MASTER OF EDUCATION

HMEF 5093

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

MATRICULATION NO :
IDENTITY CARD NO. :
TELEPHONE NO. :
E-MAIL :
LEARNING CENTRE :
1.0 INTRODUCTION

HMEF5093 Quantitative Research Methodology is one of the required courses for the
Master of Educational (MEd) programme. The course begins with the discussion of the
research process continued by ways in writing the literature review. The relevance of theory
in quantitative research and the characteristic of quantitative research will also be discussed.
The experimental research method and the survey method are emphasised among the
quantitative methods. The procedure for conducting the survey is introduced together with
various kinds of experimental research designs. The design and development of instruments
and issues relating to reliability and validity are discussed. The course also introduced the
application of basic statistical techniques in quantitative research. The writing of the research
proposal based on the quantitative research paradigm is the final part of the course.

In this assignment, a review on a quantitative research article titled “Effects of

cooperative learning on students’ achievement and attitudes in secondary mathematics”
written by Anowar Hossain & Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi in 2013 has to be presented in a form
of report. All the key aspects of the research will be analysed with constant reference to the
article and also supported by related past researches.

2.0 TITLE

The first thing that reviewers and editors will see upon receiving your research paper
is the title and it will immediately form a view on what they should expect in your research
paper (Manivannan, G., 2018). It is therefore imperative that you write clear, persuasive title
that leads readers to know more about your research. The title of “Effects of cooperative
learning on students’ achievement and attitudes in secondary mathematics” is an appropriate
topic. From the title, the readers can easily form a clear view on what the researcher are going
to study.

An effective title of an academic research paper should reveal adequate information

about the variables, subjects and research setting. According to Siegle (2013), in a research
study, independent variables are antecedent conditions that are presumed to affect a
dependent variable. In Anowar Hossain & Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi’s research article, it
clearly includes the two variables. Referring to the title of the article, the independent
variable is “cooperative learning”. There are two dependent variables, which are “students’
achievement” and “students’ attitudes”.

1
 A human subject is as a living individual about whom an investigator conducting
research obtains data through intervention or interaction with the individual. Referring to the
title, the subject is not clearly stated. However, after read through the article, readers can
found that the subject selected in the research was the ninth grade students of selected Boys’
and Girls’ secondary schools in Natore, Bangladesh.

The research setting can be seen as the physical, social, and cultural site in which the
researcher conducts the study (Lisa M., 2008). From the title of the article, it does not show
any physical, social, and cultural site in which the researcher conducts the study.

Although the title of Anowar Hossain & Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi’s research article
does not reveal adequate information about subject and research setting, but it is still an
appropriate title. An effective title should convey the main topics of the study and highlight
the importance of the research. A good research title should summarize the research’s content
in few words to get the readers’ attention (Manivannan, G., 2018). Thus, the title is very
appropriate.

3.0 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Research background is a brief outline of the most important studies that have been
conducted so far presented in a chronological order. Research background should also
include a brief discussion of major theories and models related to the research problem.

In the article, sufficient background information on the research is given. Researchers

began with the introduction of cooperative learning. The researchers cited the appropriate
literature to lead readers to the focus of research. For example, “It is a fundamental principle
of cooperative learning that group members are linked together in such a way that they
cannot succeed unless everyone succeed, they will actively assist each other to make sure that
the assignment is done and the purpose of the group achieved (Deutsch, 1949).” Researchers
had concluded that “cooperative learning establishes a community in which students can get
help and support from other group members immediately in a non-competitive learning
environment, just raising their hands and waiting for the right answers to be given.”

