Citation

McNeese MD. Cogn. Technol. Work 2000; 2(3): 164-177.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2000, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/PL00011499

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Within cooperative learning great emphasis is placed on the benefits of ætwo heads being greater than oneÆ. However, further examination of this adage reveals that the value of learning groups can often be overstated and taken for granted for different types of problems. When groups are required to solve ill-defined and complex problems under real world constraints, different socio-cognitive factors (e.g., metacognition, collective induction, and perceptual experience) are expected to determine the extent to which cooperative learning is successful. Another facet of cooperative learning, the extent to which groups enhance the use of knowledge from one situation to another, is frequently ignored in determining the value of cooperative learning. This paper examines the role and functions of cooperative learning groups in contrast to individual learning conditions, for both an acquisition and transfer task. Results for acquisition show groups perform better overall than individuals by solving more elements of the Jasper problem as measured by their overall score in problem space analysis. For transfer, individuals do better overall than groups in the overall amount of problem elements transferred from Jasper. This paradox is explained by closer examination of the data analysis. Groups spend more time engaged with each other in metacognitive activities (during acquisition) whereas individuals spend more time using the computer to explore details of the perceptually based Jasper macrocontext. Hence, results show that individuals increase their perceptual learning during acquisition whereas groups enhance their metacognitive strategies. These investments show different pay-offs for the transfer problem. Individuals transfer more overall problem elements (as they explored the context more) but problem solvers who had the benefit of metacognition in a learning group did better at solving the most complex elements of the transfer problem. Results also show that collective induction groups (ones that freely share) - in comparison to groups composed of dominant members - enhance certain kinds of transfer problem solving (e.g., generating subgoals). The results are portrayed as the active interplay of socio-cognitive elements that impact the outcomes (and therein success) of cooperative learning.

Language: en