You are here

American Journal of Educational Research

ISSN (Print): 2327-6126

ISSN (Online): 2327-6150

Editor-in-Chief: Freddie W. Litton


Google-based Impact Factor: 1.27   Citations


Educators’ Attitude towards Outcomes-Based Educational Approach in English Second Language Learning

1Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines

2Institute for Governance and Rural Development, College of Public Affairs and Development, University of the Philippines Los Baños, Domingo M. Lantican Ave. College, Laguna, Philippines

American Journal of Educational Research. 2016, 4(8), 597-601
doi: 10.12691/education-4-8-3
Copyright © 2016 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Rose Ann A. Ortega, Ruth A. Ortega-Dela Cruz. Educators’ Attitude towards Outcomes-Based Educational Approach in English Second Language Learning. American Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 4(8):597-601. doi: 10.12691/education-4-8-3.

Correspondence to: Ruth  A. Ortega-Dela Cruz, Institute for Governance and Rural Development, College of Public Affairs and Development, University of the Philippines Los Baños, Domingo M. Lantican Ave. College, Laguna, Philippines. Email:,


Determining the educators’ attitude towards Outcomes-Based Educational (OBE) approach in English language is essential for the success of any undertaking to shift to a new paradigm in the curriculum. This study used descriptive-correlational research design to investigate to what extent English language educators are accepting or resisting the envisioned education approach in a State University. Quantitative data gathered from researcher-made survey were analyzed using SPSS software. Relationships among variables were determined using the Spearman’s rho. Results revealed that the respondents’ age, number of years in teaching and educational attainment are positively related to their attitude towards Outcomes-Based Education (OBE). This study has helped in making the educational institution realize the pressing need for their commitment to support academic staff by providing continuing professional development to educators, and a facilitative learning environment to students that will help achieve the desired learning outcomes in English as Second Language (ESL) class.



[1]  Comidoy M.D.S. (2014). Ched lists priority courses. Retrieved May 11, 2015 from
[2]  Macasinag T.B. (2011). On the decline of English proficiency. Retrieved May 12, 2015 from
[3]  Malan, S. P. T. (2000). The 'new paradigm' of outcomes-based education in perspective. Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences/Tydskrifvir Gesinsekologie en Verbruikerswetenskappe, 28(1).
[4]  Davis, M. H. (2003). “Outcome-based education”. Journal of veterinary medical education 30.3 (2003): 258-263.
[5]  Borsoto, L. D., (2014). “Status of Implementation and Usefulness of Outcomes-Based Education in the Engineering Department of an Asian University”. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Research, 2(4), 14-25.
Show More References
[6]  Lichakane, T. E. (2005). Teaching methods used by educators at Marquard sub-district: An OBE perspective. MEd dissertation, University of the Free State.
[7]  Owen, J. E. (1995). Cooperative learning in secondary schools. London: Routledge.
[8]  Ngidi, T. Z. N. (2006). Educators' implementation of assessment in outcomes-based education (Doctoral dissertation).
[9]  Schlebusch, G., & Thobedi, M. (2005). “Linking English First Additional Language teaching and learning with Outcomes-based Education: what is really happening?” Journal for Language Teaching= TydskrifvirTaalonderrig, 39(2), p-306.
[10]  Schlebusch, G., & Thobedi, M. (2004). Outcomes-based education in the English second language classroom in South Africa. The qualitative report, 9(1), 35-48.
[11]  Gravett, S. (2005). Adult learning: designing and implementing learning events: a dialogic approach.
[12]  Killen, R. (2000). Outcomes-based education: Principles and possibilities. Unpublished manuscript. University of Newcastle, Faculty of Education.
[13]  Killen, R. (2007). Teaching strategies for outcomes-based education. Juta and Company Ltd.
[14]  Laugksch, R. C., Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2007). “Outcomes-Based Education in South Africa: Using an Instrument to Assess School-Level Environments during the Implementation”. Education (AARE), 25, 29.
[15]  Engelbrecht, J., & Harding, A. (2008). “The impact of the transition to outcomes-based teaching on university preparedness in mathematics in South Africa”. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(2), 57-70.
Show Less References


Promoting Collaborative Learning among Students

1Birkbeck College University of London, Honorary Lecturer, Honorary Fellow, Dissertation Adviser, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom

American Journal of Educational Research. 2016, 4(8), 602-607
doi: 10.12691/education-4-8-4
Copyright © 2016 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Suriyakumari Lane. Promoting Collaborative Learning among Students. American Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 4(8):602-607. doi: 10.12691/education-4-8-4.

