Improving reading comprehension skills through cooperative learning for the second year non english majored students at tien giang university

ABSTRACT The purposes of this research were: 1 to investigate whether cooperative learning enhances reading comprehension skills for non-English majored students in the second year at Ti

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HUE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NGUYEN KIM THAO

IMPROVING READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS THROUGH COOPERATIVE LEARNING FOR THE SECOND-YEAR NON-ENGLISH MAJORED

STUDENTS AT TIEN GIANG UNIVERSITY

FIELD OF STUDY: THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

CODE: 60.14.10

MA THESIS IN EDUCATION SUPERVISOR: TRUONG BACH LE, D.Ed

HUE, 2013

BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO

ĐẠI HỌC HUẾ TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NGUYỄN KIM THẢO

CẢI THIỆN KỸ NĂNG ĐỌC HIỂU THÔNG QUA VIỆC HỌC HỢP TÁC CHO SINH VIÊN KHÔNG CHUYÊN TIẾNG ANH NĂM THỨ HAI TẠI

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC TIỀN GIANG

CHUYÊN NGÀNH: LÝ LUẬN VÀ PHƯƠNG PHÁP

DẠY – HỌC MÔN TIẾNG ANH

MÃ SỐ: 60.14.10

LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ GIÁO DỤC

NGƯỜI HƯỚNG DẪN KHOA HỌC:

TS TRƯƠNG BẠCH LÊ

HUẾ, 2013

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I hereby acknowledge that this study is mine The data and the findings discussed

in the thesis are true, and have not been published elsewhere

Author

ABSTRACT

The purposes of this research were: (1) to investigate whether cooperative learning enhances reading comprehension skills for non-English majored students in the second year at Tien Giang University, and (2) to find out students’ attitudes towards the cooperative learning activities applied in reading sessions

This was an experimental research study, which was conducted on one group with pre- and post- test design The data were collected by means of questionnaires, pre-/ post- tests on reading comprehension skill, and in-depth interviews Forty- five questionnaires for students were delivered and returned, and 9 interviews were conducted with 9 students The data were analyzed in descriptive statistics, i.e statistical frequency and percentage

The findings showed that the second-year non-English majored students at TGU improved their reading comprehension skills when exposed to cooperative learning activities, and they had positive attitudes towards cooperative learning However, five students (11% of the participants) had a negative attitude on cooperative learning These students liked working alone Besides, based on some limitations of this study, suggestions for further research and pedagogical implications were mentioned

In the process of choosing and writing the thesis, I am fortunate to receive invaluable assistance and support

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Doctor Truong Bach Le, for his careful instructions through the course, great advice, and especially his invaluable documents, experienced suggestions and comments without which this thesis could not have been fulfilled

I would like to show my heartfelt gratitude to Assoc Prof Dr Tran Van Phuoc, Assoc Prof Dr Truong Vien, Assoc Prof Dr Le Pham Hoai Huong, Doctor Pham Hoa Hiep, Doctor Pham Thi Hong Nhung, and Doctor Ton Nu Nhu Huong for their helpful instructions during the post-graduate course

I would like to express my sincere thanks to all the participating students at Tien Giang University for their cooperation during the time carrying out this study

Finally, it is my pleasure to acknowledge my debt to my parents, my husband, and my dearest friend as well as my colleague – Nguyen Thi Anh Thu for all of their support and encouragement that has helped me overcome the difficulties during the time I was working on this thesis

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUB COVER PAGE i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP iii

ABSTRACT iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v

TABLE OF CONTENTS vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xi

LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS xii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background of the research 1

1.2 Rationale for the study 2

1.3 Research purposes 3

1.4 Research questions 3

1.5 Research scope 3

1.6 Significance of the study 4

1.7 Research outline 4

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 5

2.1 Cooperative learning 5

2.1.1 Definition of cooperative learning 5

2.1.2 Types of cooperative learning 7

2.1.2.1 Formal cooperative learning groups 7

2.1.2.2 Informal cooperative learning groups 7

2.1.2.3 Cooperative base groups 7

2.1.3 Basic elements of cooperative learning 8

2.1.3.1 Positive interdependence 8

2.1.3.2 Face-to-face interaction 10

2.1.3.4 Interpersonal skills 12

2.1.3.5 Group processing 12

2.1.4 Cooperative learning models and cooperative learning activities 13

2.1.4.1 Student Teams Achievement Division model 13

2.1.4.2 Think-Pair-Share activity 14

2.1.4.3 Numbered Heads Together activity 14

2.1.4.4 Round Robin Brainstorming activity 14

2.1.5 Possible challenges with cooperative learning in EFL classroom and some ways to overcome them 15

2.1.5.1 Possible challenges with cooperative learning 15

2.1.5.2 Some ways to overcome the challenges 16

2.2 Teacher’s role in structuring formal cooperative learning groups 17

2.2.1 Pre-implementation 17

2.2.2 Implementation 19

2.2.3 Post-implementation 20

2.3 Reading comprehension 21

Definitions of reading comprehension 21

2.4 Related research on the positive effects of cooperative learning on improving students’ reading comprehension skills 22

