Students attitudes towards cooperative learning at nghe an teachers college and implications for teacher education programs

2.5.1Students‟ preferred habits and learning styles 152.5.2Students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL 162.5.4Students‟ engagement and preferences in CL 242.5.5Students‟ suggestions t

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

-HOÀNG THỊ BÍCH THỦY

STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS COOPERATIVE LEARNING AT NGHE AN TEACHERS’ COLLEGE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

PROGRAMS

(Thái độ của sinh viên trường CĐSP Nghệ An về hoạt động học mang tính hợp tác và các hàm ý cho việc đào tạo giáo viên)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10

HANOI - 2010

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

HOÀNG THỊ BÍCH THỦY

-STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS COOPERATIVE LEARNING AT NGHE AN TEACHERS’ COLLEGE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

PROGRAMS

(Thái độ của sinh viên trường CĐSP Nghệ An về hoạt động học mang tính hợp tác và các hàm ý cho việc đào tạo giáo viên)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10

Supervisor: Lê Văn Canh, M.A

HANOI - 2010

2.5.1Students‟ preferred habits and learning styles 152.5.2Students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL 16

2.5.4Students‟ engagement and preferences in CL 242.5.5Students‟ suggestions to improve CL 28

CHAPTER III: IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 30

3.1 Challenges of Cooperative Learning in foreign language learning 30

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CL : Cooperative Learning

EFL: English as a foreign language

ESL: English as a second language

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Students‟ preferred learning styles of learning

English Table 2.2: Students‟ attitudes towards CL

Table 2.3: Students‟ perceived benefits of CL

Table 2.4 : Students‟ difficulties in CL

Table 2.5: The frequency of using of CL in and outside classroom

Table 2.6: Teachers‟ ways of assigning students to groups

Table 2.7: The number of students teachers assign to a group

Table 2.8: Students‟ evaluation of teachers‟ way of assigning to a groupTable 2.9: Teachers‟ ways of rewarding groups of students

Table 2.10: Students‟ evaluation of teachers‟ way of rewarding groups of studentsTable 2.11: Group size preferred by students

Table 2.12: Students‟ working in groups

Table 2.13: Students‟ interest in some activities

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

Co-operative learning has attracted a great attention in the last few decades for its value

as one of the startegies which help to provide students with more opportunities to learnfrom each other By cooperating with each other in solving learning tasks in the classroom,the students at the same time create a favourable and active learning atmosphere, therebymaking use of each other‟s resources

Over the last few decades, Cooperative Learning (CL) has become a popular practice inboth mainstream education and in second/ foreign language education There has beenempirical evidence to justify the effectiveness of CL in promoting mastery of knowledgeand skills among students of various abilities and ages Regarding second/foreign languagelearning, students, through cooperation, become more actively involved in their lessons andthus, they have more chance to use the target language than they are in the whole classarrangement

Despite its documented benefits, CL has not been adequately researched in Vietnameseeducational settings So, one of the unresolved questions is to what extent the contextualvariables such as students‟ social background and learning culture affects the success of

CL For instance, it is not clear whether CL can bring about similar success in the contextwhere students come from remote rural areas and are taught largely with traditionalmethods as it does in other, especially in Western, contexts This question motivates me toundertake this study, which aims to explore the possibility of applying the principles andtechniques of CL in a Junior Teachers‟ Training College in one central province ofVietnam The focus of my study is to find out the college students‟s attitudes toward CL inthe classroom

2 Aims of the study

This study sets out to achieve the following aims:

● to know the degree to which teachers use CL in their classroom throughstudents‟ self-reports.

● to investigate into college students‟ attitudes and perceptions toward CL

It is hoped that the result of the study will inform teachers, first of all those working inthe college, of the possibilities for using cooperative techniques in their teaching I believethat any innovative teaching strategy or technique the teacher is trying to use is likely tofail if the students do not have a positive attitude toward it Therefore, it is critical tounderstand the students‟ attitudes before implementing innovation Another dimension ofthe study is to gain insights into how teachers in the College have used CL throughstudents‟ verbal reports

3 Research questions

To achieve the aims of the thesis, the following research questions were proposed:

1 What are the English language students‟ preferred learning habits and learning styles?

2 How do teachers use CL both inside and outside the classroom according to

students‟ self-reports?

