Problem Solving Through Cooperative Learning in the Chemistry Classroom

  • Liberato Cardellini


Cardellini in this chapter analyzes problem solving through cooperative learning in the chemistry classroom at the university level. He presents cooperative learning as an instructional method that should incorporate five criteria, such as positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face interaction, development, and appropriate use of interpersonal skills and periodic self-assessment of group functioning. The review of the literature about cooperative learning is presented and the definition and structure of cooperative learning are presented. He describes in detail how he implements this teaching approach in his university-level chemistry classes, how to motivate and engage the students participating in the general chemistry course, and how to learn chemistry to achieve the best results according to the students’ abilities.


Team Member General Chemistry Cooperative Learning Interpersonal Skill Instructional Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



I am grateful to Richard Felder of North Carolina State University, who like a father helped me with advice and encouragement in my first hesitating steps in using cooperative learning, and who also offered suggestions for improving an early draft of this chapter.


  1. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. In J. D. Novak & D. B. Gowin (1995), Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bertucci, A., Meloni, C., Conte, S., & Cardellini, L. (2005). The role of personality, gender and interaction in a cooperative and in a computer supported collaborative learning task. Journal of Science Education, 6(Special issue), 32–35.Google Scholar
  5. Bertucci, A., Conte, S., & Cardellini, L. (2006). Cooperative Learning. Una metodologia al servizio dei contesti educativi e del “brainframe” del nuovo millennio. Orientamenti Pedagogici, 53(3), 517–536.Google Scholar
  6. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educator, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7(2), 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., Donovan, M. S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2000). How people learn. Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students lo learn (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, R. W. (1995). Auto rating: Getting individual marks from team marks and enhancing teamwork. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference, IEEE/ASEE, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  10. Cardellini, L. (2006a). The foundations of radical constructivism: An interview with Ernst von Glasersfeld. Foundations of Chemistry, 8(2), 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cardellini, L. (2006b). Fostering creative problem solving in chemistry through group work. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(2), 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cardellini, L., & Felder, R. M. (1999). L’apprendimento cooperativo: Un metodo per migliorare la preparazione e l’acquisizione di abilità cognitive negli studenti. La Chimica nella Scuola, 21(1), 18–25.Google Scholar
  13. Cardellini, L., & Pascual-Leone, J. (2004). On mentors, cognitive development, education, and constructivism: An interview with Juan Pascual-Leone. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology [online], 4(2), 199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carson, B. H. (1999). Bad news in the service of good teaching: Students remember ineffective professors. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, 10(1), 91–105.Google Scholar
  15. Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2006). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools. Developing fundamental knowledge and skills for teaching (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  16. Childs, P. E., & Sheehan, M. (2009). What’s difficult about chemistry? An Irish perspective. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10(3), 204–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cooper, M. M. (1995). Cooperative learning. An approach for large enrolment courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(2), 162–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Damon, C., Buchs, C., & Butera, F. (2002). Epistemic and relational conflicts in sharing identical vs. complementary information during cooperative learning. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 61(3), 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dougherty, R. C., Bowen, C. W., Berger, T., Rees, W., Mellon, E. K., & Pulliam, E. (1995). Cooperative learning and enhanced communication. Effect on student performance, retention, and attitudes in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(9), 793–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. El-Banna, H. (1987). The development of a predictive theory of science education based upon information processing theory. Ph.D. thesis, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  21. Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Felder, R. M. (1996). Active-inductive-cooperative learning: An instructional model for chemistry? Journal of Chemical Education, 73(9), 832–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1994). Cooperative Learning in Technical Courses: Procedures, Pitfalls, and Payoffs. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 377038, October)Google Scholar
  24. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2007). Cooperative learning. In P. A. Mabrouk (Ed.), Active learning: Models from the Analytical Sciences (pp. 34–53). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2008). The ten worst teaching mistakes I. Mistakes 5–10. Chemical Engineering Education, 42(4), 201–202.Google Scholar
  26. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009a). The ten worst teaching mistakes I. Mistakes 1–4. Chemical Engineering Education, 43(1), 15–16.Google Scholar
  27. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009b). Active Learning: An Introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief, 2(4). Retrieved from
  28. Gillies, R. M., & Boyle, M. (2009). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teacher Education: Teaching and.Google Scholar
  29. Goldman, S. R., Mayfield-Stewart, C., Bateman, H. V., Pellegrino, J. W., & Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1998). Environments that support meaningful learning. In L. Hoffmann, A. Krapp, K. A. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning (pp. 184–196). Kiel: IPN.Google Scholar
  30. Hardy, T., & Kirkwood, V. (1994). Toward creating effective learning environments for science teachers: The role of a science educator in the tertiary setting. International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 231–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Heller, P., & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 637–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Herron, J. D. (1986). What can we do about sue: A case study of competence. Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 528–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Herron, J. D. (1990). Research in chemical education: Results and directions. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. Disessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 31–54). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Herron, J. D. (1996). The chemistry classroom. Formulas for successful teaching. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, D. W., Skon, L., & Johnson, R. T. (1980). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic conditions on children’s problem-solving performance. American Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89(1), 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 30(4), 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Stanne, M. E. (2000). Cooperative Learning Methods: A meta-analysis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Cooperative Learning Center. Retrieved October 25, 2009, from
