Ahmed El-Basiony

Journal of Applied Sports Science

June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

Effect of Jigsaw Instructional Method on Pre-Service Teacher Teaching Proficiency Skills and Perceptions Toward
Working in Small-Groups.
Ahmed El-Basiony Elsaid
Faculty of Physical Education ,Helwan University, Egypt.

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of Jigsaw cooperative learning on students Teaching Proficiency
Skills. In addition, this study also determined students perception toward working in small-groups concerning Jigsaw
cooperative learning. The samples of this study consisted of 60 form third grade students at the faculty of physical
education were divided in two groups (Experimental and Control) each consists of 30 students. In order to control the
differences of dependent variables, a pre-test was given before treatment. After treatment, a post-test was administered to
both groups. Two types of instruments were used to collect the data: the Teaching Proficiency Skills checklist to gather
information on students performance in PE lesson skills, and what happened in the groups questionnaire (WHGQ) to
gather information on students perceptions of how group members worked in their small-group. The pre-test and the
post-test data were analyzed using t-test for Teaching Proficiency Skills, A MANOVA was conducted on the students
responses to the WHGQ to determine if there were differences in the students perceptions of how group members worked
in their small-groups in the experimental and control groups. Findings of this study show that learners taught using
Jigsaw cooperative learning strategy performed better than those taught using Conventional learning methods, and
students in the jigsaw cooperative learning groups were more willing to work with others on the assigned tasks and they
provided more elaborate help and assistance to each other than their peers in the control group. Furthermore, as the
students in the cooperative learning group had more opportunities to work together, they developed a stronger
perception of group cohesion and social responsibility for each others learning than their peers in the control group .
Keywords:- Teaching; Proficiency; Performance achievement; Jigsaw Cooperative Learning; Self-Confidence; Teaching
proficiency..

together, since each can induce the others. Methods and

Introduction:
techniques are the key to ultimate learning, and knowing
ne of the biggest targets of todays education the way of reaching the goal is as crucial as the goal itself

O system which aims at development and change is

to teach students how to reach information by
way of research, instead of giving it to them directly. A
(Allison& Rehm, 2007) Reaching the educational goals is
dependent upon being able to choose the appropriate
method (Gamal, 1997). Choosing the appropriate methods
research dominated, rather than a memorizing and giving is in accordance with the suitable methods for an effective
concrete information, type of education system has to be in class learning-teaching process (Arra et all, 2011). For
founded, so that students can consider scientific idea as a an effective learning, teachers should be attentive about
life style in all lessons, they are encouraged to do work on teaching style, and in order for teachers can be attentive
all science, they foster approaches to their lessons in a about the method, they should be familiar with the
positive way, and they are active in the purpose of methods available and appropriately use them (Aronson&
improving their skills and knowledge. In this period, Thibodeau, 1992). In physical education, different
students who are in their childhood and puberty; an age of research has reported similar conclusion to those develop
gaining information, ability, skills, attitude and habit, in conceptual area thus advantage of cooperative learning
should be considered entirely with regard to their physical, to promote development of motor Skills (Ashly& Ben,
mental and psychological aspects and education. They 2004) social skills inclusion of students with disabilities
should be rearranged regarding that type of attention and students self-esteem and motivation toward physical
according to the conception of our era. activity (Giles& Adrian, 2003).

Cooperation is a generic human endeavor that affects Field and laboratory studies have produced a great deal of
many different outcomes simultaneously. These can be knowledge about the effects of many types of cooperative
divided into three broad categories; effort to achieve, interventions and about the mechanisms responsible for
positive interpersonal relationships and psychological these effects. The jigsaw one of the cooperative learning
health/social competence. (Johnson & Johnson; 2000), techniques is based on group dynamics and social
these three categories or outcomes are likely to be found interactions (Giles& Adrian, 2003). Its one of the pure

