تأثیر تدریس مشارکتی بر انسجام گروهی دانشجویان: بررسی نقش واسطه‌ای رویکردهای مشارکت
محورهای موضوعی : تربیتی
مهدی محمدی
1
(
عضو هیأت علمی دانشکدۀ علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی دانشگاه شیراز
)
رحمت اله مرزوقی
2
(
عضو هیأت علمی دانشکدۀ علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی دانشگاه شیراز
)
رضا ناصری جهرمی
3
(
دانشجوی دکتری برنامه‌ریزی درسی دانشگاه شیراز
)
مریم درفشان
4
(
دانشجوی دکتری روان‌شناسی تربیتی دانشگاه شیراز
)
زینب مختاری
5
(
دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد آموزش و بهسازی منابع انسانی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
)
کلید واژه: دانشجویان, رویکردهای مشارکت, تدریس مشارکتی, انسجام گروهی,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف از این پژوهش، بررسی تأثیر تدریس مشارکتی بر انسجام گروهی دانشجویان با واسطۀ نحوۀ مشارکت آنان در فرایند یاددهی ـ یادگیری بود. روش پژوهش از نوع همبستگی و جامعۀ آماری شامل تمامی دانشجویان مقطع کارشناسی رشتۀ مترجمی زبان انگلیسی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد بندرعباس و دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت، در سال تحصیلی 93ـ1392 بود. ابزار پژوهش پرسشنامۀ محیط گروهی (کارون و همکاران، 1985) و پرسشنامۀ رویکردهای مشارکت (تریاندیس و همکاران، 1994) بود. نتایج نشان داد که تدریس مشارکتی پیش‌بینی‌کنندۀ مثبت و معنی‌دار انسجام گروهی دانشجویان (49/0=2R، 001/0>P ) و پیش‌بینی‌کنندۀ مثبت و معنی‌دار رویکردهای جمع‌گرایی و فردگرایی دانشجویان (33/0=2R، 001/0>P ) است. همچنین رویکردهای جمع‌گرایی و فردگرایی دانشجویان پیش‌بینی‌کنندۀ مثبت و معنی‌دار انسجام گروهی در آنان (51/0=2R، 001/0>P ) است.
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of cooperative teaching on students’ group cohesion mediating the role of cooperation approaches in teaching-learning processes. The research method was correlational and the population was all undergraduates majoring in English translation as a foreign language in Bandar Abbas and Marvdasht Azad Islamic University in 2004 the academic year 2013-14. Research instruments were Group Environment Questionnaire (Carron, et al., 1985) and Cooperation Approaches Questionnaire (Triandis et al., 1994). Data were analyzed using path analysis technique and multivariable regression analysis. The results showed that cooperative teaching is a significant positive predictor of students’ group cohesion (R2=0.49, P < 0.001). Also, it was a significantly positive predictor of students’ individualism and collectivism approaches, as well (R2=0.33, P < 0.001). The students’ individualism and collectivism approaches were significantly positive predictors of students’ group cohesion (R2= 0.51, P < 0.001).
Alton Lee, A. (2012). Cooperative learning in physical education: A research based approach [Book review]. Qualitative Research in Education, 1(2), 228- 232. doi: 10.4471/qre.2012.11.
Arthur, C.A., Hardy, J., Callow, N., & Williams, D. (2012) Transformational leadership and task cohesion in sport: The mediating role of intra team communication, Journal of Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14 (2): 249- 257.
Avendano, J. (2003). Student involvement: assessing student satisfaction, gains, and quality of effort. Doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois state, School of education.
Beuckelaer, A.D., Lievens, F., & Bucker, J. (2012). The Role of faculty members’ cross-cultural competencies in their perceived teaching quality: evidence from culturally-diverse classes in four European countries. The Journal of Higher Education, 83 (2): 217, - 248.
Carpenter, M. D. (2007). Testing the efficacy of team teaming. Learning Environment, 10: 53-56.
