Engineer pedagogics

Application of Cooperative Teaching Method in

Engineering Education

Xinyu Li

Institute of Physical Education, Yangtze

University, Jingzhou 434023, Hubei, China

Abstract
In cooperative learning, learners constitute a team to achieve their common objectives. They make
efforts and maximize learning effect for the success of all group members. Among the great number
of existing researches on the practical effect of cooperative teaching method, only a few researches
focus on the application of cooperative teaching method in civil engineering. Targeting at engineering
colleges and universities, this paper discuss the teaching effect of cooperative teaching method for
college students majoring in civil engineering, so as to promote further development of the method
in colleges and universities. Through comparing the experimental group using cooperative teaching
method and the control group using traditional educational method, it analyzes the differences between
the academic performance of college students majoring in civil engineering under education with and
without the use of cooperative teaching method. The statistical results of the investigation show that
cooperative teaching method has positive effect on the improvement of academic performance and
psychological health of college students majoring in civil engineering.
Key words: cooperative teaching method, civil engineering, college
students, teaching effect

1. Introduction they can achieve learning effects better than the sum
The definition of cooperative learning is not uni- of those of individual members – “the sum of parts is
fied in academic circles currently. This experience is more than the entirety. Therefore, group cooperative
based on the theory and strategy of Johnson & John- learning must have five elements below [3]: positive
son in Cooperative Learning Centre of University interdependence, face to face promotive interaction,
of Minnesota in USA. Therefore, their definition is Individual and group accountability, interpersonal
adopted. They consider cooperative learning as the and small group skills and group processing.
use of group in teaching so as to allow students to act Basic methods of cooperative learning with the
jointly and promote their study to the greatest extent. most in-depth research on cooperative learning that
In group cooperative learning, learners constitute a are most widely used include student team-achieve-
team with common objectives [1]. They make efforts ment divisions (STAN), team games tournament
for the success of all members in the group and maxi- (TGT), Jigsaw, learning together (LT), group investi-
mize learning effect. Group members benefit both oth- gation (GI), academic controversy (AC), team assist-
ers and themselves. Reward resources are not limited. ed individualization (TAI) and cooperative integrated
They celebrate for common success. After the com- reading and composition (CIRC) [4-6]. Cooperative
pletion of activities, they evaluate the performance of learning became a commonly used form of active
group learning with the pre-established standard [2]. pedagogy in 1980s and continues to be a valuable
If group members cooperate with tacit understanding, tool for learning in academic institutions today [1],

