10.1080/00461520.1987.9653051

Cited by 78 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This mirrors both the peer tutoring findings and the findings of Noreen Webb (2008), who discovered that the students who gained the most from cooperative activities were those who provided elaborated explanations to others. Studies of Reciprocal Teaching, in which students learn to formulate questions for each other, have generally supported its positive effects on student achievement (Palincsar, Brown, & Martin, 1987;Rosenshine & Meister, 1994;O'Donnell, 2000;Sporer, Brunstein, & Kieschke, 2009). …”

Section: Empirical Evidence For the Cognitive Elaboration Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Cooperative Learning and Academic Achievement: Why Does Groupwork Work?. [Aprendizaje cooperativo y rendimiento académico: ¿por qué funciona el trabajo en grupo?]

Slavin

2014

analesps

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Título: Aprendizaje Cooperativo y rendimiento académico: ¿Por qué funciona el trabajo grupal? Resumen: El aprendizaje cooperativo hace referencia a los métodos de enseñanza en los que los estudiantes trabajan en pequeños grupos para ayudarse a aprender. En este artículo se revisan cuatro de las principales perspectivas teóricas sobre los efectos del aprendizaje cooperativo en el rendimiento: motivacional, cohesión social, evolutiva y elaboración cognitiva. La evidencia de la investigación práctica en el aula apoya, fundamentalmente, la perspectiva motivacional, que destaca el uso de los objetivos del grupo y la responsabilidad individual para el éxito del grupo. Sin embargo, hay condiciones en las que los métodos, derivados de las cuatro perspectivas teóricas, contribuyen al aumento del rendimiento. En este artículo se reconcilian estas cuatro perspectivas en una teoría unificada de los efectos de aprendizaje cooperativo. Palabras clave: Aprendizaje cooperativo; rendimiento; cooperación; motivación, desarrollo Abstract: Cooperative learning refers to instructional methods in which students work in small groups to help each other learn. Four major theoretical perspectives on achievement effects of cooperative learning are reviewed: Motivational, social cohesion, developmental, and cognitive elaboration. Evidence from practical classroom research primarily supports the motivational perspective, which emphasizes the use of group goals and individual accountability for group success. However, there are conditions under which methods derived from all four theoretical perspectives contribute to achievement gain. This chapter reconciles these perspectives in a unified theory of cooperative learning effects.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Evidence For the Cognitive Elaboration Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Cooperative Learning and Academic Achievement: Why Does Groupwork Work?. [Aprendizaje cooperativo y rendimiento académico: ¿por qué funciona el trabajo en grupo?]

Slavin

2014

analesps

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When Chi, de Leeuw, Chiu, and LaVancher (1994) asked subjects to explain examples to themselves, the subjects acquired more knowledge. While Chi et al focused on an individual learning situation, Brown, Palincsar and their colleagues (Brown & Palincsar, 1989;Brown et al, 1991;Palincsar, Brown, & Martin, 1987) have developed a teaching strategy called "reciprocal teaching" which consists of questioning, clarifying, summarizing, and predicting through group discussion, a strategy that includes requests for explanation. The strategy helped students to generate explanations and strongly suggests that Pairs participated in such explanations more often than Singles because Pairs received such requests more often than did Singles.…”

Section: Some Related Research On Scientific Discoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain

Okada¹

1997

Cognitive Science

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

in aThis study compares Pairs of subjects with Single subjects in a task of discovering scientific laws with the aid of experiments. Subjects solved a molecular genetics task in a computer micro-world (Dunbar, 1993). Pairs were more successful in discovery than Singles and participated more actively in explanatory activities (i.e., entertaining hypotheses and considering alternative ideas and justifications). Explanatory activities were effective for discovery only when the subjects also conducted crucial experiments. Explanatory activities were facilitated when paired subjects made requests of each other for explanation and focused on them. The study extends from individual to collaborative discovery activities the importance to the discovery process of setting goals to find hypotheses and evidence (Dunbar, 1993) and to construct explanations of phenomena and processes encountered in examples (Chi, Bassok, Lewis, & Glaser, 1989).Discovery through collaboration is a common and growing practice in science whose processes have not yet been extensively studied. We do not yet know whether discovery processes are different when people work together, what role discussion plays in collaboration, how researchers entertain hypotheses and conduct experiments when working together or how they handle alternative hypotheses and justifications that arise in discussion.These questions may be approached through historical case studies, field observation, interviews with researchers involved in collaboration, and laboratory experiments. Each approach has its advantages and limitations. This paper follows an experimental approach. We are aware that, although experiments are highly useful for detailed analyses of discovery processes, we need to be cautious in interpreting these data as reflecting actual scientists' collaborative discovery processes. Over the long run, combining various approaches Direct all correspondence to: Herbert A. Simon, Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. 109 110OKADA AND SIMON is most likely to produce a full and accurate picture of collaborative discovery; but one task at a time. In this paper, we first briefly mention historical case data and interview data from our previous studies; then focus on experimental data. Okada et al. (1995) reviewed three historical cases of collaborative discovery that helped to shape modem science: Jacob and Monod's operon theory in biology; Watson and Crick's double helix in biology; and Simon and Newell's work in artificial intelligence. They identified four features shared by the collaborations. Then, interviewing working cognitive scientists in Japan, they found evidence that each of these features remains essential for successful collaboration: (a) frequent, intense contact between the participants, (b) an egalitarian and exploratory style of discussion, (c) and a shared interest in the research questions, combined with, (d) a diversity in skills and experience . HISTORICAL AND CURRENT COLLABORATION IN SCIENCEDiscussion style is ...

show abstract

“…Appelant à distinguer les normes de réussite scolaire des pratiques littéraires (Reuter, 1992b(Reuter, , 1992c, il définit toute didactique de la littérature en fonction de savoirs concernant trois ordres de phénomènes: des savoirs sur son fonctionnement diachronique et synchronique, des savoirs sur le système de positions et de relations qui la constitue, des savoirs sur le fonctionnement des textes, des lectures et 4 A titre d'exemple, les recherches sur l'enseignement réciproque trouvent, dès le début des années 1980, leur source dans des recherches de laboratoire (Brown & Campione, 1995;Brown, Palincsar & Armbruster, 1994;Palincsar & Brown, 1984;Palincsar, Brown & Martin, 1987). Par la suite, le souhait des auteurs d'opérer un transfert à des situations de plus en plus proches de situations de classe marque un déplacement, soustendu par l'hypothèse que la recherche peut apporter quelque chose à la pratique qui, en retour, offre l'occasion d'une mise à l'épreuve des théories.…”

Section: Littérature Comme Ensemble Organisé De Textesunclassified

Candide, La fée carabine et les autres. Vers un modèle didactique de la lecture littéraire

Daghé¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peer Interaction in Reading comprehension Instruction

Cited by 78 publications

References 0 publications

Cooperative Learning and Academic Achievement: Why Does Groupwork Work?. [Aprendizaje cooperativo y rendimiento académico: ¿por qué funciona el trabajo en grupo?]

Cooperative Learning and Academic Achievement: Why Does Groupwork Work?. [Aprendizaje cooperativo y rendimiento académico: ¿por qué funciona el trabajo en grupo?]

Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain

Candide, La fée carabine et les autres. Vers un modèle didactique de la lecture littéraire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About