Researchers continued to veil the poor quality of secondary education in Bangladesh,

especially with most of the students failed mathematics in secondary school certificate (SSC).
Samad (2005) mentioned from the findings of his study which has been conducted in the
secondary school mathematics classrooms in Bangladesh that teachers are familiar with
conventional mode of thought and teaching. He stresses the need of involvement of

2
secondary teachers with those methods of teaching which have positive impact on students’
academic performance. In previous research, Effandi (2003) concluded that utilization of
cooperative learning method is a preferable alternative to traditional instructional method.
Whicker et al. (1997) found that students in the cooperative learning had higher test scores
than students in the comparison group. Vaughan (2002) examined the effects of cooperative
learning on the achievement and attitudes towards mathematics of a group of fifth graders.
The analysis of pre- and post-test scores revealed positive changes in attitudes and
achievement. Thus, the article clearly gives very sufficient background on the research and an
in-depth lead-in to the focus or objective of the study.

All the statements and past researches clearly provide lead-in to the objective by
explaining and giving evidences that the focus of the research is regarding the effects of
cooperative learning on student’s mathematics achievement and attitudes towards
mathematics.

4.0 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

A research question is a carefully worded question that addresses an aspect or concept

of a hypothesis. It is a key element of a research study because it defines the main purpose or
direction of the study (Goel, N., 2014). A hypothesis is a predictive statement about the
relationship between two or more variables. Research questions are similar to hypotheses, but
they are in question format (Morgan, G. A., & Harmon, R. J., 2000). In the article, the
research question “identifying the effects of cooperative learning on students’ mathematics
achievement and attitudes towards mathematics in selected Boys’ and Girls’ schools in
Natore, Bangladesh.” is not in the question form. The research question is a question.
Therefore, do not draft it as a statement. The research question should write as “Do
cooperative learning affect on students’ mathematics achievement and attitudes towards
mathematics in selected Boys’ and Girls’ schools in Natore, Bangladesh ?”

Even though the research question for the article is not in the question form, but the
research question appropriately framed to provide clear direction for measuring the variables
investigated. In the question, the variables are clearly stated. “Cooperative learning” is the
independent variable. “Students’ achievement in mathematics” and “students’ attitudes
toward mathematics” are dependent variables. From the research question, readers can clearly
know that students’ achievement and attitudes towards mathematics are related and
influenced by cooperative learning. According to Johnson and Johnson (1990) in cooperative

3
learning, students study in small groups to achieve the same goals using social skills. Besides,
a study conducted by Zakaria, E., Lu, C.C, & Daud, Y.M. (2010) found that students in the
experimental group of cooperative learning study showed a positive attitude towards
mathematics.

According to Aloysius (2015) research objectives are the specific actions and
activities to answer the research questions. Objectives indicate what we are trying to get from
the study or the expected results and outcome of the study. Based on the research question,
the researchers stated the four objectives:

i. To identify the effects of cooperative learning on students’ mathematics achievement.

ii. To identify the effects of cooperative learning on students’ attitudes towards mathematics.

iii. To make a comparison of cooperative learning effects on mathematics achievement

between experimental group students in Boys’ and Girls’ schools.

iv. To make a comparison of cooperative learning effects on students’ attitudes towards

mathematics between experimental group students in Boys’ and Girls’ schools.

Based on the above objectives, it is very relevant and in line with the research
question. The above research objectives are very clear, achievable and verifiable, as they
directly assist in answering the research questions. Besides to identify the effects of
cooperative learning (independent variable) on students’ mathematics achievement and
students’ attitudes towards mathematics (dependent variable), researchers also make a
comparison of the two dependent variables by the independent variable between experimental
group students in Boys’ and Girls’ schools. In short, the clear, concise and well framed
research questions by the researchers make it easier to conduct an effective study that results
precise and accurate knowledge.

5.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review is a written overview of major writings and other sources on a
selected topic. Sources covered in the review may include scholarly journal articles, books,
government reports, Web sites, etc. The literature review provides a description, summary
and evaluation of each source. It is usually presented as a distinct section of a graduate thesis
or dissertation (Lyons, K., 2017).

