Individual or collaborative projects? Considerations influencing the preferences of students with high reasoning ability and others their age

References

• Abrami, P. C., Chambers, B., Poulsen, C., De Simone, C., d’Apollonia, S., & Howden, J. (1995). Classroom connections: Understanding and using cooperative learning. Toronto, ON: Harcourt Brace & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Chambers, B., Poulsen, C., & Spence, J. C. (2000). Why should we group students within-class for learning? Educational Research and Evaluation, 6(2), 158–179.
   Google Scholar
• Allen, K. C. (2012). Connecting Research to Teaching: Keys to successful group work: Culture, structure, nurture. The Mathematics Teacher, 106(4), 308–312.
   Google Scholar
• American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychological Association, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education. (2015). Top 20 principles from psychology for preK–12 teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/schools/cpse/top-twenty-principles.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bertucci, A., Conte, S., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2010). The impact of size of cooperative group on achievement, social support, and self-esteem. The Journal of General Psychology, 137(3), 256–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boultinghouse, A. (1984). What is your style? A learning styles inventory for lower elementary students. Roeper Review, 6(4), 208–210.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, D. E., Johnson, S. E., & Gable, R. K. (1998). Can we generalize about the learning style characteristics of high academic achievers? Roeper Review, 20(4), 276–281.
   Google Scholar
• Cantwell, R. H., & Andrews, B. (2002). Cognitive and psychological factors underlying secondary school students’ feelings towards group work. Educational Psychology, 22(1), 75–91.
   Google Scholar
• Cera Guy, J. N. M. T., Williams, J. M., & Shore, B. M. (2019). High- and otherwise-achieving students’ expectations of classroom group work: An exploratory empirical study. Roeper Review, 41(3), 166–184.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, D. W. (2001). Learning styles of gifted and nongifted secondary students in Hong Kong. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(1), 35–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chichekian, T., & Shore, B. M. (2017). Hold firm: Gifted learners value standing one’s ground in disagreements with a friend. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(2), 152–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, J. S. (2017). Engaging secondary students in collaborative action-oriented inquiry: Challenges and opportunities. Networks, 19, 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Clinkenbeard, P. (1991). Unfair expectations: A pilot study of middle school students’ comparisons of gifted and regular classes. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15(1), 56–61.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, E. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, M. R., Gallagher, J. J., & Nelson, S. M. (1993). Co-operative learning: Educators of gifted students speak out through survey about attitudes. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 16(5), 23–25.
   Google Scholar
• Cowan, M. (2014). Multiage grouping and student collaboration. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED545478.pdf. Eric Document 545478.
   Google Scholar
• Cuevas, J. (2015). Is learning styles-based instruction effective? A comprehensive analysis of recent research on learning styles. Theory and Research in Education, 13(3), 308–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curry, L. (1990). A critique of the research on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 48(2), 50–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2001). The collaboration of mathematically gifted students on challenging tasks. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25(1), 7–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinno, A. (2012). paran: Horn’s test of principal components/factors. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=paran
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, R. S., & Price, G. E. (1980). The learning style characteristics of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24(1), 33–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewing, N. J., & Yong, F. L. (1992). A comparative study of the learning style preferences among gifted African-American, Mexican-American, and American-born Chinese middle grade students. Roeper Review, 14(3), 120–123.
   Google Scholar
• Ewing, N. J., & Yong, F. L. (1993). Learning style preferences of gifted minority students. Gifted Education International, 9(1), 40–44.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Gifted students’ perspectives on an instructional framework for school improvement. NASSP Bulletin, 96(4), 285–301.
   Google Scholar
• French, L. R., & Shore, B. M. (2009). A reconsideration of the widely held conviction that gifted students prefer to work alone. In T. Balchin, B. Hymer, & D. J. Matthews (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 176–182). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• French, L. R., Walker, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (2011). Do gifted students really prefer to work alone? Roeper Review, 33(3), 145–159.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Karns, K. (1998). High-achieving students’ interactions and performance on complex mathematical tasks as a function of homogeneous and heterogeneous pairings. American Educational Research Journal, 35(2), 227–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Kazdan, S., Karns, K., Calhoon, C. L., & Hewlett., S. (2000). Effects of workgroup structure and size on student productivity during collaborative work on complex tasks. The Elementary School Journal, 100(3), 183–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gagné, F. (2017). The integrative model of talent development (IMTD): From theory to educational applications. In J. A. Plucker, A. N. Rinn, & M. C. Makel (Eds.), From giftedness to gifted education: Reflecting theory in practice (pp. 149–182). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gillespie, A., & Richardson, B. (2011). Exchanging social positions: Enhancing perspective taking within a cooperative problem solving task. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(5), 608–616.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillies, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: Integrating theory and practice. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Gillies, R. M. (2014). Cooperative learning: Developments in research. International Journal of Educational Research, 3, 125–140.
