Effect of Peer Group Activity-based Learning on Students’ Academic Performance in Chemical Bonding

This study was designed to examine the effect of peer group activity-based learning on students’ academic performance in chemical bonding. This study was conducted at Nkawkaw Senior High School and the study employed an action research design. The study involved a pre-test, post-test and observation checklist as instruments. The study used a purposive sampling technique to select an intact class of 45 students in 2 General Arts 8 class. The intervention activities were carried out within 4 weeks. After the analysis of the tests and the observation checklist, it was revealed that students performed better in the post-test after the implementation of the peer group activity-based learning. The majority of the students also had higher engagement levels about the implementation of the peer group activity-based learning in the science classroom. The study therefore recommended that Science teachers at Nkawkaw Senior High School should use peer group activity-based learning approach in science lessons to improve the academic performance of students. The school authorities at Nkawkaw Senior High School should provide enough teaching and learning materials to facilitate effective implementation of peer group activity-based learning strategy in science classroom to improve students’ engagement levels.

Introduction

The teaching and learning of chemical bonding in many traditional educational settings continue to rely heavily on teacher-centered methods, which place emphasis on memorisation rather than deep conceptual understanding (Brown & Taylor, 2021). These approaches often limit students’ active participation and do little to support collaborative learning, thereby making it difficult for learners to grasp the fundamental ideas underlying chemical bonding (Tampubolon & Sudrajat, 2024). In Ghanaian science classrooms, the abstract nature of chemical bonding, particularly the need to visualize sub-microscopic processes, further complicates learning for many students (Dorsahet al., 2025; Nartey & Hanson, 2021). Without adequate representational tools such as models, simulations, or hands-on activities, students frequently develop alternative conceptions and persistent misconceptions (Taber, 2018). Additional challenges such as the symbolic language of chemistry, limited laboratory resources, large class sizes, and insufficient pedagogical training for teachers also hinder the effective teaching of chemical bonding (Devetaket al., 2009; Eilks & Hofstein, 2015; Mavhunga & Rollnick, 2013).

These pedagogical and systemic constraints reveal the need for innovative, student-centered strategies that actively engage learners and enhance their academic performance. Peer group activity-based learning has emerged as a promising approach for improving conceptual understanding, promoting critical thinking, and enriching students’ engagement in science lessons (Ajewole, 2016; Hayatet al., 2017). By placing students at the center of the learning process, this method encourages collaborative work, peer explanations, and hands-on experiences that reinforce understanding. Research has shown that peer and activity-based interactions help tutors and tutees develop communication skills, strengthen their knowledge, and improve academic outcomes (Bakare & Orji, 2019; Liu & Chen, 2020; Shana & Abulibdeh, 2020; Worley & Naresh, 2014).

However, classroom observations and informal interviews with Form Two General Arts 8 students at Nkawkaw Senior High School revealed persistent difficulties in understanding chemical bonds. Students struggled to distinguish between ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds and relied heavily on rote memorization rather than meaningful learning. The researchers observed that lessons were predominantly lecture-based, with minimal use of student-centred strategies or practical activities. These findings suggest that the teacher-centered instructional approach contributed significantly to students’ conceptual difficulties. Consistent with Nwosuet al. (2022), who noted the effectiveness of peer group activity-based learning in enhancing creativity and performance, these challenges highlight the need for an intervention that actively engages learners. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of peer group activity-based learning on students’ academic performance in chemical bonding at the Nkawkaw Senior High School. This study also sought to explore students’ level of engagement with this instructional approach.

The study was guided by the following research questions:

1. What is the effect of peer group activity-based learning on students’ academic performance in chemical bonding at the Nkawkaw Senior High School?

2. What is the level of student’ engagement in the use of peer group activity-based learning in teaching chemical bonding at Nkawkaw Senior High School?