Based on the article, there are many literatures cited to relate the research title of
“effects of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and attitudes in secondary

4
mathematics” with the earlier research. For example, cooperative learning has been well
documented in the educational research as a successful pedagogy to improve students’
academic achievement. It is a fundamental principle of cooperative learning that group
members are linked together in such a way that they cannot succeed unless everyone succeed,
they will actively assist each other to make sure that the assignment is done and the purpose
of the group achieved (Deutsch, 1949).They acquire this by providing help and cooperation
to each other, sharing resources, and encouraging each other’s efforts. As a result, group
members who work in cooperative groups outperform students who work by themselves or
incompetition with each other (as seen in competitive conventional classrooms) (Johnson &
Johnson, 2004).

Besides, researchers also cited another example to prove that the cooperative learning
had an effect on students’ achievement and attitudes. The source stated that cooperative
learning is one of the two ways of organizing the learning environment of a classroom, the
other being competitive. In cooperative learning environment, the goals of separate
individuals become so linked that there is a positive correlation between them; on the
contrary, in a competitive conventional environment, the goals of the students are so linked
that there is a negative correlation between their goal attainments (Johnson & Johnson,
1994).Based on the example given above, the literature cited shows that cooperative learning
brings positive effects on students’ achievement and attitudes. However, it does not
specifically show the effects of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and attitudes
towards mathematics.

In the article, the citations cited include resources from Deutsch (1949), Johnson &
Johnson (1994), Whicker et al. (1997), Vaughan (2002), Effandi (2003) and Johnson &
Johnson (2004). Most of these references are not the current literature to support the research
taking into account that this article was only published in year 2013. Instead, the researchers
should cite the literature that published in the recent years.

Moreover, there are some evidences of critical analyses of past research in the article.
For example, Effandi (2003) embarked on a study to determine the effects of cooperative
learning over the conventional teaching method in matriculation level mathematics. He found
cooperative learning improved students’ achievement in mathematics and attitudes towards
mathematics. He concluded that utilization of cooperative learning method is a preferable
alternative to traditional instructional method. Whicker et al. (1997) investigated the effects
of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and attitudes in a secondary mathematics

5
classroom. They found that students in the cooperative learning had higher test scores than
students in the comparison group. Vaughan (2002) examined the effects of cooperative
learning on the achievement and attitudes towards mathematics of a group of fifth graders.
The students participated for twelve weeks in cooperative learning in mathematics. The
analysis of pre- and post-test scores revealed positive changes in attitudes and achievement.
Thus, the past research above has clearly indicated that the positive effects of cooperative
learning on students’ achievement and attitudes towards mathematics.

In short, only some of the citations were relevant to the research agenda. The
literature cited was not the current literature. However, there are some evidences of critical
analyses of past research in the article to support the research. Overall, the literature review
provides adequate content information about the research topic.

6.0 RESEARCH DESIGN

Burns and Grove (2003) define a research design as “a blueprint for conducting a
study with maximum control over factors that may interfere with the validity of the findings”.
Parahoo (1997) describes a research design as “a plan that describes how, when and where
data are to be collected and analysed”. Polit et al (2001) define a research design as “the
researcher’s overall for answering the research question or testing the research hypothesis”.

In the article, the research design clearly described and explained. The quasi-
experimental pre-post test control group design was administered by the researchers to
identify the effects of cooperative learning in the experimental schools. The quasi-
experimental design compared a control group using conventional teaching method with an
experimental group using cooperative learning in light of three major points:

(i) Pre-test of students’ mathematics achievement and attitudes towards mathematics was
given to both experimental and control groups.

(ii) Control and experimental groups were guided by the two teachers (one from each school)
who had more than twelve years of teaching experience in mathematics. Each teacher
taught two classes in each school in one academic session for the duration of 15 -weeks,

(iii) Post-test of students’ mathematics achievement and attitudes towards mathematics was
given to both experimental and control groups.

Researchers administered the quasi-experimental design. In quasi-experimental

studies, researchers do not randomly assign participants to groups (Cook & Campbell, 1979).

