Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis

By Yiping Lou, Philip C. Abrami, Sylvia T. d'Apollonia. 2001

769 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fea1dc254ca515330956108e9dfa16a927cfb58f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Teachers' reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation (2010, result): “The research on group size and ability composition is clearer with Lou et al. (1996) reporting in a meta-analysis of 66 studies on small-group work that students learned better in small groups of three or four members.”
Cooperative Learning: Review of Research and Practice. (2016, result): “In summary, the results of these meta-analyses (Lou et al., 1996, 2001, 2006) indicate students derive both academic and social benefits when they work cooperatively together rather than when they compete or work individually.”
Cooperative Learning: Developments in Research (2014, result): “Similar results were obtained in a meta-analysis of small group and individual learning with technology by Lou, Abrami and d’Apollonia (2001) with small group learning having significantly more positive effects than individual learning on students’ individual achievement and group task performance.”
When Is It Better to Learn Together? Insights from Research on Collaborative Learning (2015, background): “supported), as there are already several meta-analyses examining critical topics related to each of these areas (Johnson and Johnson 1989; Johnson et al. 2000; Lou et al. 2001; Springer et al. 1999).”
A Meta-analysis of the Effects of Computer Technology on School Students’ Mathematics Learning (2010, methodology): “The categories for gender composition are adapted from the work of Lipsey and Wilson (2001) where students are divided into: predominant female (males≤ 45%), predominantly male (males≥55%), and gender balanced (45% Lipsey and Wilson (2001) .”
Making the Black Box of Collaborative Learning Transparent: Combining Process-Oriented and Cognitive Load Approaches (2010, background): “Several meta-analyses have thus been carried out showing that collaborative learning can be an effective strategy for promoting retention and problem solving (e.g., Lou et al. 2001; Roseth et al. 2008; Slavin 1980; Springer et al. 1999).”
Group Work Can Be Gratifying: Understanding & Overcoming Resistance to Cooperative Learning (2010, background): “Concerning the definition of goals, instructors should clearly, not vaguely, encourage students to work in groups ( Lou, Abrami & d'Apollonia 2001 ) and should state goals as specifically as possible.”
A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: from the general to the applied (2014, background): “The exceptions to this (i.e., Rosen and Salomon 2007; Lou et al. 2001; Azevedo and Bernard 1995) have attempted to discern among different instructional strategies within technology use (i.e., constructivist use of technology in K-12 mathematics, the use of technology with small groups and feedback…”