000029004 IMPROVING THE CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION OF GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES IN SPEAKING CLASS OF THE FIRST YEAR ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT THANG LONG UNIVERSITY NÂNG CAO VIỆC TRIỂN KHAI HOẠT ĐỘNG LÀM VIỆC NHÓM TRONG LỚP HỌC NÓI CỦA SINH VIÊN NĂM THỨ NHẤT NGÀNH TIẾNG ANH TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC THĂNG LONG HIỆN NAY
Background and reasons for the s tu d y
Thang Long University is Vietnam's first private higher education institution, founded in 1994 by Prime Minister's Decision No 441/Tg The university comprises three main departments: Mathematics and Information Science, English, and Business Management.
The English Department at the university offers English courses for both English majors and non-majors It employs twenty teachers who are professionally trained and generally well-qualified Most hold B.A degrees from Hanoi National University – Foreign Language College, with others coming from Hanoi University of Foreign Studies or Hue Teachers Training College, and three graduates from Thang Long University Although relatively few instructors have specialized in methodology and may be less familiar with the latest teaching techniques, their enthusiasm and willingness to support students and colleagues keep the department effective.
University teaching and learning have recently undergone significant changes to meet the university’s objectives and current labor market demands In the English Department, ongoing efforts to select and adapt the syllabus, materials, and teaching methods aim to meet students’ needs and develop a more comprehensive language competence While traditional approaches emphasized mastering a set of language structures, today’s materials promote pair and group work and a shift toward a communicative language teaching (CLT) approach across the university.
Despite abundant evidence that group-work activities can boost students’ speaking skills, both teachers and students at TLU are reluctant to adopt this approach Many teachers report low student participation in group work despite their best efforts, which leads them to revert to traditional, “safe” methods for teaching speaking and to avoid group activities in language classes A colleague described in this study—the classroom teacher—expressed discouragement about students’ inadequate participation in group activities, yet also showed a willingness to improve the situation Overall, both teachers and students at the institution feel that implementing group work in language classes yields fewer benefits than they had expected.
The hesitant attitudes of both students and teachers toward incorporating group work into the speaking classes at TLU, and the willingness to revise how these activities are currently applied—as noted by a colleague—motivated this study The aim is to identify and understand the problems in implementing group work and the factors behind them Built on the findings, the project seeks to enhance the quality of teaching and learning in speaking through more effective use of group work activities.
Aims o f the s tu d y
With an attempt to improve the current im plementation o f group work activities in speaking class at TLU, this study aims at:
• investigating the student participation in the current group work activities in a first year speaking class at TLU.
• identifying the factors affecting their participation in those activities.
• conducting an experimental teaching to examine w hether the suggested procedure for group work help students participate more actively.
• making relevant recommendations on teaching methods, based on the results o f the experimental teaching, to design and implement group work activities more effectively in speaking class.
Scope o f the study
Due to limits in the researcher’s time, ability, and other conditions, this study cannot cover every issue TLU students face when implementing group work activities Instead, it focuses on the most common problems related to conducting these activities in the speaking class using the Speaking One material For the task instructions of the group work activities within this material, see Appendices G and H Overall, the study examines the implementation of all group work activities in the Speaking One material designed for first-year English major students at TLU in term three.
Organization o f the s tu d y
The study is divided into five main chapters under these headings; INTRODUCTION, LITERATURE REVIEW, TH E STUDY, D ISCUSSION AND SUGGESTIONS and CONCLUSION.
Chapter One, Introduction, provides the general overview and background of the study, outlining the reasons for the research and the current challenges faced by teachers and students at TLU when implementing group work activities in the speaking class The chapter also presents the study’s aims, scope, and organization, setting the stage for the investigation into optimizing group work in TLU’s speaking instruction.
• Chapter two, LITERATURE REVIEW, provides related theoretical background to the study.
