Student Learning Communities as Builders of Collective Efficacy

References

• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations  of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. The American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175–1184. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 1, 164–180. 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchini, J. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: Student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039–1065. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199712)34:10.≤1039::AID-TEA5≥3.0.CO;2-S doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199712)34:10<1039::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-S
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenfield, P. C. (1992). The task and the teacher: Enhancing student thoughtfulness in science. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Vol. 3. Planning and managing learning tasks and activities. Somerville, MA: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2002). Observational learning and the effects of model-observer similarity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 405–415. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cogaltay, N., & Karadag, E. (2017). The effect of collective teacher efficacy on student achievement. In E. Karadag (Ed.), The factors effecting student achievement. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Eccles, J. (2005). Subjective task value and the model of achievement-related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Eymur, G., & Geban, Ö. (2017). The collaboration of cooperative learning and conceptual change: Enhancing the students’ understanding of chemical bonding concepts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(5), 853–871. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2019.208.8. doi:10.1007/s10763-016-9716-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan, J. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327–358. doi:10.1037/h0061470
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, M. E., & Smith, P. R. (2007). Thriving with social purpose: An integrative approach to the development of optimal human functioning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 153–171. doi:10.1080/00461520701416280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frankl, V. (1959). Man’s search for meaning. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Galton, M., & Hargreaves, L. (2009). Group work: Still a neglected art? Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(1), 1–6. doi:10.1080/03057640902726917
   Google Scholar
• George, T. R., & Feltz, D. L. (1995). Motivation in sport from a collective efficacy perspective. International Journal of Sports Psychology, 26(1), 98–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 39–54. doi:10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goddard, R. D., & Salloum, S. J. (2012). Collective efficacy beliefs, organizational excellence, and leadership. In G. M. Spreitzer, & K. S. Cameron (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of positive organization scholarship (pp. 642–650). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Good, T. L., McCaslin, M. M., Reys, B. J. (1992). Investigating work groups to promote problem solving in mathematics. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching: Vol. 3. Planning and managing learning tasks and activities. Somerville, MA: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habeeb, C. M., Eklund, R. C., & Coffee, P. (2019). Reciprocal relationships between efficacy and performance in athlete dyads: Self-, other-, and collective constructs. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 41(3), 147–158. doi:10.1123/jsep.2018-0248
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, D. A., Price, K., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams and task performance: Changing effects of surface and deep level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1029–1045. doi:10.5465/3069328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J., & Zierer, K. (2019). Visible learning insights. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., & Vedder, P. (2006). The relationship between the quality of cooperative learning, students’ goal preferences, and perceptions of contextual factors in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47(1), 9–21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00488.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111–127.
   Google Scholar
• Hord, S. M. (2004). Professional learning communities: An overview. In S. Hord (Ed.), Learning together, leading together: Changing schools through professional learning communities (pp. 5–14). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47–62. 10.1037/0022-0663.77.6.668.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kafka, F., & Corngold, S. (1981). The metamorphosis. Toronto: Bantam Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kong, J. Z. N., Liem, G. A. D., & Klassen, R. M. (2017). Task performance in small group settings: The role of group members' self-efficacy and collective efficacy and group's characteristics. Educational Psychology, 37(9), 1082–1105.
   Google Scholar
• Klassen, R. M., & Krawchuk, L. L. (2009). Collective motivation beliefs of early adolescents working in small groups. Journal of School Psychology, 47(2), 101–120. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2008.11.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klassen, R. M., & Usher, E. L. (2010). Self-efficacy in educational settings: Recent research and emerging directions. In T. C. Urdan & S. A. Karabenick (Eds.). Advances in motivation and achievement: The decade ahead - Theoretical perspectives on motivation and achievement (Vol. 16A, pp. 1–33). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Law, Y. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning on second graders’ learning from text. Educational Psychology, 28(5), 567–582. doi:10.1080/01443410701880159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy, I., Kaplan, A., & Patrick, H. (2000, April). Early adolescents’ achievement goals, intergroup processes, and attitudes towards collaboration. [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
   Google Scholar
• McGroarty, M. (1989). The benefits of cooperative learning arrangements in second language instruction. National Association for Bilingual Association Journal, 13, 127–143. 10.1080/08855072.1989.10668555.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012a). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century (Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, J.W. Pellegrino and M.L. Hilton, Eds.). Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012b). Education for life and work: Guide for practitioners (Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, J.W. Pellegrino & M.L. Hilton, Eds.). Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ohmer, M. L. (2007). Citizen participation in neighborhood organizations and its relationship to volunteers’ self- and collective efficacy and sense of community. Social Work Research, 31(2), 109–120. doi:10.1093/swr/31.2.109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormrod, J. E. (2011). Educational psychology: Developing learners (7th ed.). Mahwah, NY: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Paris, S. G., Turner, J. C. (1994). Situated motivation. In P. R. Pintrich, D. R. Brown, & C. E. Weinstein (Eds.) Student motivation, cognition, and learning: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie. Mahwah, NY: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Raviv, A., Cohen, S., & Aflalo, E. (2019). How should students learn in the school science laboratory? The benefits of cooperative learning. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 331–345. doi:10.1007/s11165-017-9618-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ray, J., & Hendricks, K. S. (2019). Collective efficacy belief, within-group agreement, and performance quality among instrumental chamber ensembles. Journal of Research in Music Education, 66(4), 449–464. doi:10.1177/0022429418805090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2015). Self-efficacy: Education aspects. In International Encyclopaedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 521–545), London. 10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92019-1
   Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Self-efficacy theory. In K. R. Wentzel, & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35–53). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2004). Self-efficacy in education revisited: Empirical and applied evidence. In D. M. McInerny & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited (pp. 115–138). New York, NY: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, D. L., Black, J. B., & Strange, J. (1991, April). Dyads have a fourfold advantage over individuals inducing abstract rules [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Chicago, IL, United States.
   Google Scholar
• Shelley, M. W. (1998). Frankenstein, or, The modern Prometheus: the 1818 text. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, N. (2017). Dear Martin. New York, NY: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Thurston, A., Cockerill, M., & Craig, N. (2019). Using cooperative learning to close the reading attainment gapfor students with low literacy levels for Grade 8/Grade 9 students. International Journal of Educational Research, 94, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2019.02.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Ryzin, M.J., Roseth, C.J., & Biglan, A. (2020). Mediators of effects of cooperative learning on prosocial behavior in middle school. International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, 5(1–2), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21858. doi:10.1007/s41042-020-00026-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang, S. L., & Lin, S. S. J. (2007). The effects of group composition of self-efficacy and collective efficacy on computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2256–2268. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, N. M., & Mastergeorge, A. M. (2003). The development of students’ helping behavior and learning in peer-directed small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 21(4), 361–428. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2104_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.
   Google Scholar
• Zakaria, E., Solfitri, T., Daud, M.Y., & Abidin, Z. Z. (2013). Effects of cooperative learning on secondary students’ mathematics achievement. Creative Education, 04(02), 98–100. doi:10.4236/ce.2013.42014
   Google Scholar