Enhancing Outcomes in School Science For Pupils During Transition From Elementary School Using Cooperative Learning Free

Groupwork and cooperative learning in science education are already incorporated into the pedagogical practices in many countries (Howe et al., 2007). Groupwork in science often forms part of practitioner guides (e.g., Harlen & Qualter, 2004; Sharp, Peacock, Johnsey, Simon, & Smith, 2007; Topping & Thurston, 2005). Within Scotland groupwork has reached the level of national policy in the new “Curriculum for Excellence” science outcomes which specifically identify the need for group discussion in effective learning (Scottish Government, 2008). The effectiveness of groupwork and cooperative learning strategies in science have been widely reported over a number of years. Basili and Sanford (1991) reported that in a sample of 62 students studying in a community college, use of cooperative groupwork in chemistry resulted in students holding fewer misconceptions than those taught by direct tuition. Howe et al. (2007) reported that in a sample of elementary school pupils drawn from 24 classes that groupwork, and the discussion it facilitated, played a critical role in enhancing the learning of pupils in two science topics. However, there is an absence of literature regarding the longevity of such gains, and no previous literature that looks at whether such gains survive transition after a change of school.

The Group Work Transition (GWT) project was designed as a longitudinal follow-up to the Economic & Social Research Council Teaching & Learning Research Program funded project “Supporting Group Work in Scottish Schools: Age and Urban/Rural Divide” (SCOTSPRING). The SCOTSPRING project examined the effects of a group work intervention in science on 10-12 year old pupils in 24 (12 rural and 12 urban) elementary schools in Scotland. Pupils in experimental classrooms engaged in general group work skills training and two structured group work projects in science. Important aspects of the work undertaken during the original SCOTSPRING project were that it took place in authentic classrooms and the implementation covered structural features, teacher role, and pupil interaction. SCOTSRPING started with activities for developing generic group skills. These activities began with a continuing professional development session, where teachers were introduced to desired structural features and teacher roles. Subsequently, teachers took their classes through group-based exercises designed to promote skills such as listening, questioning, helping, giving explanations and reaching agreement. In these respects the SCOTSPRING science group work differed significantly from the sort of group work that already exists in schools. The exercises were described in resource packs that the researchers provided, and were introduced during the continuing professional development session. After skills training, the pupils went through two programmes of science teaching, one addressing evaporation and condensation, and the other addressing forces. Each program covered key concepts, and required pupils to design investigations. For instance, the forces programme covered the angle, smoothness and height of slopes, and the weight and streamlining of cars as influences on motion, and introduced the concepts of gravity, friction and air resistance. The group tasks incorporated features to maximise the chances of pupils proposing ideas, disagreeing, explaining their reasoning, referring back and reaching consensus. In other words, the generic training was designed to promote pupil and teacher confidence and capability to use effective interaction when undertaking group work activities in science. The tasks themselves were designed to support the forms of pupil interaction that previous research had found to be beneficial. The programmes were implemented by teachers using researcher-supplied resources (which had themselves been developed in consultation with teachers), and in each case involved one hour of teaching per week, spread over about 12 weeks.

Pupil understanding of evaporation and condensation and forces was tested before and after the programmes. Progress significantly exceeded that made by control pupils who received teaching in the two topic areas, but did not participate in the group skills training or the SCOTSPRING science programs. Observational data were collected while the programmes were being implemented, and these supported the conclusions that enhanced ability of pupils to use appropriate discourse and dialogue (directly related to the group work communication skills training the pupils received in SCOTSPRING, namely, proposing and explaining explanations of scientific concepts) were good predictors of subsequent gains in attainment. Data from the SCOTSPRING project was analyzed with multiple regression analysis to examine the extent to which posttest scores were predicted by the proposition/explanation frequencies. Analysis indicated that proposition/explanation frequencies predicted posttest score for both evaporation and condensation (β = 0.28, t = 3.10, p < 0.01), and force and motion (β = 0.29, t = 3.13, p < 0.01) (Howe et al., 2007). General science attainment was also assessed using the Performance Indicators in Primary Schools (PIPS) instrument significant gains in general science attainment were observed in the experimental classes. Significant changes in observed groupwork behaviors were evident in both urban and rural classes. Changes in groupwork behavior were correlated to increased general science attainment. Increases in the number of ideas suggested by children were significantly correlated to increases in science attainment in the urban condition (r = 0.557, n = 37, p < 0.001). Increases in offering explanations were correlated to increases in science attainment in the rural condition (r = 0.465, n = 40, p < 0.01) (Thurston, Topping, Christie, et al., 2008). In the social domain, rural and urban pupils showed significant gains in the number of relationships they reported. Urban pupils showed greatest growth on this measure, but they started the project reporting a lower number of connections to other pupils (Tolmie et al., in press).