• Chapter three, TH E STUDY, presents the methodology o f the study The procedures and techniques in collecting and analysing data are the core o f this chapter.
• Chapter four, DISCUSSION AND SUGGESTIONS, discusses the main findings in the previous chapters and gives suggestions relevant to the teachers’ procedures o f implementing group work activities at TLU.
• Chapter five, CONCLUSION, finally gives a summary o f the whole thesis, the limitations o f the thesis and provides implication for further study.
This chapter lays the theoretical background for the study by addressing key issues relevant to the topic, establishing the scholarly basis for the research It comprises two main parts: a concise examination of teaching speaking skills within Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and a literature review on the use of group work activities in language classrooms.
Speaking skill and Communicative Language Teaching (C L T )
Speaking has long been undervalued as a casual or incidental language skill, which helped explain its lower priority in many teaching contexts Yet with English increasingly functioning as an international language of communication, there is a growing urgency for learners to develop strong speaking abilities In many situations, speaking is the skill by which people are judged at face value, with overall language competence often inferred from how someone speaks rather than from other skills such as reading or writing.
The recent growth o f CLT has led to important changes o f emphasis in the methodology o f language teaching By definition, CLT puts the focus on the learners According to Nolasco & A rthur (1993), in practical terms, CLT has had a profound effect on classroom materials and practice The most im portant o f which has been a greater emphasis on:
_ relating the language we teach to the way in which English is used (an emphasis on use rather than usage or form)
_ providing activities in which students have the chance to determine what they want to say independently o f the teacher (fluency activities)
_ exposing students to examples o f natural language rather than material which has been written for language teaching purposes (authenticity)
CLT method is learner-centered and em phasizes com m unication and real-life situations The role o f the teacher in CLT is quite different from that in traditional teaching methods In the traditional classroom, the teacher is in charge and
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) redefines the classroom by making the teacher a facilitator and giving students more control over their own learning, while still setting up activities and providing direction Students in CLT speak and interact more than in traditional settings, which can boost their confidence in using the language The focus is on language as a tool for genuine communication, with real-life situations and context driving instruction While grammar remains a component, CLT shifts the emphasis from mastering rules and verb conjugations to effectively conveying a message and communicating in context.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) centers on integrating all language skills and using them in authentic, interactive contexts The current focus on speaking highlights not only language competence but language use, with speaking activities designed to build the learner's confidence, motivation, and ability to communicate in the target language accurately, appropriately, and effectively A successful communicative classroom develops over time through a supportive social-emotional climate in which learners feel respected as individuals with their own views, interests, strengths, and weaknesses This approach fosters cooperation and views language learning as a socially shared experience.
The development of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has important implications for enhancing students' speaking ability through cooperative learning, as this approach creates an appropriate learning environment and provides numerous opportunities for authentic language use By organizing tasks that require collaboration and dialogue, cooperative learning leverages group work to boost spoken fluency, accuracy, and confidence The following section reviews the theories underpinning how cooperative learning supports speaking development, highlighting how task design, peer interaction, and social meaning making drive communicative competence in real classroom settings.
2.2 G roup w ork in language teach in g and learn in g
When defining group work, Johnson, Johnson and Sm ith (1991, p 15) states that:
“Group work, in language class, is a co-operative activity, during which students share aims and responsibilities to complete a task assigned by the teacher in groups or in pairs”.
Group work fosters greater independence as members make their own learning decisions without the teacher micromanaging every move In collaborative tasks, students learn to negotiate and listen to different opinions, which leads to more equal participation and a willingness to experiment with language The emphasis shifts from a sole focus on the final product to valuing the process and the skills that are activated along the way, such as communication, collaboration, and critical thinking, all of which contribute to the group’s success.
