Assessing the Effectiveness of Pair and Conventional Learning Strategies in Enhancing Academic Achievement at the Elementary Level
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55737/psi.2025d-44138Keywords:
Pair Learning, Conventional Learning, Academic Achievement, Cooperative Learning, Elementary EducationAbstract
The purpose of the present investigation was to compare the relative efficiency of dyadic cooperative instructions with traditional instructions with regard to fostering academic performance among elementary pupils. The experimental group (n=30) was instructed with the help of pair learning, and the control group (n=30) was instructed with the help of conventional instruction. The quasi-experimental pretest-posttest control group design was applied. The measurement of academic performance was done through the standardized English-language test during the pre- and post-intervention periods. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS and involved descriptive statistics, paired and independent comparisons, and correlation. The findings revealed that the use of the traditional method in training only resulted in a weak level of improvement in the post-test scores, but this was not the case in the pair-learning condition, as it was statistically significant (p <.001). Another level of analysis comparing the results between the pair learning group and the conventional group indicated that the former obtained higher post-test scores than the latter group (p <.001). Altogether, these results reflect the conclusion that, even though the relative improvement in the traditional pedagogy was rather small, the pair-learning model offered much more valuable results in the academic performance. That study hence affirms the fact that pair learning is an instructional modality that is more efficient compared to traditional teaching in the elementary setting. According to cooperative learning and social constructivism, pair learning enhances elementary students’ performance and encourages greater student interaction in the classroom setting.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
Boud, D. (1988). Developing student autonomy in learning. Kogan Page.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (10th ed.). Pearson.
Hattie, J. (2019). Visible learning: Feedback. Routledge.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2020). Cooperative learning: The foundation for active learning. Interaction Book Company.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
Rosenshine, B. (2020). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 44(2), 12–19.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (2021). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (13th ed.). Pearson.
Steinmayr, R., Meißner, A., Weidinger, A. F., & Wirthwein, L. (2014). Academic achievement. In R. Pekrun & L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 319–336). Routledge.
Topping, K. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Weeger, A. (2018). The effects of active learning on student engagement in higher education. Springer.
Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
