Student team achievement divisions technique to improve students’ behaviour engagement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26486/jele.v4i2.380Keywords:
Student Team Achievement Divisions, Students’ behaviour engagement.Abstract
Student Team Achievement Divisions (STAD) is a teaching strategy where students work together in small groups on a structured activity and it is presumably able to improve students’ behaviour engagement and learning outcome. Collaborative learning and engagement (specifically behaviour engagement) are something considered important in learning, especially in language learning as they can promote the effectiveness of learning via active participation of students in the learning process. The data of this study were collected by using questionnaire, observation, interview and diary which used successively. The data analysis revealed that (1) STAD can improve students’ behaviour engagement (2) Difficulties of STAD when it was applied in enhancing students’ behaviour engagement. Taking sample of twenty one students divided into five small groups, the research was conducted by using classroom action research design. The results indicates that students in a class with caring atmosphere and supportive interaction managed by the teacher; who played active roles as prompter, participant, and/or tutor as well as addressed the students autonomy via group work activity, are engaged behaviourally to the instructional. In conclusion, the student team achievement divisions technique can be applied to enhance students’ behaviour engagement on the english class successfully.
Â
Keywords: Student Team Achievement Divisions, Students’ behaviour engagement.
References
Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, P., Gonyea, R., Kuh, G. (2008). Learning at a distance: Engaged or not. Innovative: Journal of Online Education, 4(3)
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second language Research. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Finn, J. D., and Voelkl, K. E. (1993). School characteristics related to school engagement. Journal of Negro Educa-tion, 62, 249–268.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept: State of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–119. doi: 10.3102/00346543074001059.
Harper, S.R. and Quaye, S.J. (2009a) Beyond Sameness, with Engagement and Outcomes for. In: Student Engagement in Higher Education. New York and London: Routledge, pp. 1–15.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K.A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company
Klem, A. M., and Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74, 262–273.
Lincoln, Y. S., &Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184.
Michaelsen, L. K. & Sweet, M. 2008. The Essential Elements of Team-BasedLearning .New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 116, Winter 2008 Published online in Wiley Inter Science. Available at:(www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/tl.330 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How College Affect Students: Finding and Insights from Twenty Years of Research. San Fransisco, California, USA: Jossey-Bass.
Schlechty, P. (2004). Working on the work. Jossey-Bass Publishing, San Francisco, CA.
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in The Classrroom: Reciprocal Effects of Teacher Behaviour and Students Engagement Across The School Year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.
Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A Motivational Perspective on Engagement and Disaffection :. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525.
Slavin, E. Robert. (2009). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Massachusetts: Needham Heights.
Steinberg, L. D., Brown, B. B., & Dornbush, S. M. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Wallace. 1998. Training Foreign Language Teacher. Cambridge: Cambrige University Press.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with JELE (Journal of English Language and Education) agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the JELE (Journal of English Language and Education)  right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the work for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in JELE (Journal of English Language and Education). Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in JELE (Journal of English Language and Education)
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
