Main Article Content
The cooperative learning approach abbreviated as CLA in this study has been extensively explored as a promising tool for boosting active participation in teaching and learning activities among learners in secondary schools. The present study investigated the advantages of using a cooperative learning approach in teaching sciences particularly, the nonrepresentational nature of Chemistry among learners could be alleviated when this approach is well implemented. Three groups of respondents were considered in this study namely teachers, director of studies, and head teachers to gain their understanding of the advantages of using CLA and constraints met during its implementation. Research tools used in this study are online survey designed in the form of questionnaires and distributed by using the link. Questions were formulated to get a general understanding of respondents in regard to the research model limited to the rationale of CLA in teaching and learning activities. 182 respondents participated in the survey but this study considered the calculated sample size of 125 respondents were further considered. The responses were scaled by using a psychometric scale commonly known as a Likert scale. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods were employed. The results obtained were analyzed and presented by using percentages of respondents. The results are found to be in the line with previous studies indicating that all elements of CLA greatly affect students’ academic performance and from the results, it could be concluded that this approach is advantageous compared to traditional teaching methods.
Küçük H, Ersoy S. The effect of a new teaching methodology on learning performances of automotive-mechatronics students; 2010.
Twizeyimana E, Renzaho A, Mujawimana E. Effectiveness of locally made instructional materials on students' academic performance and retention in science education in Eastern Province of Rwanda.
Chu SKW, et al. 21st Century skills development through inquiry-based learning. Singapore: Springer Singapore. 2017;1007: 978-981.
DOI: https://doi. org/10
Boaler J. Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students' potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. John Wiley & Sons; 2015.
Dörnyei Z. Motivating students and teachers. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. 2018;1-6.
McGlynn AP. Classroom Atmosphere in College: Improving the Teaching/Learning Environment; 1996.
Vakil JB. Innovative approaches towards increasing student participation and engagement in asynchronous, online courses. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare and Higher Education. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); 2018.
Schulze S, Lemmer E. Family experiences, the motivation for science learning and science achievement of different learner groups. South African Journal of Education. 2017;37(1).
Alamri H, et al. Using personalized learning as an instructional approach to motivate learners in online higher education: Learner self-determination and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2020;52(3):322-352.
Hewson ER. Students’ emotional engagement, motivation and behaviour over the life of an online course: Reflections on two market research case studies. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. 2018;1(10).
Marczyk J, Deshpande B. Measuring and tracking complexity in science, in unifying themes in complex systems. Springer. 2010;27-33.
Lehn J-M. Towards complex matter: Supramolecular chemistry and self-organization. European Review. 2009;17(2): 263-280.
Frederiksen N. Implications of cognitive theory for instruction in problem solving. ETS Research Report Series. 1983;1983(1):363- 407.
Artz AF, Armour-Thomas E. Development of a cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis of mathematical problem solving in small groups. Cognition and Instruction. 1992;9(2):137-175.
Zoller U, Ben‐Chaim D. Interaction between examination type, anxiety state and academic achievement in college science; an action‐oriented research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 1989;26(1):65-77.
Höft L, et al. Knowing more about things you care less about: Cross‐sectional analysis of the opposing trend and interplay between conceptual understanding and interest in secondary school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2019;56(2):184-210.
Smith MA. Effects of concretely illustrated instruction versus abstractly illustrated instruction on acquisition of abstract concepts; 2000.
Williams TP. The downsides of dominance: Education quality reforms and Rwanda’s political settlement, in the politics of education in developing countries. Oxford University Press.
Williams TP. The political economy of primary education: Lessons from Rwanda. World Development. 2017;96:550-561.
Christine AB, Billiah G, Jared NA. Influence of teaching methods on students’ academic performance in kiswahili subject in public and private secondary schools in lang’ata Sub-county.
Raviv A, Cohen S, Aflalo E. How should students learn in the school science laboratory? The benefits of cooperative learning. Research in Science Education. 2019;49(2): 331-345.
Drakeford W. The effects of cooperative learning on the classroom participation of students placed at risk for societal failure. Online Submission. 2012;2(4):239-246.
Mahmoud MMA. The effectiveness of using the cooperative language learning approach to enhance EFL writing skills among Saudi university students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. 2014;5(3):616.
Ferrer LM. Developing understanding and social skills through cooperative learning. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in SE Asia. 2004;27(2):45-62.
Laal M, Geranpaye L, Daemi M. Individual accountability in collaborative learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013;93:286-289.
Varga FAA. A handbook for learning together–an introduction to co-operative learning; 2015.
Kristiansen SD, et al. Face-to-face promotive interaction leading to successful cooperative learning: A review study. Cogent Education. 2019;6(1):1674067.
Acar B, Tarhan L. Effect of cooperative learning strategies on students' understanding of concepts in electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2007;5(2):349-373.
Bucholz JL, Sheffler JL. Creating a warm and inclusive classroom environment: Planning for all children to feel welcome. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education. 2009;2(4):1- 13.
Laal M. Positive interdependence in collaborative learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013;93:1433-1437.
Kagan S. The two dimensions of positive interdependence. Kagan Online Magazine. 2007;10(3).
Boud D. Making the move to peer learning. Peer Learning in Higher Education: Learning from and with Each Other. 2001;1-21.
Kwaku Sarfo F, Elen J. Investigating the impact of positive resource interdependence and individual accountability on students' academic performance in cooperative learning. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology. 2011;9(1):73- 94.
Johnson DW, Johnson RT. Social skills for successful group work. Educational Leadership. 1990;47(4):29-33.
Gillies RM. Cooperative learning: Integrating theory and practice. Sage; 2007.
Lavasani MG, Afzali L, Afzali F. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences. Sciences. 2011;4:186-193.
Goodwin MW. Cooperative learning and social skills: What skills to teach and how to teach them. Intervention in School and Clinic. 1999;35(1):29-33.
Yoruk A. Students' ideas on cooperative learning method. Universal Journal of Educational Research. 2016;4(5):1231-1235.
Burke A. Group work: How to use groups effectively. Journal of Effective Teaching. 2011;11(2):87-95.
Levine JM, Hogg MA. Encyclopedia of group processes and intergroup relations. Sage. 2010;1.
Lin E. Cooperative learning in the science classroom. The Science Teacher. 2006;34.
Johnson RT, Johnson DW. Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science and Children. 1986;24(2):31-32.
Gillies RM. The effects of cooperative learning on junior high school students' behaviours, discourse and learning during a science-based learning activity. School Psychology International. 2008;29(3):328-347.
King A. Structuring peer interaction to promote higher-order thinking and complex learning in cooperating groups, in The teacher’s role in implementing cooperative learning in the classroom. Springer. 2008;73- 91.
Gottfredson LS. Life, death and intelligence. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology. 2004;4(1):23-46.
Mumford MD. Handbook of organizational