According to Davis (1993), there are 3 general types o f group work They are:
Informal learning groups are temporary clusters of students within a single class session, designed to check understanding, apply new material, and provide a change of pace They can be initiated by asking students to turn to a neighbor for a brief two-minute discussion or by the teacher forming small groups of three to five to solve a problem These groups can be organized at any time in classes of any size, and the tasks are created quickly, such as prompting students to discuss a concept The lifetime of informal learning groups is short, ranging from a few minutes to the length of the class.
Formal learning groups are teams formed to complete a specific task, such as performing a lab experiment, writing a report, or carrying out a project These groups may work together in a single class session or over several weeks, and students typically stay with the same team until the task is finished, at which point the project is graded Formal learning groups last from several days to several weeks, and they require careful planning regarding the group's size and composition They also feature greater structure and a clearly defined purpose, designed to improve collaboration, accountability, and overall learning outcomes.
Group w ork activities in language teaching and le a rn in g
Benefits o f using group work activities in language c la s s
Speaking activities such as dialogue, discussion, and interviews can be conducted in pairs or groups, and in many cases, group work offers clear advantages Goldhaber (1982, p 2, cited in Beebe and Masterson, 1982) describes cooperative learning in which group work is a regular feature of these activities.
“The glue that binds the organizations The oil that smoothes the organization’s function The thread that ties the system together
The force that pervades the organization The binding agent that cements all relationships”
Numerous studies have reported the potential benefits of pair work and group work in language teaching and language learning This paragraph summarizes the most commonly cited advantages of using group work in the language classroom, including increased opportunities for meaningful communication, enhanced speaking fluency and accuracy through peer interaction, richer exposure to authentic language use, improved learner engagement and motivation, supportive peer feedback, and the development of collaboration skills and learner autonomy.
• G roup work prom otes learners ’ responsibility and autonom y
Working in pairs or small groups, members are tightly linked so that group success depends on every individual; they sink or swim together to complete the task The team is characterized by high interdependence, with everyone responsible for the group task’s outcomes and for supporting one another's efforts Each member is accountable for their own learning as well as for helping others learn, creating a culture of shared responsibility within collaborative learning The focus is on joint performance, not on isolated achievement as seen in traditional classes.
• G roup work increases students 'participation, talking time a n d oral flu en cy
Harmer (1991) argues that group work offers more opportunities for student initiation, negotiation of meaning, extended conversational exchanges, face-to-face give-and-take, and the adoption of roles, all of which enhance communicative practice; Ur (1996, p 232) also endorses this view, emphasizing that collaborative work similarly expands opportunities for interaction and meaning-making in language learning.
Group work engages learners in a learning task through small group interaction, a form of learner activation that is especially valuable for developing oral fluency When a class is divided into five groups, students gain five times as many opportunities to talk as in whole-class instruction, highlighting the effectiveness of group work for practicing spoken language.
• W orking in pairs/groups enables students to produce better decisions to solve a specific task
Two heads are better than one, and groups often outperform individuals in decision-making because of the diverse backgrounds and experiences each member brings A team's richer pool of information, ideas, and multiple effective methods enhances problem-solving, enabling more thorough analysis and better decisions through collective intelligence.
• Group w ork prom otes individuals ’ motivation
Group work helps students use the language and increases their motivation to participate actively and focus on the assigned tasks Richards and Lockhart (1994) argue that collaborating in groups pushes students into more active roles in the learning process and allows them to benefit from sharing ideas with fellow group members As understanding of the subject under discussion typically improves in group settings, students become more motivated overall.
Doff (1988) suggests that working in pairs or groups engages students more deeply and helps them focus on tasks In a non-threatening, collaborative classroom environment, motivation often increases as students feel less inhibited and more able to explore self-expression and the possibilities for learning.
Group work in language class can bring substantial benefits to language learners, including increased interaction, authentic communication practice, and peer support that reinforces understanding Yet implementing these activities is often challenging, because multiple factors can hinder the smooth execution of group work in the classroom This article identifies the key difficulties that commonly affect the successful use of group work in language learning, such as unequal participation, unclear task goals, time management and classroom noise, assessment concerns, and the need for effective group roles and processes, and it offers practical ways to address these barriers to improve outcomes in the language classroom.