Correspondence to: Suriyakumari  Lane, Birkbeck College University of London, Honorary Lecturer, Honorary Fellow, Dissertation Adviser, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom. Email:,


What is the distinction between collaborative and co-operative learning? In co-operative learning action is adjusted by individuals in a group to achieve individual goals. In collaborative learning, actions are adjusted to achieve shared goals. They not only learn from the teacher, but also from each other. In contrast in co-operative learning, the teacher still remains in control of what is going on in the class. The design of the collaborative task is crucial to the effectiveness of collaboration. The task must not be one which can be completed only by one person in a group. It should require a contribution from each member of the group. The group members should be interdependent upon each other to successfully complete the task. The task should not be a ‘right answer’ task. There should be several possible answers so that the group members could discuss which answers are better and the reason why some answers are better. What are the challenges of collaborative learning? Participants may only be used to isolated learning, where they compete with other students, and if that is the case, they would find it difficult to adjust to collaborative learning. Some students prefer to be taught and be passive learners, rather than be active learners, which would require more effort on their part. Another challenge is teachers who find it difficult to give up their teacher-centred instructional role and move to a facilitator of learning role. What are the advantages of collaborative learning? Such learning improves communication and dialogue between participants in a group, and assists in socially and intellectually connecting with members of the group. Students are motivated as they are actively involved in the learning process. The retention rate improves and students perform better at assessments, as they have engaged in deeper and more meaningful learning. As students are engaged in discussing and debating they are more likely to become critical learners. When students learn in a group, with other students explaining concepts to them, they will find different interpretations, which will result in students having to re-think their own understanding. There will be development of higher-level thinking skills, oral and written communication (in online collaborative learning), leadership and teamwork skills. A disadvantage of collaborative learning is that there might be one or two who dominate. There might be some who do not make much contribution despite having the opportunity to do so. Collaborative learning may not be suitable to some individuals who prefer isolated learning. They may not gain much benefit if they are forced into collaborative learning situations. Research has shown frustration among some students who have experienced collaborative learning. There may be some students who prefer to learn from an expert on a subject rather than from other students who they perceive to be lacking in knowledge. Students may find that they are studying at a different pace than others in the group, which may cause difficulties to themselves and their group members.



