Enhancing Students’ Learning Outcomes through Cooperative Learning: A Classroom Action Research
Abstract
Purpose of the study: This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of cooperative learning using the greeting and questioning technique in achieving students’ mastery of chemistry learning outcomes on the topic of chemical bonding.
Methodology: The study employed classroom-based action research conducted in several instructional cycles. Data were collected using achievement tests, classroom observations, and documentation. Achievement tests were administered to measure students’ learning outcomes, while observations were used to monitor teacher performance and student engagement throughout the learning process. Documentation supported the collection of contextual data related to the school, teachers, and students. Data analysis focused on the percentage of students achieving mastery learning criteria across cycles.
Main Findings: The results revealed a progressive improvement in students’ mastery learning across instructional cycles. Classical mastery increased from 42.5% prior to the intervention to 47.5% in Cycle I, 72.5% in Cycle II, and reached 87.5% in Cycle III. These findings indicate that cooperative learning with the greeting and questioning technique effectively enhanced students’ learning outcomes and enabled the achievement of classical mastery in chemical bonding material.
Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides empirical evidence on the effectiveness of a cooperative learning strategy integrating greeting and questioning activities in improving mastery learning in chemistry, particularly on abstract topics such as chemical bonding, thereby contributing practical insights to classroom-oriented chemistry instruction.
References
.[1] U. Azizah and H. Nasrudin, “Problem Solving Thinking Skills: Effectiveness of Problem-Solving Model in Teaching Chemistry College Students,” J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1462–1469, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v8i3.1700.
S. Chi, Z. Wang, and X. Liu, “Assessment of Context-Based Chemistry Problem-Solving Skills: Test Design and Results from Ninth-Grade Students,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 295–318, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11165-022-10056-8.
B. Pölloth, D. Diekemper, and S. Schwarzer, “What resources do high school students activate to link energetic and structural changes in chemical reactions? – A qualitative study,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1153–1173, 2023, doi: 10.1039/D3RP00068K.
D. A. Karnishyna, T. V. Selivanova, P. P. Nechypurenko, T. V. Starova, and S. O. Semerikov, “Enhancing high school students’ understanding of molecular geometry with augmented reality,” Sci. Educ. Q., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 25–40, 2024, doi: 10.55056/seq.818.
N. G. Korkmaz and B. A. Öztürk, “Evaluation of Teachers ’ Opinions on Mathematics Teaching Methods,” Int. J. Acad. Stud. Technol. Educ., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 151–185, 2025.
C. Stroumpouli and G. Tsaparlis, “Chemistry students’ conceptual difficulties and problem solving behavior in chemical kinetics, as a component of an introductory physical chemistry course,” Chem. Teach. Int., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 279–296, 2022, doi: 10.1515/cti-2022-0005.
F. Yovanie, “Learning Chemical Bonds in Terms of Identifying Difficulties, Misconceptions, Learning Media, and Learning Models: A Systematic Literature Review,” J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 292–303, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v10i6.6823.
S. Winarni, E. Effendy, E. Budiasih, and S. Wonorahardjo, “Constructing ‘Concept Approval Strategy,’ A Chemistry Learning Idea to Prevent Misconceptions,” Educ. Química, vol. 33, no. 2, p. 159, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.22201/fq.18708404e.2022.2.79841.
X. Xiong, “Influence of teaching styles of higher education teachers on students‘ engagement in learning: The mediating role of learning motivation,” Educ. Chem. Eng., vol. 51, pp. 87–102, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ece.2025.02.005.
G. Abdullah, A. Arifin, M. Saro’i, and S. Uhai, “Assessing the Influence of Learning Styles, Instructional Strategies, and Assessment Methods on Student Engagement in College-Level Science Courses,” Int. Educ. Trend Issues, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 142–150, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.56442/ieti.v2i2.466.
A. Hussein, S. Dzaiy, and S. A. Abdullah, “The Use of Active Learning Strategies to Foster Effective Teaching in Higher Education Institutions,” Zanco J. Humanit. Sci., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 328–351, 2024, doi: 10.21271/zjhs.28.4.18.
D. Andrews, E. Van Lieshout, and B. Bhatta Kaudal, “How, Where, And When Do Students Experience Meaningful Learning?,” Int. J. Innov. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 28–45, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.30722/IJISME.31.03.003.
T. N. T. Nguyen and D. Thi Kim Oanh, “Cooperative learning and its influences on student engagement,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2513414.
T. Tadesse, H. Ware, A. Asmare, and R. M. Gillies, “Enhancing Student Engagement and Outcomes: The Effects of Cooperative Learning in an Ethiopian University’s Classrooms,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 9, p. 975, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14090975.
R. M. Gillies, “Using Cooperative Learning to Enhance Students’ Learning and Engagement during Inquiry-Based Science,” Educ. Sci., vol. 13, no. 12, p. 1242, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.3390/educsci13121242.
R. Silva, C. Farias, and I. Mesquita, “Cooperative Learning Contribution to Student Social Learning and Active Role in the Class,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 15, p. 8644, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13158644.
J. Ramadevi, C. Sushama, K. Balaji, V. Talasila, N. Sindhwani, and Mukti, “AI enabled value-oriented collaborative learning: Centre for innovative education,” J. High Technol. Manag. Res., vol. 34, no. 2, p. 100478, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.hitech.2023.100478.
L. Li, S. M. Ismail, I. Patra, and D. Lami, “RETRACTED ARTICLE: Not a passive learner but an active one: a focus on the efficacy of philosophy-based language instruction and its consequences on EFL learners’ critical thinking, engagement, and academic achievement,” BMC Psychol., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 148, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-01648-2.
A. A. Alzubi, M. Nazim, and J. Ahamad, “Examining the effect of a collaborative learning intervention on EFL students English learning and social interaction,” J. Pedagog. Res., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 26–46, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.33902/JPR.202425541.
Y. Yuan, J. Harun, B. Y. Wong, and L. Li, “Technology-Driven Framework for College English Courses: If and How Mobile-Assisted Collaborative Language Learning Affects EFL Student Engagement,” SAGE Open, vol. 15, no. 2, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1177/21582440251329687.
I. A. Ismail, F. U. Jhora, Q. Qadriati, and M. Insani, “Enhancing Science Learning Activities through the Implementation of Discovery Learning and Teaching at the Right Level Method,” J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1886–1895, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v10i4.7359.
C. Wardoyo, B. S. Narmaditya, and A. Wibowo, “Does problem-based learning enhances metacognitive awareness of economics students?,” Pegem J. Educ. Instr., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 329–336, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.47750/pegegog.11.04.32.
Copyright (c) 2025 Setiawati Setiawati, Eva Antony
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and acknowledge that the Journal of Chemical Learning Innovation is the first publisher licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
.png)
.png)
