Laura Weis
9/20/06
Current Event 1
“Cooperative Learning in the Science Classroom,” Emily Lin, summer 2006, vol 73, no 5
The Science Teacher . p34-37
Summary:
Cooperative learning is a strategy that many science teachers may shy away from because they are not aware of the instructional methods or they have a vague understanding of how to implement cooperative learning in their classroom. This article summarizes the major ideas of cooperative learning research over the last 20 years, citing data and research done by other educational researchers. It also details three techniques for cooperative learning: think pair-share, formal group roles (including a list of 10 titles), and jigsaw. The article also aligns the benefits of cooperative learning with the national science standards.
Analysis:
This article has many strong points. It is extremely well written and easy to understand. It provides excellent descriptions of specific cooperative learning techniques by including summaries, examples, and references to scaffolding cooperative learning.
The article is well researched with over 25 sources and recommended readings. By providing specific examples, the author ensures that educators can implement cooperative learning with ease and excitement.
Although this article is a summary of the major ideas in cooperative learning over the last 20 years, it provides a very minimal amount of data. There is only one location in this article where any quantitative data exists. The authors cites Moores research about student retention of data from three medium: lecture (5%), demonstration (30%), and

practice or application (75%-90%). The article states that practice and application can be used in cooperative learning models. At other locations in the article when the benefits of cooperative learning are discussed, the author cites other authors and articles of the same opinion. However, she does not include any data that led those authors or articles to that conclusion.
The author and article imply that cooperative learning strategies should be used in the science classroom because they provide opportunities for students to practice and apply knowledge. They also give students a chance to construct their own knowledge and teach other students. This article states that it is a summary of the major ideas in cooperative learning and the research that has been done over the last few years.
However, the article does not provide any research evidence that cooperative learning is beneficial. This article makes statements that cooperative learning is good and should be used in all science classrooms on a regular basis. It also concludes that students are less competitive, more tolerant of other races and ethnicities, and are able to actively process personally meaningful information. Each of these statements is cited by research, however the exact research is not mentioned. However, the research is available in other articles.
Reflection:
I feel that this article is very accessible to educators and explains the research that has been done in cooperative learning. This article would be better if it had provided more data to persuade educators that cooperative learning works. As a reader of this article, I can assume that the statements made were conclusions drawn from data samples of researchers. I have not checked each reference to see how their research was

conducted and if it were valid. Even when educational research was cited, as Moore’s research was, the author did not mention the sample size or how the data was collected.
This information on all researcher statements would have lead to the credibility of the article and helped to encourage teachers to use cooperative learning strategies.
The author includes a personal testimonial to the benefits of cooperative learning at the end of the article. This testimonial is very persuasive because it is the first place where cooperative learning is applied and we can see the direct results. The rest of the article focuses on general statements, without including specific benefits for specific students.