the full range of social situations (Ten Frequent Questions, 2005).

When reading about this theory a more liberal view of cooperative learning comes to mind. When trying to find a specific amount of steps by this theorist, it is impossible because there are too many to count or write about in one paper. Basically this style focuses on “stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement”. With these different concepts comes different goals such as, “building team spirit and positive relationships among students; information sharing; critical thinking; communication skills; and mastery (learning/remembering) of specified material”(Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure, 2005). Unlike the simple 5 steps of the last theorists, a teacher would have to put the information together based on her students. The teacher would have to explore many different lead and use the information to her best judgment.

In conclusion, Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec have set the basis for cooperative learning in the classroom. Their theory is easy to understand and can be simple implemented in the classroom.

Cooperative Learning is actually having the students work in groups or a group setting. Instead of the traditional style of teaching, the students interact with each other and build upon their school relations. In Week 4’s class lecture it states, “Cooperative learning teaches students to be a functional member of a team, with not only individual responsibilities, but group responsibilities as well” (Week 4, 2005). This is an importance learning style to incorporate in the lessons because it builds communication skills in the classroom. These skills will become the basis of their adult relations. In order to better understand cooperative learning, the main theorists and basis of this subject need to be explored.

Due to the internet and the vast majority of sites on this subject, teachers can implement this information into their classroom quickly. When going to google and typing in “Cooperative Lesson”, 826,049 sites can be viewed. The main idea behind the 10 most popular sites are “What is Cooperative Learning” and “How can Teachers implement it in the Classroom”. The most vaulable site found in regards to this subject is http://edtech.kennesaw.edu/intech/cooperativelearning.htm. This site is titled, “Cooperative Learning” and have a dozen links which will help a teacher grasp this style. The consensus of this site states cooperative learning.

Is a successful teaching strategy in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of a subject. Each member of a team is responsible not only for learning what is taught but also for helping teammates learn, thus creating an atmosphere of achievement. Students work through the assignment until all group members successfully understand and complete it (Cooperative Learning, 2005).

Learning how to use Cooperative Learning in the classroom room is a must for teachers because of the communication and social relations she can develop for the students. These communication and social relations are best understood by comparing and contrasting the major theorists of Cooperative Learning.

In the models of Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec explain, “the five advantages to cooperative learning are interwoven in five basic principles: 1) positive interdependence, 2) simultaneous interaction, 3) individual responsibility, 4) Interpersonal and small-group learning skills, and 5) reflection and planning” (University of Phoenix, 2002). These five basic principles seem to be the basis for cooperative learning. These theorists understood children need to learn to work together and know each other in a non-competitive environment. Some of the interesting facts about these theorists is the “sink or swim” philosophy, mutual goal idea, and assigned roles (Principles of Cooperative Learning, 2005). Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec seem to have grasped the updated version of cooperative learning in the classroom. Their methods and ideas are more conservative than the other theorists and tend to be more approachable by teachers.

Dr. Robert Slavin’s approach to cooperative learning is more based on catering to individual students needs. He developed the Student Teams and Achievement Division, STAD. His theory was also based on 5 different ideas much like Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec. The five components are Class Presentation, Teams, Quizzes, Individual Improvement Scores, and Team Recognition (Cooperative Learning a New Direction, 2005). The difference in Slavic’s earlier theory and the theorists present before is his concern for the lack of experience teachers have in this subject and how the subject might not achieve all the expectation. This theorist had a strong belief that high risk students and special educational students would benefit the most from cooperative learning (Dr. Robert Slavin on Cooperative Learning, 2005). In reality, this man’s theory was a good basis, but his lack of experience in the needs of today somewhat discredit his thinking. In the reading it seems this doctor presented the lack of vision of a world where teachers are highly educated and there is a melting pot of students in a classroom, which is the major difference between the theorists.

Dr. Spencer Kagan has Two important points to be made: (1) The world is not just competitive and in some important respects is becoming less so; (2) I do not advocate exclusive use of cooperative learning methods, but rather a healthy balance of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic classroom structures to prepare students for the full range of social situations (Ten Frequent Questions, 2005).

When reading about this theory a more liberal view of cooperative learning comes to mind. When trying to find a specific amount of steps by this theorist, it is impossible because there are too many to count or write about in one paper. Basically this style focuses on “stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement”. With these different concepts comes different goals such as, “building team spirit and positive relationships among students; information sharing; critical thinking; communication skills; and mastery (learning/remembering) of specified material”(Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure, 2005). Unlike the simple 5 steps of the last theorists, a teacher would have to put the information together based on her students. The teacher would have to explore many different lead and use the information to her best judgment.