2.2.3 M ajor d ifficulties in im plem enting group w o rk activities in language class
Difficulties to im plement the group work activities fall into two main types which are listed below:
According to Sheils (1993), group work can be inappropriate in certain teaching contexts when the physical setting is unsuitable, such as classrooms that are too large, have unmovable desks, or host a high number of students, which in turn creates management challenges for teachers This makes it difficult for teachers to organize and oversee activities effectively, and students may default to using their mother tongue during group work, chat with classmates, or become less motivated, leading to little or no improvement in speaking skills and a waste of instructional time.
A lack of linguistic knowledge that prevents meaningful contributions to group work is a common challenge for many students Speaking is the most complex of linguistic skills because it requires thinking about what to say while you are saying it To do this effectively, learners must select patterns, structures, and vocabulary that fit the specific situation and the intended attitude Byrne (1986) has pointed out that successful oral communication depends on making these timely, context-appropriate linguistic choices.
Thoughts are shaped by vocabulary: without words for a concept, we cannot articulate it, which can distort our perception of reality, increase the likelihood of overreactions, and hinder collaboration When students lack sufficient language to express themselves, they often become reluctant to participate in group work.
Participation in group work is influenced by individual personality traits and the compatibility of group members Shy, passive, or reserved students, as well as incompatible personality dynamics, can hinder engagement in collaborative tasks Sheils (1993) observed that many students are comfortable speaking in chorus or under teacher guidance during drills, but become inhibited when asked to express themselves openly before the whole class The fear of being corrected in front of peers can lead to uneasy collaboration and unproductive groups In such cases, students may not have been adequately encouraged to "have a go" without worrying about mistakes, or they may be accustomed to a traditional, teacher-centered classroom.
Learning style preference certainly affects the students’ perform ance in group work
Nguyen (2004) demonstrates that students' learning style preferences influence their performance in group work, noting that in Eastern countries such as China and Vietnam these styles are shaped by Confucian culture Students in these contexts are often accustomed to receiving knowledge from teachers rather than from peers, which can make the implementation of group work in language classes challenging Consequently, teachers may encounter negative responses to communicative language teaching and learning when trying to foster collaborative learning.
Beyond the challenges already discussed, some students do not struggle with language competence or personality, but have no ideas to contribute to the topic chosen by the teacher This can occur when a topic requires specialized knowledge, when there is little interest to talk about, or when tasks can be completed by only one or two students rather than prompting input from everyone To address this, teachers should select and adapt tasks to be relevant and engaging, arouse learners’ interest, and encourage equal, meaningful participation from all students.
The roles o f teachers and students in group work a c tiv itie s
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has dramatically reshaped the roles that teachers and learners are expected to play, especially in oral interaction tasks and group work where learners must use language for real purposes, respond appropriately, negotiate meaning, and draw on their own resources rather than simply repeat or absorb input In this study, 'roles' refer to both the parts teachers and learners assume during learning tasks and the social and interpersonal relationships that emerge in the process For group work to be successful, both teachers and students must take active, collaborative roles in the teaching and learning process The discussion that follows begins with an examination of teachers' roles in group work and how these roles influence student learning.
2.2.4.1 T h e roles o f teach ers in g rou p w ork activities
Teacher and learner roles are largely complementary, and when learners take on more initiative in the classroom, the teacher must assume a different set of responsibilities In effect, learners’ roles are tightly linked to the functions and status of the teacher, shaping how instruction is delivered and how participation is structured Richards and Rodgers (1986, p.24) point out that teachers’ roles are connected to several key issues, underscoring the interdependence of instructional dynamics and classroom authority.
- The types o f functions teachers are expected to fulfill, e.g w hether that o f a director, a counselor or a model.
- The degree o f control the teacher has over how learning takes place.
