IMPACT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING STRATEGY ON THE PROCESS SKILLS ACQUISITION AND PERFORMANCE AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

ATTENTION:

BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPICS BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!

INFORMATION:

YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COST N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR

YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08137701720

WHATSAPP US ON: 08137701720

IMPACT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING STRATEGY ON THE PROCESS SKILLS ACQUISITION AND PERFORMANCE AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the study

Borich (2004, p. 331) asked, “What good are critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving skills if your learners cannot apply them in interaction with others?” Cooperative learning activities instill in learners important behaviours that prepare them to reason and perform in an adult world (Adams & Hamm, 1996; Marzano, Pickering, &

Pollock, 2001). Attitudes and values of learners are formed through social interaction. Borich (2004) noted that most of our attitudes and values are formed by discussing what we know or think with others. Continuing, in this manner, we exchange our information and knowledge with that of others who have acquired their knowledge in different ways. This exchange shapes our views and perspectives.

Our attitudes and values are among the most important outcomes of schooling (Borich, 2004). They provide the framework for guiding our actions outside the classroom. Cooperative learning is important in helping learners acquire from the curriculum the basic cooperative attitudes and values they need to think independently inside and outside of the classroom.

Academic achievements of students have been found to be enhanced by the use of cooperative learning (Lampe, Rooze & Tallent-Runnels, 1998; Johnson & Johnson, 1989; Slavin, 1990, 1991; Webb, 1989). Stevens and Slavin (1995) stated that, the fact that it has been linked to increases in the academic achievement of learners at all ability levels is another reason for its use. Bramlett (1994), Megnin (1995), and Webb, Trooper, and Fall (1995) in their contributions noted that cooperative learning activity engages the student in the learning process and seeks to improve the critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving skills of the learner.

While research efforts on cooperative-learning indicate that it enhances student achievement (Johnson & Johnson 1989; Slavin 1990; 1991; Webb 1989), Lampe, Rooze and Tallent-Runnels (1998) stated that peer interaction is central to the success of cooperative learning as it relates to cognitive understanding. They further noted that comprehension is facilitated. Lampe et al (1998) again emphasized that as learners, some of who might normally “turn out” or refuse to speak out in a traditional setting, become actively involved in the learning process through group interaction. Stahl and Vansickel (1992) noted that every cooperative-learning strategy, when used appropriately, can enable students to move beyond the text, memorization of basic facts, and learning lower level skills. This method which results in cognitive restructuring leads to an increase in understanding of all students in a cooperative group.

Apart from academic benefits, cooperative learning has been found to promote self-esteem, interpersonal relationship and improved attitudes toward school and peers (Johnson & Johnson, 1996). Lampe et al (1998) stated that in a competitively structured classroom, except for the few “Winners” or students who succeed, self-esteem can suffer. When competition is promoted, students may learn to value winning at all costs, and cooperation may be discouraged (Lampe, et al 1998; Conrad, 1988). Although the advocates of cooperative learning are not opposed to all competition, they do oppose inappropriate competition (Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Johnson & Johnson, 1991). Stahl (1992) stated that inappropriate competition tends to widen the existing differences and abilities, which, in turn, can widen negative perceptions of others on the basis of gender, race, or ethnicity. Studies by Glassman (1989), and Johnson, Johnson and Stanne (1986) and comments by Johnson and Johnson (1996) and Trowbridge and Bybee (1996) on cooperative learning found cooperative-learning groups to equalize the status and respect for all members, regardless of gender. Research by Klein (1985) noted by Lampe et al (1998) revealed that competitively structured classrooms have the effect of favouring boys or reinforcing sex role stereotypes that may limit opportunities for girls. In cooperative learning this usually is not the case, where interaction among students is intense and prolonged and students gradually take responsibility for each other’s learning (Borich, 2004).

A synthesis of researches on the influences of ability and gender on cooperative learning outcomes indicated similar findings in all. Studies by Stevens and Slavin (1995), Bramlet (1994), Megnin (1995), Webb, trooper and fall (1995), Glassman (1989), Johnson, Johnson and Stanne (1986) and Crosby and Owens (1993) found that cooperative learning gains are not limited to a particular ability level or sex but to all who engage in it. Stevens and Slavin (1995), for example, linked cooperative learning to increases in academic achievement of learners at all ability levels, while studies by Glassman (1989) and Johnson, Johnson and Stanne (1986) found cooperative learning to equalize the status and respect for all group members, regardless of gender. Again the study by Crosby and Owens (1993) found that different cooperative learning strategies can be employed to help low ability students to improve achievement, who had difficulties making success in the traditional classroom.