Methodology

Research Design

This study adopted an action research design, which is widely recognized for its ability to provide practical and context-specific solutions to classroom-based problems. In the context of this study, the design was particularly appropriate because it enabled researchers to investigate, implement, and evaluate the effect of peer group activity-based learning on the teaching and learning of chemical bonding at Nkawkaw Senior High School. The design allowed for a cyclical process of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting, providing a holistic understanding of how peer group activity-based strategies influence students’ engagement and performance. Additionally, the design empowered the researchers to introduce a targeted intervention aimed at addressing specific learning difficulties identified among students, while simultaneously contributing to instructional improvement in Integrated Science.

Sample and Sampling Technique

The study used a purposive sampling technique to select 45 students from Form 2 General Arts Class 8. In this case, the intact class was selected because the researchers taught this class and had observed persistent difficulties among the students in understanding chemical bonding. Selecting an intact class also minimized disruptions to the school’s timetable and ensured natural classroom interactions during the intervention. Therefore, 45 students constituted the sample size and provided sufficient representation for evaluating the impact of peer group activity-based learning on students’ performance and engagement levels.

Research Instruments

Two main instruments were used to collect data: tests and an observation checklist. The tests used in this study consisted of a pre-test and three post-tests, each comprising ten multiple-choice items designed to assess students’ conceptual understanding of chemical bonding. The pre-test assessed the baseline knowledge of fundamental concepts including the definition of chemical bonding, types of bonds, and common misconceptions. The first post-test measured immediate learning outcomes after peer group activities on ionic and covalent bonding, while the second post-test assessed students’ understanding of metallic bonding, coordinate covalent bonds, and bond polarity. The final post-test served as a retention and summative assessment conducted one week after the intervention.

An observation checklist was also employed to record student’ engagement during peer group activity-based learning. The checklist, structured on a three-point scale, captures students’ participation in discussions, collaboration, attentiveness, problem-solving involvement, and enthusiasm. This real-time observational tool provided authentic insights into students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement as the intervention progressed.

Validity and Reliability of Instruments

To ensure the validity of the tests and observation checklist, the instruments were thoroughly reviewed by the researchers’ supervisor, the Head of the Science Department, and other experienced Integrated Science teachers at Nkawkaw Senior High School. Their expert evaluation ensured that the instruments were aligned with the research objectives, covered relevant content areas, and reflected appropriate difficulty levels. They also assessed the clarity, coherence, and relevance of each item to eliminate ambiguity and enhance the students’ ability to respond accurately. The review process strengthened the content validity of the instruments and ensured that the collected data were appropriate for addressing the research questions.

The researchers employed the test-retest method to determine the reliability of the tests by administering the test on two different occasions to the same group of students. The reliability coefficient was computed using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20), yielding a value of 0.75, which meets the acceptable threshold of 0.70. This indicates that the test items consistently measured students’ understanding. For the observation checklist, internal consistency reliability was established using Cronbach’s alpha, which yielded a coefficient of 0.76. This value demonstrates that the checklist items reliably measured students’ engagement throughout the intervention.

Data Collection Procedure

The data collection process for this study was conducted in three main stages: pre-intervention, intervention, and post-intervention.

Pre-Intervention

The researchers first administered a pre-test to determine students’ baseline knowledge of chemical bonding. This stage also involved explaining the purpose of the study to students, seeking permission from school authorities, and preparing all the teaching and learning materials required for the intervention.

Intervention

The intervention spanned four weeks and involved the implementation of peer group activity-based learning strategies to teach different aspects of chemical bonding.

Week 1: Introduction to Chemical Bonding

Students worked in peer groups using molecular model kits, periodic tables, and visual aids to explore ionic and covalent bonds. They constructed models of compounds such as NaCl and H₂O, and identified the differences between electron transfer and electron sharing. They also conducted experiments to compare the properties of ionic and covalent compounds, such as their solubility, melting point, and electrical conductivity.

Week 2: Advanced Concepts in Bonding

Peer groups conducted hands-on investigations and collaborative discussions to reinforce their understanding of ionic and covalent bonding through guided tasks and explanations supported by the instructor.

