9315(1)127~166

NTTU EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2004, 15(1), 127166

R. E. Slavin 1978
(STAD)

-127-

 9315(1)127~166

(1991)

(2002)

1930 May Doob ((

))(Competition and Cooperation) 80 (
1992) 1970

Johnson & Johnson

Slavin Sharan
Kagan Webb Dansereau

(1999)
( 1991
19941995)

(1998)QinJohnson & Johnson(1995)

-128-

---
Slavin(1978)
(STAD)

Sharan & Shachar(1988)

(1992)
Slavin(1995)

Lefrancois(1997)

(1998)

(1998)
-129-

 9315(1)127~166

---

---(1996)

1.
2.

3.
4.
5.

6.

1.
2.

3.
4.

5.

6.

(1996 21)
Cohen(1986)

-130-

Johnson & Johnson(1989,1994)

(positive interdependence)
(face-to-face interaction)(individual accountability)
(interpersonal and small-group skills)
(group processing)

1800 1898
N. Triplett1889 Turner1903 A. Mayer 1929 J. Maller

(Sharan, 1980Slavin, 1983, 1995)

S-T

(1996)
()
()

-131-

 9315(1)127~166

()

Edwards, DeVries, & Snyder , 1972

TGT

96

Edwards, & DeVries , 1974

TGT

128

12

Hulten, & DeVries , 1976

TGT

299

10

Slavin, Karweit, 1982

STAD

569

30

Huber, Bogatzki , &Winter, 1982

STAD

170

Robertson , 1982

L. T.

166

2-3

Madden & Slavin, 1983

STAD

175

3-6

TAI

506

3-5

TAI

320

4-6

10

TAI

212

4-6

18

Slavin, Learey, & Madden , 1984

Slavin, Madden, & Learey , 1984

1
2

TAI

220

3-5

16

Okebukola, 1985

STAD

630

Okebukola , 1985

TGT

359

Robertson , 1985

L. T.

356

Slavin & karweit, 1985

TAI

345

4-6

18

Okebukola, 1986

STAD

99

24

Robertson , 1986

L.T.

97

24

Robertson , 1986

L.T.

97

24

384

Malvin,

Jigsaw

1996

Moskowitz, &

STAD

1998

STAD

82

13

12

1998

40

1999

197

10

12

2001

12

2001

2002

40

36

2003

237

13

-132-

S-T Slavin(1978)
(Students Team Achievement Division STAD)
45

()

()

1.
2.

3.

4.
-133-

 9315(1)127~166

()

Slavin (Students Team Achievement

Division STAD)

20

30

10

20

1~9

10

0~9

10

()

()

-134-

STAD

(
)
( Kemmis &
McTaggart1988)
(2002)

-135-

 9315(1)127~166

(Action Research)

()

-136-

R1 R1
R2
R1R2
() R1 R2
R1

(researcher bias)
R2 R1

()
R1 45
( 60 ) 55-60 15
45-49 15 40-44 14 35-39 1

( )

()()

-137-

 9315(1)127~166

<

2
3

()

1
2
3
4
5

1
2
3

4
5
1
2

a + bi

a n = a1 + (n 1)d = a m + (n m)d

a n

()

lim a n

rn

= a1 r n 1 = a m r n m

ar

n 1

n =1

-138-

1
2

3
4
5

0 <

a = b q + r 0 r < b

(1)31 4
(2)100 -13

a = b q + r 0 r < b

(1)1651 7
(2)1564 -15

()
-139-

 9315(1)127~166

(Robson1993)Denzine
( 84)
R2

-140-

R1

R1

(901012 )

27

15( x 2 5 5 x 2 5 )

(15)

2x 3 2 2 2 x 3 2 1 2 x 5

1
5
x
2
2

R1
R2

---

--

------
R1

R1 R2
-141-

 9315(1)127~166

()

1.
(1)
(2)(3)
(4)

(1)

(a)

()(900905 )
(b)
-142-

(900906 )

16

33

...