JASS 801 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

cooperative learning techniques, this technique, including Therefore, the researcher studying the effect of the use of
many different treatments with different small groups in cooperative learning on the effectiveness of Teaching
order to help learning and improve cooperation between Proficiency Skills to the second grade students in the
students. (Gaber Abdel Hamid, 1999). There are two Department of Curriculum and Physical Education
Jigsaw methods, original jigsaw and jigsaw II. The Teaching Methods in the Faculty of Physical Education
original jigsaw is the jigsaw method that was developed for Boys because there were a little attention in physical
by Aronson and his colleagues. The original jigsaw education literature about alternative group formation of
requires each student to read and become expert on only cooperative learning methods. This lack of researches is
one part of reading selection rather than reading the entire surprising, given that the emphasis in cooperative learning
selection. This approach would require accessible is on group interaction and activities.
instructional material neatly divided into four to five
Aims of the study:
appropriate topics. Original jigsaw also takes a little time
because its reading are shorter, only one part of the total The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of
unit to be studied. Later in 1996 Slavin adapted jigsaw cooperative learning on achievement of Teaching
Aaronsons original jigsaw to be more practiced and an Proficiency Skills. In addition, this study also looks at
easier format he called it jigsaw II. Jigsaw II is an activity students perception of jigsaw cooperative learning. The
that allows a small group of students to work together in specific objectives of this study are:
order to maximize their own and each others learning
(Slavin, 1996). Jigsaw II can be used whenever the To determine whether
material to be studied is in written and narrative form. Its 1. To determine the difference in Teaching
most important in such subject as social studies, literature, Proficiency Skills between students tough using
some parts of science and related areas in which concepts, jigsaw cooperative learning and students taught
rather than skills, are the learning goals. The instructional using traditional methods.
material for jigsaw II should be usually a chapter, story, 2. students responses to the WHGQ to determine
biography or similar narrative or descriptive materials. if there were differences in the students
(Arra et al, 2011). Jigsaw II students work in five perceptions of how group members worked in
heterogeneous groups of six or so students each material their small-groups in the experimental and
that the teacher has a broken into subsection for each control groups
student to work on. (Aronson& Thibodeau, 1992).
Hypothesis:-
Search problem:
1. There is significant difference in the Teaching
Research in physical education fields supports the Proficiency Skills between students who are
movement toward students active engagement in their exposed to jigsaw co-operative learning
learning at all levels, but practically at college level, (experimental) and those who are exposed to
receive augmented benefits from increasing involvement traditional methods (control) to the experimental
in their acquisition of new knowledge and skills. This is group.
practically critical for teacher education candidates who 2. H02-There is significant difference in students
are preparing for earns as educators (Gall et all, 2003). perceptions of how group members worked in
Teaching Proficiency Skills in the Field practice is one of their small-groups to the experimental than
the important activities within the Faculty of Physical control groups.
Education programs that contribute to the preparation of
the pre-service students to meet the needs of the labor Search Terms:
market. Furthermore, teacher preparation and professional Jigsaw
programs should effective strategies to prepare teachers to
teach in more challenging ways. Out of the need for high- Jigsaw is a cooperative learning strategy that enables each
quality physical education teachers programs, these student of a "home" group to specialize in one aspect of a
include and introduce innovative teaching models, topic. Students meet with members from other groups who
strategies, or practice. New instructional strategies to be are assigned the same aspect, and after mastering the
adopted by teachers, and great deal of discussion about material, return to the "home" group and teach the material
how to prepare future physical education teachers, the plan to their group members.
for this study evolved regarding the use of jigsaw I Teaching Proficiency Skills
cooperative learning as a teaching strategy within students
of physical education(Asar, 2012); (Eman, 2012). Teaching Proficiency Skills was developed to gather

