Expectations, Attributions, and Achievement of College Students under Cooperative, Group Competitive, and Individualistic Goal Structures.

Autor/inn/en	Warring, Douglas; Maruyama, Geoffrey
Titel	Expectations, Attributions, and Achievement of College Students under Cooperative, Group Competitive, and Individualistic Goal Structures.
Quelle	(1986), (17 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Beigaben	Tabellen
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Tagungsbericht; Academic Achievement; Community Colleges; Comparative Analysis; Competition; Cooperation; Expectation; Group Activities; Group Instruction; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); Learning Processes; Learning Strategies; Student Motivation; Teaching Methods; Technical Institutes; Two Year Colleges + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Schulleistung; Community college; Community College; Wettkampf; Co-operation; Kooperation; Expectancy; Erwartung; Gruppenaktivität; Gruppenunterricht; Grouping; Gruppenbildung; Learning process; Lernprozess; Learning methode; Learning techniques; Lernmethode; Lernstrategie; Schulische Motivation; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Technische Fakultät
Abstract	In consecutive quarters, two studies were conducted at a two-year vocational/technical college to determine how different goal structures within the learning environment could influence student expectations, achievement, and perceptions of the causes of learning outcomes. The first study investigated three goal structures (i.e., cooperative, individualistic, and cooperative with group competition), while the second added a "homogeneous group" cooperative condition. Study subjects were students from sections of a general psychology course, who were given expectation measures and individual achievement tests. In the cooperative condition, students worked in small groups during their section meetings to help prepare for exams, which were taken on individual and group bases. In the group competition condition, students similarly worked in groups, with the highest-scoring groups receiving bonus points. In the individualistic condition, students worked individually in their sections and participated in whole class discussions. In the homogeneous group condition, students selected their own small work group, as opposed to having these groups teacher-assigned. Results from the two studies provided a mixed pattern of findings. While the first study provided support for the cooperative model in terms of improved expectations and achievement, poor student performance in the second study greatly diminished the benefits of cooperation. (LAL)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2004/1/01