The Benefits of Cooperative Learning to Socio-scientific Discussion in Secondary School Science

Abstract

The aim of this research was to determine the benefits of cooperative learning to opening up socioscientific discussion in secondary science. Seventy-four classes of 20 13-14-year-old pupils in one secondary school were observed engaging in discussion concerning climate change over three rounds of action research involving 12 teachers associated with the implementation of a Topical Science strand of a new national science curriculum. Pupil views on the cooperative learning approach used to facilitate the lessons and the associated discussion were determined using a pupil questionnaire (n ¼ 171). By the end of the action research, the overall average typical exchange in the observed lessons was between pupil-to-pupil (mean + SD, 41% + 5%) and pupil-to-teacher (32% + 4%) with teacher-to-pupil interactions accounting for only 27% + 5% of exchanges. However, the pace of the typical exchanges was predominantly fast with most of the questions being a mixture of low order on task questions from teacher-to-pupil; technical exchanges, inquiring what to do from pupil-to-teacher; and quiz questions from teacher-to-pupil or from pupil-to-pupil. Questionnaire data indicated that overall 50.3% of pupils enjoyed the discussion (on global warming) and 59.7% did not find it boring. Nevertheless, only 45% felt that they were given the chance to express their own opinions during these discussions. Prior to these lessons, 59.6% were not interested in the issue of climate change and global warming. Cooperative learning facilitated a shift in the pattern of typical exchanges away from a teacherdominated discourse towards a more pupil-centred, open discourse.

Characterising patterns of engagement of different participants in a public STEM-based analysis project

“…These findings underline the potential impact of visitor centre science in engaging the public in STEM learning, especially those who self-identify as non-scientists, to undertake STEM learning (Falk & Dierking, 2000). The nonscientists may participate despite having visited for purposes such as cultural entertainment, personal identification and historical reminiscence (Day & Bryce, 2013;Sheng & Chen, 2012). One potential disadvantage of contextualised STEM is that it risks causing processing overload, although there is no empirical evidence of this problem occurring at visitor centres (Fox, Park & Lang, 2007;Johnstone, 1991).…”

Exploring Collaborative Learning with a Focus on Group Activities in EFL Classrooms

“…Most research on CL focuses on the effects of CL on academic achievements of elementary, secondary, high school and university students (Azap, 2012;Batdi, 2013;Çokparlamış, 2010;Çopur, 2011;Dilek, 2012;Kartal, 2014;Kartal ,2012;Tekeli, 2013;Tonbul, 2001). Very few of these investigate learner perceptions or teacher perceptions of collaborative learning ( Batdı,2013;Gillies and Boyle,2011; Gillies and Boyle,2010;;Kocaman,2005); Although scant, some research has focused on young learners' perceptions of CL (Lee and Macaro, 2013), whereas other research has focused on secondary (Day and Bryce, 2013;Gagne, 2013;Macquarrie, Howe andBoyle, 2012) or high school (Nair et al, 2012) students' perceptions of CL. Alghamdi and Gillies (2013) investigate male 10 th -grade students' perceptions of CL; Mulryon (1994) investigates 5 thand 6 th -grade students' perceptions of group work.…”

“…Research in the CL literature also supports this finding ( Kocaman, 2005) Similarly,the students reported that they prefered their groups to have three or more members. Day andBryce (2013, p.1537) indicate that a typical group may contain between two and six members, with four being the ideal number. , Lou, Abrami and d'Apollonia (2001) also find that students learned better in groups of three or four members.…”

AGHAMIC Action Approach (A3): Its Effects on the Pupils’ Conceptual Understanding on Matter

“…Critical and creative thinking skills are more developed among the pupils in the experimental group compared to their counterparts as shown from their written works and performance tasks. Science education is in a unique position to help young people develop skills which should enable them to respond critically to various platforms such as media reports on issues with a science dimension (Day & Bryce, 2013). The teacher-implementer likewise realized that critical review of the AGHAMIC learning tasks using rubrics is also important to ensure the successful attainment of the learning outcomes.…”