JASS 801 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

information about preservice teacher in the field practice teaching skills performance.
the observer asked to respond to each item using a likerts 2. The test was given to both groups before and
scale of 1-5 to indicate weather behavior almost never after instruction was completed.
happened {1}, to wheather most happened {5}. Cronbach 3. Videotape.
alpha for the overall scale was 0.86 (Eman, 2012). 4. What happened in the groups questionnaire
(WHGQ) was developed to gather information
What Happened in the Groups Questionnaire
on students perceptions of how group members
(WHGQ)?
worked in their small-groups.
The What Happened in the Groups Questionnaire
Data Analysis:-
(WHGQ) was developed to gather information on
students perceptions of how group members worked in 1. The computer statistical program (SPSS version
their small-groups. The WHGQ was informed from 17 Package) was used to analyze quantitve data.
previous observation protocols and surveys by Johnson 2. Means were calculated for the experimental and
and Johnson (1995) and Gillies and Ashman (1996). The control groups based on the experts responses to
WHGQ consists of 15 items designed to measure students the checklist and the questionnaire of Teaching
perceptions of their cooperative, small-group work Proficiency Skills.
experiences. The items were written to represent the five 3. The independence samples t-test was applied to
key elements of successful group cooperation: Positive compare the effects of the traditional teaching
interdependence; Individual responsibility to help others and cooperative learning on students Teaching
achieve the groups goal; Interpersonal communication; Proficiency Skills.
Facilitation of each others efforts; and, regular processing 4. A MANOVA was conducted on the students
of the groups functioning in managing the task and its responses to the WHGQ to deter- mine if there
members (Johnson & Johnson; 1995). In addition, items were differences in the students perceptions of
covering students motivation, attitudes, and group how group members worked in their small-
behaviors were also included. The students were asked to groups in the experimental and control groups.
respond to each item using a Likert scale of 15 to
Applying the main research experiment
indicate whether they perceived the behavior almost never
happened {1}, to whether it almost always happened {5}, 1. The researchers applied the study in the period
Cronbachs alpha for the overall scale was 0.78. from February 2012 to May 2013.
2. The design of this study is a quasi-experiment
Material and methods:
consisting of experimental group and a control
Sample:- group, since the classes existed as intact groups.
3. Pre-tests were used to determine the equality of
Respondents for this study comprised of 60 students from the two groups.
third grade physical education college students. All of 4. This study consisted of 60 students, divided into
them were selected randomly. two groups consisting of 30 students in the
The procedure followed for randomization was all the control group and 30 students in the
names of the students were put in a hat and were pull them experimental group.
out at random. Same procedure was followed for the 5. Experimental groups were exposed to jigsaw
selection of the students who participated in the cooperative learning, while the control group
experiment. The age range of the students was between was given the traditional teaching method.
18- 20 years and they were more or less similar with 6. The lecturers who implemented the jigsaw
regard to socioeconomic status, cultural background, and cooperative learning underwent training on the
academic background. Tests for homogeneity of variance use of cooperative learning in order to ensure
(Qw) of effect sizes were calculated. that it was implemented as planned.
7. Upon completion of instruction, post-tests were
The duration of an experiment was four months i.e. conducted to determine the difference between
February 1st to end of May 2013, at the rate of one session the groups.
per week of total of 15 seasons. 8. Instruments used in this study were Teaching
Instruments:- Proficiency Skills checklist and students
perceptions of how group members worked in
1. Teaching Proficiency Skills checklist to measure their small-groups.

JASS 880 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

Results:

Table (1)
Compare between control and experimental

Experimental group Control Group Sig.

Groups in pretest df t
mean Std Mean Std (2-tailed)
Good Planning 10.72 1.16 10.92 1.29 0.325 0.932
Mastering the Lesson Skills 10.78 1.62 11.38 1.72 0.345 0.766
Clarity of orders and instructions 11.08 1.34 10.94 1.39 0.423 0.674
58
Correcting Errors 12.80 0.67 12.90 0.91 0.342 0.525
Safety Procedures 8.70 0.94 8.80 0.72 0.310 0.498
Total 54.08 5.39 54.94 4.18 0.423 0.674

The results of t-test displayed in table (1), Students in the the different were not statically significantly different.
experimental group had a mean score of 54.08 with a Because there was no significant difference between the
standard deviation of 7.39; students in control group had a groups on the pre-test scores, it was possible to assess the
mean score of 52.94 with a standard deviation 6.38. The t- difference between groups on the post-test by means of a
test yield a score of 0.423 with a degree of freedom 58 and t-test.
Table (2)
Compare between control and experimental groups in posttest

Experimental group Control Group Sig. (2-

df T
mean Std Mean Std tailed)
Good Planning 17.65 1.26 17.47 1.34 0.324 0.747
Mastering the Lesson Skills 16.92 1.82 14.68 1.26 4.03 0.001**
Clarity of orders and instructions 16.58 2.94 15.73 1.93 2.11 0.046*
58
Correcting Errors 18.74 1.97 18.65 0.98 1.74 0.142
Safety Procedures 17.25 2.11 15.17 1.47 4.17 0.001**
Total 87.14 6.11 81.64 4.90 2.16 0.047*

As shown in table (2) having performed t-test, there was The MANOVA was significant, T 2 = 0.44, F (1, 58) =
astatically significant different in the total of mean of 4.28, p < 0.01 permitting an examination of the univariate
Teaching Proficiency Skills score of students across the results. An examination of Table 3 shows that six
experimental group and control group at the alpha level of univariate results were significant (adjusted alpha = 0.04);
0.05. Therefor null hypothesis was rejected. It can be No interrupting or cutting off; Listen to each other; Asked
concluded that a Teaching Proficiency Skills achievement to expand on point; Opportunities to share ideas; No
of students through jigsaw CL was better than Teaching domination by others; and members helped each other.
Proficiency Skills achievement of students undergoing Table 3 shows that the students in the experimental groups
traditional instruction. reported that group members were less likely to interrupt
or cut each other off when they spoke or to try and
What happened in the groups questionnaire?
dominate each other. Furthermore, the students in the
A MANOVA was conducted on the students responses to experimental groups were more likely to listen to each
the WHGQ to determine if there were differences in the other, ask each other to elaborate on their points; share
students perceptions of how group members worked in their ideas; and, help each other than the students in the
their small-groups in the experimental and control groups. control groups

