Across cultures, classroom arrangements facilitating cooperative learning are more effective in supporting motivation and achievement than individual or competitive goal structures¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2004 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Cooperative classroom arrangements support motivation and achievement better than individual or competitive goal structures across cultures. → Phalet 2004 q2 i? Introducing small group learning improved the school achievement of Hawaiian children by resembling their home environment. → Phalet 2004 (2)

Evidence¶

Phalet 2004¶

Phalet, K., Andriessen, I., & Lens, W. (2004). How Future Goals Enhance Motivation and Learning in Multicultural Classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 16, No. 1. https://hdl.handle.net/1874/23520

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review's synthesis of motivational studies of cooperative classrooms, citing Ames and Archer (1988), Gallimore (1981), and Johnson and Johnson (1985). It concludes cultural similarity per se may matter less than the culture-general adaptive value of cooperative learning.

"Across cultures, classroom arrange- ments facilitating cooperative learning are more effective in supporting mo- tivation and achievement than individual or competitive goals structures (Ames and Archer, 1988; Gallimore, 1981; Johnson and Johnson, 1985)."

Phalet 2004 (2)¶

Phalet, K., Andriessen, I., & Lens, W. (2004). How Future Goals Enhance Motivation and Learning in Multicultural Classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 16, No. 1. https://hdl.handle.net/1874/23520

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports, citing Jordan (1984), that small group learning improved Hawaiian children's achievement because the arrangement is more similar to a home environment structured around child-initiated peer-group activity.

"the introduction of small group learning improved the school achievement of Hawaiian children (Jordan, 1984)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Cooperative Learning Improves Achievement — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Collaborative Learning Improves Outcomes — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• A 1994 adult-literacy practice guide asserts, citing no specific study, that primary and secondary students learn more through non-competitive collaborative group work than in individualized competitive classrooms — related
• In school studies, cooperative and peer-learning methods that reward groups on every member's individual learning raised achievement more than methods without such rewards — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Cooperative concept mapping produces better meaningful learning than individualistic concept mapping — related
• Small-group learning improves undergraduate STEM achievement — related
• Three practitioner digests report, second-hand, Johnson and Johnson's finding that cooperative learning tends to promote higher achievement than competitive and individualistic learning across ages, subjects, and types of learning — a broader claim this one bears on
• In one experiment with undergraduate business majors in asynchronous online small groups, reward interdependence raised agreement that group work was beneficial and generated better ideas — related
• Classroom research primarily supports the motivational perspective on cooperative learning effects — related
• Individualized instruction shows low effects compared to cooperative and collaborative learning — a narrower finding that bears on this claim