The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Distance Education
Review of Literature

Introduction

Distance education, structured learning in which the student and instructor are separated by time and place, is currently the fastest growing form of education. What was considered formal education is no longer restricted to traditional classroom formats. Due to the rapid development of technology, education programs are delivered via a variety of media to students in various locations. Distance education, as an alternative to traditional education, is used for the modern society, where constantly up-dated information and trained workforce are needed. Employers and employees alike need new information to keep up with the rapid changing world, especially the business world. Currently, if a company wants to improve its ability to compete in business world, it is necessary to have well-educated and trained employees. Most company employees are adults, having responsibilities to work and family. It is impractical to ask them to leave their work and family behind and go back to school. Distance education offers a great opportunity for adult employees to get education while they can retain their duty for work and family. As a consequence, distance education is welcomed by the majority of company employees when they need advanced knowledge or degrees.

Although distance education provides a convenient way to get advanced knowledge, some skeptics query the quality of the knowledge that distance education programs offer. A large portion of educators agrees with these skeptics. They indicate that there are many weaknesses in distance education programs. First of all, they argue that the geographical separation of distance education between instructors and students negatively affects student academic performance (Meacham and Evans 1989). They add that the lack of face-to-face communication between instructor and students prohibits students' feeling of belonging to a scholarly community, which is considered essential part of traditional campus life by many students.

In an attempt to address many criticisms, researchers conducted empirical research to find if there is difference in student performance between course taught at a distance and traditional classrooms. Accumulated evidence shows that teaching and studying at distance can be as effective as in traditional classrooms as long as proper instructional technologies and pedagogical approaches are used, especially the pedagogical approach.

Cooperative learning has been proved an effective instruction approach in traditional classrooms. In class students receiving cooperative learning methods outperform students receiving lecture format. With the effectiveness of cooperative learning, some educators suggest its use in distance education hoping it can create the same positive outcomes.

However, traditional classroom settings and distance education settings obviously differ. Can the positive outcomes of cooperative learning be duplicated in distance education despite the intrinsic difference between traditional classrooms and distance education? This study is going to examine if cooperative learning methods can create positive outcomes in the environment of distance education. In other words, this study will compare student performance and attitudes between students receiving cooperative learning methods and students receiving traditional lecture formats in a distance education course. In addition, it asks if the utilization of cooperative learning methods improve distance student’s feeling of belonging to a scholarly community.

Review of Literature

As the world continues on a course of rapid change, people are experiencing the impact of new information needed in workplace. In order to adapt themselves to the rapid changing world, modern people need to acquire new skills and information. As a result, lifelong learning has become a popular trend in education and adult learners have become an increasing proportion of the student population. Bound by home and work, adult learners desire a high degree of flexibility in learning. The structure of distance education gives adults the greatest possible control over the time, place and pace of education. Furthermore, with assistance from high-tech delivery system, distance education can offer instant communication for instructors and students. Not surprisingly, the number of educational courses and training programs migrating to the World-Wide-Web, the Internet, and corporate Intranets is astounding (see for example Bassi, Benson, and Cheney, 1996). Also, according to the latest official survey conducted by U.S. Department of Education, in academic year 1994-95, an estimated 25,730 distance education courses with different catalog numbers were offered by higher education institutions. The same survey also shows that out of about 14.3 millions students enrolled in higher education institutions in fall 1994, about 758,640 students formally enrolled in distance education courses in academic year 1994-95. With the rapidly increasing number of distance education courses, Cantelon, in his 1995 book, Facilitating Distance Education, projects "most of higher education will take place off-campus through technological methods of delivery" (p.5). Distance education has become an inevitable trend for the future.

While distance education formats are widely embraced by many educators and learners, some skeptics suspect the quality of distance education. They argue that distance education with physical separation between instructors and students cannot create instruction as good as traditional classroom format. Meanwhile, many research studies prove that these skeptics' concerns are groundless. Mooreand and Kearsky (1996) in their book, Distance Education: A Systems View, write,

Comparing the achievement of learners (as measured by grades, test scores, retention, job performance) who are taught at a distance and those taught in face-to-face classes is a line research going back more than 50 years. The usual finding in these comparison studies is that there are no significant differences between learning in the two different environments, regardless of the nature of the content, the educational levels of the students, or the media involved.

With these encouraging results from distance education, educators and researchers try to find the successful elements of distance education courses. Instruction pedagogy is considered the most important factor for successful distance education (Sherry 1996). In an attempt to design an effective distance education program, educators from different professions try to adapt some effective instruction pedagogy into the distance education instruction. Among the approaches adapted, cooperative learning is the one that is broadly welcomed and chosen.