3 What are their attitudes towards, and perceptions of, CL as well as their

suggestions for the use of CL?

4 Scope of the study

As it has been stated above, the study is carried out to investigate college students‟attitudes toward CL, and therefore, it is a survey by nature It is not intended to examinethe impact of CL on students‟ learning outcomes Neither is it intended to exploreteachers‟ attitudes toward, and perceptions of, CL The study was carried out within oneJunior Teachers‟ Training College only This means that no generalisation of the findings

is intended

5 Research methodology

Due to the aim and scope of the study, two research methods are used in the presentstudy:

● A questionnaire to investigate students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL as well astheir preferences The questionnaire is designed, primarily, to find out what students think

of CL And how they prefer to have CL activities in their foreign language classes Datawere analyzed mainly by means of descriptive statistics

● Follow-up interviews were conducted to get better insights into students‟ attitudes,perceptions, and preferences

6 Organization of the thesis

The thesis is structured into 3 parts:

Part A: Introduction, which introduces the rationale, the aims, the scope, the researchmethods and the organization of the study

Part B: Development which consists of 3 chapters:

Chapter I is a Literature Review In this chapter, a basic theoretical background for thestudy is created by reviewing the relevant literature with a focus on Attitudes, and CLtechniques

Chapter II, The Study, presents the methods and procedures used in the study, whichconsists of a survey questionnaire and follow-up interviews This chapter also includesResult and Discussion which presents the method of data analysis as well as the resultsderived from the data analysis Results are presented under themes as coded from the dataanalysis

Chapter III, Implications and Suggestions, presents some suggestions on how to apply CLtechniques in the classroom to achieve better impact

Part C: Conclusion, summarises the main remarks of the study and suggest some ideas forfurther study Limitations of the study will also be acknowledged in this chapter

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews the literature on CL In the first place, a definition of „attitude‟ isprovided This will be followed by a discussion of the nature of CL as well as itsadvantages in foreign language learning Finally, previous studies on CL will be reviewed

to identify a research niche for the present study

1.1 Attitudes

In general understanding, attitudes are defined as a disposition or tendency to respondpositively or negatively towards a certain thing such as an idea, object, person or situation.This is often referred to as attitude object, but in the scale of my study, attitude isunderstood as „learning attitude‟ The construct of „Attitude‟ has long been considered asone of the affective variables beside motivation in the realm of language learning as well,(e.g., Gardner and Lambert 1972)

According to Oxford and Shearin (1994), attitude is one of the factors impactingmotivation in language learning Gardner (1985) states that positive attitudes andmotivation are related to success in second language learning

Holmes (1992) believes that people develop attitudes towards languages, which reflecttheir views about those who speak the languages, and the contexts and functions withwhich they are associated He claims that attitudes in the context of language learning aredefined as the way people look at the language, the class and the people, and the culture oflanguage

Lambert (1967, cited in Macnamara, 1973: 37) mentions two types of attitudes:

„integrative‟ and „instrumental‟ attitude to language learning He claims that an integrativeattitude (desire to know and become friendly with speakers of a language) is more likely tolead to success in learning a second language than an instrumental attitude (desire to betteroneself materially by means of the language)

Chamber (1999) asserts that learning occurs more easily, when the learner has apositive attitude towards the language and learning Positive attitudes on the part of thelanguage learners can enhance an integrative motivation, and attitudes upon success inlanguage learning is widely acknowledged Gardner and Lambert (1972) in their extensivestudies give evidence that positive attitudes towards language enhance proficiency as well.Also, Holme (1992) states that if people feel positive towards those who use the language,they would be more highly motivated towards learning it.

Unquestionably, good learners are those that have a positive attitude towards theirsubject The overall findings show that positive attitudes have a strong impact on thesuccess of language learning Most of the researches have claimed that students‟ attitude is

an integral part of learning and that it should, therefore, become an essential component ofsecond language pedagogy There are many educational factors affecting students‟ positiveattitude, such as teacher-student relationships, a positive psychological classroomatmosphere, or the use of authentic teaching materials and activities Probably, one of thebest method to help students develop their positive attitudes towards learning English as aforeign language should be the CL techniques since these techniques help to developpositive student-teacher attitudes, create a cooperative community of practice, and bringabout helpful, harmonic atmosphere in classroom