6
Quasi-experimentation is used often in educational research, because it is often impossible
and sometimes unethical to randomly assign students to settings. When the researchers
cannot randomly assign subjects, we can be sure that extraneous variables will creep into the
experiment and threaten its internal validity.

Phillips (2009) stated that experimental research, often called true experimentation,
uses the scientific method to establish the cause-effect relationship among a group of
variables that make up a study. An independent variable is manipulated to determine the
effects on the dependent variables. Thus, based on the article, it is obviously an experimental
research where there is comparison between two independent variables (experimental group’s
cooperative learning and control group’s traditional teaching method) in affecting the
dependent variable (students’ mathematics achievement and attitudes towards mathematics).

Besides that, according to Edmonds & Kennedy (2012), an experimental research also
utilises a between-subjects approach with a pre-test and post-test control group design. Based
on the article, the research design is very well described and explained by Table 1: Pre- and
-post-test control group design.

Table 1: Pre- and –post-test control group design

Group Pre-test Treatment Post-test

A O1 X O1
(n=40)
B O2 O2
(n=40)

Based on Table 1, A represents the experimental group while B represents the control
group. O1 represents the pre-test while the post-test is represented as O2 for the experimental
and control groups respectively.

In addition, the research design is appropriately addressing the research objectives and
research question. The research design is able to answer the research question and test the
research objective. The comparison of post-test score between experimental group and
control group is able to identify the effects of cooperative learning on students’ mathematics
achievement and students’ attitudes towards mathematics. The research design also can make
the comparison of cooperative learning effects on mathematics achievement and students’
attitudes towards mathematics between experimental group students in Boys’ and Girls’
schools.

7
 Thus, the effectiveness of the learning method in terms of the students’ learning
retention and knowledge gains can determine by comparison between the experimental group
and the control group. The research design is clearly described and explained. The research
design is very appropriate in addressing the research objectives and research question.

7.0 POPULATION AND SAMPLE

In order to answer the research questions, it is doubtful that researcher should be able
to collect data from all cases. Thus, there is a need to select a sample. The entire set of cases
from which researcher sample is drawn in called the population (Hamed, T., 2016).
According to James, H. (1996) a population is a group of elements or cases, whether
individuals, objects, or events, that conform to specific criteria and to which we intend to
generalize the results of the research. The sample is the group of elements, or a single
element, from which data are obtained.

Based on the article, the population from which the sample was drawn is defined and
described. According to researchers, the population of this study were the ninth grade
students of selected Boys’ and Girls’ schools in Natore, Bangladesh. Besides, prior to the
implementation of the study, the researcher obtained permission from the District Education
Officer of the Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for conducting the study.
Mashinda High School and Sreepur Adarsha Girls’ High School were approved by the
District Education Officer to carry outthis study. Hence, the target population for the study
were the ninth grade boys and girls from Mashinda High School and Sreepur Adarsha Girls’
High School in Natore, Bangladesh.

However, the sample was not properly defined, described and delimited in the article.
The reason is quasi-experimental design was administered by the researchers to identify the
effects of cooperative learning in the experimental schools. A quasi-experiment is designed a
lot like a true experiment except that in the quasi-experimental design, the participants are not
randomly assigned to experimental groups (Chris, C., 2016). The fact that there is no random
assignment means that sample in the experimental group and control group may not be
equivalent on all variables. In the article, a total of 80 full-time students (40 students for
experimental group and the other 40 students for control group) constitute the sample. Each
experimental school comprised two sections in which Section -I was represented as the
experimental group while Section -II represented the control group in grade nine mathematics
classrooms as per the directives of the Headmasters of the sample schools. Hence, there is no

8
explanation of sampling technique. The process of selecting the sample was not described by
researchers. The sample was determined by the Headmasters of the sample schools. When the
sample cannot randomly assign, we can be sure that extraneous variables or factors will creep
into the experiment and threaten its internal validity. Knowing that extraneous factors will
creep into a quasi experiment, the researchers shall take steps to ensure that the subjects in
the experimental group and control group are as similar as possible. However, there was no
any description to enhance the internal validity of the research.

