This research paper is designed to set forth ideas on how to implement cooperative learning and examine its effect on social and cooperative skills while imparting science education at the Secondary Level. The strategy used is Jigsaw Technique making heterogeneous groups based on intelligence and gender. Instructional material and observation schedule were constructed by researchers. The cooperative skills of the students were found improving during the experimental period, and they developed positive interdependence, face-to-face interaction skills, and feeling of individual accountability, as compared by Mann Whitney U test. The students developed the feeling of working in a group in the classroom of science, and it also improved performance, as the discussion always leads to a considerable degree of clarity of concepts. 1. Introduction In the modern era of science and technology, especially, in the realm of information technology, the approach to education has undergone significant changes. The philosophy of education has played a varied but pivotal role in shaping and designing curriculum. Pedagogy in this respect has also undergone major changes in accordance with the need of times. The teaching-learning process has become an issue of rational consideration and of critical query on various fronts, and there have been academic debates on the instructional material being provided to the students of various levels worldwide. The American Psychological Association in its report 2061 [1] validates the importance of innovative teaching methods in science by saying, “Calls for reforms in the ways we teach science at all levels, and in all disciplines are wide spread. The effectiveness of the changes being called for, employment of student-centered, active learning pedagogy, is now well supported by evidence. The relevant data have come from a number of different disciplines that include the learning sciences, cognitive psychology, and educational psychology. There is a growing body of research within specific scientific teaching communities that supports and validates the new approaches to teaching that have been adopted.” The worldwide institutes of repute have conducted surveys, workshops, seminars, and research activities on pedagogy, teaching aids, infrastructure, and newly established theories in education (The Centre for Pedagogical Innovation (CPI), Brock University, Center for Teaching Excellence, Saint Anselm College). These theories, which give rise to methods and techniques of teaching, emphasize on the all-round development of students. The
References
[1]
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Science for All Americans: Project 2061, Oxford University Press, 1989.
[2]
D. W. Johnson and R. Johnson, “Positive interdependence: key to effective cooperation,” in Interaction in Cooperative Groups: The Theoretical Anatomy of Group Learning, R. Hertz-Lazarowitz and N. Miller, Eds., Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1992.
[3]
T. Panitz, “Collaborative versus cooperative learning: a comparison of the two concepts which will help us understand the underlying nature of interactive learning,” Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 5–7, 1997.
[4]
E. Zakaria and Z. Iksan, “Promoting cooperative learning in science and mathematics education: a Malaysian perspective,” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 35–39, 2007.
[5]
K. J. Hermann, “The impact of cooperative learning on student engagement: results from an intervention,” Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 175–187, 2013.
[6]
D. Vreven and S. McFadden, “An empirical assessment of cooperative groups in large, time-compressed, introductory courses,” Innovative Higher Education, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 85–92, 2007.
[7]
M. Cavanagh, “Students’ experiences of active engagement through cooperative learning activities in lectures,” Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 12, pp. 23–33, 2011.
[8]
N. Webb and A. Mastergeorge, “Promoting effective helping behavior in peer-directed groups,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 39, no. 1-2, pp. 73–97, 2003.
[9]
R. Wegerif, N. Mercer, and L. Dawes, “From social interaction to individual reasoning: An empirical investigation of a possible sociocultural model of cognitive development,” Learning and Instruction, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 493–516, 1999.
[10]
C. Toumasis, “Cooperative study teams in mathematics classrooms,” International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 669–679, 2004.
[11]
R. M. Felder, “Cooperative learning in the sequence of engineering courses: a success story,” Cooperative Learning and College Teaching Newsletter, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 10–13, 1995.
[12]
S. Lighfner, M. J. Bober, and C. Willi, “Team-based activities to promote engaged learning,” College Teaching, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 5–18, 2007.
[13]
S. V. Rosser, “Group work in science, engineering, and mathematics: consequences of ignoring gender and race,” College Teaching, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 82–88, 1998.
[14]
P. J. Hinds, K. M. Carley, D. Krackhardt, and D. Wholey, “Choosing work group members: balancing similarity, competence, and familiarity,” Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 226–251, 2000.
[15]
D. W. Johnson, R. Johnson, and E. Holubec, Cooperation in the Classroom, Interaction Book Company, Edina, Minn, USA, 8th edition, 2008.
[16]
D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, “An educational psychology success story: social interdependence theory and cooperative learning,” Educational Researcher, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 365–379, 2009.
[17]
D. W. Johnson and R. Johnson, “Controversy and peace education,” Journal of Research in Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 71–91, 2003.
[18]
R. M. Gillies, “The behaviors, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 137–147, 2003.
[19]
R. M. Gillies, “The effects of communication training on teachers' and students' verbal behaviours during cooperative learning,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 257–279, 2004.
[20]
N. M. Webb, M. L. Franke, T. De et al., “Explain to your partner: teachers’ instructional practices and students’ dialogue in small groups,” Cambridge Journal of Education, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 49–70, 2009.
[21]
J. Biggs and C. Tang, Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does, The Society for Research into Higher Education, Open University Press, Maidenhead, UK, 4th edition, 2011.
[22]
A. Pritchard and J. Woollard, Psychology for the Classroom: Constructivism and Social Learning, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2010.
[23]
N. Baghcheghi, H. R. Koohestani, and K. Rezaei, “A comparison of the cooperative learning and traditional learning methods in theory classes on nursing students' communication skill with patients at clinical settings,” Nurse Education Today, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 877–882, 2011.
[24]
P. Wang, “Applying Slavin’s cooperative learning technique to EFL conversation class,” The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 112–120, 2009.
[25]
C. Siegel, “Implementing a research-based model of cooperative learning,” Journal of Educational Research, vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 339–349, 2005.
[26]
R. Stevens and R. Slavin, “The Cooperative elementary school: effects on Students achievement, attitudes and social relation,” The American Educational Research Journal, vol. 32, pp. 321–351, 1995.
