1. Learners’ perception of their STAD cooperative experience Shing-Yu Lynn Tsai Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa Hsu Date: March 16, 2009

3. STAD Student S Divisions D Teams- Achievement TA

4. STAD Role Play The Teacher lectures materials & assigns a context ( at the restaurant) Team members are assigned the roles( waiters, customers) The team members show their performance. Team members practice the conversation. ( How to order the meal? ) D B C A

5. Contents Reflection Limitation IV. Introduction I. Methodology II. Result III. V.

8. Introduction positive interdependence individual accountability Principles of Cooperative Learning heterogeneous grouping equal opportunity

9. Research Questions Q1:What do middle school learners think of their STAD experience? The participants’ perceptions of their STAD experience tend to be on the positive rather than negative.

10. Research Questions Q2: Do high-achieving learners differ from the low-achieving learners in their perception of their STAD experience? Yes, high achievers had more contribution than low achievers.

11. Research Questions Q3: Do male and female learners differ in their perception of their STAD experience? Most of males’ perception were more positive than females’. However the male participants didn’t recommend the use of STAD while all of the female participants recommended use of this strategy.

12. Methodology Participants Place Lebanon Grouping 30 low achievers 31 high achievers 61 seventh-grade students enrolled in EFL sections of junior high school

13. Lebanon

14. Instrument the participants’ perceptions of the amount of their own learning Semantic Differential Scale whether they would recommend CL in other class or not their perception of the amount of their contribution to the learning of their group mates

15. Treatment Period Program Group Language art program 12 weeks 14 heterogonous teams- mixed-gender & mix-ability

16. Treatment Team recognition Teacher’s lecture Individual quizzes Team study The STAD cooperative strategy

17. Statistical analysis Pearson Chi-square Independent variables: gender & achievement ( Q2 & Q3) Pearson Chi-square Dependent variables: the participants’ responses to the scale

20. Limitation The researchers divided students into high achievers and low achievers. Are there any intermediate students? ？

21. Reflection Do you think it is fair? Yes / No R H High Low