Cooperative learning in science: Intervention in the secondary school

Research in Science and Technological Education

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 91-106

  Topping, K J ^a   Thurston, A ^b   Tolmie, A ^c   Christie, D ^d   Murray, P ^a   Karagiannidoud, E ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Attainment; Cooperative learning; Group work; High; Implementation fidelity; Implementation integrity; Science; Secondary; Self esteem; Social

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952644289     PISSN: 02635143     EISSN: 14701138     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02635143.2010.539972     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Acar, B., and L. Tarhan. 2008. Effects of cooperative learning on students' understanding of metallic bonding. Research in Science Education 38, no. 4: 401-420.
2. Baines, E., P. Blatchford, and P. Kutnick. 2008. Promoting effective group work in the classroom: A handbook for teachers and practitioners. London: Routledge.
3. Balfakih, N.M.A. 2003. The effectiveness of Student Team-Achievement Division (STAD) for teaching high school chemistry in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Science Education 25, no. 5: 605-624.
4. Bennett, J., F. Lubben, S. Hogarth, and B. Campbell. 2004. A systematic review of the use of small-group discussions in science teaching with students aged 11-18, and their effects on student's understanding in science or attitude to science. Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.
5. Brown, B.L. 2001. Women and minorities in high-tech careers. ERIC Digest No. 226. ERIC Document Reproduction Number ED452367.
6. Chang, C.Y., and S.L. Mao. 1999. Comparison of Taiwan science students' outcomes with inquiry-group versus traditional instruction. Journal of Educational Research 92, no. 6: 340-346.
7. Chang, H.P., and N.G. Lederman. 1994. The effects of levels of cooperation within physical science laboratory groups on physical science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31, no. 2: 167-81.
8. Cross, D., G. Taasoobshirazi, S. Hendricks, and D.T. Hickey. 2008. Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education 30, no. 6: 837-61.
9. Ding, N., and E. Harskamp. 2006. How partner gender influences female students' problem solving in physics education. Journal of Science Education and Technology 15, no. 5/6: 331-43.
10. Dori, Y.J., and O. Herscovitz. 1999. Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36, no. 4: 411-430.
11. Faro, S., and K. Swan. 2006. An investigation into the efficacy of the studio model at the high school level. Journal of Educational Computing Research 35, no. 1: 45-59.
12. Galton, G., J. Gray, and J. Rudduck. 2003. Transfer and transitions in the middle years of schooling (7-14): Continuities and discontinuities in learning. London: DfES Research Report 443. http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR443.pdf
13. Gillies, R.M. 2003. The behaviors, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 95, no. 1: 137-147.
14. Gillies, R.M. 2008. The effects of cooperative learning on junior high school students' behaviours, discourse and learning during a science-based learning activity. School Psychology International 29, no. 3: 328-47.
15. Hanze, M., and R. Berger. 2007. Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction 17, no. 1: 29-41.
16. Harter, S. 1985. Manual for the self-perception profile for children. Denver, CO: University of Denver.
17. Hogan, K. 1999. Thinking aloud together: A test of an intervention to foster students' collaborative scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36, no. 10: 1085-1109.
18. Howe, C., A. Tolmie, A. Thurston, K.J. Topping, D. Christie, K. Livingston, E. Jessiman, and C. Donaldson. 2007. Group work in elementary science: Organisational principles for classroom teaching. Learning and Instruction 17, no. 5: 549-563.
19. Hsu, Y.S. 2004. Using the internet to develop students' capacity for scientific inquiry. Journal of Educational Computing Research 31, no. 2: 137-161.
20. Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, and B. Taylor. 1993. Impact of cooperative and individualistic learning on high-ability students' achievement, self-esteem, and social acceptance. Journal of Social Psychology 133, no. 6: 839-44.
21. Kutnick, P., P. Blatchford, and M. Galton. 2005. S-TOP: SPRinG - teaching observation protocol. Brighton: University of Brighton.
22. Lazarowitz, R., R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, and J.H. Baird. 1994. Learning science in a cooperative setting: Academic achievement and affective outcomes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31, no. 10: 1121-131.
23. Lonning, R.A. 1993. Effect of cooperative learning strategies on student verbal interactions and achievement during conceptual change instruction in 10th grade general science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30, no. 9: 1087-1101.
24. Lumpe, A.T., and J.R. Staver. 1995. Peer collaboration and concept development - learning about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32, no. 1: 71-98.
25. Mercer, N., R. Wegerif, and L. Dawes. 1999. Children's talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal 25: 95-111.
26. Pell, T., and T. Jarvis. 2001. Developing attitude to science scales for use with children of ages from five to eleven years. International Journal of Science Education 23, no. 8: 847-862.
27. Rothenberg, J.J., P. McDermott, and G. Martin. 1998. Changes in pedagogy: A qualitative result of teaching heterogeneous classes. Teaching and Teacher Education 14, no. 6: 633-642.
28. Scottish Executive. 2000. Room for improvement in pupil's attainment in science. News Release: SE3070/2000. www.scotland.gov.uk/news/2000/11/se3070.asp
29. Scottish Executive Education Department. 2005. Assessment of achievement programme: Sixth survey of science 2003. Edinburgh: SEED.
30. Snyder, T., and H. Sullivan. 1995. Cooperative and individual learning and student misconceptions in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology 20, no. 2: 230-235.
31. Thurston, A. 2006. Effects on attainment of group work in primary school geography. Karlsruhe Padagogische Studien 7: 57-89.
32. Thurston, A., G. Grant, and K.J. Topping. 2006. Constructing understanding in primary science: An exploration of process and outcomes. Revista de Investigacion Psicoeducativa 4, no. 1: 1-18.
33. Tolmie, A., K.J. Topping, D. Christie, C. Donaldson, C. Howe, E. Jessiman, K. Livingston, and A. Thurston. 2010. Social effects of collaborative learning in primary schools. Learning and Instruction 20, no. 3: 177-191.
34. Topping, K.J., and S. Ehly. 1998. Peer-assisted learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35. Trumper, R. 2001. A cross-age study of junior high school students' conceptions of basic astronomy concepts. International Journal of Science Education 23, no. 11: 1111-1123.
36. Webb, N.M., K.M. Nemer, A.W. Chizhik, and B. Sugrue. 1998. Equity issues in collaborative group assessment: Group composition and performance. American Educational Research Journal 35, no. 4: 607-661.
37. Winther, A.A., and T.L. Volk. 1994. Comparing achievement of inner-city high school students in traditional versus STS-based chemistry courses. Journal of Chemical Education 71, no. 6: 501-505.