JASS 888 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

Table 3
Means and Standard deviations of students perception of what happened in the group in Experimental and control group

Experimental group control group

Item F value
M SD M SD
1. Free to talk 4.22 0.96 4.17 1.11 2.44
2. Interrupting or cutting off 2.26 1.24 2.91 1.39 14.84**
3. Listen to each other 4.38 0.76 3.76 1.14 19.54**
4. Asked to expand on point 3.73 1.03 3.09 1.2 8.93**
5. Opportunities to share ideas 4.29 0.80 3.77 0.88 7.91**
6. Domination by other 2.22 1.15 3.18 1.08 18.17**
7. Sensitive to needs of others 3.53 1.18 3.47 1.19 0.30
8. Consider others ideas 3.76 0.77 3.73 1.08 0.88
9. Agree on decisions 4.16 0.81 4.34 1.03 1.09
10. Organization in the group 3.58 1.11 3.47 1.19 0.76
11. Formed new friendships 3.18 1.21 3.12 1.09 0.17
12. Members helpful to me 3.64 1.11 3.49 1.16 1.75
13. Members worked together 4.17 1.02 4.08 1.03 0.87
14. Felt ok about being in group 4.22 0.95 4.11 1.13 0.93
15. Members helped each other 4.22 0.97 3.76 0.99 5.10*
* P < 0.05., ** P < 0.01.

Discussion:- explanations must be timely, relevant to the recipients

need for help, correct, and of sufficient detail to enable
Effects of Jigsaw Cooperative Learning on Teaching them to correct any misunderstandings (Webb, Troper, &
Proficiency Skills: - Fall, 1995). (Gillies and Ashman; 1996, 1998) found that
students are often more perceptive of the needs of their
The results of this study indicate that jigsaw cooperative
fellow students and will provide unsolicited help, such as
learning methods result in higher Teaching Proficiency
explanations, when they perceive it is necessary (Eman,
Skills achievement than the traditional teaching methods.
2012). In short, while students can receive both solicited
A probable reason is that, when students explain and
and unsolicited explanatory help from their peers, this help
receive explanations from each other in group, they retain
must be of sufficient elaboration for them to benefit from
the new skills much longer in their memory. They better
it (Zuckerman, Chudinova, & Khavkin, 1998). Certainly,
understand what they have learned and therefore improve
the help the students provided to each other in the
their Teaching Proficiency Skills. The cooperative
cooperative learning groups was detailed and timely and
approach has the element of accountability and
coincided either with specific requests for help or with
interdependence embedded in a structure that is not found
students perceptions of the need to help and support
in the traditional classroom. This study supports the
others in their groups (Akram, 2013). In effect, through
findings conducted by Zakaria et all (2010) and Melihan
their willingness to help each other succeed with the task,
and Sirri (2011). The positive impact produced by jigsaw
the students demonstrated their cohesiveness as a group
cooperative learning shows the importance of student
(Johnson & Johnson, 2000); (Slavin, 1996) and their
interaction as proposed by Vygotsky and Piaget. The
shared sense of community (Fawzia, 2014).
students in experimental group were more willing to work
with others on the task, listen to what they had to say, and Students taught how to teach physical education lesson
share ideas and skills and they did this by giving both through the Jigsaw cooperative learning strategy
solicited and unsolicited explanations to each other. It is performed significantly better than those who were taught
the explanations that students provide to each other as they through the conventional or traditional teaching methods.
work together in small groups that are critical if learning is These findings support earlier studies that concluded that
to occur (Webb; 1992). Moreover, if students are to the use of the Jigsaw cooperative learning strategy
benefit from the explanatory help they receive, the

