Student academic performance in undergraduate business programs: Differences between traditional and collaborative learning.

摘要

In order to investigate whether collaborative or "team" learning produces greater academic and affective outcomes than traditional methodologies, as has been claimed by a number of academicians and other specialists for decades, a study was done at two prominent undergraduate colleges: The DeVry Institute and Baruch College, both in New York City. Because of the relative paucity of studies of collaborative learning at the college level, this study was undertaken in order to provide empirical evidence of the efficacy of this teaching methodology, specifically in undergraduate business courses. The study examined five pairs of classes---with each pair being the same subject (either Principles of Management, Principles of Economics or Introduction to Business and Technology.) For each pair, one class was taught in a collaborative format (termed CL for "Collaborative Learning"), with students arranged in dedicated teams throughout the semester. The other class (termed IL for "Individualized Learning"), was taught in a more traditional lecture format with varying degrees of interaction among students and faculty. The same academic and affective assessments were administered to both classes in each pair. The total number of students involved from all classes was 262.; The results of comparing the CL & IL groups with regard to both academic and affective measures indicated no statistically significant differences between the groups. That is, in this study, the hypotheses that predicted better performance for the CL group were not proven true. The implication of these findings, if confirmed by others, may be that collaborative learning, in itself, will not produce better academic or affective results, nor will it result in better retention, as has been suggested by some experts. More studies of a similar nature are necessary to confirm or refute these findings.