- The degree to which the teacher is responsible for content.
- The interactional patterns that develop by teacher and learners.
Breen and Candlin (1980) identify three main roles that teachers typically assume in a communicative classroom where group work is a regular activity: first, the facilitator of the communication process, second, the participant, and third, the observer Davis (1993) adds that when organizing group work, teachers may act as the facilitator of learning and must perform a variety of specific roles, either separately or simultaneously, depending on the activity.
_ As a general overseer o f the students’ learning, he must aim to coordinate the activities so that they form a coherent progression, leading tow ards greater com municative ability.
As a classroom manager, he designs structured lessons by grouping activities and ensures they are well organized at the practical level He chooses his role in each activity, often acting as the language instructor by introducing new items and directly guiding learners’ performance, while in other cases he initiates the activity and then steps back to enable learning through independent work.
During independent activity, the teacher acts as a consultant or adviser, offering help as needed He also moves around the classroom to monitor the learners’ strengths and weaknesses, using these observations as the basis for planning future learning activities.
As a participant, he engages directly in classroom activities to communicate with learners, modeling new language while preserving learner autonomy In this facilitator role, he can stimulate and present fresh language without taking the main initiative away from the learners themselves, keeping the learning process collaborative This approach places him on an equal footing with the learners, reducing tension and breaking down barriers to participation, and fostering a more effective, learner-centered language learning environment.
During small-group work, teachers circulate to keep students on task and offer targeted support, sometimes guiding individuals while others collaborate in groups When confusion arises, teachers help without disrupting the activity, and when a student finishes early, clear instructions are given on the next steps Leading the discussion is a key responsibility, with teachers planning the end-of-activity debrief rather than interrupting during group work It’s important to cultivate “productive noise,” recognizing that lively group dialogue is beneficial when it stays on task and differentiates from disruptive chatter Finally, if a student has a question, the teacher should address it within the student’s group rather than addressing the entire class.
In a communicative language classroom, teachers' roles shift from being teacher-centered to student-centered and from a purely language-based approach to a needs-based one The primary responsibility of the teacher is to establish conditions and design activities that allow learners to practice the language in meaningful contexts Equally important is cultivating a positive attitude toward learning, because students who feel secure are more willing to practice and take risks A healthy classroom climate promotes risk-taking and experimentation, enabling meaningful interaction Experienced teachers continually discover or invent ways to encourage authentic communication, and instead of directing every activity, they set up opportunities for meaningful practice and act as a resource person for learners.
As the teacher moves toward being a facilitator o f language learning, the students will also acquire skills that will enable them to be independent language learners In
14 the next part, the roles the students need to perform in order to work successfully in group work activities will be discussed.
2.2.4.2 T h e roles o f students in group w ork activities
In order to accom plish the group goal in a productive way, a variety o f tasks or roles must be perform ed by the group members Two kinds o f roles suggested by Ruben
(1988) that should be taken by the students include the task roles and the group building and m aintenance roles.
Task roles directly relate to the group’s goal, such as gathering information, making recommendations, solving problems, or completing a specific task For example, a student who keeps the discussion on track and another who initiates shared ideas both fulfill task-oriented roles in group work Additional task roles include facilitator, contributor, coordinator, and recorder As a contributor, a student organizes the group’s work, ensures everyone understands the group’s objective, and brings questions or concerns to the teacher after attempting a solution and exploring alternatives; a contributor also proposes new ideas or changes to the approach for the group problem As an analyzer, a member helps solve problems with skill, moves the group toward the core issue, and examines the reasoning behind each contribution As a coordinator, the member clarifies relationships among ideas and suggestions and tries to synthesize them As a recorder, they document the group’s response or data on a group response sheet or capture the product of the discussion As an encourager, they offer support and keep others feeling good about working together.