  39. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2006). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book.Google Scholar
  40. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching. A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Johnstone, A. H. (1997). Chemistry teaching—science or alchemy? Journal of Chemical Education, 74(3), 262–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of chemistry—logical or psychological? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kagan, S. (2001). Teaching for character and community. Educational Leadership, 59(2), 50–55.Google Scholar
  45. Kaufman, D. B., Felder, R. M., & Fuller, H. (2000). Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 133–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Laughlin, P. R., Hatch, E. C., Silver, J. S., & Boh, L. (2006). Groups perform better than the best individuals on letter-to-numbers problems: effects of group size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 644–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lazarowitz, R., Hertz, R. L., Baird, J. H., & Bowlden, V. (1988). Academic achievement and on-task behaviour instructed in a cooperative students instructed in a cooperative small investigative group. Science Education, 72(4), 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lazarowitz, R., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Baird, J. H. (1994). Learning science in a cooperative setting: Academic achievement and affective outcomes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1121–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ledlow, S. (2001). An interview with Richard Felder. Retrieved October 30, 2009, from
  50. Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 5(4), 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction. A user’s manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  52. McKeachie, W. J. (1994). Teaching tips. Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (9th ed.). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Co.Google Scholar
  53. Millis, B. J., & Cottell, P. G, Jr. (1998). Cooperative learning for higher education faculty. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  54. Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry. Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Nurrenbern, S. C. (Ed.). (1995). Experiences in cooperative learning: A collection for chemistry teachers. Madison, WI: Institute for Chemical Education.Google Scholar
  57. Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9–34.Google Scholar
  58. Obaya, A. (1999). Getting cooperative learning. Science Education International, 10(2), 25–27.Google Scholar
  59. O’Donnell, A. M., & O’Kelly, J. (1994). Learning from peers: Beyond the rhetoric of positive results. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), 321–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Okebukola, P. A., & Ogunniyi, M. B. (1984). Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic science laboratory interaction patterns—Effects on students’ achievement and acquisition of practical skills. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(9), 875–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Open Teaching Toolkit. (1999). Effective group work. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Patrick, H., Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., & Midgley, C. (2003). How teachers establish psychological environments during the first days of school: associations with avoidance in mathematics. Teachers College Record, 105(8), 1521–1558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Qin, Z., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 129–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Raven, B. H., & Shaw, J. I. (1970). Interdependence and group problem-solving in the triad. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14(2), 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Reid, N., & Yang, M. J. (2002). Open-ended problem solving in school chemistry: A preliminary investigation. International Journal Science Education, 24(12), 1313–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Richlin, L. (2006). Blueprint for learning. Constructing college courses to facilitate, assess, and document learning. Sterling: VA, Stylus.Google Scholar
  70. Roadrangka, V., Yeany, R. H., & Padilla, M. J. (1983). The construction and validation of Group Assessment of Logical Thinking (GALT), Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas.Google Scholar
  71. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Robinson, W. R. (1995). Groups-of-three study. In S. C. Nurrenbern (Ed.), Experiences in cooperative learning: A collection for chemistry teachers (pp. 148–149). Madison, WI: Institute for Chemical Education.Google Scholar
  73. Shulman, L. S. (2002). Making differences: A table of learning. Change, 34(6), 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Shulman, L. S. (2004). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. In S. M. Wilson (Ed.), The wisdom of practice. Essays on teaching, learning, and learning to teach (pp. 189–215). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  75. Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  77. Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Sleet, R. J., Hager, P., Logan, P., & Hopper, M. (1996). Broader Skill Requirements of Science Graduates (pp. 128-130). Sydney: University of Technology.Google Scholar
  79. Smith, K., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981). Can conflict be constructive? Controversy versus concurrence seeking in learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(5), 651–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Soloman, B. A., & Felder, R. M. (1988). Index of Learning Style. Retrieved October 20, 2009, from
  82. Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. (1997). Measuring the Success of Small-Group Learning in College-Level SMET Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Retrieved November 15, 2009, from
  83. Towns, M. H. (1998). How do i get my students to work together? Getting cooperative learning started. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(1), 67–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vermetten, Y. J., Vermunt, J. D., & Lodewijks, H. G. (2002). Powerful learning environments? How university students differ in their response to instructional measures. Learning and Instruction, 12(3), 263–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Witkin, H. A. (1974). Psychological differentiation: studies of development. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  87. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Witkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1981). Cognitive styles: essence and origins. Field dependence and field independence. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
  89. Ziegler, S. (1981). The effectiveness of cooperative learning teams for increasing cross-ethnic friendship: Additional evidence. Human Organization, 40(3), 264–268.Google Scholar
  90. Zusho, A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Skill and will: the role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1081–1094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università Politecnica delle MarcheAnconaItaly

Personalised recommendations