Cooperative Learning and Achievement: Theory and Research
Abstract
Slavin, Hurley, and Chamberlain present a historical review of cooperative learning. Four theoretical perspectives on cooperative learning and achievement are presented: Motivational, Social Cohesion, Cognitive Developmental, and Cognitive Elaboration Perspectives. In subsequent sections, critical philosophical differences are presented, particularly about where to locate motivation for learning behaviors, how to structure interactions among students, and how incentive and task structures impact forms of cooperative learning. In the final section, prospective areas for research are presented, and include a unified theoretical model that can guide future research efforts, inform educational practice, and foster the design of effective professional training and development.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many past researchers have only looked at the outcome of cooperative learning on achievement.
“Many past researchers have only looked at the outcome of cooperative learning on achievement (Slavin, 1995;Slavin, Hurley & Chamberlain, 2003), but undoubtedly changes in students' conceptions are strong indicators of the effectiveness of cooperative learning strategies on students' understanding of concepts in addition to achievement.”
From FIFTH GRADE STUDENTS ENGAGED IN A COOPERATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: EVALUATING THEIR ABILITY TO DETERMINE THE STATUS OF THEIR OWN CONCEPTIONS ABOUT MATTER (2013) · cites this paper as Slavin, Hurley & Chamberlain, 2003
Cites
Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups
Cohen, E. G. (1994) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543064001001 · Cited by 2,120 · see citing works
Peer interaction and learning in small groups
Webb, N. M. (1989) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/0883-0355(89)90014-1 · Cited by 1,050 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Developing the theory of formative assessment
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009) · Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5 · Cited by 3,301 · see citing works
Using mindful movement in cooperative learning while learning about angles
Shoval, E. (2011) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9137-2 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
LEWIS, D. M., TREAGUST, D. F., & CHANDRASEGARAN, A. L. (2013) · COSMOS · doi:10.1142/s0219607712500061 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Slavin, R. E., Hurley, E. A., & Chamberlain, A.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Columbia University (US)
- Success for All Foundation (US)
- Venue
- Handbook of Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-04-15
- Pages
- 177-198
- OpenAlex
- W1513760897
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 15
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Wiley eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion
- Keywords
- cooperative learning, academic performance, student motivation, social cohesion, cognitive development, cognitive elaboration, incentive structures, task structure, professional development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review