Week 3: Metallic Bonding

Groups constructed models of metallic bonding using craft materials and performed simple demonstrations to explore properties, such as malleability and conductivity. Their models illustrated the concept of the sea of electrons and explained how these delocalized electrons influence metallic properties.

Week 4: Bond Polarity and Intermolecular Forces

Students analyzed electronegativity differences in molecules such as HCl and NH₃, related these to bond polarity, and demonstrated intermolecular forces through group presentations, diagrams, and role-playing activities.

Post-Intervention

A final post-test was administered to assess the effect of the peer group activity-based learning intervention on student performance. This stage also involved collecting observational data and documenting key reflections on students’ participation throughout the intervention.

Data Analysis

Data collected from the tests and observation checklists were analyzed using SPSS Version 27. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations, were used to summarize the students’ engagement levels and test performance. A t-test analysis was employed to determine the effect of peer group activity-based learning on students’ academic performance.

Ethical Considerations

This study adhered to all ethical protocols governing research involving human participants. The students were assured of confidentiality and anonymity, and no identifiable information was collected. Participation was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from both the school authorities and participants. The instruments were designed to avoid sensitive or discriminatory content, and no biases related to religion, sex, ethnicity, or culture were included. Participants were also informed that their responses would be used solely for academic purposes and that they had the right to withdraw at any stage without any consequences.

Results

Research Question 1: Students’ Performance

This section answers the question on the effect of peer group activity-based learning on students’ academic performance in chemical bonding at Nkawkaw Senior High School. This section presents the raw scores of the students’ pre-intervention test, as well as the three post-intervention tests. The results of the pre- and post-intervention test scores of students, 001-045 are presented in Table I.

Table I. Frequency Distribution of Students’ Pre-Test and Post-Test Scores

Student ID	Pre-test (10)	Post-test1	Post-test2	Post-test3	Total (40)	Mean
		1 (10)	2 (10)	3 (10)
001	1	4	5	7	17	4.25
002	1	4	5	6	16	4.00
003	1	5	5	7	18	4.50
004	1	6	6	6	19	4.75
005	1	6	6	7	20	5.00
006	1	6	6	6	19	4.75
007	1	6	7	7	21	5.25
008	1	6	7	8	22	5.50
009	2	7	7	8	24	6.00
010	2	7	7	6	22	5.50
011	2	7	7	7	23	5.75
012	2	7	7	8	24	6.00
013	2	7	7	9	25	6.25
014	2	7	7	8	24	6.00
015	2	7	8	9	26	6.50
016	2	8	8	8	26	6.50
017	2	8	8	7	25	6.25
018	2	8	8	8	26	6.50
019	2	8	8	9	27	6.75
020	2	8	8	8	26	6.50
021	3	8	8	10	29	7.25
022	3	8	8	6	25	6.25
023	3	8	8	10	29	7.25
024	3	8	9	6	26	6.50
025	3	9	9	10	31	7.75
026	3	9	9	10	31	7.75
027	3	9	9	9	30	7.50
028	3	9	8	6	26	6.50
029	3	9	8	10	30	7.50
030	4	9	8	10	31	7.75
031	4	9	8	10	31	7.75
032	4	9	10	6	29	7.25
033	4	9	9	10	32	8.00
034	4	9	10	9	32	8.00
035	4	9	6	9	28	7.00
036	4	9	10	10	33	8.25
037	5	10	9	9	33	8.25
038	6	6	10	10	32	8.00
039	6	6	10	8	30	7.50
040	7	10	6	8	31	7.75
041	7	6	10	9	32	8.00
042	8	10	6	10	34	8.50
043	9	10	10	10	39	9.75
044	9	10	10	9	38	9.50
045	9	10	10	8	37	9.25
Total	153	350	355	371	1229	307.25
Mean	3.40	7.78	7.89	8.24	27.31	6.83

