The impact of cooperative learning and direct instruction on Saravan Islamic Azad university student’s math progress in first half of educational year 2013-2014

  • Authors

    • Abdol Hamid Parsafar Faculty member
    • Azizollah Nosrat
    2018-03-16
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijamr.v7i2.8904
  • Progress, Cooperative Learning, Direct Instruction, Math.

  • Abstract

    The aim of this study is to compare the impact of cooperative learning and direct instruction on Saravan Islamic Azad University student’s math progress in first half of educational year 2013-2014. Research method is semi – trial of unequal control group with pre and post – test. Population of the sample includes all students of first half of 2013-2014 educational year that have taken math courses in Saravan Unit and the number of them is 130. 65 subjects are in control group and 65 subjects are in test group. There were 35 female students and 30 male students in each group. Measurement tools in this study are researcher built math progress and Rion’s Intelligence test. Subjects of the study first participated in pre – tests and then instructed by cooperative learning method for 10 weeks and after that post – tests were done and required data were collected. In order to analyze the data, t-test was used. Results showed that math progress of test group with cooperative method, was higher than the control group that were instructed by direct method and the difference was significant .in addition, it was con-cluded that there is no significant math progress in two females and males groups.

  • References

    1. [1] Alamol, hodaie, S. H. (2009). Principles of Math Training. Mashhad: Donyaye Farda Publishing.

      [2] Arends, R. (1998). learning to teach. boston: Mc Grow hill.

      [3] Bahmayi, L. (2011). New Ideas for Wondering (Primary). Tehran: Aradaktab.

      [4] Brown, w & Brown, B. (1998). Cooperative learning in latin America. international jornal of education research, vol 29.no 2

      [5] Col, P & ChanL. (1990). Methods and Strategies for special Education. prentice-hall

      [6] Cohen, E. (1994). Desiging groupwork teacher. College press, Columbiana university.

      [7] Delavar, A. (2013). Uses and Practices in Psychology and Educational Sciences. Tehran: Roshd Publication.

      [8] Elliot, S. N & et all. (1996). Educational psychology. Usa:brown and benchmark

      [9] Gardner,J,N. & Jewler ,J,A.(2008).Your College Experince. USA:Wodsworth Publishing Company.

      [10] Ghodrati, M. (2001). Comparison of the Effect of Participatory Learning with Individual Learning on the Level of Understanding, Understanding, Understanding, Analyzing and Deciding Science in the Empirical Science Session of the 5th Grade Students. Graduate Diploma: Allameh Tabatabaei University.

      [11] Herried, C, F. (2000). Why isn’t cooperative learning used teach scince? American institute of science.

      [12] Jacobes, G. & et All. (2002). The Teachers Sourcebook for cooperative learning. Gorwin inc.

      [13] Johnson, D. W. & Johnson R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competrtion:theory and research.edina,M.N:iteraction book company

      [14] Johnson R. T & Johnson, D. W. (1982). effect's of cooperative , competitive and individualistic learning on student in scinse class. jornal of research in scince teaching,19.

      [15] Karamati, M. R. (2009). Comparison of Participatory Learning Methods, Participatory Learning with Learning the Principles of Dialogue, and Lecture on the Academic Achievement of Geography of Primary V Students. Educational and Vocational Education, No. 100.

      [16] Karamati, M. R. (2002). A Study on the Impact of Collaborative Learning on the Advancement of Social Skills and Mentoring Academic Achievement in the Fifth Grade Students of Shahid Moshhad in the academic year of 81-82. PhD Thesis. Tehran: Tarbiat Moallem University.

      [17] Kathleen. j. k & et all. (2003). A comparision of cooperative learning and small group indiviualized instruction for math in a self-contained classroom for elementary students with disablties.educational research quarterly, stanford university. Vol 24.3.

      [18] Khoshbakht, F. (2001). The Impact of Participatory and Individual Education on Free Learning and Reminder. Graduate Certificate. Shiraz University.

      [19] Saif, A.A. (2003). Effect of teaching learning strategies on the speed of reading, recalling and comprehension of different texts. Educational and teaching dissertation. The nineteenth century. The number two.

      [20] Saif, A.A. (2013). Modern educational physiology. Tehran: Agah.

      [21] Sha'bani, H. (2011). Educational skills. Tehran: Samt.

      [22] Slavin, R, E. (2012). Educational psychology. New York: Pearson.

      [23] Talebi, M. (2005). Comparison of the Effect of Participatory and Technological Learning Methods on Academic Achievement and Attitude to Learning in Mathematics Course of Secondary School Students in Urmia Schools in 2005. Graduate Diploma: Tabriz University.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Parsafar, A. H., & Nosrat, A. (2018). The impact of cooperative learning and direct instruction on Saravan Islamic Azad university student’s math progress in first half of educational year 2013-2014. International Journal of Applied Mathematical Research, 7(2), 33-36. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijamr.v7i2.8904

    Received date: 2017-12-21

    Accepted date: 2018-01-22

    Published date: 2018-03-16