JASS 881 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

improved achievement scores compared to the teach so students could learn and in such faculty,
conventional teaching methods (Hanze & Berger, 2007). cooperative learning was not widely endorsed. This
attitude was not evident in faculty that had a high
Students perceptions towards jigsaw cooperative
commitment to cooperative learning. In fact, this faculty
learning
was very similar in they implemented cooperative learning
This study also investigated students perceptions of what to the faculty identified by (Slavin; 1995) where
happens during cooperative learning and how their cooperative learning was used as an overarching
perceptions may differ as a result of participating in philosophy to change school and classroom organization
experimental or control groups. The results showed that and instructional processes. When this occurred, Slavin
the students in the experimental groups perceived other found the students obtained higher obtained higher
group members were less likely to interrupt and cut each academic achievements across the curriculum than their
other off and more likely to listen to each other, ask each peers in more traditional faculty (Slavin; 1996). In the
other to expand on points they were making, share ideas study reported here, it was the faculty that demonstrated a
with each other, and help each other. They were also less high commitment to cooperative learning that established
likely to try and dominate others than their peers in the experimental cooperative learning groups in their
experimental groups. In short, the students in the classrooms and it was these groups that obtained higher
experimental groups perceived their peers were more learning outcomes on the questionnaire than their peers in
willing to help and promote each others learning than the the control groups.
students in the control groups. When students do this, they
Conclusions
demonstrate care and concern for each other and
responsibility for each others achievements (Slavin, In the light of the objectives and hypotheses of the study
1995). These attitudes help to build a sense of group and through the research sample characteristics,
identity and promote pro-social norms among group researchers reached the following conclusions: -
members that help to create an environment conducive to
learning (Slavin; 1996). Faculty demonstrate a 1. The effectiveness of use of the jigsaw
commitment to cooperative learning when they encourage cooperative learning on Teaching Proficiency
their staff to participate in professional development Skills score.
activities designed to broaden their understanding of how 2. Use Method is covered as a form of cooperative
to embed this approach to learning and teaching into their learning. impact on students' awareness of the
curricula (Sharan et all; 1999). Moreover, they sanction its skills of working in small groups, cooperative
use by publically acknowledging this pedagogical practice and acquires the skills necessary to achieve
(Slavin; 1996). In such faculty, which I have referred to as success in the learning processes.
high commitment faculty, lectuers realize the importance Implications
of cooperative learning activities so that students
experience task interdependence, promote each others 1. The use of Jigsaw learning strategy in teaching
learning, and accept personal responsibility for results in better students performance in
contributing to the task (Johnson & Johnson; 2000). Teaching Proficiency Skills.
Comments by lectures in the faculty that had a high 2. The Jigsaw learning strategy is therefore a
commitment to promoting cooperative learning included suitable method for teaching.
the following: When we do group work, we must do it 3. School Quality Assurance and Standards
properly so they students realize theyve got to work Officers in education should encourage teachers
together and help each other. That way, they theyve got to to use this strategy of Teaching Proficiency
do their fair share (of the work) and not sit back and wait Skills in order to improve the current trend of
for others. They get really involved in their groups. Its dismal performance in Teaching Proficiency
very motivational (meaning group work). They seem to Skills worldwide and especially in the field
like getting on with it (meaning the task). These types of practice at the faculty of physical education.
comments were rarely made by teachers in faculty that 4. The teacher training colleges and universities
were less committed to promoting this pedagogical should emphasize Jigsaw learning strategy as an
practice. In fact, many teachers in this faculty commented effective method of Teaching Proficiency Skills.
that they were expected to use more traditional teaching
approaches such as direct teaching in order to cover the Recommendations
content of the curriculum. Group work was seen as
In the light of the objectives and results of research the
detraction from the core business of lectures which was to
researcher puts the following