From Table I, the students’ performance in the pre-test was relatively low, with an average score of 3.40 out of 10. This indicates that, before the introduction of peer group activity-based learning, students had a limited understanding of the material or concepts being tested. Performance gradually improved with the introduction of the peer group activity-based learning strategy. In post-test 1, the mean score increased to 7.78, almost doubling the initial mean from the pre-test. This improvement suggests that peer group activity-based learning has a significant positive effect on student learning, helping them better understand the chemical concepts. Many students scored higher, with some even achieving up to 10 out of 10. This suggests that peer group activity-based learning encourages collaborative learning, deeper engagement with the material, and the opportunity to learn from peers. In post-test 2, the average score further rose slightly to 7.89. This consistency in improvement shows that peer group activity-based learning has maintained its impact on student performance. However, the marginal increase between post-test 1 and post-test 2 suggests that while students continued to benefit from the strategy, the improvement plateaued for some learners. This might indicate that additional instructional support or variation in learning strategy could further enhance outcomes.

By post-test 3, the mean score had increased to 8.24, reflecting continuous progress. This improvement demonstrates that peer group activity-based learning had a sustained positive influence on students’ performance, with a number of students achieving near-perfect scores, including 10 out of 10. The students’ total scores increased progressively. This suggests that the collaborative nature of peer group activity-based learning activities encourages sustained learning and better retention of knowledge over time. The final total average score for the students across all tests was 27.31 out of 40, with a mean score of 6.83 across the four tests. This cumulative score illustrates the overall growth in students’ learning and understanding due to the intervention. Students who started with lower pre-test scores, such as those who scored 1 or 2, showed substantial improvement, achieving higher post-test results by the end of the assessment cycle. Therefore, the data indicate that peer group activity-based learning has a marked and consistent positive effect on students’ performance. Students’ understanding of biology improved significantly from pre-test to each subsequent post-test, demonstrating the effectiveness of peer group activity-based learning as a learning strategy.

Table II presents the t-test analysis of students’ pre-test and post-test scores after the introduction of peer group activity-based teaching. The results indicated clear and consistent improvements in students’ academic performance across all post-tests compared to the pre-test. For the comparison between pre-test and post-test 1, the mean difference was 4.38 with a t-value of 3.85 and a p-value of 0.0004. This shows a statistically significant improvement in students’ performance immediately after their initial exposure to peer group learning. The early gains suggest that collaborative activities quickly helped students better engage with and understand the concepts being taught.

Table II. T-Test Analysis of Students’ Pre-Test and Post-Test Scores

Comparison	Mean difference	Df	t-value	p-value
Pre vs. Post 1	4.38	39	3.85	0.0004
Pre vs. Post 2	4.49	39	3.96	0.0006
Pre vs. Post 3	4.84	39	4.28	0.00007

In the case of pre-test and post-test 2, the mean difference increased slightly to 4.49, with a t-value of 3.96, and a p-value below 0.001. This further improvement indicates that continued participation in peer-based learning activities has sustained and reinforced students’ academic progress. The findings emphasize the positive influence of peer explanations and group discussions in deepening our understanding. The comparison between pre-test and post-test 3 showed the highest mean difference of 4.84, supported by a t-value of 4.28, and a p-value below 0.001. This result demonstrates that ongoing peer-group interactions not only maintained but also strengthened the gains achieved in the earlier stages of the intervention. The consistent rise from Post-test 1 through Post-test 3 reflects long-term knowledge retention and enhanced mastery of the subject matter. These findings strongly affirm that peer group activity-based teaching significantly improves students’ academic performance. The progressive increases in the mean differences across the three post-tests highlight the effectiveness of collaborative learning in fostering deeper conceptual understanding, encouraging active participation, and boosting students’ confidence in science learning.

Research Question 2: Students’ Engagement Levels

This section answers the question on the level of students’ engagement about the use of peer group activity-based learning in teaching chemical bonding at Nkawkaw Senior High School. Data on the level of students’ engagement in science lessons facilitated by peer group activity-based learning activity-based learning were analyzed as means and standard deviations. The results are presented in Table III.