In general, cooperative learning can be said to lead to the formation of attitude and values, provision of models of prosocial behaviour, presentation of alternative perspective and viewpoints, building a coherent and integrated identity, and promotion of critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving behaviour (Borich, 2004; Stevens & Slavin, 1995; Abruscato, 1994; Zehin & Kottler, 1993). All these result in collaborative skills improvement, better self-esteem and increased achievement. (Johnson & Johnson, 1996).

Science teaching and learning today is to a great extent focused on activities by which the learner acquires facts, rules and action sequences (Kpangban & Ajaja, 2007). In a student-centered instructional approach like this, using student ideas means incorporating student experiences, points of view, feelings, and problems into the lesson by making the student the primary point of reference. A completely student- oriented lesson is always initiated by asking students questions and assigning specific roles to them on the content to be taught and their answers and dispositions would become the focus of the lesson. This approach, according to Borich (2004), is intended to heighten student’s interest and to encourage positive attitude and feeling towards the subject. Research by Johnson and Johnson (1991) on learning together and alone showed that cooperative learning enhanced more positive attitude towards subject members and the teacher.

Evidences from research works in Nigeria indicated that very little research efforts had been directed at cooperative learning. This approach has been highly recommended for teaching at all levels, as stated by the Federal Government of Nigeria (2004) in the National Policy on Education. This, therefore, tends to suggest that as most teachers are not sensitized on the advantages of the use of cooperative learning, it is believed that the manner in which most schooling occurs may not be teaching students to become aware of their own learning, to think critically and to derive their own pattern of thought and meaning from content presented through interaction as a result of cooperative learning. It was purely in an attempt to bridge the wide gap on the knowledge of the effects of cooperative learning on science students’ achievement using our local environment that, this study was carried out. In the study attempt was made to find out the effects of cooperative learning on junior secondary school (JSS) students’ achievement in integrated science, attitude towards their studies, and also determined whether it was sex and ability biased

Statement of Problem

There have been a lot of comments in books, particularly those written in Europe and America, which confirmed cooperative learning to be an effective way to structure learning activities. But there is surprisingly very little research effort, particularly in Nigeria, that emphasized cooperative interaction in science and even less that focused on integrated science at the junior secondary school level. Furthermore, no studies to our knowledge had investigated the effect of cooperative learning and its interaction with sex and ability on science achievement and attitude among junior secondary school students in Nigeria. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to specifically determine, among others, the effects of cooperative learning on students’ achievement in integrated science, students’ attitude toward their studies and to see if the effects were sex and ability- dependent. The statement of the problem, therefore, is; will the application of cooperative learning strategy in the teaching of integrated science produce differential achievement and attitude scores among junior secondary school students generally and specifically among students of varying abilities and sex?

Research Questions

This study was guided by the following research questions.

Is there any difference in achievement test scores between students instructed using cooperative learning strategy and those instructed using the traditional classroom teaching method?
Is there any difference in attitude scores between students instructed using cooperative learning strategy and those instructed using traditional classroom teaching method?
Is there any difference in achievement test scores between male and female students instructed with cooperative learning strategy?
Is there any difference in achievement test scores between high ability students taught with cooperative learning strategy and those taught with traditional classroom teaching method?
Is there any difference in achievement test scores between low ability students taught with cooperative learning strategy and those taught with traditional classroom teaching method?
Are there interaction effects among methods, sex and ability on achievement?

Research Hypotheses

From the research questions raised, five hypotheses were stated and tested at 0.05 level of significance.

Ho₁:	There is no significant difference in achievement test scores between students instructed with cooperative learning strategy and those taught using traditional classroom teaching method.
Ho₂:	There is no significant difference in attitude scores between students instructed with cooperative learning strategy and those taught using traditional classroom teaching method.
Ho₃:	There is no significant difference in achievement test scores between male and female students instructed with cooperative learning strategy.
Ho₄:	There is no significant difference in achievement test scores between students of varying abilities instructed with cooperative learning strategy and those taught with traditional classroom teaching method.