User:Mukeshabrc/sandbox

The educational field has experienced a sea change in its thinking about the nature and conditions of human learning that best promote its diverse dimensions (Applefield, Huber &Moallem, 2001 as cited in Gan, 2008). Numerous researchers asserted that people learn best when they repeat a course several times and that the theory underlying this method of instruction in most Western schools is constructivist in nature (Gan, 2008).

Gan (2008) states that teachers typically begin instruction by introducing the subject or concept, explaining it, and providing examples of works. Finally, the teacher assigns homework to the students. Students cannot develop their understanding of this learning environment because they are not actively involved in teaching and learning. Students cannot think creatively, innovatively, or critically because they are only aware of what they have been taught.

Additionally, some students are unable to keep up with the teaching pace. As a result, teachers should adapt their teaching style to more student-centered to encourage active participation. Peer tutoring is one method of teaching. However, peer tutoring is a systematic, peer-mediated teaching strategy (Rohrbeck, Ginsburg-Block, Fantuzzo& Miller, 2003).

To bolster the preceding statement, Ezengwu (2007) stated that most teachers in this field continue to use traditional teaching methods, which, while having some advantages, are didactic, stereotypical, ineffective, and yield no results. According to Anselm (2010), the National Mathematics Panel (2008) argued that we must improve the quality of mathematics instruction received by all secondary school students to continue making progress in mathematics. Although numerous factors influence a student's mathematics learning, schools control the mathematics program chosen by teachers, administrators, and curriculum developers.

Peer tutoring is not a novel concept; it may be as old as any community or collaborative action and has almost certainly always been implicit or vicarious in nature (Topping 2005). However, more formalized and even valued forms of peer education are gaining popularity in a changing landscape of higher education. Indeed, peer tutoring systems appear to be strategically designed to meet accountability requirements, better evaluation, and better student results. (Colombia, 2010).

Peer tutoring is a very ancient practice that can at least be traced back to ancient Greeks. In a linear model of knowledge transfer, the pair tutor is seen as a substitute teacher from a teacher to a tutor. The interaction between a teacher and a student was then realized to be qualitatively different and had several advantages and disadvantages (Razia, 2012). Peer-tutoring consists of a partnership between students that links highly accomplished students with lessons or similar accomplishments in structural and mathematical studies. Peer-tutoring refers to situations where a child provides a child with instruction and guidance (Tan, Cheah&Choug, 2005).

Furthermore, as Nathern & Liz (2007) and Loretta (2013) quoted in Ezenwosu, peer tutoring allows teachers to adapt a classroom to improve their academic achievements in skill and content with diverse learners. Vygotsky (1987), mentioned in Razia (2012), points out that peers play a particular role in children's development. Although the relationship between children and parents is more intense and sustainable than that between peers, the interactions between elderly colleagues are freer and less equitable. The increased smoothness of peer relations offers children the opportunity to experience and explore in a new way.

1.2 BACKGROUND:

Constructivist learning theory says that pupils become more aware when they learn. This idea is based on meaningful learning through participation in learning activities. It also believes that in real-world environments, knowledge must be used. A student-centered social learning environment gives them the chance to do well in class. Constructivism is the belief that students build knowledge individually and socially (Hein, 1991). Many constructionists believe that the learning of Piaget (1985), Vygotsky (1986), and Dewey is much more effective under social conditions than through individual learning (Gagnon & Colllay, 1990; Derry, 1996; Prawat, 1996). (2001). The constructionists' education emphasizes meaningful learning and social commitment.

They use their past knowledge to learn better if students connect socially. Costa and Mallick say that the principles of constructivism are to promote self-directed learning (2004). They said that questions arise in a constructivist environment and that students try to make sense of learning. The authors also thought that constructivist teaching techniques would boost cognition. Social environments also offer students the opportunity to overcome the fear of failure. Costa and Kallick also said that student discussion and communication facilitated learning.

The constructivist Glasserfeld (1997) wrote that the mental functions of human beings are found in social interactions. Students must therefore interact to improve the functioning of the mind. Nevertheless, traditional teaching techniques, guided mainly by teachers, do not allow for increased socialization and new meanings. If the teacher focuses on all instruction, higher orders may not occur.