2.5 Summary of the literature review 24

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 25

3.1 Participants 25

3.2 Materials 26

3.3 Research instruments 27

3.3.1 Questionnaire 27

3.3.2 Test 28

3.3.3 Interview 29

3.4 Procedures for data collection and data analysis 30

3.4.1 Procedures for data collection 30

3.4.2 Data analysis 37

3.4.2.1 Administering the reading comprehension tests 37

3.4.2.2 Administering the questionnaire 38

3.4.2.3 Administering the interview 38

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 40

4.1 The effects of cooperative learning on improving students’ reading comprehension skills after the experiment 40

4.1.1 Learners’ English reading ability within two groups 40

4.1.1.1 Control group 40

4.1.1.2 Experimental group 42

4.1.2 Score differences between the pre-test and post-test for two groups 44

4.1.2.1 Control group 44

4.1.2.2 Experimental group 47

4.2 Participants’ attitudes towards cooperative learning applied in reading

sessions…… 50

4.2.1 From the questionnaire 50

4.2.1.1 The participants’ ideas about cooperative learning 51

4.2.1.2 The effects of cooperative learning 52

4.2.1.3 The participants’ interest in participation 54

4.2.1.4 The teacher’s monitoring and encouragement 55

4.2.2 From the interview 57

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 62

5.1 Restatement of the Study Purposes 62

5.2 Research Questions 62

5.2.1 To what extent does cooperative learning improve reading comprehension skills for the second year non-English majored students at Tien Giang University? 62

5.2.2 What are the students’ perceptions of cooperative learning employed during the reading sessions 62

5.3 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research 63

5.4 Pedagogical implications 64

References 67

Appendices 73

Appendix 1 Questionnaire 73

Appendix 2 List of interview questions for students 77

Appendix 3 Reading Text: Driving in London 79

Appendix 4 Illustration of means of transportation 80

Appendix 5 Pre-test 83 Appendix 6 Post-test 86

LIST OF ABBREVIATONS

RRB : Round Robin Brainstorming

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

TABLES

Table 3.1 Distribution of the participants’ characteristics

Table 3.2 The aspects of the questionnaire items

Table 3.3 Research design for implementing cooperative learning method

Table 4.1 Control group’s English reading ability

Table 4.2 Experimental group’s English reading ability

Table 4.3 Score differences between the pre-test and post-test for the control group

Table 4.4 Score differences between the pre-test and post-test for the experimental

group

Table 4.5 The experimental participants’ ideas about cooperative learning

Table 4.6 The effects of cooperative learning

Table 4.7 The participants’ interest in participation

Table 4.8 The teacher’s monitoring and encouragement

Table 4.9 Summary of the respondents’ positive comments

Table 4.10 Summary of the respondents’ negative comments

Figure 4.3 Reading ability

Figure 4.4 The teacher helped students a lot when they got difficulties in reading

Figure 4.5 The participants were pleased with the teacher’s monitoring when she used cooperative learning in reading lessons

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents (1) the background of the research, (2) the rationale of the study, (3) the research purposes, (4) research questions, (5) the research scope, (6) the significance of the study and (7) the research outline

1.1 Background of the research

In recent years, cooperative learning has emerged as a significant concept and instructional practice in the field of second language education Attention has been paid to the pedagogical and psychological rationale of its use in second language classrooms (Long & Porter, 1985) and to the possible benefits it might have in bilingual programs and second or foreign language settings (Coelho, 1992, 1994; Cohen, 1994; Holt, 1993; Kessler, 1992; McGroarty, 1989, 1992)

The use of cooperative learning in the ESL/ EFL classroom has been advocated

on the assumption that it promotes classroom interaction and enhances learners’ cognitive and communicative development (Kagan, 1985; Kessler, 1992; McGroarty, 1993) These educators and researchers, among others, have claimed that cooperative learning makes it possible for learners to have maximum opportunities “for meaningful input and output in a highly interactive and supportive environment” (Ghaith, 2003,

p 451)

Johnson & Johnson, and Stanne (2000) reviewed that cooperative learning is one of the most widespread areas of theory, research and practice in education According to Slavin (1991), the researchers found out that among the 67 studies of the achievement effects of cooperative learning, 61% found greater achievement in cooperative than in traditionally taught control groups Cooperative learning methods have also been found to have positive effects on improving reading comprehension To the National Reading Panel (2000), the readers need to work in groups to help one another promote effective reading comprehension The readers joining cooperative

learning activities learn to focus and discuss the reading texts together Miritz (1989) conducted a study on the effects of cooperative learning approach on enhancing reading achievement for the fifth grade students in one public school in Wisconsin The conclusion of this study was that there was positive effect concerning the use of cooperative learning and students’ reading achievement

1.2 Rationale

According to Fry (1997), reading is a basic tool of learning and one of the most important skills in everyday life Hence, it is necessary for students to be good readers when they want to study higher Unfortunately, students’ reading abilities are not good

As an EFL teacher at Tien Giang University (TGU) for 10 years, I notice that non-English majored students have many difficulties in reading comprehension For instance, many students read without any particular strategies for making use of clues

in the text, or recognizing the topic sentence, so they do not comprehend the gist of what they are reading, and consequently they gain little information Therefore, they get bored with the reading texts in English In fact, the teachers usually use traditional methods to teach reading For example, students read without peer interaction Moreover, the teachers do not pay much attention to the students’ reading process in class That is the reason why I would like to help the students overcome difficulties in reading comprehension I really want to engage them in reading activities, and motivate them to read So I will use cooperative learning strategies in reading lessons