In conclusion, Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec have set the basis for cooperative learning in the classroom. Their theory is easy to understand and can be simple implemented in the classroom.

dtech.kennesaw.edu/intech/cooperativelearning.htm. This site is titled, “Cooperative Learning” and have a dozen links which will help a teacher grasp this style. The consensus of this site states cooperative learning.

Is a successful teaching strategy in which small teams, each with students of different levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to improve their understanding of a subject. Each member of a team is responsible not only for learning what is taught but also for helping teammates learn, thus creating an atmosphere of achievement. Students work through the assignment until all group members successfully understand and complete it (Cooperative Learning, 2005).

Learning how to use Cooperative Learning in the classroom room is a must for teachers because of the communication and social relations she can develop for the students. These communication and social relations are best understood by comparing and contrasting the major theorists of Cooperative Learning.

In the models of Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec explain, “the five advantages to cooperative learning are interwoven in five basic principles: 1) positive interdependence, 2) simultaneous interaction, 3) individual responsibility, 4) Interpersonal and small-group learning skills, and 5) reflection and planning” (University of Phoenix, 2002). These five basic principles seem to be the basis for cooperative learning. These theorists understood children need to learn to work together and know each other in a non-competitive environment. Some of the interesting facts about these theorists is the “sink or swim” philosophy, mutual goal idea, and assigned roles (Principles of Cooperative Learning, 2005). Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec seem to have grasped the updated version of cooperative learning in the classroom. Their methods and ideas are more conservative than the other theorists and tend to be more approachable by teachers.

Dr. Robert Slavin’s approach to cooperative learning is more based on catering to individual students needs. He developed the Student Teams and Achievement Division, STAD. His theory was also based on 5 different ideas much like Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec. The five components are Class Presentation, Teams, Quizzes, Individual Improvement Scores, and Team Recognition (Cooperative Learning a New Direction, 2005). The difference in Slavic’s earlier theory and the theorists present before is his concern for the lack of experience teachers have in this subject and how the subject might not achieve all the expectation. This theorist had a strong belief that high risk students and special educational students would benefit the most from cooperative learning (Dr. Robert Slavin on Cooperative Learning, 2005). In reality, this man’s theory was a good basis, but his lack of experience in the needs of today somewhat discredit his thinking. In the reading it seems this doctor presented the lack of vision of a world where teachers are highly educated and there is a melting pot of students in a classroom, which is the major difference between the theorists.

Dr. Spencer Kagan has Two important points to be made: (1) The world is not just competitive and in some important respects is becoming less so; (2) I do not advocate exclusive use of cooperative learning methods, but rather a healthy balance of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic classroom structures to prepare students for the full range of social situations (Ten Frequent Questions, 2005).

When reading about this theory a more liberal view of cooperative learning comes to mind. When trying to find a specific amount of steps by this theorist, it is impossible because there are too many to count or write about in one paper. Basically this style focuses on “stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement”. With these different concepts comes different goals such as, “building team spirit and positive relationships among students; information sharing; critical thinking; communication skills; and mastery (learning/remembering) of specified material”(Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure, 2005). Unlike the simple 5 steps of the last theorists, a teacher would have to put the information together based on her students. The teacher would have to explore many different lead and use the information to her best judgment.

In conclusion, Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec have set the basis for cooperative learning in the classroom. Their theory is easy to understand and can be simple implemented in the classroom.

es: 1) positive interdependence, 2) simultaneous interaction, 3) individual responsibility, 4) Interpersonal and small-group learning skills, and 5) reflection and planning” (University of Phoenix, 2002). These five basic principles seem to be the basis for cooperative learning. These theorists understood children need to learn to work together and know each other in a non-competitive environment. Some of the interesting facts about these theorists is the “sink or swim” philosophy, mutual goal idea, and assigned roles (Principles of Cooperative Learning, 2005). Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec seem to have grasped the updated version of cooperative learning in the classroom. Their methods and ideas are more conservative than the other theorists and tend to be more approachable by teachers.

Dr. Robert Slavin’s approach to cooperative learning is more based on catering to individual students needs. He developed the Student Teams and Achievement Division, STAD. His theory was also based on 5 different ideas much like Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec. The five components are Class Presentation, Teams, Quizzes, Individual Improvement Scores, and Team Recognition (Cooperative Learning a New Direction, 2005). The difference in Slavic’s earlier theory and the theorists present before is his concern for the lack of experience teachers have in this subject and how the subject might not achieve all the expectation. This theorist had a strong belief that high risk students and special educational students would benefit the most from cooperative learning (Dr. Robert Slavin on Cooperative Learning, 2005). In reality, this man’s theory was a good basis, but his lack of experience in the needs of today somewhat discredit his thinking. In the reading it seems this doctor presented the lack of vision of a world where teachers are highly educated and there is a melting pot of students in a classroom, which is the major difference between the theorists.