For the past three decades, cooperative learning has proved to be a very successful instruction approach. The positive results of cooperative learning have been shown in many research findings. In general, cooperative learning has three positive outcomes that are most well known. These are improved student academic performance, positive intergroup relations and increased self-esteem. In 1990, Slavin did research examining the academic achievement of cooperative classes. In his research, overall, of 67 studies of the achievement effects of cooperative learning, 41 (61 percent) found significantly greater achievement in cooperative than in control classes. Twenty-five (37 percent) showed no differences, and in only one study did the control group outperform the experimental group (Slavin 1990). Furthermore, the usefulness of cooperative learning strategies is not only limited to certain levels or a certain subject. Substantial differences favoring cooperative learning groups have been found in such diverse subjects as social studies (e.g., Allen and Van Sickle 1984), language arts (Slavin and Karweit 1981), reading comprehension (Stevens, Slavin, Farnish, and Madden 1988), mathematics (Sherman and Thomas 1986), and science (Okebukola 1985).

As to intergroup relations and self-esteem, many research findings show a significant improvement in these two dimensions. Sharan and Shacher found that students in cooperative learning classes improved their attitude and behaviors toward classmates of different ethic backgrounds (Sharan and Shacher 1988). In the aspect of self-esteem, several researchers working on cooperative learning techniques have found that these methods do increase student’s self-esteem (Slavin 1990), (Blaney et al. 1977), (Slavin and Karweit 1981). Overall, the use of cooperative learning methods improves student learning in academic performance and social life.

The successful outcomes of cooperative learning led researchers to ponder what elements make cooperative learning effective. After conducting several studies, Slavin concluded that group goals and individual accountability should be presented if cooperative learning is to be effective (Slavin 1983a, 1983b, 1994). Later in 1994, Stahl synthesize research findings on cooperative learning, suggesting 14 key elements of successful cooperative learning, including 1) a clear set of specific student learning outcome objectives, 2) all students in the group "buy into" the targeted outcome, 3) clear and complete set of task-completion directions or instructions, 4) heterogeneous groups, 5) equal opportunity for success, 6) positive interdependence, 7) face-to-face interaction, 8) positive social interaction behaviors and attitudes, 9) access to must-learn information, 10) opportunities to complete required information-processing tasks, 11) sufficient time is spent learning, 12) individual accountability, 13) public recognition and rewards for group academic success, 14) post-group reflection (or debriefing) on within-group behaviors (Stahl 1994). Among these elements, face-to-face interaction is a basic essence in cooperative learning. Without this element, other elements might be difficult to attain.

When instructors try to apply cooperative learning in distance education, the learning and teaching environment changes and face-to-face interactivity is missing, in other words, teaching and learning at a distance is very different from face-to-face instruction (Luetkehans, 1998). Geographical separation is an intrinsic characteristic of distance education and that is a major problem reported by distance students (Meacham and Evans 1989). Most of the time, the interactivity among distance students is based on asynchronous and text-based communication in many distance education formats. Distance students, therefore, often experience delayed, text-based feedback from their peers. These problems of distance education have a significant effect on the distance student’s motivation and learning (Kahl and Cropley 1986).

Recently, with the advent of emerging technology, distance education was given a probability of on-line, real-time instruction. This gives students more opportunity to access to each other. Educators hope it can facilitate student cooperation. However, recent research on cooperative learning has found that participating in an on-line cooperative learning is a new, and perhaps frightening, experience. Mary Lou Crouch and Virginia Montecino (1997) note a phenomenon experienced by on-line learners called "cyberstresses". The asynchronous nature of many on-line courses, problems with communication tools, and the perceived distance between learners and other group members contributes to fears of contributions and assignments left unnoticed and “lost in cyberspace. Students who haven’t developed sufficient experiences for dealing with delayed communications might feel discouraged when their actions are not given an instant response. Also student might feel frustrated when they cannot express themselves effectively to team members through written communication. Under these disadvantages of distance education, distance students often do not perceive that they belong to a scholarly community. This may lead to feelings of inadequacy and insecurity, and a lack of confidence in their own abilities (Wood 1996). In order to mitigate these problem distance education has, many researchers suggest the utilization of cooperative learning in distance education instruction (Galusha, 1997). Cooperative learning emphasizes the cooperation between students and students. With this approach, student participation in learning process will increase. If students are more engaged in their learning activities, they feel that they are a part of an academic group, thus their feeling of being isolated and lost in “cyberspace" can be reduced.

Conclusion

Although distance education has been in existence for at least 100 years, it was not given much attention until recent decades. Distance education is still in its infant phrases in the history of education. However, in the hope of fully utilizing distance education more and more researchers from different professions started paying attention on its potential trying to facilitate benefits of distance education and remove barriers to it. Although in the past, research on the effects of cooperative learning in distance education was quite limited, there is a growing number of researches on this topic. Cooperative learning with its past successful experience with traditional classroom settings might help educator design a distance education programs with high quality. It might also create a warm, positive atmosphere, where students are more willing to participating in learning activities despite the geographical separation.

