The Impact of Teaching Models, Group Structures and Assessment Modes on Cooperative Learning in the Student Design Studio

Figures & data

Figure 1 Graph showing composition of 2005 cohort as determined by Keirsey Temperament Sorter (Where E = Extroversion, I = Introversion, N = Intuition, S = Sensing, F= Feeling, T = Thinking, J = Judging, P = Perceiving)

Table 1 One Way ANOVA

Class	Years	Sums of Squares		DF	F statistic	Significant >.05
2B	2003 – 2005	Between Groups	87.481	2	.272	.762
		Within Groups	39458.890	245
		Total	39546.371	247
3A	2003 – 2005	Between Groups	1407.735	2	11.105	.000**
		Within Groups	16732.424	264
		Total	18140.159	266
Atelier	2003 – 2005	Between Groups	2324.341	2	12.314	.000**
		Within Groups	25198.355	267
		Total	27522.696	269
4B	2003 – 2005	Between Groups	112.633	2	.755	.471
		Within Groups	14990.720	201
		Total	15103.353	203

** Significant at the .000 level

Figure 2 Means of Class 3A 2003 – 2005

Figure 3 Means of Atelier Geelong 2003 — 2005

Table 2 Preliminary Questionnaire to Students regarding attitudes towards previous group work experiences

	Observed Count	Expected Count	Residual	Chi-Square	DF	Sig
	Y	N
Has group work in other units been a positive experience for you?	24	47	35.5	11.5	7.451	1	.006**
Do you prefer to design in groups?	24	47	35.5	11.5	7.451	1	.006**
Do you feel that in group projects in previous units every contributed equally?	11	60	35.5	24.5	33.817	1	.000**
Do you think that the group design projects you were previously involved in were good preparation for professional practice?	14	57	35.5	21.5	26.042	1	.000**

** Significant at the .000 level

Figure 4 Means of Combined Factor Second Questionnaire to students’ Feedback on Group work