It is hoped that the cooperative learning can enhance the students’ achievement in the reading process because to the National Reading Panel (2000), the readers need to work in groups to help one another promote effective reading comprehension According to Kagan (1995), the two major components of communicative language teaching (1) socially oriented lessons, and (2) small group interaction corresponded to the essence of cooperative learning In cooperative learning groups, group members

cooperative learning activities have been found to develop students’ reading ability effectively as these activities provide students with a supportive environment in which they can learn how to interpret texts (Gambrell, Mazzoni & Almasi, 2000), enhance reading strategies (Palincsar and Brown, 1984), and improve literal and higher-order reading comprehension (Ghaith & El-Malak, 2004; Stevens, 2003)

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of cooperative learning on

TGU’s second-year non-English majored students reading comprehension ability

1.3 Research purposes

There are two purposes for this research:

(1) to investigate whether cooperative learning enhances reading comprehension skills for non-English majored students in the second year at TGU

(2) to find out students’ attitudes towards the cooperative learning applied in reading sessions

1.4 Research questions

This study will attempt to answer the following questions:

1) To what extent does cooperative learning improve reading comprehension skills for the second year non-English majored students at TGU?

2) What are the students’ perceptions of cooperative learning employed during the reading sessions?

1.5 Research scope

Due to the constraints of time, the project is only restricted to the participants who are the second year students at TGU

1.6 Significance of the study

After finishing my research, I hope that this study brings several benefits First

of all, as an EFL teacher I can know the students’ attitudes towards cooperative learning This thesis will encourage other teachers to apply this method in teaching reading in EFL class Furthermore, the study also shows some problems when using cooperative learning in class Therefore, the teachers who want to apply this method into their teaching can avoid the problems and know how to deal with them Finally, I can help the students of non-English major in the second year at TGU improve their reading comprehension skills through cooperative learning

1.7 Research outline

This thesis includes five chapters

(1) Chapter 1 is the introduction which explains to readers the background of the research, the rationale, research aims, research questions, research scope, significance of the study and research outline

(2) Chapter 2 is the review of related literature

(3) Chapter 3 describes the research methodology including the research design, participants, materials, research instruments, the research procedures of cooperative learning implementation and data collection

(4) Chapter 4 reports and analyzes the data collection, and shows the results of the experiment

(5) Chapter 5 contains the restatement of the study purposes, research questions, limitations of the study, suggestions for further research, and pedagogical implications

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter introduces a review of literature related to the relationship between cooperative learning method and reading comprehension skills It consists of (1) the concepts of cooperative learning, (2) the teacher’s role in structuring formal cooperative learning groups,(3) the concepts of reading comprehension, (4) related research on the positive effects of cooperative learning on improving students’ reading comprehension skills, and (5) summary of the literature review

2.1 Cooperative learning (CL)

2.1.1 Definition of cooperative learning

CL is defined as “group learning activity organized so that learning is dependent

on the socially structured exchange of information between learners in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his or her own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others” (Olsen & Kagan, 1992, p.8) CL is a teaching arrangement that refers to small, heterogeneous groups of students working together to achieve a common goal (Kagan, 1994) Students work together to learn and are responsible for their teammates’ learning as well as their own CL is not having students sit side-by-side at the same table to talk to each other as they do their individual assignments CL is not assigning a report to a group of students where one student does all the work and the others put their names on the product as well (Johnson, Johnson, Holubec, & Roy, 1984) However, cooperative learning is much more than being physically near other students such as discussing the lessons with other students, helping other students, or sharing and contributing ideas among students

Daniel et al (1991) state that CL is now one of the most promising practices in the field of education According to Johnson and Johnson (1998), CL is grouping students together to accomplish shared learning goals Students work in small groups

of three or four to get the most out of their own learning and each other’s learning They encourage and support each other to learn and are responsible for their own as well as their teammates’ learning Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec (1994) also defines

CL as the instructional use of small groups through which students work together to maximize their own learning and each other’s learning To Slavin (1995), CL is an instructional program in which students work in small groups to help one another achieve academic content As defined by Artzt and Newman (1990), CL is an activity involving a small group of learners who work together as a team to solve a problem, complete a task, or accomplish a common goal Moreover, Brown (1994) elaborated the definition According to him, CL involves students working together in pairs or groups, and they share information They are a team whose players must work together

in order to achieve the goal successfully And to Smith (1996), the more students worked in CL groups, the more they would learn The better they would understand what they were learning, the easier it would be to remember what they learnt and the better they would feel about themselves, the class, and their classmates He also proved that cooperation among students typically resulted in higher achievement and greater productivity

There are lots of definitions formulated by the researchers Based on the definitions, it is obvious to see that in group participation, the tasks are shared and each person’s success is linked with every other person’s success Students with lower levels

of proficiency can interact with students with higher levels in order to negotiate the meaning of content In this current research, cooperative learning, a particular type of active learning, is a formal instructional approach in which students work together in a mixed-level group of four (one high-, two average-, and one low-achieving student) to support and assist one another so that they can improve their reading comprehension ability after working cooperatively