Phillips, J.A. (2009) stated that the sample size required for a survey partly depends
on the statistical quality needed for survey findings. There is no simple rule for sample size
that can be used for all surveys. When the sample selected has to be broken down into smaller
groups involving comparisons of groups, a larger sample is advisable. According to James, H.
(1996) most researchers use general rules of thumb in their studies, such as having at least 30
subjects for correlational research, and at least 15 subjects in each group in an experiment. In
the article, a total of 80 full-time students (40 students for experimental group and the other
40 students for control group) were selected as the sample. The number shows that the
sample size in the article is adequate for the research study.

In short, we can conclude that the article clearly defined and described the population.
The sample size is adequate for the research study. However, the sample drawn was not
properly defined and described and no appropriate and properly explained sampling
technique in the study.

8.0 INSTRUMENTATION

Instrumentation refers to the tools or means by which investigators attempt to measure

variables or items of interest in the data-collection process. It is related not only to instrument
design, selection, construction, and assessment, but also the conditions under which the
designated instruments are administered. The instrument is the device used by investigators
for collecting data. (Neil, j., 2010)

According to Muhammad & Zahra (2011), the two most commonly used research
instruments in quantitative research studies include questionnaire and tests. Roxana & Juan
(2017) also stated that the most used quantitative research technique is the survey. In a
quantitative survey, researchers may use a short answer responses or dichotomous questions,

9
multiple choice answers, paragraph, check boxes, drop down, linear scale, multiple choice
grid and more.

In the article, the instruments used by the researchers were not mentioned. The
validity and reliability of the instruments were also not discussed. There is also no theoretical
and past research support for the instruments used. The researchers should explain the
instruments used to obtain the data about students’ mathematics achievement and also
students’ attitudes towards mathematics. The design of pre- test and post- test used in the
research should also be discussed. Overall, the instrumentation was not stated.

9.0 RESEARCH PROCEDURES

Research is an orderly and systematic procedure, and this procedure may be presented
sequentially from the first step of problem definition through the final step of the writing-up
of the final report (Yang, Y., 2001)

According to the article, there is no clear discussion of the research procedure. The
procedure stated were lacking of some important process. From the article, the researchers
conducted a research to find out the effects of cooperative learning on student’s achievement
and attitudes in secondary mathematics. The problem and the topic of the research were
identified. Independent variable and dependent variables of the research were stated. The
existing literature related to the topic was reviewed and wrote. The research design used by
researchers is quasi- experimental design. The researchers only showed part of the research
procedure. The following procedure that is instrumentation, pilot-testing and data collection
was not mentioned by the researchers.

From the article, to obtain students’ mathematics achievement and attitudes towards
mathematics, the researchers conducted a pre-test and post-test to both experimental and
control groups. Independent-sample t-test was conducted in comparing the students’
mathematics achievements and attitudes towards mathematics of the experimental groups and
control groups. The independent-sample t-test compares the means of two groups in order to
determine whether there is statistical evidence that the associated population means are
significantly different (Stephanie, 2015). However, the design of the pre-test and post-test
were not mentioned by the researchers. Researchers had no explained about the questionnaire
and test that used in the research. The number of question, type of question, how the test is

10
conducting, all about the data collection method was not discussed in the article. Therefore,
there is no clear discussion of the research procedure and no data collection procedure.

10.0 DATA ANALYSIS & RESULTS

11.1 Data Analysis

Data analysis is the process by which information generated by the design, data
collection, and data processing is brought together and used to answer the original study
questions (Riley, R.W., Robinson, S.P. & Griffith, J.E., 1996).