The project reported in this manuscript explored the effects of transitions (moving from one school context to another) and transfers (the ability of pupils to use previous learning, attitudes and skills in the new educational context) as the original study group moved school in urban and rural geographical locations. Both transition and transfer are reported as being critical influences on a child’s development and schooling.

It has long been recognized that movement from elementary to middle/high school can result in decreased academic attainment and motivation after transition (e.g., Finger & Silverman, 1966). In a sample of 933 pupils, decreased attainment scores and decreased levels of motivation were observed at transitions from elementary to middle and middle to high school (Barber & Olsen, 2004). Significant declines in science attainment scores were evident after transition for a sample of 225 twelve-year-old students (Petersen & Crockett, 1995). The falls in academic performance were related to decreased self-concept as a learner, decreased self concept in individual subjects and a mismatch between the development needs of young adolescents at the end of elementary school and the environment of the middle school (Mullins & Irvin, 2000).

At a time when friendships and the peer group are becoming increasingly important in the development of the adolescent, the transition between schools often serves to disrupt, alter or sever them (Mizelle & Irvin, 2000). Barber and Olsen (2004) reported increased loneliness and depression and decreased initiatives with peers after transition to middle school for a sample of 933 twelve-year-old pupils. Similar findings were reported in a two year longitudinal study of 143 ten-eleven-year- old pupils (Hirsch & DuBois, 1992). Peer support prior to transition was inversely correlated to increased psychological symptomatology during the period of school transition from elementary to junior high (although effects lessened over time).

A number of interventions have been reported to promote more effective transition. These include development of shared pedagogy in staff between schools, promoting study skills in students, involving parents in transition, and giving information/ orientation sessions to students (Mizelle, 2005). Mizelle concluded that an effective way to enhance transition was to engage students in positive social relationships with other incoming students. Lindsay (1998) reported an initiative that closed the school to all students except new entrants. This resulted in the formation of positive social relationships between new students and decreased levels of anxiety. Facilitating the perpetuation of peer relationships stemming from the previous school setting is also reported to promote effective transition (Carter, Clark, Cushing & Kennedy, 2005). Peer relationships are reported by students to be a cause of anxiety regarding transition (Arowosafe & Irvin, 1992). Missing friends from elementary school, having trouble making new friends and not being part of a group were reported as stressors by a sample of 11- year-old children in New Jersey assessed 4 weeks after transition to middle school (Elias, Gara, & Ubriaco, 1985).

The role of peer relationships has long been recognized as a buffer as students undergo transition (Hertzog, Morgan, Diamond & Walker, 1996). Students who had a structured series of peer interactions with older students at transition displayed fewer failing grades and missed fewer days of school than students who did not participate in such a program (Cognato, 1999, as cited in Mizelle & Irvin, 2000). It was also reported that in Cognato’s program female students in particular benefited in socialization and maintained self-esteem.

Academic performance after transition is influenced by the extent to which previous knowledge can be carried over or transferred successfully to the new school context. For some students this is a major barrier as they enter high school. In a sample of 25,795 students (average age 14.09 years) almost one quarter of students who had good eighth-grade attainment results failed at least one subject in ninth grade in the first semester after transition to senior high school high school (Roderick & Camburn, 1999). The question remains as to what could promote effective transfer of previous learning at transition. Given that it appears that transfer may not occur automatically for all students at transition, further explorations as to processes that may promote transfer are required.

Transfer or generalization of learning can occur over time and space. Transfer can be implicit or explicit. This latter distinction has been termed “low road” (depending on extensive and varied practice of a skill so that it is automatic) and “high road” (dependent on the learner’s deliberate “mindful abstraction” and subsequent application of general principles) transfer (Perkins & Salomon, 1987). The latter is akin to what many term “meta-cognition”— knowledge about one’s own cognition and the regulation of that cognition (Simons, 1994). Meta-cognition includes reflection, selfknowledge of strengths and weaknesses, learning strategies and monitoring learning.