(2)

()

(900907 )

(900907)

(3)

-143-

 9315(1)127~166

(4)
45

80 70 60

(900915 )

10

32

46 ( ) (
)

OK

---

2.
S-T
(1)
---(2)(3)
(4)
S-T
-144-

------

()

(900926 )

()()
(900926 )

---

1.
(1)
--(33)
()wait
()(900928 )(2)
(3)(4)
--
(12)(34)
() LKK
(12)()(900928 )
(5)
---
2.

-145-

 9315(1)127~166

(1)
(2)()(3)
(4)(5)
A

()

A
C
B

()

()

(1)(2)
(3)
---

()
--

-146-

901008--901130

(reward)

900903---900921

900924---901005

-147-

 9315(1)127~166

()

1.

()

()

-
2-1

2-2

2-3

(%)

(%)

77.8

88.9

20

80

64.4

84.4

8.3

71.4

35.7

78.6

53.6

82.1

0
<

()

2 3

8.3

-148-

50
20

4.1

71.4

20

40

57.1

57.8

73.6
95.6

92.9
57.8
84.6

37.7

13.3
68.9

68.9

2-4

a + bi

40

57.7

95.6

73.3

53.3

42.2

80

24.4

97.8

97.8

()

a + bi

(1)

-149-

 9315(1)127~166

(901024 )

1
17 OK

x y
(901024 ) 1

(2)

x, y R (x + 1)i + y + 2 = 2 y + 3 ( y 2 x )i x + y

( y 2 x) y 2 x
---

(3)

(901102 )
17()
(2-4)
36
-150-

( 79)
---

1
---
1

1
=
1

(4)
a + bi

a + bi

2.

(1)(2)(3)
(4)(5)(6)
(1)

a, b, c N

a bc a b a c

(2)

a = b q + r 0 r < b 100 -13

-151-

 9315(1)127~166

(900928 )
100 (13) = (7)......(9)
36

(3)

()S-T

(901010)
()
---
---

(901012 )

27

15 (

x 2 5 5 x 2 5 )

(15)

2x 3 2 2 2x 3 2 1 2x 5

1
5
x
2
2

()

OK?
(4)
-152-

(1)(2)

(3)
(4)

45 + 40 + 25 = 110

(901019 )
ABC

45 + 40 + 25 = 110
34
37
(1)
1 A
(5)

(900928
)

(6)

m2 > m1 > m3 > m4

(901022 )

-153-

 9315(1)127~166

45

(32)
32()
()
45
()
3245
OK

45

m1 > m3 > m2 > m4

(901023
)

()

-154-

()

()

(%)
55.6

(%)
93.3

a n = a1 + (n 1)d = a m + (n m)d

68.9

91.1

75.6

84.4

a n = a1 r n 1 = a m r n m

77.8

80

()

26.7

44.4

40
100
68.9

48.9
100
80

28.9

46.7

26.7

64.4

()

3-1

3-2

lim a n
n

r n
n 1

ar

n =1

3-3

51.1

66.7

66.7
n
60

95.6
80
80
26.7

()
-155-

 9315(1)127~166

3-1
(
)() (901110 )

(1)()

a1 (1 r n )

S =
1 r

(901110 )

-156-

17

17()

(901111 )
(
)

(901109 )

1 1
1
1
,...... n 1 1
2
3
3 3
3

1 1, ,
11

1 ( a b)(a n 1 + a n 2 b + ..... + ab n 2 + b n 1 ) = a n b n

11.

1 a 1 b
3

1
1
1
1
(1 )(1 + + ..... + n 1 ) = 1n ( ) n
3
3
3
3
11

1
1n ( ) n
1 1
1
3 ..
1 1 + + 2 + ..... + n 1 =
1
3 3
3
1
3
-157-

 9315(1)127~166

11..

(2)

40%~50%

(901110 )
( )
34 ( ) [
36

36

(2001)

n
(3) r

-158-

r 1 -1 1 -1

30%~50%
r
1

(901111 )
(4) n

(901120)

2.

