[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-199746-en":3,"doc-seo-199746-105":31,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":92},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"doc_content":15,"file_id":16,"file_url":17,"file_type":18,"file_size":19,"view_count":20,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":21,"is_downloadable":21,"audit_status":21,"page_count":22,"language":23,"language_code":24,"site_id":25,"html_lang":24,"table_of_contents":26,"faqs":27,"seo_title":28,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":29,"read_time":30},199746,687207024643,"Rhys","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2",8,"Research & Report","Cooperative Learning Techniques and Student Cognitive Processing Capability","This study examines how frequently university students use cooperative learning techniques during a ten-week Methods of Teaching in Nonformal Environments course and how that use relates to students’ cognitive processing capability. Students were assigned to lower or higher cognitive groups and received closing reflections with bonus questions tailored to question level. Cooperative learning techniques were modeled, and multiple instruments measured student technique use and cognitive processing. Results showed limited adoption of techniques and no significant relationship between final-exam cognitive competency and processing.","Describing the Relationship Between Cooperative Learning Techniques Used and Student Cognitive Processing Capability During College Class Sessions  \nThesis  \nPresented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University  \nBy  \nCarla Beth Jagger, B.S.  \nGraduate Program in Agricultural and Extension Education  \n* * * * * * * *  \nThe Ohio State University  \n2010  \nM. S. Examination Committee:  \nDr. M. Susie Whittington, Adviser  \nDr. Larry Miller  \nCopyright by  \nCarla Beth Jagger  \n2010  \nABSTRACT  \nThe purpose of this study was to describe the frequency use of cooperative learning techniques by students enrolled in a university, methods of teaching in nonformal environments course. In addition, the researcher sought to describe student cognitive processing capability when answering higher or lower cognitive level questions during a ten-week university course.  \nStudents (N=14) enrolled in a ten-week university, methods of teaching in nonformal environments, course were the convenient population for the study. The researchers randomly assigned each student into one of two groups prior to the first class session ; the groups were labeled lower cognitive and higher cognitive. Each group received a closing reflection at the end of each class session. A bonus question was added to each closing reflection; the lower cognitive group received a closing reflection with a lower cognitive level bonus question, while the higher cognitive group received a higher cognitive level bonus question. The researchers also demonstrated the use of cooperative learning techniques in three lectures during the course. Four instruments were used to describe student use of cooperative learning techniques, and student cognitive processing capabilities on the assignments.  \nResults were that five of the students used cooperative learning techniques in their microteaching lessons, using a total of three techniques (timed-pair share, jot-thoughts,  \nand window-paning), 12 times throughout their lessons. The majority (n=4) of the students who implemented cooperative learning techniques scored in the top 50% on the cognitively weighted final examination.  \nStudent answers in the lower cognitive group were assessed as right or wrong; on average, students answered ten questions correctly, three questions wrong, and had one missing closing reflection. The higher cognitive questions were assessed using a critical thinking rubric. None of the students scored higher than the lowest level of critical thinking as assessed by the rubric. Students in the higher cognitive group had a meanscore of 18.9 on the critical thinking rubric, with a total range of 18 to 28.  \nOn the final examination, each student was given a weighted score based on the level of cognition for each question asked. The cognitively weighted score of the final examination was 57.8; student scores ranged from 47.1 to 55.6 with a mean of 52.72.  \nNo significant relationship was found between the students’ cognitive level of competency on the final examination and their processing capabilities when responding to lower and higher cognitive questions. A negligible relationship was found between observed student use of cooperative learning techniques and their cognitive processing capability on the final examination.  \nDedicated to my parents, Dean and Beth Jagger and my Grandparents. Without your love and support I could never have accomplished so much in life.  \nACKNOWLEDGMENTS  \nI wish to thank my advisor, Dr. M. Susie Whittington, for your encouragement and support over the past several years. I appreciate your guidance and wisdom that you have graciously shared with me as an undergraduate and graduate student. Thank you for pushing me to be a better student, teacher, researcher, and person. The time and effort you put forth to help me complete my thesis and program requirements will never be forgotten, nor will our countles","cbCaictUfr7ObceM","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaictUfr7ObceM","pdf",315130,2,1,76,"English","en",105,"# Abstract\n## Purpose and Study Design\n## Participants and Group Assignment\n## Instruments and Measures\n## Results\n## Conclusions and Findings","[{\"question\":\"What was the main purpose of this study?