   Google Scholar
• Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(2), 193–223.
   Google Scholar
• Griggs, S. A., & Dunn, R. (1984). Selected case studies of the learning style preferences of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28(3), 115–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griggs, S. A., & Price, G. E. (1980a). Learning styles of gifted vs. average junior high students. Phi Delta Kappan, 61, 361. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20385493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griggs, S. A., & Price, G. E. (1980b). A comparison between the learning styles of gifted versus average suburban junior high school students. Roeper Review, 3(1), 7–9.
   Google Scholar
• Hanham, J., & McCormick, J. (2018). A multilevel study of self-beliefs and student behaviors in a group problem-solving task. The Journal of Educational Research, 111(2), 201–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooper, S., & Hannafin, M. J. (1991). The effects of group composition on achievement, interaction, and learning efficiency during computer-based cooperative instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 27–40
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2016). A new autonomy-supportive way of teaching that increases conceptual learning: Teaching in students’ preferred ways. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(4), 686–701.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, C., & Engelhard, G. (1992). Gender, academic achievement, and preferences for cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning among African-American adolescents. The Journal of Psychology, 126(4), 385–392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1998). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan cooperative learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Kanevsky, L. (2011). Deferential differentiation: What types of differentiation do students want? Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(4), 279–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanevsky, L. (2015). Do high ability learners enjoy learning alone and in groups? It depends …. International Journal of Special Education, 30(2), 32–45. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1094834
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanevsky, L. S. (1992). The learning game. In P. S. Klein & A. J. Tannenbaum (Eds.), To be young and gifted (pp. 204–241). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, P. (2013). Handbook of psychological testing. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Koutrouba, K., Kariotaki, M., & Christopoulos, I. (2012). Secondary education students’ preferences regarding their participation in group work: The case of Greece. Improving Schools, 15(3), 245–259.
   Google Scholar
• Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C. (1987). Effects of ability grouping on student achievement. Equity & Excellence in Education, 23(1–2), 22–30.
   Google Scholar
• Li, A. K. F., & Adamson, G. (1992). Gifted secondary students’ preferred learning style: Cooperative, competitive, or individualistic? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16(1), 46–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, A. K. F., & Bourque, J. (1987). Do gifted students’ preferred learning styles match the teaching styles of their teachers? AGATE: Journal of the Gifted and Talented Education Council of the Alberta Teachers’ Association, 1(2), 2–6.
   Google Scholar
• Lohman, D. (2012a). Cognitive abilities test, form 7: Directions for administration (Levels 10-17/18). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.
   Google Scholar
• Lohman, D. (2012b). Cognitive abilities test, form 7: Research and development guide. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Lohman, D. F. (2011). Cognitive abilities test, form 7. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.
   Google Scholar
• Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3516005.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & Spence, J. C. (2000). Effects of within-class grouping on student achievement: An Exploratory Model. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(2), 101–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & d’Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 423–458. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/1170650?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, S. N., Reilly, R., Bramwell, F. G., Solnosky, A., & Lilly, F. (2004). Friendship and choosing groupmates: Preferences for teacher-selected vs. student-selected groupings in high school science classes. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(1), 20–32. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ774034
   Google Scholar
• Myers, S. A. (2012). Students’ perceptions of classroom group work as a function of group member selection. Communication Teacher, 26(1), 50–64.