In addition to thinking, communication, and connection in the curriculum and assessment standards of the School of Mathematics, NCTM (2000) has placed problem-solving as an important vision in mathematical training. Problem resolution is a complicated process with many cognitive functions, including data collection and selection, heuristic strategy, and metacognition; (Garfalo& Lester, 1985; Schoenfeld, 1994; De Corte, 1995). Many educators have discovered the advantages of metacognition and cooperation to revolutionize teaching and learning for a new generation to meet the demands of this time.

Bilgin et al. (2006) and Chang & Mao (1999) have found in their contributions that cooperative learning involves students in learning processes and aims to increase learners' critical thinking, thinking, and problem-solving skills. Stevens & Slavin (1995) argued that interaction between peers is essential to cooperative cognitive learning. They also pointed out that it is easier to understand. Students who usually 'switch off' or refuse to speak in the traditional environment participate through group interaction actively in the study process. Every cooperative learning technique is found to help students move beyond text, store basic information, and master skills at a lower level. This cognitive reorganization effect gives the cooperative students better knowledge. Cooperative learning has proven to foster self-esteem and relationships among academic advantages and improve school and peer attitudes (Bilgin et al. 2006).

In the cooperative learning technique, students can discuss their solutions with fellow students. Students can write their answers, talk with their neighbors, talk to them and share their answers with the entire class. It forces students to speak about their ideas, assesses their views, and share their views with their classmates. By sharing their findings with the whole class, students can gain information and evaluate themselves from other classmates. The professor could also evaluate the students' understanding based on the content of the lectures.

Schoenfeld (1992) recognized four categories of understanding and behavior in solving a mathematical problem in his theory of the interactions between cognitive and metacognitive processes. These categories are 'resources (mathematical knowledge), heuristics (problem solving), control (metacognition) and belief systems (attitudes).' He also described the relation between cognition and metacognition, showing that mathematics often focuses on mathematical knowledge and the resolution of problems. However, Schoenfeld considered that the lack of attention to metacognitive capabilities and attitudes too often causes pupil failure to solve problems. Students often have the information to do the mathematical task but don't use it properly because they don't analyze and monitor their opinions or because they don't see it for their benefit (Gourgey, 2002).

A literature study reveals that a person can improve his or her arithmetic abilities by targeted metacognitive training (Hudesman, Crosby, Flugman, Issac, Everson, & Clay, 2013; Pennequin, Sorel, &Mainguy, 2010). While several studies focused on various metacognitive skills and tactics, the results show improved participant mathematical achievement. Papinczak, Peterson, Babri, Ward, Kippers, and Wilkinson (2012) further pointed out the importance of certain metacognitive abilities, including self-regulation and problem solving, as determinants for academic achievement and student self-confidence.

Educators must meet all students' needs in their classrooms. Proper tactics and future leaders and responsible citizens will lead to positive social change and more fairness as high-ranking thinkers and qualified problem-solvers (Cummings 2000; Hargreaves, 2003).

This study shows the importance of using social learning strategies and individual internal mental activity to prepare children for higher-order thinkers. The study examined the impact on the student achievement of cooperative learning strategies and metacognitive strategies.

1.3 PEER-TUTORING TYPES

a) Peer Tutoring: peer tutoring is carried out between same-age or same-level students. Peer tutoring can also be conducted between students from the same classroom and students from different classrooms.

b)  Cross-age Peer Tutoring: This kind of teaching occurs among pupils of various ages, where the elderly student teaches the younger pupil. For example, a middle school student may be a primary student to support a younger student with reading skills or mathematical skills.

c) Reciprocal Peer Tutoring: Paired students alternate roles in this environment as teachers and guardians. These roles often change in the same tutoring session where each pair of students becomes a tutor and tutor for a given time. In a different scenario, the role of a student may remain the same during a tutoring session until a new tutoring session takes place with another partner.

d)  Wide Peer Tutoring (CWPT) class: a model based on reciprocal peer tutoring in a game format paired with a team and assigned to each student. This leads to two equally skilled teams consisting of high, medium, and low-level students in each team. Student couples perform academic tasks with each pair member during a tutorial with the opportunity to learn and be tutored while earning points for their team. The team with more points wins after a tutoring session. Learn more about CWPT on the website of the University of Kansas, where this model was developed.

e) Peer Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS): PALS is a class-wide peer-tutoring (CWPT) version designed to complement existing mathematics and reading curriculums. Teachers create pairs of students based on the individual needs of their students. A student who needs assistance in a certain field is linked to a partner who can help the student learn the content. Over time, partners change to meet other requirements. The researchers at the Kennedy Center for Human Research at Vanderbilt University developed PALS Reading and Math. Learn more about PALS on the university's website.

