英语翻译Theyalsorecordedfewerthanhalfofthedisciplinarycommentsoftheirsmall-groupworkonlypeers.GiventhatGillies(2006)andHertz-LazarowitzandShachar(1990)wereabletodemonstratethatwhenteachersembedcooperativelearningpeda

Question

英语翻译
They also recorded fewerthan half of the disciplinary comments of theirsmall-group work only peers.Given that Gillies (2006) and Hertz-Lazarowitzand Shachar (1990) were able to demonstrate thatwhen teachers embed cooperative learning peda-gogy into their classroom curricula,they engage inmore facilitative verbal interactions than teacherswho implement whole-class instruction or small-groups only,the purpose of the study reportedhereistoprovideadetailedanalysisofthediscourseteachers use when they implement cooperativelearning.Understanding the types of discoursethat the teachers used is important because Gillies(2006) demonstrated that students’ discourse isaffected by the types of group experiences theyhave.For example,the students in the classroomswhere their teachers implemented cooperativelearning provided nearly twice as many elaborativeresponses,short responses,and directions as theirpeers in the group-work only groups.Moreover,these students were more verbally active recordingnearly twice as many task-related interactions(i.e.,all interactions excluding ‘‘interruptions’’) asthe students in the small-groups only groups,interactions that have been shown to contribute tolearning (Cohen,1994; Cohen,Lotan,Abram,Scarloss,& Schultz,2002).This article also reports on the teachers’ percep-tionsofcooperativelearning,aspectsthatneedtobeconsidered if this pedagogical approach to teachingandlearningistobeusedmorewidelyinclassroomsin junior high school.Understanding teachers’perceptions of its efficacy as a pedagogical practicewill help to determine how it can be effectivelyimplemented in classrooms.This is particularlyimportant given that Baines,Blatchford,andKutnick (2003) found that by secondary schoolstudents were more likely to work in dyads or ingroups of 11 or more members where teachersdetermined the size of the group,the workinginteraction type,and the learning tasks to beundertaken.In most cases,Baines et al.proposed,grouping practices were aimed at maintainingcontrol by the teacher; an approach to groupwork that is contrary to developing group autono-my and responsibility advocated by proponents ofcooperative learning (e.g.,Johnson & Johnson,1990; Slavin,1995).

Answer 1

他们还录得fewerthan一半的纪律的评论theirsmall组的工作,只有peers.given说,机利士（ 2006年）和赫兹- lazarowitzand shachar （ 1990 ）分别能够证明thatwhen教师嵌入合作学习环- gogy到他们的课堂课程,他们从事inmore促进口头的互动比teacherswho实施整个课堂教学或小团体只,研究的目的reportedhereistoprovideadetailedanalysisofthediscourseteachers使用时,他们实施cooperativelearning .了解类型的discoursethat教师使用很重要,因为机利士（ 2006年）表明,学生的话语isaffected由类型的集团的经验,theyhave .举例来说,学生中,classroomswhere教师实施cooperativelearning提供了近两倍,许多elaborativeresponses ,短期的反应,并指示theirpeers在该集团工作的唯一团体.此外,这些学生更积极的口头recordingnearly两倍多任务相关的相互作用（即,所有的互动,不包括''中断'' ） asthe学生在小团体,只有团体,互动已证明有助于tolearning （科恩,1994年;科恩,lotan ,艾布拉姆,scarloss ,与舒尔茨,2002年） .此文章还报告了对教师的percep - tionsofcooperativelearning ,aspectsthatneedtobeconsidered如果这个教学方法teachingandlearningistobeusedmorewidelyinclassroomsin初中生.了解teachers'perceptions其疗效作为教学practicewill帮助,以确定如何可以effectivelyimplemented在课堂上.这是particularlyimportant鉴于白耐斯,blatchford ,andkutnick （ 2003 ）发现,由中学schoolstudents更有可能工作在dyads或ingroups 11个或更多的成员那里teachersdetermined的大小集团,workinginteraction类型,以及学习任务beundertaken .在大多数情况下,白耐斯等人.建议,分组的做法,目的是maintainingcontrol由教师;办法groupwork是相反,发展中国家组autono -我的责任和所提倡的倡议者ofcooperative学习（例如,强生公司,1990年; slavin ,1995年） .