160 Metallurgical and Mining Industry No.12 — 2015

 Engineer pedagogics
as it provides benefits for both students and instruc- (4) Allow students to view problems from the per-
tors [7]. Researchers reported, “…students worked spective of others, establish positive and supportive
significantly harder for and learned more from the peer relationship with learners of different race, gen-
cooperative learning components than from the tradi- der, stratum and health status and gain greater social
tional lecture and text-based components” of courses support.
studied [8]. Empirical study of Sun and Li [9] shows (5) Help learners transfer the knowledge and skills
that cooperative learning can improve students’ inter- learnt in daily life.
est and self-confidence in English learning and their (6) Manifest learners’ implicit thinking process,
classroom learning behaviors and is good for improv- allow it to be monitored and evaluated more easily
ing their abilities of English application, independ- and take countermeasures pertinently.
ent thinking and cooperation and communication. 3. Design of experiment
Research results of Zhao [10] show that cooperative 3.1. Experimental object
learning strategy can improve English reading ability This experiment used experimental control meth-
of college students not majoring in English effective- od and selected 186 sophomores in four classes major-
ly. The research of Chen [11] shows that cooperative ing in civil engineering. They were divided into two
teaching in college teaching is good for improving groups randomly. The experimental group included
achievement motivation level of college students and 93 students in two classes and cooperative teaching
their tendency to pursue for success. method was used in PE class. The control group in-
All in all, cooperative teaching has been applied cluded 93 students in 2 classes and traditional teach-
to courses such as English and Chinese and its teach- ing method was used in PE class. Their class contents
ing effects have been proved by many researchers. were basketball teaching. After one-semester experi-
However, there are few researches on teaching ef- mental teaching, questionnaire survey was conducted
fects of cooperative teaching method for engineering on experimental objects and relevant statistical analy-
students. Therefore, with college students majoring sis was conducted on survey data obtained before and
in civil engineering as research objects, the experi- after the experiment. Then, differences of PE course
ment in this paper has important enlightenment func- with cooperative and traditional teaching methods in
tion for the promotion and application of cooperative the effect for the improvement of academic perfor-
teaching in college teaching. mance of college students majoring in civil engineer-
2. Advantage of cooperative learning ing were compared.
Cooperative learning is considered as one of the 3.2. Experimental period
three learning methods (individual independent learn- Students attended PE class in the second semes-
ing, competitive learning and cooperative learning). ter. The experimental period lasted for 16 weeks from
In cooperative learning, learners constitute a team March to June 2015. PE class was implemented once
with common objectives. They make efforts for the a week with duration of 90 minutes each time. Af-
success of all members in the group and maximize ter the completion of teaching experiment, question-
learning effect. Group members benefit both others naires were issued to experimental objects respective-
and themselves. Reward resources are not limited. ly.
They celebrate for common success. After the com- 3.3. Experimental design
pletion of activities, they evaluate the performance Traditional teaching method was used for control
of group learning with the pre-established standard. group and cooperative teaching method was used for
Compared to other learning methods, group coopera- experimental group. Cooperative learning method
tive learning has the following advantages: (group teaching) was used based on students’ char-
(1) Improve learners’ insight, abilities of cog- acteristics in basketball teaching. Students with bet-
nition, moral reasoning and understanding, critical ter techniques acted as group leader in each group
thinking and memory. and led other students to study and practice. Group
(2) Allow learners to make greater achievements, leaders became “teachers”. They gave a demonstra-
have more effective behaviors and fewer disruptive tion skillfully with their techniques and guided group
behaviors and maintain better psychological health, members to study actively. Group members guided
mental regulation and psychological status, greater each other, discussed, debated and exchanged the role
self-esteem and confidence and better social ability. and practice experience mutually. Students performed
(3) Stimulate learners’ achievement motivation bare-handed practice, imitating practice, basketball
and intrinsic motivation and make students hold a holding practice and the practice of complete move-
positive attitude towards learning. ment consciously, actively and positively according

No.12 — 2015 Metallurgical and Mining Industry 161

 Engineer pedagogics
to their own situation. After a certain period of time, common objectives of the group.
teachers organized each group for reporting practice Teaching contents mainly included shoot with
and required students to attend the competition with single hand above the shoulder, basketball pass and
technologies and rules learnt. Under such competitive catching during movement, layup during movement
conditions, students in each group strived to do better, and application of comprehensive technologies of
behaved themselves in front of others and meanwhile basketball. Let’s take the teaching of shoot with sin-
won honors for their own groups. Measuring tools for gle hand above the shoulder for example: in previ-
experimental class and control class were tested with ous conventional teaching method, single progressive
the same instruction, content and format under the teaching process of “explanation, demonstration,
guidance of the same experimenter. practice, error correction, consolidation and applica-
In experimental class, students were divided into tion” was generally used. Under cooperative teaching
multiple groups with intra-group heterogeneity and mode, explanation and demonstration were no lon-
inter-group homogeneity. Each group included 6 to ger made by teachers alone. Instead, they were per-
7 members. Group members always remained un- formed by group members alternately. Practice and
changed in the whole experimental process. All mem- error correction were conducted within group. This
bers had a common name in each group. A role was method improved the autonomy and consciousness of
assigned to each group member so that they could students in learning. (see Figure 1 and 2)
depend on and promote each other, undertake certain
responsibilities and make positive contributions to

Figure 1. The implementation steps of the cooperative teaching method

Figure 2. The implementation steps of the cooperative teaching method in the student
competition

162 Metallurgical and Mining Industry No.12 — 2015

 Engineer pedagogics
3.4. Effect evaluation has good reliability and validity [15].
This experiment mainly selected anxiety, psycho- 4. Experimental result and analysis
logical resilience and test score as three indicators for SPSS11.5 software was used for relevant mathe-
evaluating teaching effects of the application of coop- matical statistical analysis on questionnaires collect-
erative teaching method in civil engineering through ed. Statistical methods used include pairing t test and
communication and exchange with relevant teachers independent sample t test. Experimental results ob-
and psychological experts in combination with set- tained are shown as below.
ting requirements of modern cooperative teaching 4.1. Influence of cooperative teaching method
method. on anxiety of college students majoring in civil en-
(1) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) [12]: gineering
STAI prepared by Spielberger et al. was used, includ- In terms of state anxiety dimension, differences of
ing instruction and two scales, involving 40 items in scores of experimental group (60.2±8.7) and control
total. The first 20 questions were State Anxiety In- group (69.2±8.8) did not have statistical significance
ventory (S-AI) and the last 20 questions were Trait (P=0.392) before intervention. After intervention,
Anxiety Inventory (T-AI). Four-point scoring method state anxiety score of experimental group decreased
of Li Kete was used for scoring and each item was greatly (54.2±8.1) and differences from that before
scored with 1 to 4 points. The highest score was 80 intervention had statistical significance (P<0.001).
and the lowest score was 20, respectively reflecting State anxiety score of control group decreased slight-
the degree of state or trait anxiety. Lower score rep- ly after intervention (57.2±9.7), but its differences
resented lower anxiety level. This scale has satisfying from that before intervention did not have statistical
consistency, convergence, discrimination and struc- significance (P=0.142). According to the change of
tural performance and can evaluate the anxiety level scores of both groups after intervention, the change
of a person [13, 14]. of score of experimental group was greater than that
(2) Psychological resilience scale [15]: it was pre- of control group and their differences had statistical
pared jointly by Hu and Gan and composed of tar- significance (P<0.001). Therefore, cooperative teach-
get concentration, interpersonal assistance, family ing method has the function of improving state anxi-
support, emotional control and positive cognition, ety. In terms of trait anxiety dimension, differences in
including 27 items. The scale used five-point scor- inter-group comparison, intra-group comparison and
ing method with full inconformity to full conformity. the change before and after intervention did not have
Among 27 items, 12 items were subject to reverse statistical significance (P>0.05), indicating that coop-
scoring. The research proves that the internal consist- erative teaching method cannot improve trait anxiety.
ency coefficient of this scale is 0.83 in retest and it (See table 1)
Table 1. Influence of cooperative teaching method on anxiety of college students majoring in civil engineering
Comparison of inter-group
Before Intra-group
Indicators Group After intervention change
intervention comparison
before and after intervention
Experimental group 60.2±8.7 54.3±8.1 P<0.001
State anxiety P<0.001
Control group 69.2±8.8 57.5±9.7 P=0.142
Experimental group 54.5±8.4 53.2±7.8 P=0.276
Trait anxiety P=0.410
Control group 53.8±8.9 52.2±8.7 P=0.217
4.2. Influence of cooperative teaching method (3.45±0.41), but its differences from that before inter-
on psychological resilience of college students ma- vention did not have statistical significance (P=0.610).
joring in civil engineering According to the change of scores of both groups af-
Differences of scores of experimental group ter intervention, the change of score of experimental
(3.51±0.42) and control group (3.48±0.39) in psy- group was greater than that of control group and their
chological resilience did not have statistical signifi- differences had statistical significance (P=0.037).
cance (P=0.614) before intervention. After interven- Therefore, cooperative teaching method has the func-
tion, psychological resilience score of experimental tion of improving psychological resilience. (See table 2)
group decreased greatly (3.33±0.37) and differences
from that before intervention had statistical signifi-
cance (P=0.002). Psychological resilience score of
control group decreased slightly after intervention