1.4 BENEFITS OF PEER- TUTORING

The lesson's objective is to help students become self-employed and provide them with the skills needed to succeed in school. Tutoring is not just about improving school work. Working with a tutor has endless benefits like improving working and studying habits, increasing confidence and attitudes, or improving social and behavioral abilities. Tutoring can be beneficial in many ways. There is currently sufficient research to document the benefits of peer education as an addition to traditional instruction. Peer Tutoring is used in academic fields and has improved the academic performance of several students in a range of fields. Common components of peer training programs provide individual and positive cognitive and social benefits for both high-performance and low-performance mentors.

a)  Academic and cognitive benefits through peer tutoring: peer tutoring is used most effectively to enhance the performance of risky or mathematical students, basic elderly, and computational mathematics.

b)  Improves student reading performance at all levels: Some positive results in peer tutoring include improvements in key read skills and self-concept and reading skills.

c)  Houses of different students in a classroom: Inclusive learning and teaching of students who are disabled in regular schools together with students without disabilities can be facilitated by emphasizing differentiated learning, where students from different academic levels are taught according to their style their learning speed. Differentiated education that emphasizes students' ability to acquire knowledge and skills in a traditional classroom can be difficult to implement. Peer tutoring can offer educators an effective strategy to facilitate distinguished learning without distracting or alienating students. When peer tutoring occurs across classes, students can approach the curriculum at their level by using strategies tailored to their students.

d)  Promotes high order thinking: peer tutors can help students at the lowest levels to use high-level thinking skills to learn the material of their master in a classroom setting previously introduced.

e) Social and compartmental gains through peer tutoring: The social, self-concept, and behavioral outcomes of peer support strategies, including peer tutoring, were affected positively. Researchers have also found a significant positive relationship between the results of social and self-concept and academic success. Decreases in interruptive behavior and social interactions between cultural and developmental peers are also noted through pair tutoring.

f)  Increases student control and academic achievement responsibility: peer tutoring increases student responsibility. Peer tutoring has also shown that students can better accept constructive feedback from adults. By training in peer education strategies, students can assist them in taking responsibility for their education and recognizing and taking responsibility for academic failures.

1.5 ADVANTAGES OF PEER TUTORING

According to Utley (2001), peer-mediated teaching and intervention is a four-value teaching strategy: enhancing test performance (standard and curricula-based), including IEP students in general education classroom education, enhancing student acceptance with different needs and relationships, and improving student discipline. The studies reviewed showed similar results for this article. Improving test performance, particularly standardized state examinations, justifies using peer tutoring to appeal to school administrators since the connections between state examination values and federal or state funding for schools are direct. Improving the curriculum-based testing, which administrators would appreciate, is a reason for teachers to perform peer tutoring in their classrooms. Even if individualized education (IEP) students are included in a general education classroom, special education and resource teachers are less needed. A general educator may not benefit from this, but managers will again be impressed by increasing funding by cutting positions and having teachers from general education accommodate all students. (Baldwin, 2007). 2007.

The acceptance of these students with IEPs is the most evident advantage in combining all students. Although it may become harder and more taxing for the teacher to accommodate various learning styles and IEPs in one classroom, the inclusion of special needs allows traditional classmates to accept the students with disabilities. The inclusion classrooms break this divide and promote the full acceptance by average or higher education students of students who were once seen as "different." An improvement in-class behavior among students engaged in peer education is a most appealing benefit for teachers. Classroom administration plays a major role in students' productivity, commitment and achievement. Peer tutoring offers the opportunity to reduce poor behavior, improving productivity, involvement, and performance. Okay! (2001),

Additional reasons why peer tutoring is a good strategy are provided below:

a) Kids easily understand children's tutors, as they are cognitively closer to each other. Children usually find their communication methods with other children and often present a subject to others better than an adult. Children's teachers can give classmates their models of understanding a subject using their personal experience, fresh ideas, everyday examples of children, even popular symbols of communication that make learning easier. (John, as mentioned in Ellinogermanik, 2005, 2009).

