Teaching Students How To Evaluate Their Work in Cooperative Learning: Results of a Collaborative Action Research In-Service.

Three approaches to in-service development for teachers (action research, skills development, and materials dissemination) were compared using a multimethod evaluation design with innovation-specific and general outcome measures for students and teachers. Thirty-three teachers and their students participated in a project to teach students how to evaluate their work. There were no treatment differences on a self-reported use of evaluation procedures, personal teaching efficacy, or in general student outcomes (goal orientations, attributions for success and failure, and self-efficacy). There were two small but statistically significant differences favoring action research: (1) teachers in the action research condition scored higher on outcome expectancy because they had greater access to teachers who had successfully used student self-evaluation to increase student achievement and motivation; and (2) students in the action research condition scored higher on attitudes toward evaluation because their teachers had a better understanding of how to share control of evaluation, a core teacher function. The modest differences were attributable to the short duration of the treatments and to the neglect of student cognitions about self-evaluation. (Contains 9 tables and 72 references.) (Author/SLD) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** Teaching Students How to Evaluate Their Work in Cooperative Learning Results of a Collaborative Action Research In-service U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. John A. Ross Carol Rolheiser Anne Hogaboam-Gray OISE/University of Toronto PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY )01,\Y\ ROSS TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This paper is prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association in Chicago, IL BEST COPY AVAILA LE 2 Teaching Students How to Evaluate Their Work in Cooperative Learning Results of a Collaborative Action Research In-service' John A. Ross' Carol Rolheiser Anne Hogaboam-Gray OISE/University of Toronto Three approaches to in-service (action research, skills development, and materials dissemination) were compared using a multi-method evaluation design with innovation-specific and general outcome measures for students and teachers. Thirty-three teachers and their students participated in a project to teach students how to evaluate their work There were no treatment differences on self-reported use of evaluation procedures, personal teaching efficacy, or in general student outcomes (goal orientations, attributions for success and failure, and selfefficacy). There were two small but statistically significant differences favoring action research: (1) Teachers in the action research condition scored higher on outcome expectancy because they had greater access to teachers who had successfully used student self-evaluation to increase student achievement and motivation. (2) Students in the action research condition scored higher on attitudes toward evaluation because their teachers had a better understanding of how to share control of evaluation, a core teacher function. The modest differences were attributable to the short duration of the treatments and to the neglect of student cognitions about selfevaluation. District-level in-service continues to be severely criticized. Matthew Miles (1995) described it as "pedagogically naive.a demeaning exercise that often leaves its participants more cynical and no more knowledgeable, skilled, or committed than before" (p. vii). Although a great deal of experimentation in new forms of professional development has occurred, few comparative studies have assessed the outcomes of different methods. In this paper we compare three frequently used strategies (dissemination, skills training, and action research) in the context of a specific innovation (teaching students how to evaluate their work in cooperative learning settings). We were interested in the differential effects of the methods on teachers and students. In each case we attended to outcomes directly relevant to the target innovation and to more general indicators of improvement. Oc, ' Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, March, 1997. The research was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the Durham Board of Education. The views expressed in the paper are not necessarily those of the Ministry, Council, or Board. The authors wish to thank Durham teachers who collaborated in the research: Barb Bower, Michelle Ferreira, Sharon Hopkins, Cheryl Hoyle, Anne Marie Laginski, and Dianne Serra. Administrative support for the project was provided by Jim Craigen, Bev Freedman, Norm Green, Brian Greenway, and Don Real. 'Corresponding author: OISE/UT Trent Valley Centre, Box 719, 150 O'Carroll Ave., Peterborough, Ontario, Canada K9J 7A3; jross@oise.utoronto. ca