Opinions are divided on issues of transfer of learning. In the field of adult learning, strict adherents of theories of “situated learning” (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Resnick & Collins, 1994) contend that skills are quite use-specific and are acquired and situated in certain contexts. A more moderate view is that there are specific requirements for transfer to occur— the structure of the activity required in the situation which is the target for transfer must be similar to that in the original situation. Much education actually proceeds on the assumption of transfer (e.g. one subject into another, one year into another, or transition between schools).

Gray and Orasanu (1987) reviewed the literature and concluded pessimistically that training has a limited effect in enhancing intellectual performance; skills did not transfer to novel contexts. Niedelman (1991) reviewed the evidence on low road and high road transfer, and did not find research supporting the use of highroad mechanisms to foster transfer of domain-specific knowledge or higher-order thinking. In contrast, Perkins and Salomon (1989) argued that transfer could be obtained when general principles of reasoning were taught together with self-monitoring practices.

Campione, Shapiro, and Brown (1995) concluded there are multiple manifestations of transfer, ranging from the understanding of domain-specific concepts through the deployment of relatively domain-general argumentation strategies.

Sternberg and Frensch (1993) identified that transfer of an item depends upon how it was encoded and organized—and whether a person has the ability to perceive how a task or situation may carry over to other situations. Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (1999) reviewed evidence on transfer of learning and concluded that to facilitate transfer, learners must understand when what has been learned can be used. This occurs when learners have conceptual knowledge, mental representations of problems and understanding of the relationships of the components in the overall structure of a problem. In addition learners need to be self-aware and have self-appraisal strategies (i.e., meta-cognition). Pintrich’s (1999) review emphasized the role of learner motivation, suggesting that self-regulated learning could be facilitated by adoption of mastery goals (e.g., success in self-improvement and learning)andto some extentbyrelative ability goals (e.g,. competing with others), but can be hindered by the adoption of extrinsic instrumental goals (e.g., getting good grades). Alexander and Murphy (1999) suggested that nurturing transfer requires that teachers used a three-pronged attack (knowledge; strategy; motivational training) that promoted principled understanding.

To promote transfer, Campione, Shapiro, and Brown (1995) used collaborative learning (discussion involving students explaining what they were learning to others); knowledge building and transformation (rather than knowledge telling); understanding within domains; reasoning strategies; reflection and meta-cognitive skills. Students taught these showed “impressive degrees of transfer” compared with controls. There have been several successful attempts to teach meta-cognitive strategy and skills (Covington, 1987). Simons (1994) proposed a number of principles for “Meta-cognitive Instruction,” which included:

• centrality of the interaction of cognitive, meta-cognitive and affective components of learning;

• emphasizing learning processes (rather than outcomes) and deeper cognitive processing;

• helping students to recognise and practice their learning strategies, reflectivity and self-regulation skills;

• shifting responsibility for learning and its regulation gradually to the students; and building new learning onto students’ existing knowledge and conceptions.

The issue of urban and rural education is important in Scotland. Scotland has a population density of 64 inhabitants per square kilometer (although in much of the highlands the average is 8 inhabitants per square kilometer) (General Register Office for Scotland, 2004). By contrast England has a population density average of 379 inhabitants per square kilometer (Demographia, 2008) and the population densities of France, Germany, and Italy are 110, 232, and 193 inhabitants per square kilometer respectively (United Nations World Populations Prospects Report, 2004). Therefore, rural education plays an essential role in the education of many Scottish children. The rural/urban location can have an effect on the pedagogical practices employed by teachers. It was reported that teacher behavior was different in large and small classes in Norwegian rural schools. Teachers in larger classes exhibited greater control on individual behavior. This led towards the development of classroom environments dominated by teaching and mediation of knowledge. Smaller rural classrooms tended towards individual and collective freedom. This allowed social constructivist approaches to develop more effectively (Kvalsund, 2004). It was reported that pupils in rural schools in Northern Ireland had more extensive cross age and cross sex peer relationships that pupils in urban schools (Gallacher, 2005). Thurston, Topping, Christie, et al. (2008) reported that teachers in rural settings used more groupwork and facilitated more classroom discussion as a result. While it might be assumed that transition between schools in rural and urban locations may result in different experiences and outcomes, the research literature in this field is incomplete.