In the process of studying cooperative learning in distance education, some further questions might be brought out. For instance, what kind of team tasks will best utilize the cooperative learning in a distance education program? According to research findings on cooperative learning, the effective team activities vary from taught subjects to taught subjects and from group levels to group level. More studies need to examine what kind of cooperative learning activities is going to create optimal outcomes in the unique setting of distance education.

Learning styles of distance students might play a critical role in the cooperative learning. Many researchers suggest that it is important to understand how students learn while implementing delivery systems in distance education. For instance, according to literature (Witkin, Moore, Goodenough , & Cox, 1977; Raven, Cano, Garton, & Shellharmer, 1993) on learning styles suggests that field-dependent learners tend to approach a problem in a more global way, are socially oriented, prefer collaboration, and are extrinsically motivated. In contrast, field-independent learners tend to approach a problem more analytically, rely on self-structured situation, prefer competition, and are intrinsically motivated. Price and Repman (1995) report that students who are considered field-independent are more likely to success in distance education because of their well developed learning strategies which they independently apply to complex situations. Successful students who have characteristics of field independence also perform better in distance education courses. In light of this, when adapting cooperative learning into a distance education course, learning styles of students should not be ignored.

With all the considerations paid to distance education, distance education program with high quality can be tailored to meet the needs of 21^st century students and teachers alike.

Reference

Allen, W. H., and R. L. Van Sickle. (1984). “Learning Teams and Low Achievers. Social Education: 60-64.

Bassi, L. J., Benson, G., & Cheney, S. (1996). The Top Ten Trends. Training & Development, 50(11), 28-42.

Galusha, J. M. (1997). Barriers to Learning in Distance Education. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21 Century [Online], Available: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~ipct-j/1997/n4/galusha.html [December 30, 1998].

Crouch, M. L. & Montecino, V. (1997). Cyberstresses: Asynchronous anxiety or worried in cyberspace: I wonder if my teacher got my email. [Online], Available: http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/tcc-conf/pres/crouch.html.

Kahl, T. N., and Cropley, A. J. (1986). Face-to-face versus distance learning: Psychological consequences and practical implications. Distance Education, 7(1), 38-48.

Luetkehans, L. M. (1998). Using a computer supported collaborative learning tool to supplement a distance learning class in educational telecommunications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia.

Meacham, D. & Evans, D. (1989). Distance Education: The Design of Study Materials. Open Learning Institute, Charles Stuart University, Wagga Wagga.

Moore, M. & Kearsky, G. (1996) Research on Effectiveness. Chaper 4-Distance Education: A Systems View. Wadsworth Publishing, ISBN 0-524-26496-4.

Okebukola, P. A. (1985). "The Relative Effectiveness of Cooperative and Competitive Interaction Techniques in Strengthening Students" Performance in Science Classes.Science Education 69: 501-509.

Raven, M. R., Cano, J., Garton, B. L. & Shellhamer, V. (1993). A comparison of learning styles, teaching styles, and personality styles of preservice Montana and Ohio Agricultural Teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 31(1), 40-50.

Sharan, S., and C. Shachar. (1988). Language and Learning in the Cooperative Classroom. New York: Springer.

Sherman, L. W., and M. Thomas. (1986). “Mathematics Achievement in Cooperative Versus Individualistic Goal-structured High School Classrooms. Journal of Educational Research 79: 169-172.

Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. (in press) International Journal of Distance Education. AACE. [Online], Available: http://www.cudenver.edu.public/education/edschool/issues.html.

Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Slavin, R. E., and N. Karweit. (1981). Cognitive and Affective Outcomes of an Intensive Student Team Learning Experience. Journal of Experimental Education 50: 29-35.

Slavin, R. E. (1983a). Cooperative Learning. New York: Longman.

Slavin, R. E. (1983b). When Does Cooperative Learning Increase Student Achievement. Psychological Bulletin 94: 429-445.

Stahl, R. J. (1994). The essential elements of cooperative learning in the classroom. The Social Educator, 1994, 12(3, November), 41-43.

Stevens, R. J., R. E. Slavin, A. M. Farnish, and N. A. Madden. (April 1988). “The Effects of Cooperative Learning and Direct Instruction in Reading Comprehension Strategies on Main Idea Identification. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Distance Education in Higher Education institutions, NCES 98-062, by Laurie Lewis, Debbie Alexander, and Elizabeth Farris. Project Officer, Bernard Greene. Washington, DC: 1997.

Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R. & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1-64.

Wood, H. (1996). Designing Study Materials for Distance Students. [Online], Available:http://www.csu.edu.au/division/oli-rd/occpap17/design.htm.