Abstract
The aim of this study is to investigate the efficiency of cooperative learning on preschoolers’ verbal mathematics problem-solving abilities and to present the observational findings of the related processes and the teachers’ perspectives about the application of the program. Two experimental groups and one control group participated in the study. Results found that preschoolers in the experimental groups experienced larger improvements in their problem-solving abilities than those in the control group. Findings also revealed that the cooperative learning method can be successfully applied in teaching verbal mathematics problem-solving skills during the preschool period. The preschoolers’ skills regarding cooperation, sharing, listening to the speaker and fulfilling individual responsibilities in group work improved. The teachers’ points of view also supported these findings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Al-Halal, A.J. (2001). The effects of individualistic learning and cooperative learning strategies on elementary students’ mathematics achievement and use of social skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, USA.
Aronson, E. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Artut, P. D., & Tarım, K. (2007). Effectiveness of jigsaw II on prospective elementary school teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 129–141. doi:10.1080/13598660701268551.
Artzt, A. F., & Newman, C. M. (1993). How to use cooperative learning in the mathematics class. Virginia: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Askew, M., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Recent research in mathematics education 5–16. School of Education, King’s College: London Stationery Office.
Avcıoğlu, H. (2003, October). Examining the efficiency of a training program based on cooperative learning in teaching social skills to preschool children. Paper presented at the Omep World Council and Conference, Kuşadası, Turkey.
Catron, C. E., & Allen, J. (2003). Early childhood curriculum: a creative play model (4th ed.). New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Curran, L. (1998). Lessons for little ones’ mathematics: Cooperative learning lessons. San Clemente: Kagan.
Gömleksiz, M. (1997). Cooperative learning: An experimental study on mathematics achievement and building friendship on fourth grade students. Adana: Baki.
Howes, C., Unger, O. A., & Matheson, C. C. (1992). The collaborative construction of pretend: Social pretend play functions. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1981). Effects of cooperative and individualistic learning experiences on inter ethnic interaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(3). doi:10.1037/0022-0663.73.3.444.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition (2nd ed.). Edina, Minnesota: Interaction.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning mathematics and cooperative learning lesson plans for teachers. Edina, Minnesota: Interaction.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning (4th ed.). Massachusetts: Allen & Bacon.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice, 38(2), 67–73.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Stanne, M.B.(2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. Retrieved June 15, 2004, from http//www.co-opration.org/pages/cl-methods.html.
Kagan, S. (1992). Cooperative learning. Paseo Espada: Reseources for Teachers.
Karper, J., & Melnick, S. A. (1993). The effectiveness of team accelerated instruction on high achievers in mathematics. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 20(1), 49.
Katz, L. G. (2002). On how children learn through coopartion. Early Childhood Today, 16(6), 42.
Leikin, R., & Zaslavsky, O. (1997). Facilitating student interactions in mathematics in a cooperative learning setting. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(3), 331–354.
Moyles, J. R. (1989). Just playing?: The role and status of play in early childhood education. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2001). Mathematics in the preschool. Buffalo, NY: NCTM.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM).(2008) Principle & Standarts for School Mathematics. Retrieved Agust 30, 2008, from http://my.nctm.org/standards/.
Panitz, T. (2009). Collaborative versus cooperative learning- a comparison of the two concepts which will help us understand the underlying nature of interactive learning. Retrieved March 04, 2009, from http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/coopdefinition.htm.
Ramani, G.B. (2005) Cooperative play and problem solving in preschool children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.
Rogoff, B. (1998). Cognition as a collaborative process. In W. Damon, D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: vol. 2. Cognition, perception, and language (5th ed., pp. 679–744). New York: Wiley.
Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. (1998). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: vol. 3. Social, emotional, & personality development (5th ed., pp. 619–700). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groups: Recent methods and effects on achievement attitudes and ethnic relations. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 241–271.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning and cooperative school. Educational Leadership, 45, 7–13.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E., & Karweit, N. L. (1985). Effects of whole class, ability grouped and individualized instruction on mathematics achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 22(3), 351–367.
Slavin, R. E., Leavey, M. B., & Madden, N. A. (1984). Combining cooperative learning and individualised instruction: Effects on student mathematics achievement, attitudes, and behaviours. The Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 409–422. doi:10.1086/461373.
Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., & Leavey, M. (1984). Effects of team-assisted individualisation on the mathematics achievement of academically handicapped and nonhandicapped students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(5), 813–819. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.76.5.813.
Tarım, K. (2003). Effectiveness of cooperative learning method on teaching mathematics and a meta analytic study for cooperative learning method. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey.
Tarım, K., & Akdeniz, F. (2008). The effects of cooperative learning on Turkish elementary students’ mathematics achievement and attitude towards mathematics using TAI and STAD methods. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(1), 77–91. doi:10.1007/s10649-007-9088-y.
Tarım, K., & Artut, P. D. (2004). Teaching addition and subtraction skills to preschool children with cooperative learning method. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 5(17), 221–236.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Williams-Jones, T. (2004). An investigation of the use of cooperative learning techniques with a sample of children (0-4) across traditional daycare and playgroup learning communities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Loyola, Chicago.
Yıldız, V. (1998) The effects of cooperative learning and traditional teaching methods on preschool children`s mathematical achievement and teachers ideas about the present applications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dokuz Eylül, Izmir.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix A. An example of cooperative activities
Activity: Magic Door (Addition–subtraction problems)
Objective: Acquiring cooperative behaviors (happy talk, active listening, sharing, cooperation, etc.), solving oral problems of addition and subtraction
Class: 18 children
Group size: two persons
Materials: A story book related to the jungle, magic questions (one per group), and one set of scissors, crayons, and background paper per group.
Procedures:
-
1.
The teacher reads a story related to the jungle. Entire class discussion is fostered about the setting of the story, the animals in the story and the other animals that live in the jungle.
-
2.
Then, the teacher says, “We are going into a forest together. There are different kinds of animals in this forest like in our story. Can you hear their voices? I heard a lion voice. Now, think that you are also hearing some animal voices. Now imitate the animals sounds that you hear and stop. I’m going to monitor and try to guess which animal you are. I’m going to touch one of you to see if my prediction is right or not. The student whom I touch is going to try to imitate that animal’s voice. Every student whom I touch will do this in turn.” All children do this activity in turn. The two children whom the teacher touches stand behind the teacher in line holding their hands.
-
3.
The teacher tours the classroom with the children in front of him/her and with the forester song. Then, they see a magic door. The teacher says, “How many doors are there? This door is a different door. We need to answer some magic questions to open the door. Now, I’m going to ask these questions to the partners in turn. It is very important for the partners to think and to answer the questions together. The ones who answer the questions will go through the door and write the operation. If they can’t answer the question, they will go to the back of the line and try once more.”
-
4.
In this way, the teacher goes on asking questions until all the partners go through the door.
-
a.
Some sample questions are written on the door:
-
i.
The monkey had five baby monkeys. This year, she had three more baby monkeys. How many baby monkeys does she have now? (5 + 3)
-
ii.
Seven baby wolves were playing games together. Three of them were called by their mothers and they left the game. Now how many wolves are playing games? (7 − 3)
-
i.
-
a.
-
5.
Now the teacher says, “Partners will draw a picture of the forest related to the questions that they answered today.” Partners sit at a table and draw a picture of a forest. It is very important that the partners decide on the picture together. The final picture should be a common output of the group.
-
6.
The drawings are shared with the class and hung on the classroom walls.
Appendix B. Some preparatory cooperative activities
Corners: This activity is designed to allow students to know and accept themselves and others more. Any individual difference dimension can be the focus, such as favorite food, favorite cartoons, or sport you would like to play. Students go to the corner of the room representing their choice; so, for example, all the basketball people go to one corner, the football people go to another. Students then share reasons for their choice with a partner in their corner.
Inside–outside circle: Student stand in two concentric circles, with the inside circle facing out and the outside circle facing in. The ones in the inner circle move to the right, and the ones in the outside circle move to the left. Then, they stop when they are given an instruction by their teacher. Students face a partner and share information about themselves, such as name, where born, favorite song.
Group handshakes: Successful completion of any group activities can enhance the sense of group identity, if the group is allowed to complete the activity in its own unique way. One of the ways of providing this is to do a group handshake activity. Through this activity, students can develop a group handshake which symbolizes their group name. Consensus rules apply here: we do not have a handshake, unless we all agree.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tarim, K. The effects of cooperative learning on preschoolers’ mathematics problem-solving ability. Educ Stud Math 72, 325–340 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9197-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9197-x