\",\"answer\":\"The study aimed to describe how often students used cooperative learning techniques and to examine students’ cognitive processing capability when answering higher- versus lower-cognitive-level questions.\"},{\"question\":\"How were students grouped for the higher and lower cognitive questions?\",\"answer\":\"Students were randomly assigned into two groups labeled lower cognitive and higher cognitive, and each group received closing reflections with bonus questions matching the assigned cognitive level.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the study find about the relationship between cooperative learning use and cognitive processing?\",\"answer\":\"No significant relationship was found between students’ final-exam cognitive competency and their processing capability, and only a negligible relationship was observed between observed cooperative learning technique use and processing capability.\"}]","Cooperative Learning Techniques and Student Cognitive Processing Capability | PDF",1788506903,192,{"code":4,"msg":32,"data":33},"ok",{"site_id":25,"language":24,"slug":34,"title":13,"keywords":35,"description":14,"schema_data":36,"social_meta":87,"head_meta":89,"extra_data":91,"updated_unix":29},"cooperative-learning-techniques-and-student-cognitive-processing-capability","",{"@graph":37,"@context":86},[38,54,69],{"@type":39,"itemListElement":40},"BreadcrumbList",[41,45,48,51],{"item":42,"name":43,"@type":44,"position":21},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":46,"name":47,"@type":44,"position":20},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",{"item":49,"name":12,"@type":44,"position":50},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":52,"name":13,"@type":44,"position":53},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/cooperative-learning-techniques-and-student-cognitive-processing-capability/199746/",4,{"url":52,"name":13,"@type":55,"author":56,"headline":13,"publisher":58,"fileFormat":61,"inLanguage":24,"description":14,"dateModified":62,"datePublished":63,"encodingFormat":61,"isAccessibleForFree":64,"interactionStatistic":65},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":57},"Person",{"url":42,"name":59,"@type":60},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-06","2026-09-04",true,{"@type":66,"interactionType":67,"userInteractionCount":20},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":68},"ViewAction",{"@type":70,"mainEntity":71},"FAQPage",[72,78,82],{"name":73,"@type":74,"acceptedAnswer":75},"What was the main purpose of this study?","Question",{"text":76,"@type":77},"The study aimed to describe how often students used cooperative learning techniques and to examine students’ cognitive processing capability when answering higher- versus lower-cognitive-level questions.","Answer",{"name":79,"@type":74,"acceptedAnswer":80},"How were students grouped for the higher and lower cognitive questions?",{"text":81,"@type":77},"Students were randomly assigned into two groups labeled lower cognitive and higher cognitive, and each group received closing reflections with bonus questions matching the assigned cognitive level.",{"name":83,"@type":74,"acceptedAnswer":84},"What did the study find about the relationship between cooperative learning use and cognitive processing?",{"text":85,"@type":77},"No significant relationship was found between students’ final-exam cognitive competency and their processing capability, and only a negligible relationship was observed between observed cooperative learning technique use and processing capability.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":52,"og:type":88,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":59,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":90,"canonical":52},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":25},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":93},[94,98,102,106,111,116,121,124,129,132,136],{"id":21,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":95,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":97},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":20,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":99,"show_sort_weight":100,"slug":101},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":53,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":113,"show_sort_weight":114,"slug":115},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":118,"show_sort_weight":119,"slug":120},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":11,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":12,"show_sort_weight":122,"slug":123},30,"research-report",{"id":125,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":126,"show_sort_weight":127,"slug":128},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":130,"show_sort_weight":127,"slug":131},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":133,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":134,"show_sort_weight":133,"slug":135},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":137,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":138,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":139},19,"General","general"]