Skip to main content
Log in

Classroom management of situated group learning: A research study of two teaching strategies

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although peer-based work is encouraged by theories in developmental psychology and although classroom interventions suggest it is effective, there are grounds for recognising that young pupils find collaborative learning hard to sustain. Discontinuities in collaborative skill during development have been suggested as one interpretation. Theory and research have neglected situational continuities that the teacher may provide in management of formal and informal collaborations. This experimental study, with the collaboration of the science faculty in one urban secondary college, investigated the effect of two role attribution strategies on communication in peer groups of different gender composition in three parallel Year 8 science classes. The group were set a problem that required them to design an experiment to compare the thermal insulating properties of two different materials. This presents the data collected and key findings, and reviews the findings from previous parallel studies that have employed the same research design in different school settings. The results confirm the effectiveness of social role attribution strategies in teacher management of communication in peer-based work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aitkin, M., Anderson, D., Francis, B., & Hinde J. (1989).Statistical modelling in GLIM. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alton-Lee, A., Nuthall, G., & Patrick, J. (1993). Reframing classroom research: A lesson from the private world of children,Harvard Educational Review, 63(1), 50–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J., Reder, L. H., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Situative versus cognitive perspectives: Form versus substance,Educational Researcher, 26(1), 18–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Science Education Project. (1974).A guide to ASEP. Melbourne, Australia: Government Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaton, A., Mullis, I., Gonzalez, E., Smith, T., & Kelly, D. (1997).Third international mathematics and science study: Science achievement in the middle school years. Chesnut Hill, MA: IEA-TIMMS International Study Centre, Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, N. (1991). Cooperative learning in classrooms: Processes and outcomes,Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32(4), 581–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, N., Desforges, C., Cockburn, A., & Wilkinson, B. (1984).The quality of pupil learing experiences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, J. A. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: Student learning of science in small groups,Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039–1065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busato, V. V., Ten Dam, G. T. M., Van Den Eeden, P., & Terwell, J. (1995). Gender-related effects of co-operative learning in a mathematics curriculum for 12–16-year-olds.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(6), 667–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1984). Talking and working together: Status, interaction and learning. In P. L. Peterson, L. C. Wilkinson, & M. Hallinan (Eds.),The social context of instruction: Group organization and group processes (pp. 171–187). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1986).Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, C. R., Marquis, A., & Ayers-Lopez, S. (1982). Peer learning in the classroom: Tracing developmental patterns and consequences of children's spontaneous interactions. In L. C. Wilkinson (Ed.),Communicating in the classroom (pp. 69–84). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, C. (1995). On resourcing a concern for collaboration within peer interactions,Cognition and Instruction, 13(4), 541–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demaris, A. (1992).Logit modelling: Practical applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage University Papers, Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences.

  • Department of Education and Science. (1983).APU Science in schools (Age 13: Report No. 2). London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Pilla, J. (1992). Single sex science classes,Lab Talk, 36(5), 19–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom),Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fawns, R., & Sadler, J. (1996). Managing students' learning in classrooms: Reframing classroom research,Research in science Education, 26(2), 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galton, M., Simon, B., & Croll, P. (1980).Inside the primary school. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomes, S. T-M. (1994).A comparison of two strategies to manage communication in cooperative learning groups. Unpublished Master of Education Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions,Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herron, M. D. (1970).The nature of scientific enquiry as seen by selected philosophers, science teachers and recent curricular materials. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy Thesis, The University of Chicago, Chicago, United States of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, C. (1993). Giving girls a chance: Patterns of talk in co-operative groupwork,Gender and Education, 5(2), 179–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991).Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning, (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempa, R. F., & Ayob, A. (1991). Learning interactions in group work in science,International Journal of Science Education, 13(3), 341–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. (1993). Gender, group composition, and peer interaction in computer-based cooperative learning,Journal of Educational Computing Research, 9(4), 549–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, E. (1996).Two teaching strategies for managing learning in small groups. Unpublished Master of Education Thesis. The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R., & Freyberg, P. (1985).Learning in science: The implications of children's science. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osman, A. E. (1992).Girls can do science!!! A personal history of professional development. Unpublished Master of Education Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching and compensation-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities, cognition and instruction,Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, R. P., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Effects of cooperative learning on perceived status of male and female pupils.The Journal of Social Psychology, 131(5), 717–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1928).Judgement and reasoning in the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prawat, R. S. (1996). Learning community, commitment and school reform,Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18(1), 91–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prawat, R. S. (1998). Current self-regulation views of learning and motivation viewed through a Deweyan lens: The problems with dualism.American Educational Research Journal, 35(2), 199–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie, S. M. (1998). The teacher's role in the transformation of students' understanding.Research in Science Education, 28(2), 169–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J. A., & Raphael, D. (1990). Communication and problem solving achievement in cooperative learning groups.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(2), 149–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, J. (1993).Teacher's management of learning in small groups in science classes. Unpublished Master of Education Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, J., & Fawns, R. (1993). Facilitating practitioner research into strategies for improving communication in classroom groups: Action research and interaction analysis—a reconciliation?,Research in Science Education, 23, 243–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeh, K. (1996).Classroom management of cooperative learning: A research study of two teaching strategies. Unpublished master of Education Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terwell, J., Herfs, P. G. P., Mertens, E. H. M., & Perrenet, J. C. (1994). Co-operative learning and adaptive instruction in a mathematics curriculum.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26(2), 217–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R., Pattison, P., & Finch, S. (1993).Beginning statistics for psychology. London: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1984). Sex differences in interaction and achievement in cooperative small groups.Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1), 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, J. (1986).Girls in science and technology: The story of a project. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, S., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral discussion, group-to-individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups.Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 60–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smeh, K., Fawns, R. Classroom management of situated group learning: A research study of two teaching strategies. Research in Science Education 30, 225–240 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461630

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461630

Keywords

Navigation