Taheri, M., Khodareza, M. (2015). The Effect of Cooperation versus Collaboration on Iranian Students’ Reading Ability. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 3(11), 79-90.
Marzieh Taheri; Mohammadreza Khodareza. "The Effect of Cooperation versus Collaboration on Iranian Students’ Reading Ability". International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 3, 11, 2015, 79-90.
Taheri, M., Khodareza, M. (2015). 'The Effect of Cooperation versus Collaboration on Iranian Students’ Reading Ability', International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 3(11), pp. 79-90.
Taheri, M., Khodareza, M. The Effect of Cooperation versus Collaboration on Iranian Students’ Reading Ability. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2015; 3(11): 79-90.
The Effect of Cooperation versus Collaboration on Iranian Students’ Reading Ability
1Department of English, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran
2Mohammadreza Khodareza, Department of English, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran
Abstract
Abstract The present study attempted to investigate the impact of cooperation versus collaboration on college students` reading ability. To fulfill the purpose of the study, 90 participants were chosen from among 140 by means of administering the Nelson Proficiency Test. They were divided into three groups: cooperative group, collaborative group, and control group. A fifty-item multiple-choice reading vocabulary test was developed, validated, and used as the pretest. The results of the one-way ANOVA showed that there was no significant difference among the groups. Then after a number of cooperative and collaborative strategies used as the treatment in this study in six sessions of ninety minutes for each experimental group class, (control group without treatment) the posttest, which resembled the pretest in many respects, was administered to the three groups. The results of one-way ANOVA and Scheffee Test showed that the cooperative and collaborative groups worked better than the control group, and the collaborative one performed best.
Top