b)  Peer Tutoring ensures a good and efficient level of communication and cooperation for the guardians and the benefit of student tutors. The benefits of the tutors are as follows: By spending time revising the subject, they have to teach other students, they gain deeper and clearer knowledge of their subjects. We have been told that we learn 95 percent of what we teach. Tutors develop their ability and ability to teach and guide other students; tutors enjoy increased self-esteem, feel they are doing something useful, and improve their tutorships. Guardians also respect them. Often, the ambition of older children to be chosen as tutors increases competitiveness and leads to better standards for older groups. Of course, care should be taken from the teacher's side to limit discrimination to the maximum extent possible to certain children's tutors. Structured peer tutoring enhances communication and cooperation between students, improves team spirit, and helps socialize.

c) This relationship offers many advantages for the peer teacher and the tutor, says Outhred & Chester (2010). One aspect is that the tutor can connect to the tutor so that a teacher cannot. A peer tutor may have taken the same or similar classes recently. As the tutor considers the peer tutor more on his level, the tutor's advice can be more readily accepted than that of a teacher. Another main reason is that a peer tutor does not give a paper grade, but a professor who works as a teacher can always be considered a paper grader.

1.6 PEER TUTORING & ACHIEVEMENT

Classroom peer tutoring can take many forms. Spencer (2006) examined 38 studies from 1972 to 2002, in which some tutorials were given to students with emotional or behavioral problems. She found that "this shows that peer teaching is an effective education strategy in 38 research studies." The most effective form of peer tutoring was a common method in which students reverse their tutorial roles regularly. Suppose students explain their thoughts so that the other students can get a closer understanding of the concept. It is not enough to pair students, give them problems and expect them to succeed at a higher level.

Walker (2007) had five high-level students selected as peer tutors by the principal and teachers of Lowell High School for a post-school tutoring program. She chose to use the knowledge of these students to make it possible that urban students do not understand mathematics and to contribute to the creation and development of mathematical knowledge and interest. Her research demonstrates that teachers and guardians have been able to work together on teaching concepts.

Mesler (2009) paired a student with a classmate via an action research plan. The retained student was a competitor's teacher. At the end of the study, he and his tutee saw significant gains in their test scores. Mesler found that the retained student's trust increased and improved with the additional mathematical practice.

Walker (2007), Mesler (2009), and Spencer have observed the different types of children (2006). Walker's (2007) urban high school studies, 3rd-grade students from Mesler (2009), and 38 Spencer study classes from students with emotional and behavioral disorders (2006). Although the three studied different types of children, they all found that the combination of students as peer tutors improves the performance of the two students.

While previous peer tutoring research shows that student results use peer tutoring better (Delquadri et al., 1986), literature has certain gaps. The peer tutorial literature does not include recent Effect Size (E.S.) reviews with confidence ranges for primary and secondary students. Furthermore, potential moderators were not fully investigated, and an evaluation of the single case data using a common effect size metric was necessary.

Research, effect size, and trust intervals for one individual case Single-case methods can "strictly evaluate the effectiveness" (Kratochwill et al., 2010). Therefore, one-case research was used to identify several actions in schools, as this investigation method can help identify practice based on evidence (Horner et al., 2005). The use of effects in one case research allows for determining the size or magnitude of the academic or behavioral change. Determining the impact and functional relation is crucial for training and early intervention models in multi-stage practice (see Council for Exceptional Children, 2008; National Association of School Psychologists, 2010).

Data from individual cases of school practice are more summed up when new methods are developed that can address positive basic trends and require little data (Parker, Vannest, Davis, &Sauber, 2011). Although many studies using individual-case research can be seen in peer tutoring literature, no single or aggregate effect sizes with corresponding intervals were published to date. This is a major shortcoming because effect sizes help to summarise data across studies. In addition, confidence intervals are required for the accurate interpretation of effect size data (Cooper 2011; Hunter et al. 1982; Thompson 2002, Thompson 2007) and are required by the American Psychological Association (APA; U.S. Psychological Association, 2010).

1.7 PEER TUTORING AND TEACHING STRATEGY:

An Ajuba (2011) study showed that peer-readers are more sensitive than adult readers to nonverbal clues so that tutored students can show that they don't know what the tutor is trying to communicate. Each student receives more attention from the teacher in peer tutorship and more time to talk as others listen. This allows students to participate in the development of their knowledge actively.