2.1.2 Types of cooperative learning

According to Smith, Johnson, and Johnson (1992), there are three commonly recognized types of cooperative learning groups Cooperative learning groups can be used to teach specific content and problem-solving skills (formal learning groups), ensure active cognitive processing during a lecture (informal learning groups), and provide long-term support and assistance for academic progress (base groups) When used in combination, these learning groups provide an overall structure with variety for students Each type of group has its own purpose and application In this current research, I implement formal cooperative learning groups

2.1.2.1 Formal cooperative learning groups

Formal cooperative learning groups are students working together that last for several weeks to achieve shared learning goals and complete jointly specific tasks and assignments such as decision making or problem solving, completing a curriculum unit, writing a report, conducting a survey or experiment, or reading a chapter or reference book, learning vocabulary, or answering the questions at the end of the chapter (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec, 1993)

2.1.2.2 Informal cooperative learning groups

Informal cooperative learning groups consists of having students work together

to achieve a joint learning goal in temporary, ad-hoc groups that last for one class period (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec, 1993; Johnson, Johnson and Smith, 1991)

2.1.2.3 Cooperative base groups

Cooperative base groups are long-term, stable groups that last for at least a year made up of individuals with different aptitudes and perspectives (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec, 1993; Johnson, Johnson and Smith, 1991) They provide a context in which

students can support each other in academic learning as well as in other aspects of their lives

2.1.3 Basic elements of cooperative learning: what makes cooperative learning work?

Problems that commonly occur when using cooperative learning group may be minimized by carefully structuring the basic elements There are basic elements fundamental to cooperative learning that when structured, helps positive efforts and helps the cooperative learning group achieve their goal In this research, I follow Johnson and Johnson’s (2001) model of cooperative learning elements To them, cooperative learning

is “a relationship in a group of students that requires (1) positive interdependence (a sense

of sink or swim together), (2) individual accountability (each of them has to contribute and learn), (3) interpersonal skills (communication, trust, leadership, decision making and conflict resolution), (4) face-to-face interaction (students interact to explain, discuss, and teach each other, and (5) group processing (reflecting on how the team is functioning and how well the teams maintaining effective working relationships among members)” On using cooperative learning groups in the classroom, the teacher should pay much attention

to these five elements to organize the class successfully

2.1.3.1 Positive interdependence (sink or swim together)

The cooperative classroom is characterized by a positive interdependence of the students As Johnson et al (1995) summarize, positive interdependence occurs “when one perceives that one is linked with others in a way so that one cannot succeed unless they do (and vice versa) and/ or one must coordinate one’s efforts with the efforts of others to complete a task” (p.31) In other words, positive interdependence is the belief that students “sink or swim together” (p.31)

Positive interdependence results in promotive interaction, which can be defined

complete tasks, and produce in order to reach the group’s goals” (Johnson et al., 1995, p.20) Students are divided into small groups and learning takes place in these basic social units through peer teaching, joint problem solving, brainstorming, and varied interpersonal communication, as well as through individual study monitored by peers Thus, in a cooperative learning situation, as the name indicates, everything is centered around the process of cooperation, that is, giving and receiving ideas and clarification, providing task-related help and assistance, exchanging needed resources (e.g., information or materials), and providing constructive feedback (Johnson et al., 1995; Sharan, 1995.)

The key question is, how can positive interdependence be achieved? That is, how can learners be “motivated” to cooperate? Olsen and Kagan (1992) list five principal ways to accomplish CL structures:

 Structuring the goal: Groups work towards a single team product (e.g., joint

performance), students perceive that they can reach their learning goals if, and only if, the other students in the learning group also reach their goals (Deutsche, 1962) To ensure that students believe they “sink or swim together” and care about how much each other learns, the teacher has to structure a clear group or mutual goal, such as “learn the assigned lessons”

 Structuring the rewards: In addition to individual scores or grades, some sort of

team score is also calculated and joint rewards or grades are given for the group’s overall production, that is, each group member receives the same reward when the group achieves its goal To supplement goal interdependence, the teachers may wish to add joint rewards, for example, by giving students bonus points

 Structuring student roles: Assigning different roles to every group member so

that everybody has a specific responsibility The teachers create role

interdependence among students when they assign them complementary role such as an explainer, a summarizer, or a note-taker

 Structuring materials: Either limiting resources so that they must be shared

(e.g., one answer sheet for the whole group) or giving out resources (e.g., worksheets, information sheets) which need to be fitted together

 Structuring rules: Setting rules that emphasize the shared nature of

responsibility for the group product (e.g., no one can proceed to some new project or material before every other group member has completed the previous assignment)

In short, positive interdependence provides the context within which promotive interaction takes place Group membership and interpersonal interaction among students produce higher achievement when positive interdependence is clearly structured

2.1.3.2 Face-to-face interaction (promote each other’s success)

Once the teachers establish positive interdependence, they must ensure that the students interact to help each other accomplish the task and promote each other’s success Consequently, the second element of cooperative learning requires face-to-face interaction among students By using it, the learning process becomes active rather than passive