Group-building and maintenance roles require every member to take responsibility for promoting and sustaining positive attitudes and a healthy group spirit This does not mean using “team spirit” to suppress or intimidate individuals Maintenance roles focus on the feelings of individual members and the emotional behavior of the group The group-building and maintenance roles together shape how the team functions and are described below.
An active listener recognizes others’ contributions and reinforces them through precise verbal and non-verbal cues, such as a nod, a smile, or a simple “great idea.” In the role of a compromiser, they steer discussions toward consensus by addressing differences, highlighting similarities between ideas, and asking how differences can be reconciled so everyone can agree, while mediating tensions in conflict situations They may use light humor to ease pressure and keep the dialogue constructive As an encourager, they praise, affirm, and accept others’ input, fostering a collaborative atmosphere As a follower, they support others’ ideas in a receptive, passive manner, contributing to a cohesive group dynamic.
To implement group work activities effectively, students are expected to assume two main types of roles: task roles and group maintenance roles Task roles involve taking on responsibilities such as facilitator, contributor, and coordinator to complete the task assigned by the teacher Group maintenance roles focus on building and sustaining a positive group atmosphere and team spirit, ensuring productive collaboration among group members.
2.2.4.3 L ea d ersh ip and the roles o f the leaders in grou p w ork activities
Effective leadership supports the functioning and success of any group At its core, leadership coordinates individuals so their efforts align with the group's goals and adapt to changing circumstances The leader designs, implements, and oversees the procedures needed to bring about coordinated action among people and tasks A group cannot reach its aims without a capable leader Leaders can be elected, appointed, or volunteer for the role, and the best leaders lead without dominating others—drawing on insights from Lao Tzu in the Tao Te Ching as cited by Baloche A skilled leader also recognizes when to pause and close discussions to maintain momentum By balancing coordination, decision-making, and situational awareness, leadership strengthens group performance and supports progress toward shared objectives.
An effective group leader fosters satisfaction among members and prevents problems arising from disorganization They guide the group through the agenda with skill, communicate clearly, and help members locate information and analyze problems At the conclusion of discussions, they clarify tasks, summarize individual goals, and set future objectives A good leader knows when to intervene and, if a discussion veers off track or a member monopolizes the floor, steers the conversation toward other participants They should also address frequent interrupters to maintain flow and respect within the group.
Effective design and implementation o f group work a ctiv ities
Group work can be an effective approach to motivate students, promote active learning, and develop critical thinking, communication, and decision-making skills But without careful planning and skilled facilitation, it can frustrate learners and teachers and waste time To implement group work successfully, educators should follow three essential stages: preparing students for collaborative activities, monitoring dynamics and progress during group work, and ending with reflection, feedback, and clear assessment to ensure learning outcomes.
2.2.5.1 P rep arin g stud en ts for group w ork
• F orm ing students in group
Many of the problems that arise in group work originate in the group formation process This formation stage sets the foundations for effective collaboration and learning in future projects When these foundations are weak, students struggle to develop into a cohesive, high-performing team Therefore, careful group formation is essential to foster a productive, collaborative environment in group work.
For many students, being in the “right” group is extrem ely important To most, the
Choosing the right group depends on the people you will be working with Most people want to work with compatible teammates they get along with When this doesn’t happen, it quickly becomes clear that a key determinant of group work is the quality of fellow members Green, Christopher, and Lam (1997, p 23) emphasize that forming students into groups is a pivotal step for successful collaborative learning.
Effective group work relies on everyone’s willingness to make substantial, coherent contributions to the process Individual input is shaped by three factors: knowledge or experience with the topic, readiness to express ideas in the target language, and personality type When all participants engage openly and constructively, the group can collaborate more efficiently and achieve stronger outcomes.