In his research, Santander (2008) found that all participants have a greater self-concept and satisfaction when students work with a parent instructor or cooperative learning.

Sharpley and Sharpley (1981) reported substantial cognitive benefits for guards and tutors in a meta-analysis of 82 school studies. Tutoring at the same age was as effective as the results achieved by tutoring and training tutors.

The results from Beasley (1997) and Royal (2007) suggest a fascinating combination of social and academic activity outside the classroom. Another aspect of this finding is that students who access tutoring interact with people they might not otherwise have associated. In particular, these programs provided students with an opportunity to interact outside their social networks and extend both tutors' and tutors' social networks. The positive reciprocal relationship between tutors and guardians may have been used to generate social capital for both groups. Moreover, those tutoring environments appear to be part of the curriculum structure that could influence social capital conversion.

1.8 PEER-TUTORING AND GENDER PERFORMANCE IN MATHEMATICS

Several reports revealed the difference in mean results between male and female mathematics students. For example, in their study, Uloko and Imoko (2007) found that male students were higher than their female counterparts. Other studies have shown that the women have achieved more than the men, but the difference between them is not significant (Igbo, 2004 and Chiasson, 2008, as cited at Uloko; (2014). Would the utilization of PTS also produce a difference in mean achievement rates between male and female students with statistical challenges? Against this background, the study will also examine the impact of PTS and gender on student performance in statistics.

1.8.1 INTER-GROUP RELATION:

The concept of intergroup relations reflects the fact that more than one or two groups usually exist. We should argue that no group or individual is an island and that there is always an exchange of relationships because of individual specifics, limitations, and shortcomings to complement the shortcomings of our relationships as an individual or a society. All that a society or an individual needs can not produce, and therefore the need for inter-relationships.

Intergroup relationships refer to interactions between individuals in social groups and interactions between groups themselves. She has long been a research subject of social psychology, political psychology, and organization.

The now widely recognized definition of intergroup relations, which Muzafer Sherif proposed in 1966: "When individuals belonging to one group interact with another group or its members, collectively or individually, we have an instance of intergroup behaviour." Intergroup research involves studying many psychological phenomena linked to intergroup processes, social identity, prejudice, group dynamics, and conformity. Research in this field has been shaped by many prominent figures and provides empirical insight into contemporary social issues, including social inequality and discrimination.

The study of intergroup relations has long been a major element in social research and social psychology. More recent work has sought to assess whether group connections can lead to favorable consequences (Lee et al. 2004). Examples of inter-group relations in Iraq include 9/11, Al-terrorist Qaeda's strike in the United States, the Tutsis massacre in 1994 in Rwanda, and ongoing tensions between the Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

Social psychologist Gordon Allport (1897–1967) conducted the earliest and most extensive intergroup study. He researched intergroup connections in his book Nature of Prejudice from the mid-1950s (1954). Since then, several investigations have enhanced our understanding of intergroup relations and, in particular, the requirements for healthy social-psychological contact between groups (e.g., Amir 1969; Lee et al. 2004). For example, substantial changes in population and immigration policy, technological progress, and economic volatility - better and worse – are known to modify the character of group relations and the toppling of current political regimes.

The social identities and perceptions of each member influence the intergroup. The quality of intergroup relations also influences the identities of group members. Consequently, the processes of group identification and the quality of intergroup relations are circular. One influences and the other influences.

The potential challenge for intergroup relations is that persons tend to be classed socially. Because of the conceptual tendency to split the universe into different categories, one Group instead of the other is almost unavoidable. People are socially classed to provide a seemingly complete set of incentives (for example, for other people) they meet. The process of nominating someone in one's Group (i.e., in the Group) is nearly automatic. (i.e., a member of the outgroupoutgroup). When intergroup relationships are cordial, various groups can less emphasize the difference between groups and outgroupsoutgroups. However, in the event of a conflict, your Group's identity will increase, disparities between groups will increase, and conflict between groups increases.

The social categorization trends are even more troublesome; experts Henri Tajfel and John Turner believe if people are normally motivated to raise their self-esteem by aligning themselves with specific social groups. According to the notion of social identity (Tajfel and Turner 1986), persons can boost self-esteem by aligning themselves with groups they believe are superior to outgroupsoutgroups. This notion was often adopted as a prejudice explanation. Prejudice usually means negative sentiments towards members of the Group based merely on membership in the Group. People who harbor group membership prejudices frequently feel unfavorable about each group member and tend to see that they are more like one another than themselves.

