The attendance records showed that both, teachers and students appreciated the advantages of cooperative
learning. However, in some situations the difference between the individual, competitive and cooperative work is
not clear yet.
In Chart No. 2; you can see from the scale used that 48% confirmed that teachers often prepare carefully their
classes, 79% explain the objectives and 70% use the method of questions. On the other hand, it showed that 58%
never utilize cooperative learning, 60% do not consider the personal characteristics from students, 61% said they are
not able to finish their classes thoroughly, and 54% do not supported their classes using graphic organizers to
explain different topics.
Students pointed out several reasons why they fail: lack of the basic knowledge; lack of good habits to study;
accelerated dynamic of the courses and overdoses of homework in some subjects.
They also emphasized that one of the main factors for some students is the lack of financial resources in their
homes and the lack of interest they perceive in the teaching of a subject.
The students suggested that classes could be more enriched with practical activities to understand the theory
easily and mainly focusing them to their area of study and their everyday life. As well as to provide an individual
attention in the classroom, a factor that emerged with the CL. They ask to have a more detailed and diversified
lesson plan with different strategies, so the contents can be analyzed with more detail.
It was noted that CL facilitates positive interdependence of tasks when planification is detailed and promotes the
importance of each student activity to interchange and develop their critical thinking, and enhances attention of the
different personal characteristics of students as shown in Figure No. 3
Die bywoning rekords toon dat beide onderwysers en studente waardeer die voordele van koöperatiewe
leer. Maar in sommige gevalle die verskil tussen die individu, mededingend en koöperatiewe werk is
nog nie duidelik.
In Chart No. 2; jy kan sien uit die skaal wat gebruik word dat 48% bevestig dat onderwysers dikwels voor te berei versigtig hul
klasse, 79% verduidelik die doelstellings en 70% gebruik die metode van vrae. Aan die ander kant, dit het gewys dat 58%
nooit koöperatiewe leer gebruik, 60% dink nie die persoonlike eienskappe van studente, 61% het gesê hulle is
nie in staat om hul klasse deeglik voltooi nie, en 54% het nie ondersteun hul klasse gebruik van grafiese organiseerders om
verskillende onderwerpe te verduidelik.
Studente uitgewys verskeie redes waarom hulle misluk: 'n gebrek aan die basiese kennis; gebrek aan goeie gewoontes te bestudeer;
versnel dinamiese van die kursusse en oordosisse van huiswerk in sommige vakke.
Hulle het ook beklemtoon dat een van die belangrikste faktore vir 'n paar studente is die gebrek aan finansiële hulpbronne in hul
huise en die gebrek aan belangstelling wat hulle sien in die onderrig van 'n onderwerp. Die studente het voorgestel dat klasse meer kan verryk met praktiese aktiwiteite om die teorie te verstaan en maklik hoofsaaklik fokus om hul area van studie en hul alledaagse lewe. Sowel as om 'n individu te voorsien aandag in die klaskamer, 'n faktor wat na vore gekom met die CL. Hulle vra om 'n meer gedetailleerde en gediversifiseerde het lesplan met verskillende strategieë, so die inhoud ontleed kan word met meer detail. Daar is opgemerk dat CL fasiliteer positiewe interafhanklikheid van take wanneer planification is gedetailleerde en bevorder die belangrikheid van elke student aktiwiteit wisselaar en ontwikkel hul kritiese denke, en verhoog die aandag van die verskillende persoonlike eienskappe van studente soos in Figuur 3 No.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