Based on the article, independent-sample t-test was conducted in comparing the

mathematics achievements and students’ attitudes toward mathematics between the two
groups. The independent-sample t-test compares the means of two groups in order to
determine whether there is statistical evidence that the associated population means are
significantly different (Stephanie, 2015). The independent-sample t-test that used is
appropriate for the research design by which the researchers would want to examine the
effects of cooperative learning (independent variable) on students’ achievement and attitudes
towards mathematics (dependent variables). Based on the mean scores obtain from the post-
test of two groups, readers can determine the effectiveness and influences of the cooperative
learning by comparing the mean scores.

Besides, the data analyses provided answers to the research questions and research
objective. From the article, “Table 2: Independent-sample t-test comparing means of students’
mathematics achievement post-test scores between experimental and control groups”, the
objective 1, “to identify the effects of cooperative learning on students’ mathematics
achievement” is answered. “Table 3: Independent-sample t-test comparing means of students’
attitudes toward mathematics post-test scores between experimental and control groups”
answered the objective 2 “to identify the effects of cooperative learning on students’ attitudes
towards mathematics.” Moreover, “Table 4: Independent-sample t-test comparing means of
students’ mathematics achievement post-test scores between experimental group students in
Boys’ and Girls’ schools” answered the objective 3 “to make a comparison of cooperative
learning effects on mathematics achievement between experimental group students in Boys’
and Girls’ schools.” And the 4th objective “to make a comparison of cooperative learning
effects on students’ attitudes towards mathematics between experimental group students in
Boys’ and Girls’ schools” is answered by “Table 5: Independent-sample t-test comparing

11
means of students’ attitudes toward mathematics post-test scores between experimental group
students in Boys’ and Girls’ schools”. Thus, all the data analyses provided answer to the
research question and objectives.

Independent-sample t-test was used throughout the data analysis process. However
the researchers did not provide justification and explanation for it. Kim, T.K. (2015) defines
independent-sample t-test can be used when the two groups under comparison are
independent of each other. T tests are usually used in cases where the experimental subjects
are divided into two independent groups, with one group treated with A and the other group
treated with B. An independent t test can be used for an intergroup comparison of post-A and
post-B or for an intergroup comparison of changes in pre-A to post-A and changes in pre-B to
post-B.

11.2 RESULTS

The article and the tables showed the results of the study are reported based on the
objectives stated earlier. The results and tables were presented clearly and correctly with
accurate and detailed interpretations. In the article, the post-test mean scores of students’
mathematics achievement for the experimental group taught by the cooperative learning was
47.56 (SD = 2.74), and that for the control group taught by the conventional teaching it was
35.31 (SD= 1.89). The difference between these two post-test mean scores was significant t
(78) = 23.24, p < 0.05 in favour of the experimental group, which revealed that the
performance of experimental group was significantly better than control group. As such,
cooperative learning positively affects students’ mathematics achievement.

Similar with the above result, the effects of cooperative learning on attitudes towards
mathematics between experimental and control groups showed that the mean for the
experimental group, M = 4.75 was greater than that for the control group, M = 4.00, which
revealed that the experimental group showed improvement in attitudes towards mathematics
in comparison to control group.

Besides, the result for comparison of cooperative learning effects on mathematics

achievement between experimental group students in Boys’ and Girls’ schools showed Girls’
school scored mean of 47.75, which is slightly higher than the Boys’ school with mean score
of 47.37, which indicated that there is no statistically significant difference in mathematics
achievement post-test mean scores between experimental group students in Boys’ and Girls’

12
schools. The results show that experimental group students in Boys’ and Girls’ schools were
equal in their performance in mathematics achievement after cooperative learning
implementation. In addition, Table 5 in the article also showed the experimental group
students’ performance in attitudes towards mathematics in Boys’ and Girls’ schools were
equivalent after cooperative learning integration. As expressed, all the results were presented
clearly and correctly with accurate and detailed interpretations.