Table III. Frequency Distribution of the Level of Students’ Engagement Using Peer Group Activity-Based Learning

Statement	Mean	SD
Peer group activity-based learning in science enhances my understanding of difficult concepts.	2.53	1.471
I feel more motivated to participate in science lessons because of peer group activity-based learning.	2.24	1.351
Peer group activity-based learning sessions make science lessons more enjoyable for me.	2.27	1.388
I feel more comfortable asking questions in peer group activity-based learning sessions compared to regular class.	2.47	1.342
Peer group activity-based learning helps me build confidence in my science skills.	2.23	1.412
I believe peer group activity-based learning has a positive impact on my overall performance in science.	1.49	0.968
I would recommend peer group activity-based learning to other students who struggle in science.	1.78	1.106
I look forward to attending peer group activity-based learning sessions for science.	2.31	1.311
Peer group activity-based learning encourages collaboration among students in science.	1.93	1.214
I actively engage in discussions during science lessons.	1.67	1.108
Overall mean	2.052	1.281

From Table III, the overall mean score of 2.052 indicates that students generally had a moderate level of agreement on the positive effects of peer group activity-based learning on their engagement, with some variability in their responses, as seen in the standard deviation (SD) of 1.281. While students found some aspects of peer group learning beneficial, particularly in understanding difficult concepts (mean = 2.53, SD = 1.471), their overall responses revealed a mix of moderate engagement and hesitation towards its full effectiveness. For instance, the scores suggest that, while peer group learning enhances comprehension for certain students, the benefit is not universally felt, as reflected in the relatively high variability in their responses. In most cases, the standard deviations exceeded 1.3, indicating that students had varied engagement levels with peer group activity-based learning. In terms of motivation, a mean score of 2.24 for feeling more motivated to participate in science lessons indicates that students were somewhat motivated by peer group activities, but engagement levels could be improved. The variability in responses (SD = 1.351) suggests that some students were motivated by the collaborative learning environment, while others did not find it stimulating.

The data also show that peer group activity-based learning had a moderate effect on students’ enjoyment of science lessons (mean = 2.27, SD = 1.388). The fact that students found science lessons more enjoyable during peer group sessions aligns with the idea that learning in a collaborative setting can make the content more relatable and interactive. However, the standard deviation again points to varied experiences, where some students likely found these sessions to be more engaging, while others did not experience the same level of enjoyment. The comfort level students felt when asking questions during peer group learning was another important factor, with a mean of 2.47. This suggests that students generally felt more comfortable raising questions in peer group settings than in the regular class, but the standard deviation (SD = 1.342) implied that this comfort level was not uniform across the group. It seems that, while some students gained confidence in asking questions, others remained hesitant or indifferent, which may point to differences in group dynamics or personal learning styles. Despite these moderately positive responses, when asked about the impact of peer group activity-based learning on overall performance, students expressed more inconsistencies (mean = 1.49, SD = 0.968). This lower score indicated that many students did not feel that peer group activities significantly improved their overall science performance. This suggests that while the strategy may have enhanced students’ understanding and engagement in certain areas, it did not necessarily translate into noticeable academic improvement for all students. The data also reflected students’ mixed feelings about recommending peer group activity-based learning to others (mean = 1.78). This shows a lack of strong endorsement, possibly due to varying personal experiences and the effectiveness of the strategy. However, peer group activity-based learning seemed to foster a collaborative environment, as indicated by the mean score of 1.93 for encouraging collaboration, although not to the extent that all students actively promoted it. Therefore, the findings show that peer group activity-based learning has an impact on students’ engagement in science lessons.