Initial investigations have shown simple prejudiced sensations (LaPiere 1934; Pettigrew 1969; Hyman and Sheatsley 1956/1964). More recent work shows that discriminatory views have fallen and become more subtle in the United States. Today, for example, the whites harm blacks less because they are less harmed than past generations. This is significant since negatives can be found in a wide range of studies using subtle assessments for the members of different external groups (e.g., Banaji and Bhasker 2000; Bargh and Chartrand 1999; Dovidio et al. 1997). Together they reduced the expressions of prejudice, law, social prescription, and fear of representatives.

Although less bloody, many social psychologists who have studied harm say that what substituted the "earlier" prejudices is a new, insidious prejudice known as modern racism (McConahay et al., 1981). This prejudice entails the careful camouflage of harmful behavior, except in the case of comparable minds. It is against racial problems, including affirmative action and interracial marriage. The modern racist connects his attitudes to causes other than harm. Social psychologists have taken subtle measures to evaluate this current sort of harm (e.g., the Implicit Association Test).

Prejudice usually comes with stereotypes. Stereotypes are cognitive constructs containing people's information (Group, place, or thing). Stereotypes affect how specific information is processed, encoded, and accessed subsequently. In short, stereotypes influence social information processing. Stereotypes are functional because they allow cognitive resources to be preserved. Stereotyping encourages people to forgo efforts to comprehend social information. The difficulty, however, is that the heterogeneity between people is overlooked. We overlook their individuality by categorizing others and place constraints on them. The quality and depth of intergroup relations and their detriment to outgroupoutgroup members do not unexpectedly influence people's stereotypes. Less is preferable in intergroup relations (i.e., less stereotyping and prejudice is associated with more positive intergroup relations). The intergroup study tends to focus on the negative effects of intergroup relations, including discrimination and prejudice.

Discrimination is an indication of compartmental harm. It entails unjustified conduct towards a group of people just due to their membership. As with evident prejudice, civil law and social pressure have in recent years effectively decreased glaring forms of discrimination in the U.S. and other nations (Swim et al. 1995). Discrimination remains unsolved and, in some cases, strongly contested. For example, in the Los Angeles police and criminal justice systems, rampant discrimination led to the 1992 attack on Rodney King, Fred Pincus reported (2000). The Los Angeles Police Department leadership condoned the anti-black behavior, and the attack on the King symptomatically reflected a climate that fostered prejudice against Black people. In addition, when the defense requested a change of location, the white jury acquitted the officials and shifted this trial to a conservative, predominantly white neighborhood. This certainly demonstrates institutional discrimination.

Institutional discrimination typically refers to the system or recurrent treatment of someone for their race by an institution or Group. This relates to the impacts of practices and policies, which sometimes can be imposed without looking carefully at the race yet hurt a group. Personal prejudice should not be caused by institutional discrimination.

Research on intergroup relationships and their associations (e.g., social identity, stereotypes, harm, or prejudice) remains a successful research subject for scholars and policymakers. People worldwide belong to a range of organizations and groups that often affect groupings and groups. Recent global events underscore the necessity for research to explain the factors for healthy intergroup relations.

1.9 THE STUDY'S JUSTIFICATION:

The common problem with mathematics is that although students understand all the formulae of a particular problem, they may not correctly apply them, which prevents them from solving the problem. This shows how important it is to consider a higher level of problem and how important it is to talk to teachers, mentors, or even their peers to solve the problem. Cooperative learning, David Roger and Johnson (1975) report, has increased the range of thinking processes used by group members, facilitated mutual liking, improved communication, and enhanced peer acceptance and support.

Bossert (1988) emphasized that cooperative learning is effective at any age level, in all fields, and across a broad range of tasks while highlighting the benefits of cooperative learning. In a statistical study, Keeler and Steinhorst (1994) concluded that formalizing cooperative learning strategies used in primary and secondary schools improved student performance and retention in a college course in new stats.

A thorough review and evaluation by Slavin et al. (2009) of all studies on the relevant mathematical programs from all countries were undertaken to determine what works for children aged 11-18. The review findings show that teaching programs (interventions with educational processes) that change the way students teach and foster student interaction impact student achievement. Cooperative learning was particularly successful, even if the impact of various textbooks and ICTs was negligible.