Students need to do real work together in which they promote each other’s success by sharing resources and helping, supporting, encouraging, and praising each other’s efforts to learn There are important cognitive activities and interpersonal dynamics that can only occur when students promote each other’s learning This includes orally explaining how to solve problems, discussing the nature of the concepts being learned, teaching one’s knowledge to classmates, and connecting present with

become personally committed to each other as well as to their mutual goals (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1998, p 1:14)

2.1.3.3 Individual accountability (no hitchhiking! No social loafing)

Individual accountability was the element, which provided for each student believing that it was important for him/ her to learn the material Each team member feels in charge of their own and their teammates’ learning and makes an active contribution to the group Thus there was no “hitchhiking” or “freeloading” for anyone

in a team – everyone contributes (Kagan, 1990) This element leads to the belief that

“what students can do together today, they can do alone tomorrow.” (Vygotsky, 1962)

It makes each member a stronger individual in his / her own right

The teacher must have a way of determining what each individual had learned,

as well as what the group had accomplished There were a number of ways of accomplishing individual accountability; random selection of student paper if each student was doing work within the group, random oral quizzes of students, or written quizzes or examinations at the culmination of the work (Kagan, 1989)

 Keeping the size of the group small The smaller the size of the group, the

greater the individual accountability may be

 Giving an individual test to each student

 Randomly examining students orally by calling on one student to present his or her group's work to the teacher (in the presence of the group) or to the entire class

 Observing each group and recording the frequency with which each contributes to the group's work

member- Assigning one student in each group the role of checker The checker asks other group members to explain the reasoning and rationale underlying group

answers

 Having students teach what they learned to someone else

2.1.3.4 Interpersonal skills

Interpersonal skills are essential for effective grouping function Groups cannot function effectively if the students do not have and use the needed social skills Placing socially unskilled students in a group and telling them to cooperate did not guarantee that they have the ability to do so effectively (Johnson & Johnson, 1994) Students must learn the task and maintenance skills for the groups to run smoothly Students might not intuitively know those social skills; therefore, they must be taught explicitly how to cooperate with others Johnson et al (1990) suggest that the interpersonal and small group skills could be taught through a number of means; first of all, setting a social skills goal along with the academic goal lets students know it is important to the teacher Secondly, it could be established through role playing, modeling, and discussing the components of particular social skills (Cohen & Tellez, 1994)

The teacher’s role in this teaching method was not that of someone who measures the capacities of the students in terms of a final product but in terms of the process That was, someone who acted a friend, as a coordinator, as a director who guided his/ her actors how to perform, and as an advisor in the academic tasks and in the psychosocial and cognitive development of the students (Cowei, Smith, Boulton, & Laver, 1994)

2.1.3.5 Group processing

The final element necessary to make cooperation work is structuring group processing This element is present when students discuss how well they are achieving their goals and maintaining relationships Cuseo (1992) suggests that the teacher can structure group processing by assigning tasks The teacher can have the students judge what they did to get the subject-matter task done and have them consider their use of social skills He or she asks students to list one action that could be added to make the

feedback on their participation, and reminds students to practice collaborative skill consistently Without group processing, cooperative groups are often only groups of students sitting together working on the same task

In short, to be cooperative, a group must have clear positive interdependence The group members must promote each other’s learning and success, have a face-to-face interaction, and hold each other personally Moreover, they should be individually accountable to do their fair share of the work, and appropriately use the interpersonal and small group skills needed for cooperative efforts to be successful These five essential components are fundamental requirements for making cooperative learning work

2.1.4 Cooperative learning model and cooperative learning activities

Cooperative learning can be structured in many different models Most of these structures are developed by Dr Spencer Kagan and his associates at Kagan Publishing and Professional Development in 1992 As Olsen and Kagan (1992) stated, all cooperative learning models share the ideas that students work together to learn and are responsible for their teammates’ learning as well as their own learning The approach used in this research is based on Student Teams Achievement Division model and three activities of cooperative learning such as Think-Pair-Share, Numbered Heads Together and Round Robin Brainstorming

2.1.4.1 Student Teams Achievement Division model (STAD)

STAD model is an instructional technique designed to improve student’s comprehension of a text It organizes instruction according to the elements of positive interdependence, individual accountability, promotive face-to-face interaction, social and collaborative skills, and group processing (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec 1994a, 1994b)

In STAD, the teacher first lectured on the topic Then, students were assigned to heterogeneous teams in which they studied the learning material provided by the

teacher in preparation for a quiz Students are assigned to four-member learning teams that are mixed in performance level, gender, and ethnicity STAD has five major components These are class presentation, team study, quizzes, individual improving scores, and team recognition (Slavin, 1995) The teacher presents a lesson, and then students work within their teams to make sure that all team members have mastered the lesson Finally, all the students take individual quizzes on the lesson they have just studied

2.1.4.2 Think-Pair-Share activity (TPS)

TPS involves a three-step cooperative structure During the first step individuals think silently about a question posed by the instructor Individuals pair up during the second step and exchange thoughts In the third step, the pairs share their responses with other pairs, other teams, or the entire group

