Effects of Collaborative Group Composition and Inquiry Instruction on Reasoning Gains and Achievement in Undergraduate Biology

This study compared the effectiveness of collaborative group composition and instructional method on reasoning gains and achievement in college biology. Based on initial student reasoning ability (i.e., low, medium, or high), students were assigned to either homogeneous or heterogeneous collaborative groups within either inquiry or didactic instruction. Achievement and reasoning gains were assessed at the end of the semester. Inquiry instruction, as a whole, led to significantly greater gains in reasoning ability and achievement. Inquiry instruction also led to greater confidence and more positive attitudes toward collaboration. Low-reasoning students made significantly greater reasoning gains within inquiry instruction when grouped with other low reasoners than when grouped with either medium or high reasoners. Results are consistent with equilibration theory, supporting the idea that students benefit from the opportunity for self-regulation without the guidance or direction of a more capable peer.

[1]  Paul Cobb,et al.  Small-group interactions as a source of learning opportunities in second-grade mathematics. , 1991 .

[2]  K. Bruffee.  Sharing Our Toys: Cooperative Learning Versus Collaborative Learning , 1995 .

[3]  Anton E. Lawson,et al.  What kinds of scientific concepts exist? Concept construction and intellectual development in college biology , 2000 .

[4]  Scott B. Watson,et al.  Heterogeneous Grouping as an Element of Cooperative Learning in an Elementary Education Science Course , 1995 .

[5]  Patrick R. Laughlin,et al.  Ability and Group Problem Solving. , 1978 .

[6]  L. Vygotsky.  Genesis of the higher mental functions. , 1991 .

[7]  L. Goodfellow,et al.  Cooperative Learning Strategies , 1995 .

[8]  Anton E. Lawson,et al.  Science Teaching and Development Of Thinking , 1994 .

[9]  M. Gail Jones,et al.  Relationship between ability‐paired interactions and the development of fifth graders' concepts of balance , 1994 .

[10]  R. Slavin.  Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. , 1996 .

[11]  Helen L. Gibson,et al.  Longitudinal impact of an inquiry‐based science program on middle school students' attitudes toward science , 2002 .

[12]  E. Forman,et al.  The role of peer interaction in the social construction of mathematical knowledge , 1989 .

[13]  Steven W Rissing,et al.  Can an inquiry approach improve college student learning in a teaching laboratory? , 2009, CBE life sciences education.

[14]  E. Cohen.  Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups , 1994 .

[15]  N. Webb.  Task-Related Verbal Interaction and Mathematics Learning in Small Groups. , 1991 .

[16]  Elwood D. Heiss,et al.  Modern science teaching , 1950 .

[17]  Shu-Mei Chang,et al.  Cooperative learning in industrial-sized biology classes. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[18]  Simon Hooper.  Effects of Peer Interaction during Computer-Based Mathematics Instruction. , 1992 .

[19]  S. Abdi.  Aptitude Revisited: Rethinking Math and Science Education for America's Next Century , 1997 .

[20]  B. Bloom.  Taxonomy of educational objectives , 1956 .

[21]  S. Sharan,et al.  Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation , 1992 .

[22]  W. Damon.  Peer education: The untapped potential , 1984 .

[23]  G. O. M. Leith,et al.  INDIVIDUAL VERSUS CO‐OPERATIVE LEARNING , 1969 .

[24]  J. Shea.  National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[25]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[26]  Amalya Nattiv.  Helping Behaviors and Math Achievement Gain of Students Using Cooperative Learning , 1994, The Elementary School Journal.

[27]  A. Lawson.  Using reasoning ability as the basis for assigning laboratory partners in nonmajors biology , 1992 .

[29]  J. Ormrod.  Educational Psychology : Developing Learners , 1997 .

[30]  Don G. Stafford.  An Evaluation of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study (SCIS) Material Objects Unit at the Kindergarten Level. Final Report. , 1971 .

[31]  C. W. Bowen,et al.  A Quantitative Literature Review of Cooperative Learning Effects on High School and College Chemistry Achievement. , 2000 .

[32]  L. Tibell,et al.  Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version of the same experiment , 2003 .

[33]  Scott B. Watson,et al.  Effects of cooperative incentives and heterogeneous arrangement on achievement and interaction of cooperative learning groups in a college life science course , 1995 .

[34]  Kemal Doymuş,et al.  Teaching Chemical Equilibrium with the Jigsaw Technique , 2008 .

[35]  J. Tudge.  Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice , 1992 .

[36]  N. Webb,et al.  Short Circuits or Superconductors? Effects of Group Composition on High-Achieving Students’ Science Assessment Performance , 2002 .

[37]  J. Tudge.  Peer influences on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives , 1989 .

[38]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom , 2006 .

[39]  Frances Lawrenz,et al.  Aptitude treatment effects of laboratory grouping method for students of differing reasoning ability , 1985 .

[40]  Mark D Spiro,et al.  Alternation of generations and experimental design: a guided-inquiry lab exploring the nature of the her1 developmental mutant of Ceratopteris richardii (C-Fern). , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[41]  L. Fuchs,et al.  High-Achieving Students’ Interactions and Performance on Complex Mathematical Tasks as a Function of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Pairings , 1998 .

[42]  A. Lawson,et al.  Development of Scientific Reasoning in College Biology: Do Two Levels of General Hypothesis-Testing Skills Exist?. , 2000 .

[43]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  Collaborative Learning, Reasoning, and Technology , 2005 .

[44]  K. McKinney,et al.  The Use of Collaborative Learning Groups in the Large Class: Is It Possible? , 1993 .

[45]  Ali Simsek.  The Impact of Cooperative Group Composition on Student Performance and Attitudes during Interactive Videodisc Instruction. , 1992 .

[46]  W. Doise.  The social development of the intellect , 1984 .

[47]  Ralph W Preszler.  Replacing lecture with peer-led workshops improves student learning. , 2009, CBE life sciences education.

[48]  Luis C. Moll.  Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Implications and Applications of Sociohistorical Psychology , 1991 .

[49]  Angela M. O'Donnell,et al.  Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning , 1999 .

[50]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[51]  Peer Interaction in Science Concept Development and Problem Solving , 1995 .

[52]  Anton E. Lawson,et al.  The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning , 1978 .

[53]  W. Doise,et al.  Socio-cognitive conflict and structure of individual and collective performances , 1978 .

[54]  D. Howard,et al.  Using a module-based laboratory to incorporate inquiry into a large cell biology course. , 2005, Cell biology education.

[55]  J. Flavell.  The Developmental psychology of Jean Piaget , 1963 .

[56]  J. Piaget,et al.  The equilibration of cognitive structures : the central problem of intellectual development , 1985 .

[57]  John Baer.  Grouping and Achievement in Cooperative Learning , 2003 .

[58]  W. Damon,et al.  Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education , 1989 .

[59]  M. Pulaski.  Understanding Piaget: An Introduction to Children's Cognitive Development , 1971 .

[60]  Abigail Jurist Levy,et al.  Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002 , 2010 .

[61]  T. Lord,et al.  A comparison between traditional and constructivist teaching in college biology , 1997 .