Mevarech&Kramarski (1997) described two forms of cooperative learning: STAD, a cooperative learning-based approach, and IMPROVE, a mathematical approach that has been developed in Israel combining cooperative learning, metacognitive instruction, and teaching skills. In seven investigations, they reported a weighted mean impact of +0.46, four of which had been randomly assigned to conditions and a weighted medium effect size of +0.48. The results for the cooperative learning programs were consistent with the results of the elementary review, which determined that the median impact of cooperative learning was +0.29. (Slavin& Lake 2008). (2008).

Many researchers (Hargreaves, 2003; Levy & Murnane, 2004) found that conventional mathematics teaching methods are not enough to attract attention and do not meet student intellectual, psychological and emotional needs. The methods of mathematics teaching must be changed. The modern concept of teaching is more student-centered and learner-driven. Education has been slowly evolving from an educational system to a central learning system, requiring changes to the educational process and the materials used to make this process more effective (Marge, 2001; Schoenfeld, 1985). The learner is actively involved in the teaching-learning process, and learning should affect desirable change of behavior, habit, living style, an adaptation of knowledge, skills, etc. It aims to maximize the experience of learning. The threshold of the new millennium is innovation in all spheres of life, including education. Teachers today have a responsibility to enrich the student through efficient education strategies with ever-exposing information.

The primary responsibility of teachers is to prepare systematic teaching and provide learning experiences which are necessary components of efficient and dynamic teaching. Through teaching-learning tactics, the classroom can become a marvelous place for the students to absorb learning material without any effort. The development of new learning theories has important implications for education.

Currently, constructivist education theory is the dominant education theory, focusing on students and how to teach them. Constructivism stresses the need to encourage students to study, observe, work in groups, share their ideas, draw comparisons, draw conclusions and judgments (Costa and Kallick, 2004). One of the fundamental concepts of constructivism is that students should build new understanding through prior knowledge. Metacognition is the act of thinking, knowing both what we know and what we don't know. Metacognition is based on constructivist theory and lays the foundation for new knowledge generation. Metacognition is a term that refers to higher-order thinking that involves active control over the cognitive processes of learning. Metacognitive activities include deciding how to approach a specific learning task, verifying understanding, and assessing progress towards completing the task. Metacognition guides students' selection of tasks, effort level, and strategy. Metacognitive methods bring relevant knowledge of the learner about their task-related strengths and deficiencies and their wish to complete their tasks. Students are guided throughout their lives to identify and practice metacognitive skills. Since 1979, John Flavell created the word; metacognition has become prominent in cognitive and educational psychology. Since then, an outpouring of research has been initiated in this sector. Three primary fields of study play a major role in metacognition:

Psychological development focuses on mind theory, experimental cognitive psychology focusing on metal mics, and educational psychology focus on self-regulated learning.

The wide range of fields and views of metacognition is because metacognition is closely connected to awareness and consciousness of the mental state. In India, metacognition research is at an early age. Only a few scientists have begun a study on this subject.

The researchers discovered that this type of study was carried out in the Indian environment by Jayapraba (2013), which looks at the impact of metacognitive education and cooperative learning on improving perceptual learning in science. However, the researcher could not find any studies focusing on mathematics in the Indian context. Therefore, it was determined that a study using mathematics as the primary theme had to assess the effect of metacognitive methods, cooperation, and the combination of the two on mathematics achievement.

1.10 Research Questions

Considering the negative attitude toward mathematics and the lack of attainment of mathematical competence, the investigator, as a mathematics teacher educator, recognized the need for developing a method for upper primary students with diverse learning styles to learn mathematics in a relaxed and friendly environment. Based on the investigation, the following research questions were formulated:

·       Is cooperative learning more effective than the standard way of improving class VII students' mathematical achievement?

·       Is the metacognitive strategy more effective than the conventional way at increasing pupils' achievement in mathematics?

·       Which teaching style is more effective at improving class VIII students' mathematics achievement when compared to both cooperative learning and metacognitive strategy teaching methods?

When these queries are extended to different intellect levels, they provide additional minor points of inquiry. These include the following:

·       Is there a difference in the achievement of kids with higher intelligence who are taught cooperatively versus those taught conventionally?