2.1.4.3 Numbered Heads Together activity (NHT)

A team of four is established Each member is given numbers of 1, 2, 3, 4 Questions are asked of the group Groups work together to answer the question so that all can verbally answer the question Teacher calls out a number and each two is asked

to give the answer

2.1.4.4 Round Robin Brainstorming (RRB)

Class is divided into small groups (4 to 6) with one person appointed as the recorder A question is posed with many answers and students are given time to think about answers After the “think time”, members of the team share responses with one another round robin style The recorder writes down the answers of the group members The person next to the recorder starts and each person in the group in order gives an answer until time is called

As we can see clearly from the above literature, active participation instead of passive listening in class distinguished cooperative learning from traditional lecturing

So, it is very important for the teacher to plan and structure the strategy in the classroom

2.1.5 Possible challenges with cooperative learning in EFL classroom and some ways to overcome them

2.1.5.1 Possible challenges with cooperative learning

When applying cooperative learning method in the EFL classroom, the teachers can face some challenges

First, students who have never been taught how to work effectively with others

cannot be expected to do so automatically (Crosby and Owens, 1993) Thus, it takes time to transform classrooms into places where the students learn to care about each other’s learning Especially, in a crowded class, it will be inconvenient for the students

to arrange their seats if the furniture is not well-equipped

Second, grouping students into productive groups and monitoring social skills of

the students are not easy to do Cooperative learning activities will not be successful when the students in groups do not have information to discuss with one another

Third, the teachers who are unfamiliar with cooperative learning may not

initially accept this style of learning because they may feel they will lose control of their classroom, or they may be unsure of the techniques used or possibly even think that it takes time

Fourth, because cooperative learning is centered on group work, students may

be concerned that other members of their group are going to bring their grades down This is especially true if the students are grouped by mixed ability

Finally, the classroom will be made up of several small groups, so it may make

a lot of noise This can be very uncomfortable for some teachers who are accustomed

to a lecture and seatwork classroom This can also cause some problems for those students who have attention difficulties

2.1.5.2 Some ways to overcome the challenges

As the problems stated above, it is important for the teachers to know how to alleviate them

First of all, if a crowded classroom is equipped with easily movable tables, the

teachers will spend less time on arranging pair work or group work The problem can also be showed by keeping as much distance as possible among the pairs and the groups Moreover, many classrooms are not furnished for EFL work So if the furniture

is small, light tables, and simple, light chairs, these can easily be rearranged for pair and group work Large tables are difficult to move and to arrange but if they are accompanied by light, movable chairs, they can often be left in place and chairs placed opposite each other on both sides

Second, if the students have no information to discuss, the activities will fail

The best way to alleviate this difficulty is by rotation That is having students change partners during lessons

A few ways to keep changing partners:

- Establish “rules” from the start: tell students that you want them to sit next

to somebody different each lesson from the start, and make sure this happens regularly,

or they will quickly fossilise and groan when you ask them to change partners

- Look in a different direction: students can always work with a new partner

in front of, beside or behind them, just by turning their heads

Third, in order for cooperative learning to be utilized in the classroom, the

teachers must receive training to be proficient in implementing the techniques Besides, because cooperative learning takes time to implement, the initial lessons may take

longer Once the students and the teacher are comfortable with the process, the amount

of time for each lesson will decrease

Fourth, in mixed groups, it is essential for higher ability students to guide lower

ability students so that their groups perform well and gain high scores

Finally, in case pair work and group work are successful, they will create high

noise level The best solution is simply to keep pair work and group work sessions short about twenty minutes A high noise level can be tolerated for approximately that amount of time

In conclusion, in spite of the possible challenges, using cooperative learning in EFL classroom has been found effective to encourage students’ responsibility for learning, promote peer interaction among students, and develop their academic performance

2.2 Teacher’s role in structuring formal cooperative learning groups

The role of the teacher is to contribute to the development of learning sets The teacher plays an important role as a facilitator, a consultant, or an organizer There are three phases of the implementation of cooperative learning Each phase requires the teacher to exhibit his/ her role clearly In this present study, I followed three stages of cooperative learning conducted by Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (1991)

2.2.1 Pre-implementation

After the teacher decides to implement cooperative learning, he/ she has to face

a challenge, that is, planning and readying the classroom and students for cooperative learning According to Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (1991), there are several tasks that the teacher must accomplish before implementing cooperative learning in class

- Determine group size and assign students to groups: the teacher can divide class into groups of four or five students or the teacher has students work in pairs depending on the cooperative learning task These groups can be

homogeneous or heterogeneous Groups can be formed by putting students together who share common strengths, interests, etc., or they can be randomly assigned Once the students are assigned to cooperative learning groups, they should keep the same group members during the learning process Moreover, the students also need time to develop a cohesive group and work together for a while before moving to discuss with a different group

- Arrange room: the teacher should arrange the space in class so that the groups can interact and move around the room easily It is important that a group’s seats face one another

- Plan instructional materials to promote interdependence: the instructional methods and materials that the teacher chooses must allow each member to contribute to the group’s success in a unique and meaningful way

- Assign group roles: the teacher should choose and help the students in choosing roles that use their strengths and improve their areas of weakness The teacher should ask the students not to choose the same role over and over again Some of the roles that could be chosen or assigned include facilitator, timekeeper, recorder, checker (for understanding), summarizer, elaborator (on discussion points), research-runner (get materials), and wild card (does anything else that needs to be done)