12.0 FINDINGS & DISCUSSION

Once data analysis has been completed, the researcher has the responsibility of
formally and succinctly stating the results, also known as findings, as well as conclusions and
recommendations resulting from the study. This is the point in the study where the researcher
actually provides answers to the originally stated research questions. (Denscombe, M.,1998)

Based on the article, the discussion of the article is in line with the findings and
carefully connected to other sections of the report. In the discussion section, researchers
stated that “Findings from this study indicate that cooperative learning has significant effect
on students’ performance in mathematics and attitudes towards mathematics. The
experimental group shows significant improvement in students’ mathematics achievement
and attitudes towards mathematics in comparison to control group. The result suggests that
the increase of the students’ mathematics achievement and attitudes towards mathematics
post-test mean scores for the experimental group was due to the significant effects of
cooperative learning.” As expressed, the discussion is carefully connected with problem
statement, research question and objectives. The discussion reminds readers about the
objectives of the research and how the findings are related to the research objectives by
which the objectives of the study had been accepted based on the result obtained.

From the article, the finding has discussed in relation to the theory and findings of
past research. However, the theory and findings of past research stated by researchers are not
clearly mention and describe. Researchers should show the results of others’ past research
which are consistent with their own result. This can be seen in the statement found in the
article saying, “The findings of the study, therefore, are consistent with the results as reported
by Effandi (2003), Whicker et al. (1997) and Vaughan (2002). The findings of this study are
also consistent with studies by Johnson and Johnson (1994), Davidson (1990), Faizah (1999),
Ozsoy and Yildiz (2004), and Zakaria et al. (2010). However, the findings of cooperative
learning effect on attitudes towards mathematics are in contrast to the findings by Ismail

13
(2000). Ismail found no significant difference in attitudes towards mathematics between
experimental and control groups. The short treatment period of three and a half weeks might
be the possible reason for no significant difference between the two groups.” Overall, the
finding only showed the past research authors’ name and year of published.

Read through the discussion and conclusions of the article, there is no clearly
implications, recommendations and directions for future research drawn from research
findings. There is also no discussion on the limitations of the study. The researchers only
discussed and elaborated the results and simplified the findings and checked whether the
objectives of the study have been achieved or not. The only statement researchers raised
about future research was “Future research should focus on the longitudinal study of
cooperative learning on academic achievement in various disciplines.” Longitudinal study is
an observational study that researchers continuous or repeated measures to follow particular
individuals over prolonged period of time often years or decades. Respondents are observed
over a period of time ranging from months to even decades to observe any changes in them or
their attitude (Bhat, A., 2016). In short, the researchers only stated clearly about the results of
the research. The implications, recommendations and directions for future research are not
explained in the article.

13.0 CONCLUSION

According to the article, the results of the research showed that cooperative learning
has significant effect on students’ performance in mathematics and attitudes towards
mathematics. Even though the results of the research showed cooperative learning can be
successfully used to promote students’ performance in mathematics, the article still has the
weaknesses. Reading through the article, from my view of point, the researchers did not
clearly describe how the cooperative learning is conducted in the research. How are the
teachers teaching and students learning in the cooperative learning classrooms? The
researchers need to add in the teaching methods and learning methods of cooperative learning
in the article.

Based on the research article written, I personally think that it is still a good
quantitative research which follows most of the basic requirements or criteria in producing a
quantitative experimental research. Although there are a few minor weaknesses identified, it
still is a valid and reliable quantitative research in general.

(5312 words)

14
 REFERENCES

Aloysius, H. (2015, March 22). Research Questions and Objectives. Retrieved from
http://www.idi.ntnu.no/grupper/su/publ/html/totland/ch012.htm

Bhat, A. (2016). What Is A Longitudinal Study?- Definition With Examples. Retrieved from
QuestionPro: https://www.questionpro.com/blog/longitudinal-study/

Chris, C. (2016). Experiments And Quasi-Experiments. Retrieved from Child Care and Early
Education:
https://www.researchconnections.org/childcare/datamethods/experimentsquasi.jsp

Campbell, C. (1979). Quasi-Experimental Research. Retrieved from BCCAMPUS:

https://opentextbc.ca/researchmethods/chapter/quasi-experimental-research/

Goel N. (2014). Introduction. Hypothesis and Research Question in Quantitative Research, 7.