[1]  Cesez-Kesmanovic, D and Webb, C “Towards a Communicative Model of Collaborative Web-mediated Learning” accessed 21 February 2016.
[2]  Resta, P and Lafferiere, T “Technology in Support of Collaborative Learning” Educational Psychology Review 19 65 – 83 2007.
[3]  Chris Watkins, “Easier said than done: collaborative learning” accessed 21 February 2016.
[4]  Leigh Smith, B and MacGregor, J T “What is collaborative learning?” Washington Centre for the improvement of Undergraduate Education. accessed 21 February 2016.
[5]  Dooley, M, “Constructing knowledge together” (21-45). Extract from Telecollaborative Language Learning. A guidebook to moderating intercultural collaboration online. M. Dooly (ed.). (2008) Bern: Peter Lang accessed 21 February 2016.
Show More References
[6]  Watkins, C “Easier said than done: collaborative learning” accessed 21 February 2016.
[7]  Du, J, Durrington, V A and Mathews, J G “Online Collaborative Discussion: Myth or Valuable Learning Tool?” MERLOT Journal of Learning and Teaching 3 (2) 94-104 2007.
[8]  Roberts, T S, “Computer-supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education”: An Introduction’ in Tim S Roberts ‘Computer-supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education’ Idea Group Publishing 2005 file:///C:/Users/Kumari/Downloads/00b7d5187a4b822e4b000000.pdfaccessed 21 February 2016.
[9]  Taylor, V, “Online Group Projects: Preparing the Instructors to Prepare the Students” in Tim S Roberts ‘Computer-supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education’ Idea Group Publishing 2005 file:///C:/Users/Kumari/Downloads/00b7d5187a4b822e4b000000.pdfaccessed 21 February 2016.
[10]  Liu, G Z, “Spontaneous Group Decision Making in Distributed Collaborative Learning: Toward a New Research Direction” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 6 (1) 279-298, 2010.
[11]  Klein, K, “Promoting Online Collaborative Social Learning Communities with Student Response System” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 5 (4) 709 2009.
[12]  Ragoonaden, K and Bordeleau, P, “Collaborative Learning via the Internet” Journal of Educational Technology and Society 3 (3) 361-372 2000.
[13]  McKinney, K and Graham-Buxton, M, “The Use of Collaborative Learning Groups in Large Classes: Is it Possible?” Teaching Sociology, 21 (4) 403-408 1993.
[14]  Cornell University Centre for Teaching Excellence accessed 21 February 2016.
[15]  Parente, C H, Duck, J, Zhao, X and Fizel, J L, “Ciollaboration: Leading and Learning by Example” Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 3 (2) 170-78 2007.
[16]  Florence Elizabeth Bacabab, F E, “From Cyberspace to Print: Re-examining the Effects of Collaborative Discussion Board Invention on First-year Academic Writing” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 6 (2) 343-352 2010.
[17]  Vassigh, S, Newman, W E, Behzadan, A, Zhu, Y, Chen, S and Graham, S, “Collaborative Learning in Building Sciences Enabled by Augmented Reality” American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture 2 (2) 83-88 2014.
[18]  Law, Q P S, Wai Yee Chung, J, Cheung Leung, C and Kwok Shing Wong, T, “Enhancement of Self-efficacy and Interest in Learning English of Undergraduate Students with low English Proficiency through a Collaborative Learning Programme” American Journal of Educational Research 3 (10) 1284-1290 2015.
[19]  Janssen, J, Kirschner, F, Erkens, G, Kirschner, P A and Paas, F, “Making the Black Box of collaborative Learning Transparent: Combining Process-Oriented and Cognitive Load Approaches” Educational Psychology Review 22 (2) 139-154 2010.
[20]  Alavi, M “Computer-mediated Collaborative Learning: An Empirical Evaluation” MIS Quarterly 18 (2) 159-174 1994.
[21]  Terenzini, P T, Cabrera, A F, Colbeck, C L, Parente J M and Bjorklund, “S A, Collaborative Learning vs. Lecture/Discussion: Students Reported Learning Gain” Journal of Engineering Education 123-130 2001.
[22]  Curtis, D D and Lawson, M J, “Exploring Collaborative Online Learning” JALN 5 (1) 21-34 2001.
[23]  Fung, Y Y H, “Collaborative Online Learning: Interaction patterns and Limiting Factors” Open Learning, Journal of Open and Distance Learning 19(2) 135-149 2004.
[24]  Uribe, D, Klein, J D and Sullivan, H, “The Effect of Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning on Solving Ill-defined Problems” Educational, Technology, Research and Development 51 (1) 5-19 2003.
[25]  Makewa, L N, Gitonga, D, Ngussa, B, Njoroge, S and Kuboja, J, “Frustration Factor in Group Collaborative Learning Experiences” American Journal of Educational Research 2 (11A) 16-22 2014.
[26]  Capdeffero, N and Romero, M, “Are Online Learners Frustrated with Collaborative Learning Experiences?” The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 13 (2) 2012 Accessed 12 February 2016.
[27]  Marjanovic, O, “Learning and Teaching in a Synchronous Collaborative Environment” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 1 129-138 1999.
[28]  Lukman, R and Krajnc, M, “Exploring Non-traditional Learning Methods in Virtual and Real World Environments’ Journal of Educational Technology & Society,Technology Supported Cognition and Exploratory Learning 15 (1) 237-247 2012.
[29]  Tim S Roberts and Joanne M McInnerney, ‘Seven Problems of Online Group Learning (and Their Solutions) 2007 (10 (4) Educational Technology and Society 257-268.
Show Less References


Using Simulations to Detect Difficulties in the Process of Learning “Chemical Solutions”

1Departamento de Ciencias Exactas, Ciclo Básico Común, Universidad de Buenos Aires, C1405CAE, Buenos Aires, Argentina

2Departamento de Ciencias Biológicas, Ciclo Básico Común, Universidad de Buenos Aires, C1405CAE, Buenos Aires, Argentina

3Instituto Centro de Formación e Investigación en Enseñanza de las Ciencias (CEFIEC), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, C1428EGA, Buenos Aires, Argentina

American Journal of Educational Research. 2016, 4(8), 608-612
doi: 10.12691/education-4-8-5
Copyright © 2016 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Diana G. Bekerman, Lorena Pepa, Elvira Vaccaro, Manuel Alonso, Lydia R. Galagovsky. Using Simulations to Detect Difficulties in the Process of Learning “Chemical Solutions”. American Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 4(8):608-612. doi: 10.12691/education-4-8-5.