JASS 881 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

1. Holding more practical training courses for Palmer, 231-256.

faculty members in the faculties of physical
5. Arra, C. T., DAntonio, M. D., & DAntonio
education at various universities on how to use
Jr., M. (2011). Students preferences for
various forms of cooperative learning.
cooperative learning instructional approaches:
2. The need to the attention of faculty members to
Considerations for college teachers. Journal of
acquire the students different cooperative
Research in Education, 21, 114-126.
learning skills.
3. Work to provide learning resource rooms in the 6. Asar, H. (2012). The effectiveness of active
faculties of Physical Education by all means and learning strategy in the cognitive side with the
in particular educational technology. decision of the basics of water sports on the
4. Encourage pre service teachers in vocational all learning outcomes for students in the faculty of
levels in the undergraduate on the use of physical education Alexandria. Master Degree,
different models of cooperative learning in field faculty of physical education for girls,
preparation programs. Alexandria University.
5. Conduct similar studies on larger samples and
7. Ashly Casey; Ben Dyson (2004): Cooperative
the various programs.
learning in physical education: A research based
6. Conduct studies on the use of various forms of
Approach; Routledge studies in physical
collaborative learning in the various stages of
education and youth sports.
education, the study of the relationship results of
those studies a number of different variables 8. Eman, M. R. (2012). Suggested criteria to
such as age, sex and specialization. evaluate teacher performance in the light of
7. Business surveys about the difficulties faced by accreditation standards. The Second
the use and recruitment of various forms of International Arab conference on quality
cooperative learning in the learning process. Assurance in Higher Education, (IACQ, 2012).
8. Action longitudinal studies on the impact of the
9. Fawzia S, A. (2014). Effectiveness of proposed
use of cooperative learning to keep the motor
Unit in the Psychology based on (Think- Pair -
skills to a long period of time.
Share) Strategy to change intolerance tendencies
9. Conducting field studies comparing between
and assure assertiveness for secondary stage
different forms of collaborative learning in many
students. Master Degree, Girls College of Arts
different academic programs.
and Sciences of Education, Ain Shams
References University.

1. Akram, A, H. (2013). The Effectiveness of 10. Gaber Abdel Hamid.(1999): Teaching and
Cooperative-Competitive and Blended Learning Learning., Dar El_ Fekr Elarbi, ciro, Egypt.
Strategies Via the Web on the Development and
11. Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003).
Achievement of Critical Thinking and Social
Educational research: An introduction (7th Ed.).
Learning Skills Among the Students of Al -
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Aqsa University in Gaza. PhD Dissertation.,
Girls College of Arts and Sciences and 12. Gamal al-Din Abdel Atti Shafei (1997).
Education. Programmed instruction in physical education,
Dar El-Fakr El-Arbi., Cairo.
2. Allison, B., & Rehm, M. (2007). Teaching
strategies for diverse learners in FCS 13. Giles, R.M., & Adrian, F. (2003). Cooperative
classrooms. Journal of Family and Consumer learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of
Sciences, 99, 8-10. learning in groups. London: Farmer Press.

3. Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997). The jigsaw 14. Gillies, R., & Ashman, A. (1996). Teaching
classroom: Building cooperation in the collaborative skills to primary school children in
classroom. New York: Addison-Wesley. classroom based work groups. Learning and
Instruction, 6, 187200.
4. Aronson, E., & Thibodeau, R. (1992). The
Jigsaw classroom: a cooperative strategy for an 15. Gillies, R., & Ashman, A. (1998). Behavior and
educational psychology course. In Lynch, J., interactions of children in cooperative groups in
Modgil, C., & Modgil, S. (Eds.), Cultural lower and middle elementary grades. Journal of
diversity and the schools, Washington, USA: Educational Psychology, 90, 746757.

JASS 881 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2

 Ahmed El-Basiony

16. Hnze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative paradigm: Building a science curriculum for the
learning, motivational effects, and student elementary school. Cognition and Instruction,
characteristics: An experimental study 16, 01233.
comparing cooperative learning and direct
instruction in 12th grade physics
classes. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 29-41.

17. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2000).

Joining together: Group theory and group skills.
(7th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon

18. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. and Holubec,

E.J. (1995). The Nuts & Bolts of Cooperative
Learning. Minnesota: Interaction Book
Company.
19. Melihan, U., & Sirri, A. (2011). The effect of
cooperative learning method on the students
success and recall levels of the 8th grade
students learning in permutation and probability
subject. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty,
12, 1-16.

20. Sharan, S., Shachar, H., & Levine, T. (1999).

The innovative school: Organization and
instruction. Westpoint, CT, USA: Bergin &
Garvey..

21. Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory,

research, and practice. (2nd ed). Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
22. Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative
learning and achievement: What we know, what
we need to know. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 21, 43-69.
doi:10.1006/ceps.1996.0004
23. Webb, N. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of
student interaction and learning in small groups.
In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, & N. Miller (Eds.),
Interaction in cooperative groups (pp. 102119).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

24. Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D., & Fall, R. (1995).

Constructive activity and learning in
collaborative small groups. Journal of
educational psychology, 87(3), 406.

25. Zakaria, E., Chin, L. C., & Daud, M. Y.

(2010). The effects of cooperative learning on
students mathematics achievement and attitude
towards mathematics. Journal of Social Science,
6, 272-275.

26. Zuckerman, G., Chudinova, E., & Khavkin,

E. (1998). Inquiry as a pivotal element of
knowledge acquisition within the Vygotskian

JASS 881 June 2015, Volume 5, No. 2