   Google Scholar
• Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005). The concept of flow. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89–105). Cary, NC: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neber, H., Finsterwald, M., & Urban, N. (2001). Cooperative learning with gifted and high-achieving students: A review and meta-analyses of 12 studies. High Ability Studies, 12(2), 199–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orbell, J., & Dawes, R. (1981). Social dilemmas. In G. M. Stephenson & J. M. Davis (Eds.), Applied social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 37–65). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Pai, H., Sears, D., & Maeda, Y. (2015). Effects of small-group learning on transfer: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 27(1), 79–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20697325
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 270–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyryt, M. (1991). Is the preferred learning style of gifted students a state or trait? International Journal of Special Education, 6, 45–53.
   Google Scholar
• Pyryt, M., Sandals, L. H., & Begoray, J. (1998). Learning style preferences of gifted, average-ability, and special needs students: A multivariate perspective. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13(1), 71–76.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsay, S. G., & Richards, H. C. (1997). Cooperative learning environments: Effects on academic attitudes of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(4), 160–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranstam, J. (2016). Multiple P-values and Bonferroni correction. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 24(5), 763–764.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rayneri, L. J., Gerber, B. L., & Wiley, L. P. (2006). The relationship between classroom environment and the learning style preferences of gifted middle school students and the impact on levels of performance. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(2), 104–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding sociocultural influences on student motivation. In D. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited (pp. 31–60). Greenwich, CN: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teacher’s autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28(2), 147–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, M. (1997). Learning styles: A critique. Management Learning, 28(2), 115–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricca, J. (1984). Learning styles and preferred instructional strategies of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28(3), 121–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riding, R. J. (1997). On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, 17(1–2), 29–49.
   Google Scholar
• Riding, R. J., & Read, G. (1996). Cognitive style and pupil learning preferences. Educational Psychology, 16(1), 81–106.
   Google Scholar
• Ristow, R. S., Edeburn, C. E., & Ristow, G. L. (1985). Learning preferences: A comparison of gifted and above-average middle grades students in small schools. Roeper Review, 8(2), 119–124.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, A. (1990). Cooperation or exploitation? The argument against cooperative learning for talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14(1), 9–27.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, A. (2003). Cooperative learning and high ability students. In N. Colangelo & G. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 282–292). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Roseth, C., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2008). Promoting early adolescents’ achievement and peer relationships: The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 223–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler-Smith, E. (1997). ‘Learning style’: Frameworks and instruments. Educational Psychology, 17(1–2), 51–63.
   Google Scholar
• Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 89–99.
   Google Scholar
• Samardzija, N., & Peterson, J. S. (2015). Learning and classroom preferences of gifted eighth graders: A qualitative study. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(3), 233–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schapiro, M., Schneider, B. H., Shore, B. M., Margison, J. A., & Udvari, S. J. (2009). Competitive goal orientations, quality, and stability in gifted and other adolescents’ friendships: A test of Sullivan’s theory about the harm caused by rivalry. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(2), 71–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C., & Goebel, V. (2015). Experiences of high-ability high school students: A case study. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(4), 428–446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sears, D. A., & Reagin, J. M. (2013). Individual versus collaborative problem solving: Divergent outcomes depending on task complexity. Instructional Science, 41(6), 1153–1172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293–336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slavin, R. E. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 471–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefanou, C. R., Perencevich, K. C., DiCintio, M., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Supporting autonomy in the classroom: Ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 97–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, E. D. (1981). Learning styles among gifted/talented students: Instructional technique preferences. Exceptional Children, 48(2), 134–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (2015). Myth busting: Do high-performance students prefer working alone? Gifted and Talented International, 30(1–2), 85–105.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, C. L., Shore, B. M., & French, L. R. (2011). A theoretical context for examining students’ preference across ability levels for learning alone or in groups. High Ability Studies, 22(1), 119–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Fung, I. Y. Y. (2002). Small-group composition and peer effects. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(5), 425–447.
   Google Scholar
• Willard-Holt, C., Weber, J., Morrison, K. L., & Horgan, J. (2013). Twice-exceptional learners’ perspectives on effective learning strategies. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57(4), 247–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, J. M., Cera Guy, J. N. M. T., & Shore, B. M. (2019). High-achieving students’ expectations about what happens in classroom group work: A review of contributing research. Roeper Review, 41(3), 156–165.
   Google Scholar
• Wismath, S. L., & Orr, D. (2015). Collaborative learning in problem solving: A case study in metacognitive learning. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, A. (1991). Cooperative learning and the academically talented student. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED350776.EricDocument350776
   Google Scholar