Discussions

The findings in Tables I and II are in line with those of Ozgelen and Sinan (2012), Ogunleye and Bamidele (2013), and Bujaket al. (2013), who highlight the positive impact of peer group activity-based learning on student performance. The notable improvement from pre-test to post-test in this study demonstrates how peer group activity-based learning sessions facilitated a deeper understanding of biological concepts. This aligns with the observation that peer group activity-based learning strategies help to reinforce knowledge over time, resulting in sustained academic growth. The consistency in student performance across the post-tests further corroborates the effectiveness of peer group activity-based learning, as noted by Hinson (2013). His research revealed that students engaged in peer group activity-based learning consistently outperformed their peers in standardized tests and course grades. Moreover, the cumulative improvement in students’ overall performance illustrates the long-term benefits of peer group activity-based learning, as reflected in earlier studies. By fostering collaborative learning environments, peer group activity-based learning appears to play a critical role in reinforcing students’ comprehension and academic success. These findings further affirm the growing body of literature advocating peer-group activity-based learning as an effective tool for enhancing student achievement, particularly in biology (Anwer, 2019).

Moreover, the findings in Table III are in concordance with the work of Bakare and Orji (2019), who emphasized the positive role of peer group activity-based learning in improving students’ understanding and motivation in biology. The enhanced understanding of difficult science concepts, as noted by students in this study, reflects the value of peer group activity-based learning as a teaching strategy. This aligns with the findings of Kimet al. (2021), who also reported that peer group activity-based learning significantly improves students’ grasp of complex science topics. The increased motivation among students to participate in lessons corresponds with the work of Parkeret al. (2023), who found that peer group activity-based learning boosted student motivation, even though slight variations in motivation scores were noted across the studies. The supportive and enjoyable environment created by peer group activity-based learning sessions, as perceived by the students, further reinforces its effectiveness. The finding that students felt more comfortable asking questions during peer group activity-based learning aligns with Farooqet al. (2021), who similarly found that peer group activity-based learning encouraged students to ask questions more freely than in traditional classroom settings. Additionally, peer group activity-based learning was found to boost students’ confidence in their science abilities, which supports the findings of Nwaforet al. (2024). Their study also noted that peer group activity-based learning contributed significantly to building student confidence, further validating the current findings. This increase in self-assurance indicates that peer group activity-based learning not only enhances academic performance, but also nurtures the psychological aspects of learning, particularly in science.

Although students recognized the positive impact of peer group activity-based learning on their overall performance, there was some variation in their perceptions. This moderate level of agreement mirrors the findings of Ghalleyet al. (2019), who observed that, while students acknowledged the benefits of peer group activity-based learning, their views on its overall impact varied. Such variations suggest that individual experiences or personal learning preferences may influence how students perceive the effectiveness of peer-group activity-based learning. The findings also correspond with Chan and Bauer (2015), who found high levels of satisfaction and perceived value among students involved in peer group activity-based learning for chemistry. The collaborative nature of peer group activity-based learning, as observed in this study, supports the findings of Anwer (2019), who emphasized that peer group activity-based learning fosters cooperation among students, encouraging them to work together and learn from one another in science. These findings are also consistent with previous research, demonstrating the significant positive impact of peer group activity-based learning on students’ understanding, motivation, confidence, and collaborative learning in science (Nazeef & Ali, 2024; Niyonsabaet al., 2022). This suggests that peer group activity-based learning is an effective strategy to enhance both academic achievement and student engagement in science lessons.

Conclusion

The use of peer group activity-based learning in teaching science concepts, particularly chemical bonding, has demonstrated a wide range of positive outcomes for students. The approach proved highly effective in fostering active participation, increasing motivation, and promoting enthusiasm and confidence during the lessons. Through structured collaboration, students engaged more deeply with the content, clarified misconceptions, and supported each other’s understanding of complex ideas. The strategy also led to substantial improvements in academic performance, as evidenced by the significant increases in post-test scores compared to pre-test scores. These gains were consistently maintained across successive post-tests, indicating not only immediate learning benefits but also sustained retention of knowledge. Overall, peer group activity-based learning stands out as a powerful instructional strategy in science classrooms, contributing meaningfully to improved engagement, conceptual understanding, and long-term learning outcomes.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have any conflict of interest.