Krashen's framework acknowledges different personality types in second language acquisition, positing that extroverts typically communicate more effectively than introverts, especially in the early stages of learning The challenges posed by silent participants are often more evident than those posed by socially skilled and assertive group members When groups are heterogeneous, introverts may feel overwhelmed by more expressive peers and lose confidence, while the more confident students may become bored if progress seems slow In contrast, discussions in relatively homogeneous groups can help introverted learners move away from strict rule-following toward more fluent, unconstrained expression of personal knowledge and views Consequently, Green et al (1997) suggest aiming for homogeneity in both linguistic ability and personality type, whereas Byrne (1986) argues that mixed-ability groups—combining fast and slow learners—can benefit fluency, since collaboration and cooperation among students support the task.
Hurd (2000) identifies two important issues in forming student groups: the size of the group and how members are allocated He argues that group size influences interaction and task effectiveness, while deliberate member allocation—considering factors such as skills, diversity, and compatibility—shapes engagement, fairness, and learning outcomes in collaborative work.
Group size should align with the task and available resources, but in many educational settings, four-member groups tend to work best Four-member groups support smoother decision-making and higher chances of consensus because there are fewer interpersonal clashes They also provide a larger pool of ideas, better division of labor, and greater overall participation, which enhances collaboration and task completion while keeping coordination manageable.
18 piece o f the work to do and feel they can make a meaningful contribution to the group assignment And next, students are more visible and accountable to each other This often reduces the problems associated with the withdrawal o f effort and there is a greater chance that the group will become cohesive in a shorter amount of time.
Concerning the allocation o f members into groups, Hurd (2000) says there is no
“ one right w ay” to allocate students into group Rather, there are a number of practices teachers can use Once again, these practices depend heavily on the task set for the group, the expertise o f each student in the class and, most importantly, the learning objectives for the subject He also states that most selection methods fall into four categories These are: o Random appointment o Self-selection o Selective appointment o Task appointment
A quick reference table outlining the above m entioned g ro uping methods suggested by H urd (2000) will be presented in the next page.
Despite the considerations above, there is no universal rule for forming student groups Educators should experiment with a range of grouping strategies across different occasions to identify the most effective approach for enabling students to collaborate in groups or pairs.
Preparing students for effective group work starts with pre-teaching the relevant language they will need to participate According to Sheils (1993), many learners feel they have nothing to say on the topic, which hinders their communication and makes them less confident to speak in group settings To address this, teachers should guide students in generating ideas through short mini-discussions or brainstorming activities, providing structured support that boosts participation and collaboration in group work.
To design effective group work, teachers should create tasks that foster interdependence and healthy competition between groups In these setups, students realize they sink or swim together, with every member responsible for and dependent on the others, so success is achieved only when all group members thrive Knowing that peers rely on them serves as a powerful motivator for collaboration (Kohn, 1986) Practical strategies to promote interdependence include establishing shared rewards for the group, assigning roles to divide the workload, and crafting tasks that require consensus-building and collective decision-making (Johnson et al., 1991).
Designing group work that aligns with students’ skills and the course objectives is a central teaching task Cooper and Associates (1990) argue that students must view group tasks as integral to the course objectives, not just busywork Many educators contend that group success comes from tasks that involve judgment, and it’s prudent to start with relatively easy assignments early in the term, gradually increasing difficulty as students become more knowledgeable.
Teachers should assign group tasks that enable a fair division of labor, ensuring that each student has a defined role Smith (1986) notes that for group work to be successful, every member must be given a specific task and follow through on it Consequently, teachers should design and structure these tasks so that all group members can contribute equally, enhancing collaboration and outcomes.
2.2.5.2 M on itorin g group w ork activities
Understanding why groups need monitoring begins with recognizing how student groups tend to struggle: they often leave too much work to the last minute and fail to complete tasks on time, resulting in rushed end products that don’t reflect their full potential This last-minute rush creates tension and conflict within groups, leaving members with a negative experience and shaping their attitudes toward future group work and their ability to reflect on the skills they have learned Several factors contribute to this time pressure, three main ones being a lack of confidence to manage each other, a lack of confidence to make decisions collectively, and a lack of confidence to deal with conflict.