·       Is there a difference in achievement between pupils taught using metacognitive tactics and those taught using the standard method?

·       Is there a difference in achievement between pupils taught through cooperative learning and those taught through metacognitive strategies?

·       Is there a difference in achievement between students taught cooperatively and those taught conventionally?

·       Is there a difference in achievement between pupils taught using metacognitive tactics and those taught using the standard method?

·       Is there a difference in achievement between pupils taught through cooperative learning and those taught through metacognitive strategies?

·       Is there a difference in accomplishment between students of greater intelligence and those of lower intelligence who are taught cooperatively?

·       Is there a difference in achievement between the higher intelligence and the lower intelligence groups when metacognitive methods are used?

1.11 Problem Statement

Keeping in mind the research above questions, the following study is entitled: -

“Effect of Peer Tutoring Strategy on Problem Solving Ability, Inter-Group Relations and Academic Achievement in Mathematics for VII Grade Students.”

1.12 Operational definition of key terms

The key terms related to this study are as follows-

1.12.1 Effect:

The term "effect" refers to a change that occurs as a result of or as a result of an activity. The results of this study were determined by the mathematical achievement of pupils in class VIII. If the result affects the dependent variable significantly, it is considered an effect.

1.12.2 Cooperative learning:

Cooperative learning is a strategy for separating academic and social learning experiences in the classroom. It is distinct from group work in that it focuses on "shaping positive dependency." (1990; Slavin; 1990; Kagan). Cooperative learning is a type of instruction in which students collaborate in groups to complete a task.

The groups will be between four and six members in size, and the aim will be to solve a mathematical issue (Cooperative learning group). The grouping will be done so that the groups are comparable by retaining reasonably gifted students in groups with non-gifted children, with the purpose of the gifted student assisting the rest, either directly or through example.

1.12.3 Metacognitive Strategies

Metacognitive tactics are deliberate strategies to learning that involve attention monitoring, reading specific types of content, taking lecture notes, and thinking critically.

The primary metacognitive methods used in this study will be teacher-led questioning, self-questioning, thinking aloud, problem-solving strategy selection, revising and critiquing, and so on. Individual pupils in one class will be assessed using metacognitive procedures.

1.12.4  Mathematics Proficiency

The degree to which a student, teacher, or institution has achieved their short or long-term educational goals is referred to as achievement or performance.

Scores received by class VII students on the investigator's criterion-referenced test covering six chapters of the mathematics curricula given by the Uttar Pradesh Board for class VII students.

1.13  OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The study's aims were as follows:

1.13.1. MAIN OBJECTIVES

1.     To study the influence of cooperative learning methods on mathematical performance compared to regular training.

2.     We are investigating the influence of metacognitive approaches on mathematical performance compared to regular instruction.

3.     I was comparing the influence of cooperative learning strategies on mathematics with metacognitive strategies.

1.13.2 SUBSIDIARY OBJECTIVES

·       In comparing class VII mathematics success, students belonging to higher intelligence groups are taught using the cooperative learning strategy and traditional methods.

·       To compare achievements in mathematics for Class VII pupils from lower intelligence groups (using median scores) that are taught using the cooperative learning model versus conventional methods.

·       I am studying the differential effect of the cooperative learning technique on the accomplishment in class VII math of students from higher and lower intelligence groups.

·       The mathematical achievement of Class VII students from higher intelligence groups (using median division of intelligence test scores) is compared by Metacognitive tactics and conventional methods.

·       Comparison of the mathematical achievements of less intelligent pupils in class VII (using median split I.Q. scores) using Metacognitive tactics and conventional methods.

·       I am studying the differential effect of metacognitive methods on class VII mathematics in higher and lower intelligence groups (using a median split of intelligence test scores).

·       In comparison with the achievement of class VII mathematics of high intelligence kids (using median division of intelligence test scores) taught by collaborative learning and metacognitive strategies.

·       To compare the performance of Class VII mathematics students from lower intelligence groups (with median results of I.Q. tests), cooperative learning, and metacognitive strategies.

1.13.3.   Concomitant Objectives

·       To develop a mathematics accomplishment test for students in Class VII.

·       To translate the Schraw and Dennison metacognitive inventory into Hindi (1994).

·       Develop lesson plans for educating the control group and two experimental groups using cooperative learning, metacognitive tactics, and traditional methods.