- Assign tasks: the cooperative learning group’s tasks should be interesting, challenging, and motivating It should also be a performance driven and authentic task The teacher should clearly explain procedures for the task, provide structure (especially useful for inexperienced cooperative learning students), and set a specific time frame for each part and the whole task Finally, the teacher should question the students to check for understanding

- Structure positive interdependence and accountability: group size should be kept small so that each member participates and contributes uniquely to the group The teacher should test groups and individuals by asking questions of both A group should be asked to collectively explain its results and individuals should be able to defend their own position as well as the group’s

on a handout for each group could prevent group discord and off-task behavior

- Assist with needs: while monitoring the groups’ work, the teacher should assist groups with their needs This might involve pointing out additional resources and/ or points-of-view, and it also includes helping the students reflect on the work they have completed and their progress

- Praise: the students need to know if they are completing the assignment in a satisfactory manner, especially if they are inexperienced at working in

cooperative groups For this reason, the teacher should let individual students and groups know when they do something right or well

- Evaluate students’ learning: the teacher should evaluate each group’s tasks during three implementation phases of cooperative learning Group products can

be evaluated in a variety of ways: (1) the teacher can evaluate the product, (2) a group can evaluate its own work if it has clear criteria, or (3) other students in the class can learn how to be constructive critics of the product of each group In addition, the teacher can design a test or quiz involving the substance of the materials learnt in the process of group work Group members should help each other in preparing for any tests Moreover, student groups should evaluate their own group process and the effectiveness of the facilitators’ role

After the teacher has completed the evaluation, it is important that they provide feedback to the students about their product and their group performance Without this information, the students will not be able to improve their cooperative learning skills

- Reflect on what happened: the teacher should keep a record of what worked and why it worked each time they undertook a cooperative learning lesson This

groups The teacher should also adjust their lessons based on the reflection and feedback of the students

2.3 Reading comprehension

Definitions of reading comprehension

The definitions of reading comprehension may appear to be both simple and obvious In fact, reading comprehension seems like a simple concept because for good readers Most of the time good readers do not think about what they are doing is to make sense of the text, to find important information, to learn how to do something, or

to follow events in a story That is why one might answer “comprehension is understanding what you read”

Most writers define reading as getting the meaning encoded by the writer from the text Reading is an interactive process between the readers and the text in which the readers use their knowledge to create or construct the meaning, a message from a text – reading with a purpose As defined by Partnership for Reading (2005), reading comprehension is understanding a text that is being read, or the process of

“constructing meaning” from a text Comprehension is a “construction process” because it involves all of the elements of the reading process working together as a text

is read to create a representation of the text in the reader's mind “Constructing meaning” indicates that often readers go beyond the meaning explicitly contained in the text and add to that meaning based on their own experience and their ability to infer additional or deeper meaning Consequently, reading comprehension far overweighs the ability to read individual words and knows what those words mean

In addition, according to Biancarosa and Snow (2006), comprehension includes elements such as “ the ability to grasp the gist of a text, to notice and repair misinterpretations, and to change tactics based on the purposes of reading” Pressley (2000) describes comprehension as involving word-level processes related to decoding

and vocabulary knowledge, together with processes above the word level, including automatic relating of text content to prior knowledge and a variety of conscious, controllable processes

To sum up, although there are different ways in giving definition of reading comprehension, nearly the definitions have something in common They defined reading comprehension as a process of constructing meaning from the text and understanding the writer’s message via the reader’s reading strategies and background knowledge However, in this study, the purposes of students’ reading comprehension are that students can skim to get the main ideas of the written text and then choose the best answer and scan for specific information, and then answer the questions correctly

As a result, they can understand the content of the text that they read In addition, I thought that reading plus discussion – reading and sharing ideas and opinions with others – would be more beneficial to the students than asking them to use reading strategies and do their reading alone That was the reason why I decided to use cooperative learning activities to teach reading skill

2.4 Related research on the positive effects of cooperative learning on improving students’ reading comprehension skills

Seetape (2003) studied the effects of CL on English reading achievement and the students’ behavior towards this learning method used in the English classroom There were 29 participants in this study They were students in Kanchanaphisekwittayalai Uthaithani School They were taught for eight periods The instruments were English reading achievement test, cooperative learning behavioral observation sheet, and lesson plans using CL technique The results of the study showed that the post-test scores after learning English reading using CL were higher than the pre-test scores, and most of the samples displayed very good behavior in cooperating in their tasks

Keuanoon and Thadphoothon (2007) investigated the effects of combining reading with CL activities The purpose of this study was to improve 106 students’ reading comprehension at Dhurakij Pundit University Data was collected from the questionnaires, classroom observations, and interviews The conclusion of this study was that students’ reading comprehension was improved and they had positive attitudes towards CL activities

Law (2011) examined the effects of CL on enhancing Hong Kong fifth graders’ achievement goals, autonomous motivation and reading proficiency The participants were 279 Grade 5 Hong Kong students located in nine classrooms Two different CL activities (jigsaw and drama) and a control condition (a traditional teacher-led approach) were compared Post-test data included a reading comprehension test and three questionnaires that investigated students’ goal orientations, initial level of relative autonomy and perceptions of instructional practices In comparison with students in traditional reading classrooms, the study found that grade 5 Chinese students’ autonomous motivation and high-order reading proficiency could be enhanced when they engaged in CL activities with sufficient guidance and scaffoldings