Burns, & Grove. (2003). Research Design Is The Cornerstone Of Research Projects. Discuss.
Retrieved from http://migwimwangi.blogspot.com/2012/07/research-design-is-
cornerstone-of.html

Cook, D.T., & Campbell, T.D. (1979). experimental and quasi-experimental designs for
generalized causal inferenc. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Denscombe, M. (1998). The Good Research Guide. Findings and Discussion (p.389). New
York: Open University Press

Edmonds, & Kennedy. (2012). Experimental Research. Retrieved from Exploreable:

https://explorable.com/experimental-research

Hamed, T. (2017). Sampling. Sampling Methods in Research Methodology; How to Choose a

Sampling, 11.

James, H. (I996). Sample. In Educational Research (p. 31). NewYork: HaperCollins

Publisher Inc.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1990). An Overview Of Cooperative Learning. Retrieved

from Cooperative Learning: http://www.co-operation.org/what-is-cooperative-learning/

15
Kim, T. K. (2015, November 25). T test as a parametric statistic. Retrieved from US
National Library of Medicine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4667138/

Lindy, W. (2014). General Considerations in Writing about Quantitative Research. Writing

about Research, 2.

Lisa, M. (2008). Research Setting .. Retrieved from SAGE researchmethods:

http://methods.sagepub.com/reference/sage-encyc-qualitative-research-
methods/n398.xml

Lyons, K. (2017). How to write a literature review. Retrieved from University Concordia:
https://library.concordia.ca/help/writing/literature-review.php

Manivannan, G. (2018, January 19). How to write better title for research papers? Retrieved
from Writeneed: https://www.writeneed.com/single-post/2018/01/19/How-To-Write-
Better-Title-For-Research-Papers

McGowan, M. H. (2011). Analysis and conclusions of the experiment. Planning a

Comparative Experiment in Educational Settings, 19.

Morgan, G. A., & Harmon, R. J. (2000). Three Types of Basic Hypotheses or Research
Questions. Research Questions and Hypotheses , 3.

Muhammad, S., & Zahra, R. (2011). Retrieved from Instruments in QuantitativeResearch:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/51917268/Instruments-in-Quantitative-Research

Neil, J. (2010). Instrumentation. Retrieved from Sage:

http://methods.sagepub.com/reference/encyc-of-research-design/n189.xml

Polit et al. (2001). Research design and methodology. Retrieved from Academia:
http://www.academia.edu/25623107/Research_Design

Parahoo. (1997). Research design and methodology. Retrieved from Academia:

http://www.academia.edu/25623107/Research_Design

Phillips, J. A. (2009). In Quantitative Research Methodology (p. 185). Kuala Lumpur: Open
University Malaysia.

16
Riley, R. W., Robinson, S. P., & Griffith, J. E. (1996). Data and Report. In Standards for
Education Data Collection and Reporting (p. 145). Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.

Roxana, & Juan. (2017). Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Retrieved from US
National Library of Medicine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4601897/

Seigle, D., (2013). Educational Research Basics by Del Siegle. Retrieved from University Of
Connecticut: https://researchbasics.education.uconn.edu/variables/

Stephanie. (2015). SPSS Tutorials: Independent Samples t Test. Retrieved from Kent State
University Library: https://libguides.library.kent.edu/SPSS/IndependentTTest

Yang, Y. (2001). Chapter 2 Research Procedures. California State University, Sacramento, 5.

Zakaria, E., Lu, C.C, & Daud, Y.M. (2010). Results. The Effects of Cooperative Learning on
Students’ Mathematics, 4.

17