Carron, A.V., Widmeyer, W.N., & Brawley, L.R. (1985). The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The group environment questionnaire. Journal of sport psychology, 7: 244-266.
Carron, A.V., Colman, M.M., Wheelar, J., & Stevens, D. (2002). Cohesion and performance in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 24: 168-188.
Centra, J.A. (1993). Reflective Faculty Evaluation: Enhancing Teaching and Determining Faculty Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chiu, M., Abeer, A., Elliott, R., & Viren, N.N. (2013). an experiential teaching session on the anesthesia machine check improves resident performance. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 59(3): 280- 287.
Esquita, B. (2001). Emotions in collectivist and individualist contexts. Journal of personality and Social Psychology. (1): 68-74.
Filkins, J.W., & Doyle, S.K. (2002). First generation and low income students: using the NSSE data to study effective educational practices and students. Self-reported gains. Paper presented at the annual forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Toronto.
Finkelstein, M.A. (2013). Individualism/collectivism and organizational citizenship behavior: An integrative framework. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40 (10): 1633-1643.
Fischer, S., & Shachar, H. (2004). Cooperative learning and the achievement of motivation and perceptions of student in 11thgrade chemistry classes. Journal of Learning and Instruction, 12(4): 69-87.
Friedkin, N.E. (2004). Social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 30: 409-425.
Garner, H.G. (1995). Team work models and experience in education. Sydney: Allan and Bacon.
Halbrook, M., Hurley, C., Bell, K., & Holden, J.E. (2013). Remove from marked Records Relationships among motivation, gender, and cohesion in a sample of collegiate athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 35 (1): 61- 77.
Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. (1984). Hofstadter’s culture dimensions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15: 417-433.
Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R.R. (2004). Personality and culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38 (1): 52- 88.
Hsiung, C.H. (2012). The effectiveness of cooperative learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1): 119- 137.
Janssen, B.W. (2012). A qualitative exploration of the relationships between graduate teaching assistants and contingent faculty members. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The Ohio State University.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher. 38(5): 365-379.
Julian, K., Appelle, N., O’Sullivan, P., Morrison, E. H., & Wamsley, M. (2012). The impact of an objective structured teaching evaluation on faculty teaching skills. Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal, 24 (1): 134- 150.
Kezar, A. & Kinzie, J. (2006). Examining the ways institutions can create student engagement: the role of mission. Journal of college student development, 47(2): 149-172.
Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J.H., Whitt, E.J. (2005). Student Success in College: creating conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Miller, N., Garnier, S., Hartnett, A.T., & Couzin, I.D. (2012). Both information and social cohesion determine collective decisions in animal group. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 25: 165- 173.
Novy, A., Swiatek, D.C., & Moulaert, F. (2013). Social Cohesion: A Conceptual and Political Elucidation. Urban Studies, 49 (9): 1873-1889.
Oishi, S., Schimmack, U., Diener, E., & Suh, E.M. (1998). The measurement of values and individualism and collectivism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24: 1177-89.
Otto, J.J. (2012). University faculty describe their use of moving images in teaching and learning and their perceptions of the library’s role in that use. College & Research Libraries, 74(1): 131- 160.
Schroeder, C.C., & Kuh, G.D. (2003). How are we doing at engaging students? Charles Schroeder talks to George Kuh. About campus, 8 (2): 9-16.
Triandis, H.C., Kurowski, L.L., & Gelfand, M.J. (1994). Workplace diversity: Handbook of Industrial and organizational psychology. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Troth, A.C., Jordan, P.J., & Lawrence, S.A. (2012). Emotional intelligence, communication competence, and student perceptions of team’s cohesion. Journal of Psycho Educational Assessment, 30: 315- 319.
Wang, S., & Hwang, G. (2013). The role of collective efficacy, cognitive quality, and task cohesion in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). Journal of Computers & Education. 58 (2): 679–687.