Dr. Spencer Kagan has Two important points to be made: (1) The world is not just competitive and in some important respects is becoming less so; (2) I do not advocate exclusive use of cooperative learning methods, but rather a healthy balance of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic classroom structures to prepare students for the full range of social situations (Ten Frequent Questions, 2005).

When reading about this theory a more liberal view of cooperative learning comes to mind. When trying to find a specific amount of steps by this theorist, it is impossible because there are too many to count or write about in one paper. Basically this style focuses on “stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement”. With these different concepts comes different goals such as, “building team spirit and positive relationships among students; information sharing; critical thinking; communication skills; and mastery (learning/remembering) of specified material”(Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure, 2005). Unlike the simple 5 steps of the last theorists, a teacher would have to put the information together based on her students. The teacher would have to explore many different lead and use the information to her best judgment.

In conclusion, Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec have set the basis for cooperative learning in the classroom. Their theory is easy to understand and can be simple implemented in the classroom.

nd Team Recognition (Cooperative Learning a New Direction, 2005). The difference in Slavic’s earlier theory and the theorists present before is his concern for the lack of experience teachers have in this subject and how the subject might not achieve all the expectation. This theorist had a strong belief that high risk students and special educational students would benefit the most from cooperative learning (Dr. Robert Slavin on Cooperative Learning, 2005). In reality, this man’s theory was a good basis, but his lack of experience in the needs of today somewhat discredit his thinking. In the reading it seems this doctor presented the lack of vision of a world where teachers are highly educated and there is a melting pot of students in a classroom, which is the major difference between the theorists.

Dr. Spencer Kagan has Two important points to be made: (1) The world is not just competitive and in some important respects is becoming less so; (2) I do not advocate exclusive use of cooperative learning methods, but rather a healthy balance of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic classroom structures to prepare students for the full range of social situations (Ten Frequent Questions, 2005).

When reading about this theory a more liberal view of cooperative learning comes to mind. When trying to find a specific amount of steps by this theorist, it is impossible because there are too many to count or write about in one paper. Basically this style focuses on “stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement”. With these different concepts comes different goals such as, “building team spirit and positive relationships among students; information sharing; critical thinking; communication skills; and mastery (learning/remembering) of specified material”(Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure, 2005). Unlike the simple 5 steps of the last theorists, a teacher would have to put the information together based on her students. The teacher would have to explore many different lead and use the information to her best judgment.

In conclusion, Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec have set the basis for cooperative learning in the classroom. Their theory is easy to understand and can be simple implemented in the classroom.

the full range of social situations (Ten Frequent Questions, 2005).

When reading about this theory a more liberal view of cooperative learning comes to mind. When trying to find a specific amount of steps by this theorist, it is impossible because there are too many to count or write about in one paper. Basically this style focuses on “stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement”. With these different concepts comes different goals such as, “building team spirit and positive relationships among students; information sharing; critical thinking; communication skills; and mastery (learning/remembering) of specified material”(Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure, 2005). Unlike the simple 5 steps of the last theorists, a teacher would have to put the information together based on her students. The teacher would have to explore many different lead and use the information to her best judgment.

In conclusion, Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec have set the basis for cooperative learning in the classroom. Their theory is easy to understand and can be simple implemented in the classroom. Overall, Cooperative learning is important because it bind communication with social skills, something every student needs to develop. It is easy to compare and contrast the different theorists because each one has a different idea on what cooperative learning actually is. The Cooperative Learning Style has been developed and redeveloped by many theorists; it just depends on the teacher’s learning style to determine the best approach to this method.

Reference:

Cooperative Learning. (2005). Retrieved on May 31 from http://edtech.kennesaw.edu/intech/cooperativelearning.htm#activities . Cooperative Learning a New Direction. (2005). Retrieved on May 31 from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3673/is_199610/ai_n8745987#continue . Dr. Robert Slavin on Cooperative Learning. (2005). Retrieved on June 5 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/math/slavintrns.htm . Principles of Cooperative Learning. (2005). Retrieved on May 29 http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/cooplrn.htm . Spencer Kagan’s Positive Learning Structure. (2005). Retrieved on June 6 from http://www.jalt.org/pansig/PGL2/HTML/Nakagawa.htm . Ten Frequent Questions. (2005) Retrieved on June 5 from http://courseweb.tac.unt.edu/overall/CECS4100/Resources/CoopLearn/10Questions.html .

Week 4 Lecture. (2005). Mat 532 Week 4 Lecture. Shannon Miller. University of Phoenix (Ed.). (2001). Curriculum Constructs and Assessment: Science and Math.. [University of Phoenix Custom Edition e-text]. Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing.