Linda HeidenrichSED 600Cooperative Learning is the Best Way to Learn Science-Con Argument“Effective science programs reflect a balanced, comprehensive approach thatincludes the teaching of investigation and experimentation skills along with directinstruction and reading (CA Science Framework, 2003, 11).” There is no best way toteach science. Despite the arguments to be made for cooperative learning includingsocial development and problem solving with peers, peers are novices and science withits complexities demands an expert. In addition, cognitive neuroscience hasdemonstrated the teacher must be directly involved in the building of knowledge or theknowledge is difficult to build. Finally, there are alternatives to cooperative learningincluding bridging assignments and inquiry assignments.Students need peers to make sense of their environment and provide emotionalsupport during the teenage years but peers cannot effectively teach science because thesubject of science includes problem solving and complex concepts that the teenage mindwould have difficulty mastering much less explaining. As discussed in How PeopleLearn, experts are needed in areas where there is extensive breadth of knowledgerequired because experts can contextualize ideas in terms of the bigger picture andprovide guidance to novices to gain understanding in these areas. In addition, experts areproductive problem solvers as well as having the metacognition to assist novices inunderstanding how to solve a problem in an area such as science which requires problemsolving. For the science curriculum, experts are needed not novices (National ResearchCouncil, 2000, 49).Much studying of the brain has occurred in the last several years and the resultsattained demonstrate the need for a teacher to be the central figure in a science classroom,not their peers. In her study relating cognitive neuroscience and the classroom, JanetPhillips explains how the brain functions best when several conditions are being met; thestudents need information chunked as they are absorbing the larger picture and studentsneed the information to be made relevant to them (Phillips, 2005, 13). Peers do not havethe ability to provide the big picture involved to make sense of the content because theythemselves have not been exposed to the big picture and, therefore, it is unfair to rely onpeers to provide appropriate context. In addition, depending on the makeup of thecooperative learning group, some students can move at a quicker pace and would notchunk the information at an appropriate pace for all students to gain required knowledge.If the teacher is controlling the classroom, s/he can provide appropriate chunks ofinformation for all students to be successful. Although peers can be effective at makinginformation relevant, the teacher can often be more effective because s/he can make theinformation relevant in terms of past, present and future in contrast to peers who can onlymake the content relevant in the present.There are viable and positive alternatives to cooperative learning in which thestudents are engaged, interacting with the content and making the information relevant tothem without using their peer group. The most effective alternative is a process entitledmodel-based inquiry as proposed in How Students Learn: Science in the Classroom.This method uses the students’ lives to generate projects and discussion items relevant tothe students. The projects discussion items are then used to understand a curricular topic.The example given in How Students Learn refers to a genetics unit in a high schoolbiology class. The students read an edited version of Mendel’s paper regarding his workwith pea plants to gain background knowledge. The students then created pedigrees of adisorder in their family (National Research Council, 2005, 529). The pedigrees were usedto understand the content standards relating to genetics, including how to read a pedigreeand understand its significance, how to determine the inheritance patterns of traits andunderstand how some disorders may have special circumstances, such as sex-linked ormultiple alleles. The students do not work with each other to access the knowledge butinstead the teacher accessing their prior knowledge and makes the content relevant tothem.Works CitedBransford, John D. & Ann L. Brown (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School. Washington D.C.: National Academies Press.Bransford, John D. & M. Suzanne Donovan (Eds.). (2005). How Students Learn: Sciencein the Classroom. Washington D.C.: National Academies Press.California Department of Education. (2003). Science Framework for California Public Schools. Sacramento, CA.Phillips, Janet (2005). From Neurons to Brainpower: Cognitive Neuroscience and Brain Based Research. Washington D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.