(1)

()

()
(901109 )

(2)
r n

ar

n 1

n =1

r = 1

-159-

 9315(1)127~166

1 < r < 1

(3)
()
n = 1,2,3,.....

(901120 )

()

1970
Nattive
(1994)

(2003)

-160-

(positive bias)
Keeves(1999) K. Popper

TAI

---

()

Johnson & Johnson(1989,1994)

(positive interdependence)(face-to-face interaction)
(individual accountability)
(interpersonal and small-group skills)(group processing)

-161-

 9315(1)127~166

--

45

-162-

(1998)
(1998)

(1994)

(2003)

(2001)---

(1992)

(1995)
(1994)

(1997)
(1992)

(1996)
(2001)

(2001)

(1998)
/
(1998)

(1999)
-163-

 9315(1)127~166

1075-104
(1999)

(1998)7285-294
(1997)
(1993)
(1994)
27175-200
(1995)
139-164
(2002) S-T ---
9261-296
(2002)S-T
2002

(2003)S-T
17195-237
(1991)23

Cohen, E. G. (1986). Design groupwork. New York: Teachers College Press.

Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperatin and competition: theory
and research. Edina, MNInteraction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone:
cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston: Ally &
Bacon.
Keeves, John P. & Lanomski, Gobriele(eds.)(1999). Preface. Issues in
educational research. AmsterdamPergaman.
Kemmis, S & Mc Taggart, R. (Eds.)(1988). The action research planner.3rd. ed.
Australia: Deakin Universtity Press.
-164-

Lefrancois, G. R. (1997). Psychology for teaching. Wadsworth.

Robson, C. (1993). Real World Research: A resource for social scientists and
practitioner-researchers. OxfordBlackwell.
Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groupsRecent methods and
effects on achievement, attitudes, and

ethnic relations. Review of

Education esearch, 50(2), pp. 241-271.

Slavin, R. E. (1983). Team-assisted individualization: A cooperative learning
solution for adaptive instruction in mathematics. ERIC Document, (ED
2328521).
Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., & Stevens, R. J. (1989-1990). Cooperative
learning models for the 3Rs. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 22-28.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative LearningTheory, Research, and practice.
BostonAllyn and Bacon.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher
psychological processes. Translated by Knox and Carol. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. A. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT

-165-

 9315(1)127~166

High school students learning performance in

a Cooperative-Learning math class
Yen-Ting Chen

Ru-Fen Yau

Abstract
This is an action research. In order to explore the effect of a
cooperative learning model, the author used a STAD model proposed by
Slavin (1978) on one of his freshmen math class in a senior high school.
This author collected data on students affective opinions and learning
performance during the teaching sessions by field observations,
questionnaire, and after-class interviews. The major findings were as
follows.
During the cooperative learning sessions of Numbers and
Coordinate and Sequence and Series, through a series of
communication, target concepts were discussed over and over and the
degree of mastery were then improved. The instruction goals of the
units were successfully achieved. However, students failed to develop
true comprehensive understanding on five concepts. Specifically, these
concepts were (1) slope relation between parallel lines and between
perpendicular lines; (2) complex numbers consisting of real numbers
and imaginary numbers, and its format; (3) the calculation of complex
numbers; (4) every point on the complex plane corresponding
exclusively to only one complex number, and how to locate the complex
number a+bi on the complex plane; and (5) the prove of the infinite
proposition involving natural numbers by mathematical induction.
In general, cooperative learning promoted students positive
interdependence and peer interaction, reduced individual competition,
and enabled the students to master skills that could not be acquired
easily in a traditional classroom. Furthermore, the students highly
valued the impacts of cooperative learning on their problem-solving
ability. They would like to study mathematics in this way in the future.

Keywordscooperative learning, learning performance, math

instruction

Lecturer, Department of Early Education, Chung Hwa College Medical Technology

Assistant Professor, Institute of Mathematics Education, National Chia Yi University

-166-