Two interwoven issues are to be addressed in this manuscript. First, the manuscript will explore whether pupils were able to transfer gains from the original project to their new high school setting. Secondly, if there was effective transition, what aspects of the original project may be responsible for promoting this, especially in relation to the differential effects of undergoing transition from either an urban or rural elementary school setting. Science attainment, attitudes towards science and the social connectedness of follow-up pupils will be assessed and compared to that of children not involved in the original project. The research aimed to:

• track pupils who had been involved in the original groupwork project after they had undergone transition from elementary to high school (follow-up pupils);

• explore whether gains in attainment in science, attitudes towards science and range and nature of social connections persisted over time and were still present after transition;

• explore whether transition resulted in differential effects for pupils in rural and urban contexts; and

• identify pupils with whom comparisons could be made—those who had not been involved in the original study (non followup comparator pupils).

In order to achieve these aims the project had the following research questions:

1. In the two academic years after involvement in the original research, did gains in science understanding, attitudes and social relationships transfer and endure despite the changed context?

2. If gains did endure and transfer occurred, what relevant differences if any were evident between rural and urban schools?

3. Could differences be identified in science attainment, attitudes towards science and the nature of social relationships during science classes after transition to high school between original experimental pupils and comparator pupils?

Twelve and 13-year-old pupils who had been involved in the SCOTSPRING project and some of their classmates for comparison purposes were tracked as they undertook transition from elementary to high school. The progress of the sample was monitored. Target high schools were therefore only those to which the elementary project pupils had transferred. A total of 21 relevant high schools were identified. Data was collected from those classes where science teachers expressed their willingness to participate. There were 16 follow-up schools—five schools declined to participate. Data was collected from a total of 630 pupils (300 male mean age 156.10 months (SD = 7.04); 330 female mean age 155.84 months (SD = 6.58 months), - 252 follow-up pupils (118 male mean age 155.78 months (SD = 7.17); 134 female mean age 155.06 months (SD = 6.33 months) and 378 comparator/control pupils (182 male mean age 156.30 months (SD = 6.96); 196 female mean age 156.37 months (SD = 6.73 months). This study emerged as a post-hoc development due to the success of the original project. Therefore, it was not possible to identify true control groups as these had not formed an integral part of the design of the original study. This was a limitation of the design of this study and it is acknowledged that results from the study must be viewed within the confines of this constraint.

A battery of assessments was developed or adapted for the testing of both cognitive and affective domains. In the original project the Performance Indicators in Primary School instrument for 11-12 year-old pupils was used to assess science attainment. This measure was specific to the age and stage of the children at the original time of testing. It would have been inappropriate to use this same measure two years later. Therefore, a new measure that had been widely used in Scottish schools was identified. The new measure was a 21-item assessment in general science derived from the full standard 2002 Assessment of Achievement Program test (scored out of 61). The test covered general science, but excluded items that were connected to the two topics covered by the SCOTSPRING project in elementary school science (forces and materials). Nine items asked questions about living things and the processes of life (five multiple choice and four sentence completion), five items were given on energy (three multiple choice and two sentence completion), five items were included about chemical changes (two multiple choice and three sentence completion) and two items were included about the earth in space (one multiple choice and one true/ false). The test was reported to have Cronbach’s alpha values of between 0.7 and 0.8 when used with 1,306 twelve- and 13 year old pupils in Scottish schools during the Assessment of Achievement Program testing phase of 2002 (Scottish Executive Education Department, 2005).

A test was also developed which measured longevity of gains from the previous intervention in the specific science topic of Forces, comprising 29 items (scored out of 37). This was administered to assess enduring knowledge on the topic from the elementary project. Cronbach’s alpha for test/retest scores of 525 pupils during the original project was 0.66. Seventeen questions addressed the properties of slopes and cars relevant to speed of rolling. Twelve further questions focused generally on forces and gravity.

Attitudes to Science, a 21-item questionnaire, was used to explore pupils’ attitudes towards the school subject of science (Pell & Jarvis, 2001). Items were slightly modified from the “what I think of science” scale. This scale was reported by Pell and Jarvis to have good reliability and validity (Cronbach’s alpha 0.74 with a group of 116 eleven-year-old pupils). Each of 21 items was scored on a five point Likert scale with only the poles marked as agree and disagree. Children were asked to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with statements. Half of the items on each subscale were worded such that the polarity of the response was reversed.