In addition, to examined whether using STAD model of CL promotes students’ reading comprehension, Wichadee (1994) studied the effects of CL on English reading skills and attitudes of 40 first-year students at Bangkok University by using a STAD program during 8 weeks The reading comprehension test, the questionnaire of attitudes towards CL, the CL behavioral assessment form, and the interview were the main instruments in this study The pre-test and post-test scores of the group were compared by using a T-Test Dependent measure The results revealed that the post-test scores after learning English reading through STAD model of CL were higher than the pre-test scores, and the students had positive attitudes towards CL approach

2.5 Summary of the literature review

The review mainly concentrates on the concepts of cooperative learning including the definitions of cooperative learning, types of cooperative learning, five basic elements of cooperative learning, the cooperative learning model and activities, and the teacher’s role in structuring formal cooperative learning groups

In many studies, the researchers proved that cooperative learning had positive effects on improving reading comprehension According to these researchers, the students who were successful in language achievements appreciated cooperative learning rather than individual learning However, no method is the best CL also has some negative effects

In general, the literature revealed that most of the studies expressed positive effects of using cooperative learning to improve students’ reading comprehension skill

It is thus hypothesized in this research that non-English majored students at TGU will enhance their reading comprehension skills by using cooperative learning and they will have positive attitudes towards this learning method I expect that the positive results from this study will encourage the English teachers of TGU to use CL in class

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study is to investigate whether cooperative learning method enhances reading comprehension skills for non-English majored students in the second year at TGU and to find out students’ attitudes towards the cooperative learning method applied in reading sessions In order to collect data for this study, a combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods was adopted

The application of both quantitative and qualitative methods can help the researcher get relevant data in terms of quality and quantity These two methods can supplement each other Concretely, questionnaire, pre/ post-test and interview were the three data collection methods carried out in this experimental study The following section describes the research design for this study in detail

45 participants who studied together in 11 teams of four members each according to the dynamics of the Student Teams Achievement Division model of cooperative learning as described in the literature review section The class met once a week for

150 minutes Due to the time limitation, the programme took place about half of academic semester, seven reading sessions were taught through cooperative learning approach during 7 weeks, the total length was 14 periods with 50 minutes for each period The textbook they studied was ENGLISH FOR EFFECTIVE

COMMUNICATION (Beginning to Pre-Intermediate) – Specially designed for the TOEIC® test, Book 3, published by IIG Vietnam This is an integrated skill book

In the experimental group, these students were placed in groups of four on the basis of pre-test scores A group consists of one high- (the high participants’ scores ranged from 8 to 10 marks), two average- (the average participants’ scores ranged from 6 to 7.5 marks), and one low- achieving student (the low participants’ scores ranged from 1

to 5.5 marks)

Table 3.1 Distribution of the participants’ characteristics

Gender Number of participants Ages Years of English learning

The material used in this research was the textbook English for Effective

Communication (Beginning to Pre-Intermediate, Book 3), published by IIG

VIETNAM I choose this book because it has been taught for all of the non-English majored students at Tien Giang University This is an integrated skill book, and was designed with communicative activities So it was suitable for the cooperative learning method There were 8 parts in each unit: warm-up 1, reading 1, listening 1, pronunciation spot, warm-up 2, reading 2, listening 2, and pronunciation spot Each unit was divided into 12 or 15 periods

Although the tasks and activities in the textbook were well-designed, I adapted and redesigned them so that it could be easy for the participants to follow, and I also added some tasks and activities which were appropriate to the participants’ level

a review Similarly, Oxford (1996) points out that questionnaires are one of the most efficient and comprehensive techniques to examine learners’ use of language learning strategies Moreover, they are quick and easy to administer, economical, confidential and self-scoring- providing immediate feedback for learners Therefore, studies of language learner strategy use, i.e reading strategies have adopted questionnaires as one

of the data-eliciting techniques Both open-ended and closed-ended questions were used to collect data

The questionnaire was designed by the researcher to evaluate the reading programme in which cooperative learning was used to improve reading comprehension skill for students The purpose of the questionnaire was to measure the participants’ attitudes towards cooperative learning after the treatment during 7 sessions

To ensure the participants’ accurate understanding, all questions that were designed for students were written in English and then translated into Vietnamese Due

to the limited level of the students’ English proficiency, I decided to give the students the Vietnamese version

There were 16 items in this questionnaire, and they focused on the aspects of the participants’ ideas about cooperative learning, the effects of using this learning method,

their interest in participation, and the teacher’s monitoring and encouragement The

questions were scored 1 point for strongly disagree, 2 points for disagree, 3 points for

neutral, 4 points for agree, and 5 points for strongly agree The questionnaire was

to evaluate the participants’ improvement in reading comprehension after the study The pre-test was taken to find out two classes that have the same level of English proficiency before instructional treatment and post-test was taken to know students’ ability as well as their improvement in reading comprehension skill after the treatment One class was chosen as the controlled group without the treatments and the other was assigned to be the experimental group with the treatments

The pre-test and post-test had the same format and content In order to avoid the students to memorize the test content, I changed the position of the parts in the post-