No.12 — 2015 Metallurgical and Mining Industry 163

 Engineer pedagogics
Table 2. Influence of cooperative teaching method on psychological resilience of college students majoring in civil
engineering
Before Intra-group Comparison of inter-group change
Group After intervention
intervention comparison before and after intervention
Experimental group 3.51±0.42 3.33±0.37 P=0.002
P=0.037
Control group 3.48±0.39 3.45±0.41 P=0.610
4.3. Influence of cooperative teaching method differences had statistical significance (P<0.001). In
on athletic performance of college students major- terms of skill performance, the score of experimental
ing in civil engineering group was 82.8±9.2 after intervention, significantly
In terms of theoretical score, the score of experi- higher than 79.6±8.9 of control group and their dif-
mental group was 84.2±8.2 after intervention, signifi- ferences had statistical significance (P=0.017). (See
cantly higher than 79.5±8.7 of control group and their table 3)
Table 3. Influence of cooperative teaching method on athletic performance
Group Theoretical score Skill performance
Experimental group 84.2±8.2 82.8±9.2
Control group 79.5±8.7 79.6±8.9
P P<0.001 P=0.017
5. Conclusions respondingly.
According to the experimental result and analy- In conclusion, in teaching process, cooperative
sis above, the application of cooperative teaching teaching method delivers the training of ability and
method in the teaching of civil engineering has good thinking mode and the development of humanistic
effect. Statistical data of the experiment show that quality. Their influence on students is long-term and
cooperative teaching method has greater influence stable. Therefore, it is necessary to apply cooperative
on college students in three aspects compared to tra- teaching method to each discipline effectively in fu-
ditional course. (1) In cooperative teaching method, ture higher education so as to give play to the effect
the individuality of students can be considered well. of cooperative teaching method in civil engineering
Learning tasks with different complexity are selected teaching to the greatest extent.
for different students according to their practical situ-
ation so that students can get a sense of achievement References
more easily. Such sense of achievement can well re- 1. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Smith, K. (2007)
duce students’ anxiety in learning. (2) In cooperative The state of cooperative learning in postsecond-
teaching method, the autonomy of students in learn- ary and professional settings. Educational Psy-
ing is fully exerted and exploratory teaching provides chology Review, 19(1), p.p.15-29.
an opportunity and platform for students to discover 2. Wittrock, M.C. (1978) The cognitive movement
and solve problems. Students are more willing to face in instruction. Educational Psychologist, 13(1),
difficulties in problems discovered by themselves and p.p.15-29.
spend time and energy solving problems. This can im- 3. Chen, T.S., Zheng, H., Cheng, C.W., Zhang, H.J.
prove their psychological resilience correspondingly. (2000) Discussions on Rationality in Application
(3) Compared to traditional educational method, co- of PE Teaching Mode. Fujian Sports Science and
operative teaching method has greater influence on Technology, 18(5), p.p.29-31.
college students’ awareness of physical exercise. 4. Wang, S.T. (2003) Exploration on New PE Teach-
With stronger awareness of physical exercise, stu- ing Mode. Journal of Shenyang Institute of Phys-
dents spend more time on physical exercise activities. ical Education, No.4, p.p.19-21.
They can release some negative emotions and fatigue 5. Gillies, R.M., Boyle, M. (2008) Teachers’ dis-
in effective physical exercise. Meanwhile, more at- course during cooperative learning and their per-
tractive parts in PE course can be understood better ceptions of this pedagogical practice. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 24(5), p.p.1333-1348.
from a non-professional perspective through interac-
6. Heba, E.L.D., Nouby, A. (2008) Effectiveness of
tion among students and between students and teach-
a blended e-learning cooperative approach in an
ers in cooperative teaching method. For students, the
Egyptian teacher education programme. Comput-
influence of cooperative teaching method is longer
ers & Education, 51(3), p.p.988-1006.
and greater than that of traditional teaching method
7. Shimazoe, J., Aldrich, H. (2010) Group work can
and their athletic performance can be improved cor-

164 Metallurgical and Mining Industry No.12 — 2015

 Engineer pedagogics
be gratifying: Understanding & overcoming re- Motivation of College Students. China Journal of
sistance to cooperative learning. College Teach- Health Psychology, 20(3), p.p.446-448.
ing, 58(2), p.p.52-57. 12. Spielberger, C.D. (2010) State:Trait anxiety in-
8. Carlsmith, K.M., Cooper, J. (2002) A persuasive ventory. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
example of collaborative learning. Teaching of 13. Iwata, N., Mishima, N., Shimizu, T., et al. (1998)
Psychology, 29(2), p.p.132-135. Positive and negative affect in the factor structure
9. Sun, Q.Y., and Li, H.L. (2009) Research on Ap- of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Japanese
plication of Cooperative Learning in Intensive workers. Psychological reports, 82(2), p.p.651-
Reading of English Majors. Journal of Hebei 656.
Normal University of Science and Technology 14. Håseth, K., Hagtvet, K.A., Spielberger, C.D.
(Social Science Edition), 8(4), p.p.45-49. (1990) Psychometric properties and research
10. Zhao, J.H. (2008) Empirical Study on Small-class with the Norwegian state-trait anxiety inventory.
Cooperative Learning in College English Read- Cross-cultural anxiety, (4), p.p.169-181.
ing. Journal of Chengdu University (Educational 15. Hu, Y.Q., Gan, Y.Q. (2008) Development and
Science Edition), 22(8), p.p.81-84. Psychometric Validity of the Resilience Scale for
11. Chen, X.D. (2012) Experimental Study on Influ- Chinese Adolescents. Acta Psychologica Sinica,
ence of Cooperative Learning on Achievement 40(8), p.p.902-912.

No.12 — 2015 Metallurgical and Mining Industry 165

Copyright of Metallurgical & Mining Industry is the property of Ukrmetallurginform STA
Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.