Finally, as in the SCOTSPRING project, a Sociometric measure was employed to investigate pupils’ social relationships and patterns of interaction both inside and outside school. In the SCOTSPRING project the instrument showed reasonable reliability when used with 575 ten- to 12-year-old pupils (Cronbach’s alpha 0.69). “People in your class” was presented in the form of a matrix and asked respondents to consider four key context questions (columns) regarding their relationships with all other members of their science class (already printed in rows on the instrument). “People in your group” asked the pupils to undertake the same task, but only for the science work group (with the names of those in their science work group already printed on the instrument). Both instruments asked the pupils to mark all those pupils in their class/group that they:

• worked with regularly in their class/group;

• liked working with in science;

• liked spending time with at break time; and

• liked seeing out of school.

All measures were administered by two research assistants. Each researcher worked to a predetermined administration protocol within schools in a defined geographical area centred around one of two major cities. They administered the tests and measures giving similar instructions and examples of how to complete responses to items and allowing a set time for completion (120 minutes for the total battery of tests administered in two sittings, before and after a 15 minute break). All measures were administered within a 3-week period in the last 2 weeks of October to the end of the first week in November. Tests were marked according to predefined marking templates and any anomalous answers discussed within the group for consistency of decision making. Therefore, interrater consistency between markers was excellent with them performing at exactly the same level of performance in the pilot marking exercises. No errors in marking were reported during this process. Each researcher collated data onto a predefined data handling template and the two data files were merged after completion.

In the results section data is only presented for each item where no discrepancies in any item were reported during the marking process. In addition correlation and regressions are reported only when data from all the instruments required to perform such analyses were completed in a satisfactory manner. For this reason it should be noted that degrees of freedom may differ between analyses. Average pre- and posttransition cognitive and attitudinal measure scores for follow-up and comparator pupils are presented in Table 1.

Posttransition follow-up pupils scored higher in the forces test (F(1, 596) = 12.28,p < 0.001) than comparator pupils. The advantage in science attainment in the topic of forces that the follow-up pupils originally exhibited (Howe at al., 2007) was still identifiable eighteen months after the initial project ended. The forces attainment scores of the follow-up pupils were not significantly lower than scores obtained for the same pupils at the end of the original project (F(1, 183) = 1.636, ns). No significant differences in posttransition general science attainment were observed between follow-up and comparator populations (F(1, 354) = 0.31, ns).

Pretransition one way ANOVA showed there were no significant differences between the rural and urban follow-up pupils in science attainment (F(1, 131) = 1.908, ns) or in the forces test (F(1, 185) = 2.11, ns). After transition no significant differences were observed between the rural and urban follow-up pupils in either science attainment (F(1.196) = 160.56, ns) or the forces test (F(1,196) = 0.016, ns). This indicated that pupils in both rural and urban contexts had transferred science knowledge with equal effectiveness.

Follow-up pupils reported more positive attitudes toward science than non-follow-up pupils, but differences did not achieve significance (F(1, 457) = 0.985, p = ns). However, when analyzed as separate subgroups both urban (F(1, 121) = 7.143, p < 0.01) and rural (F(1, 91) = 4.29, p < 0.05) follow-up pupils reported more positive attitudes toward science than comparator pupils. Positive correlations (Pearson’s r) were found between attitudes toward science and posttransition forces test scores (r = 0.329, p > 0.001, n = 155) and science attainment (r = 0.283, p > 0.001, n = 155).

Data from the sociometric instrument are presented in Table 2. Significant regression relationships were evident between percentages of pupils in the science work-groups reported as “liked seeing out of school” and posttransition science attainment (β = 0.163, t(457) = 3.531, p<0.0001; R² = 0.024, F(1, 457) = 4.87, p < 0.0001), and percentage of pupils from the science work-groups reported as “liked spending time with at break” and posttransition science attainment (β = 0.123, t(456) = 2.651, p < 0.01; R² = 0.013, F(1, 456) = 6.04, p<0.01). Positive correlations were found between posttransition science attainment and percentage of pupils from the science work-groups that children reported they liked working with in science (r = 0.183, p > 0.05, n = 167), liked spending time with at break (r = 0.188, p > 0.05, n = 167), and liked seeing with out of school (r = 0.170, p > 0.05, n = 166).