Correspondence to: Diana  G. Bekerman, Departamento de Ciencias Exactas, Ciclo Básico Común, Universidad de Buenos Aires, C1405CAE, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Email:


Using animations, visualizations and simulations is a common practice to teach chemistry. These didactic resources provide a motivational effect which in turn should improve the understanding of concepts by the students. This is effectively observed, but not all students benefit from these resources to the same extent. In this work, we use a simulation of chemical solutions and then evaluate a group of students on it. From the wrong answers we proceed to establish categories: 1) Incorrect or misguided mathematical approaches, dissociated from the chemical meaning of the question, 2) difficulties in the use of chemical syntax, 3) semantic difficulties, and 4) alternative mental models. Having identified the types of errors allows teachers to work on them in a directed manner, making possible different approaches for each category.



[1]  Talanquer, V., Simulaciones computacionales para construir y explorar modelos [Computer simulations for building and exploring models]. Alambique. 76, 8-16, Jan 2014. Available: [Accessed Dec. 10, 2015].
[2]  Adams, W. K. Paulson A. and Wieman C. E., “What Levels of Guidance Promote Engaged Exploration with Interactive Simulations?” in 2008 PERC Proceedings, Edmonton, Canada, 1064: 59-62, 2008. Available: [Accessed Nov. 4, 2015].
[3]  Bell, R.L. and Smetana, L.K., “Using computer simulations to enhance science teaching and learning”, in Bell, R.L.; Gess-Newsome, J.; Luft , J. (Eds.), Technology in the secondary science classroom, Washington, D. C. National Science Teachers Association Press, 2008, 23-32.
[4]  Honey, M. A. and Hilton, M. (eds.), Learning science through computer games and simulations. Washington, DC, The National Academies Press, 2011. Available: [Accessed Dec. 10, 2015].
[5]  Wieman, C. E. and Perkins, K. K., “A powerful tool for teaching science”, Nature, 2, 290-292, May 2006.
Show More References
[6]  Nappa, N., Insausti, M. J., Sigüenza, A. F., “Características en la construcción y rodaje de los modelos mentales generados sobre las disoluciones”, Rev. Eureka. Enseñ. Divul. Cien., 3(1), 2-22, Jan 2006. Available: [Accessed Nov. 4, 2015].
[7]  Barker, V. Beyond Appearances: Students’ misconceptions about basic chemical ideas. A report prepared for the Royal Society of Chemistry Available [Accessed May 7, 2016].
[8]  Smith K. J. and Metz P. A. Evaluating Student Understanding of Solution Chemistry through Microscopic Representations. J. Chem. Educ., 73 (3), 233-235, March 1996.
[9]  Glaser, B.G., Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory, Mill Valley, CA, The Sociology Press, 1978, 25-96.
[10]  Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A.M., Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 1994.
[11]  Sirvent, M.T. “Cuadro Comparativo entre Lógicas según dimensiones del Diseño de Investigación”, In: El Proceso de Investigación. Investigación y Estadística I (2nd. Ed.). Buenos Aires, Cuadernos de la Oficina de Publicaciones de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras (Opfyl), 2003, 9-38.
[12]  Van Dooren, W; De Bock, D.; Weyers, D and Verschaffel, L.The predictive power of intuitive rules: A critical analysis of the impact of `more A–more B' and `same A–same B'. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56: 179-207, July 2004.
[13]  Izquierdo, M., ¿Para qué se inventaron los problemas de Química?, Educación Química, 16 (2), 246-259, April 2005. Available: [Accessed Dec. 10, 2015].
[14]  Tirosh, D. and Stavy, R. Intuitive rules: A way to explain and predict student’s reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 51-66, March 1999.
[15]  Peralta, J., “Sobre los automatismos en la resolución de problemas”, Boletín de la Asociación Matemática Venezolana; 13 (1), 87-103, 2005. Available: [Accessed Nov. 10, 2015].
[16]  Talanquer, V., “Exploring dominant types of explanations built by General Chemistry students”, International Journal of Science Education, 32 (18), 2393-2412, Dec 2010.
[17]  Astolfi, J. P., El error, un medio para enseñar, Sevilla, Díada Editora, 2003, 11-78.
[18]  Bain, K., Lo que hacen los mejores profesores universitarios, PUV, Valencia, 2007, 1-128.
Show Less References