There was evidence of transfer of social gains from the original project. The percentage of people from their science work group that pupils reported that they liked to work with in science was predicted by the percentage of their classmates that pupils reported they liked to work with in elementary school. Regression analysis indicated that this relationship was linear and significant (β = 0.349, t(159) = 4.698, p < 0.0001; R2 = 0.122, F (1, 159) = 22.068, p < 0.0001). Those pupils who showed the greatest ability to form positive work relationships at the end of the original project still exhibited this ability after transition.

Pupils from follow-up groups reported higher average percentage of work and play relationships than comparator pupils (Table 2). However, these differences were not significant. Pupils from both follow-up and comparator groups showed a stronger inclination to focus relationships on peers within their science work-group rather than in their class. For follow-up pupils the percentage of the science work-group was greater than the percentage of the class that they reported they liked working with in science (t = -8.933, df = 167, p < 0.0001, one-tailed); liked spending time with at break (t = -8.207, df = 167, p < 0.0001, onetailed); and liked spending time with out of school (t = -7.706, df = 166, p < 0.0001, one tailed). For comparator pupils similar patterns were observed. The percentage of the science work-group was greater than the percentage of the class that they reported they liked working with in science (t = -14.129, df = 313, p < 0.0001, one-tailed); liked spending time with at break (t = -12.357, df = 313, p < 0.0001, one tailed); and liked spending time with out of school (t = -11.956. df = 313, p < 0.0001, onetailed).

In summary results indicated that there was evidence of transfer of gains (forces test attainment results) by pupils involved in the original project. They were significantly advantaged in the science topic of forces compared to the comparator pupils (despite general science attainment being similar in both follow-up and comparator populations). Pupils from rural and urban elementary school settings showed similar patterns of transfer. In general follow-up pupils reported more positive attitudes towards science than comparator pupils. These differences reached significant levels when analyzed in the rural and urban populations independently. Social and attitudinal aspects to learning and peer support were significant and important predictors of post transition attainment. Those pupils who demonstrated an ability to develop social connections to their peers in elementary school were the same group who were able to establish effective peer relationships in high school. Evidence of transfer was thus observed in the follow-up population.

The original project appeared to have a twofold effect. Firstly, it appeared that gains in learning and social skills observed in the SCOTSPRING project could be transferred and effectively used after transition. Attainment gains that accrued during the original study persisted over time, and gains were still observable in the experimental group eighteen months after the original cooperative learning project. Campione et al. (1995) concluded that cooperative learning could be a critical factor that dictates whether learning can subsequently be transferred. This may be due to the way that learning is encoded during the cooperative learning processes. The important aspect of the encoding process when undertaking cooperative group work is that learning may proceed with knowledge on how the learning relates to prior learning, learner selfawareness about what they are doing (self-regulation of learning being promoted and facilitated by immediate feedback from peers) and that talking about thinking is possible as the group works on a problem. Thus learning may be encoded with metacognition.

It had previously been reported that when mathematics was taught using cooperative learning and metacognitive strategies to 384 twelve and 13-year-old pupils the possibility of knowledge transfer to other contexts was enhanced (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2003). Similar findings were reported for 206 nine and 10-year-old children undertaking cooperative learning tasks, which were reported to promote metacognitive awareness about learning (Meloth & Deering, 1994). A possible mechanism for this may be that cooperative groupwork enables and facilitates a greater volume of engaged and successful feedback to each group members implicitly. The quantity and immediacy of feedback to the learner is likely to be greater than that which could be generated by teacher intervention alone. Explicit reinforcement might stem from within the groupwork or beyond it, by way of verbal and/ or nonverbal praise, social acknowledgement and status, or official accreditation. As the learning relationship develops, group members should begin to become more consciously aware of what is happening in their learning interaction, and consequently more able to monitor and regulate the effectiveness of their own learning strategies. This development into fully conscious explicit and strategic metacognition is likely to encode learning in such a way that might facilitate later transfer. It should also make group members more confident that they can achieve even more, and that success is the result of their own efforts.

It might be that each stage of the peer learning process feeds back into the originating subprocesses—forming a continuous iterative process and a virtuous circle that promotes metacognition as learning is encoded. If as cooperative groupwork proceeds information is iteratively encoded with knowledge, understanding and self-regulation of that learning (i.e., metacognition), then this would explain why learning encoded in such circumstances can be transferred to new contexts (Campione et al., 1995; Bransford et al., 1999; Sternberg & Frensch, 1993). Whilst there was evidence that the level of productive feedback and reinforcement given to group members in the original project was positively influenced by the intervention (Howe et al., 2007, Thurston, Topping, Christie, et al. 2008), further work is required to explore this process and possible mechanisms more fully.

Data indicated pupils undergoing transition in rural and urban contexts transferred cognitive gains equally. Previous research reported that rural pupils fared less well at school transition as they moved from smaller, friendlier school settings to larger, more impersonal school settings (Barber & Olsen, 2004). This finding is not consonant with that. This might lead to the reexamination of previous assumptions regarding school transition in the rural context.

The social relationships that could be developed by pupils after transition were significantly related to higher posttransition attainment. A significant finding of the original project had been increased ability to develop and maintain more peer relationships. Transfer of previous learning was directly related to the scope and extent of work based relationships after transition. There may be some support for the hypothesis that social gains from the original project had the potential to act as buffers to the effects of transition and helped promote transfer. A significant finding of the original project was the increased ability of pupils to form positive work relationships with classmates after training (Thurston, Topping, Tolmie, & Christie, 2008). Peer relationships formed in work based settings (i.e., peer relationships formed with pupils with whom respondents worked with in science, as opposed to those whom they were just in the same science class as) dominated the nature of relationships formed in the classroom, the playground and outside of school for both follow-up and comparator pupils. This finding is in line with other researchers who have reported the important buffering effects of peer relationships in students undergoing transition (Hertzog et al., 1996). At a time when friendships and the peer group become important in the development of students, transition between schools can disrupt, alter or sever existing relationships (Erikson, 1980, Mizelle & Irvin, 2000). The social advantage after transition was significantly related to the observed science attainment scores. This suggests that ability to develop effective work relationships in the science classroom may provide a buffering effect against dips in science attainment after transition. These findings are consistent with those of other studies and add weight to literature surrounding the importance of peer relationships at school transitions (Cognato, 1999; Hirsch & DuBois, 1992).

The data presented in this research indicates that using cooperative learning strategies in science may allow transfer of knowledge and skills acquired to new contexts. Prior learning undertaken during the previous project in the science topic of forces was still evident and appeared stable after transition to high school. Follow-up pupils were advantaged in respect of their knowledge in this topic when judged against comparator pupils. Pupils from both rural and urban school contexts transferred learning successfully at transition. Follow-up pupils reported more positive attitudes toward science than comparator pupils from similar geographical contexts. Peer relationships appeared to play an important role in promoting effective transition and transfer for both follow-up and comparator pupils. Pupils tended to focus peer relationships on pupils with whom they worked, rather than more generally with the class.

It may be incumbent on schools to adopt appropriate pedagogical strategies before transition. This may lead to more effective transfer of learning as pupils undergo transition and minimise falls in science attainment. In addition it appears important that schools should make effective use of peer-support mechanisms prior to transition. Some form of general training opportunities for pupils on how to develop and maintain peer relationships may be useful to them and aid pupils to transfer cognitive structures, affective dispositions towards working and effective social skills to promote learning in the new school environment.

The opportunities that cooperative learning affords are not limited to science. Many other initiatives in cooperative learning are reported in other curriculum areas such as reading (e.g., Duran & Monereo, 2005) and maths (e.g., Topping, Kearney, McGee, & Pugh, 2004). Further research may wish to establish whether transfer of learning during transition can be promoted in other curriculum areas by cooperative learning. In addition further empirical testing may explore the links between cooperative learning and its association with metacognition. This would allow full exploration of the most effective strategies for pupils to encode information with concomitant metacognition in such as way that may promote later transfer. Work is already underway in respect of this issue and will be reported in due course.

The research was supported by grants from the Economic & Social Research Council and the Scottish Government Education Department. Thanks are also due to Peter Kutnick (King’s College, London), Peter Blatchford (Institute of Education, University of London) and Maurice Galton (University of Cambridge) for their generous sharing of resources and instrumentation to support the project. In addition the team would like to thank Christine Howe (University of Cambridge) for her input in adapting a number of the measures used in the original elementary school project and subsequently modified for use in this research project.