In the present study, the definition by Gardner and Lambert (1972) is adopted,according to which attitude is “an organised, consistent and habitual manner of thinking,feeling and reacting to events and persons” (p.148) This is because the definition coversthe meaning of students‟ reactions to CL

Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) note that attitudes exert a directive influence on behaviour

An individual‟s attitudes towards something will influence his or her oeverall patterns ofreponses to it Therefore, before plan is made to apply CL models, it is critical thatstudents‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards the intended pedagogical models be investigated.Moreover, although the benefits of CL have been well documented in the literature, thestudents‟ and teachers‟ attitudes to CL models remain scarely researched

According to Calderon (1987), CL can be defined as “a strategies for the classroomthat is used to increase motivation and retention, to help students develop a positive image

of self and others, to provide a vehicle for critical thinking and problem solving, and toencourage collaborative social skills”(cited in Christison (1994: 140) In CL situation,students are motivated to use the language more extensively and they can develop theirlanguage proficiency

Currently, CL is perceived as a generic term for a number of instructional techniquesand procedures that address conceptual learning and social development Johnson, Johnson

& Stanne (2000) define CL as a general term for an instructional approach that

“emphasizes the conceptual learning and the development of social skills as learners worktogether in small heterogeneous group”, it is governed by “the principles of positiveinterdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face promoting interaction and groupprocessing” In other words, CL is not simply assigning students to groups in which onestudent does all the work or team members perform their tasks individually (Kagan, 1994).Slavin (1982) defines CL as instructional methods in which students of all levels ofperformance work together in small groups toward a common goal which encompassesinstructional techniques such as Student Team-Achievement Divisions (STAD), Team-Game-Tournaments (TGT), Team-Assisted Individualization (TAI), CooperativeIntegrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), Jigsaw, Learning Together, and GroupInvestigation (GI) This perspective on CL is adopted as a framework for this study

The central tenet of CL, according to all above-cited definitions is the idea that studentswork in small groups, taking the responsibility for their own learning, thereby helping oneanother in their groups to achieve their goals

1.2.2 Benefits of CL in foreign language learning

CL has long been proven to be effective in improving the overall climate of theclassroom In addition, CL increases interaction opportunities among learners andpromoted autonomous learning (Thomson, 1998) According to Long & Poster (1985), CL,like other group work, creates a more positive affective climate into classroom, while italso individualizes instruction and raises students‟ motivation Therefore, CL is gaining themajor priority in language learning classrooms over individual learning As such Johnson

et al (1998) maintain that CL accommodates the tenets of the theories of developmental, behavioral, and social interdependence Johnson and Johnson (1994) assertthat CL includes a variety of strategies that utilize students‟ collaboration to maximizeinteraction among students according to the principles of positive interdependence,individual accountability, group processing, and equal opportunity for class participation.Positive interdependence exists when students come to perceive that their group mates

cognitive-succeed and/or that they must coordinate their efforts with the efforts of others in the group

to complete a task Learners in CL usually take individual quizzes to demonstrateindividual accountability and personal achievement in order to control for any potentialfree ride effect on the efforts of others Furthermore, learners in CL may also get equalopportunities to demonstrate their learning For instance, learners may receive instruction

in reading an official letter; next, they sit in groups and read the letter to complete the tasksthat follow Then they may individually assume responsibility for performing the tasks.Benefits of CL, which are discussed subsequently, are out of question

In terms of academic achievements, CL produces greater student achievement thantraditional learning methodologies Slavin (1984, cited in Andrew, 10.1.94)) found that63% of the CL groups analyzed had an increase in achievement In traditional group work,students sit together and sometimes work together This leads to unequal contribution andparticipation among students because one or two better students may dominate the others.This kind of group work does not create interdependence and accountability amonglearners CL methods attempt to structure group activities so as to increase students‟responsibility and encourage group member to actively participate, improve motivation andcontribute to the atmosphere of cooperation in the class As a result, CL helps to gainacademic achievements in a quickly way

Affectionately, CL enhances students‟ self-esteem which in turn motivate students toparticipate in the learning process (Johnson & Johnson, 1989) Also, Slavin (1990) saysthat one of the most important psychological outcomes of CL is their effect on students‟self-esteem Students believe that they are valuable, important and productive individuals,thus making confident decisions Students help each other and by doing so, they can build

a supportive community which raises the performance level of each member (Kagan,1986) Students share their success with their groups, which enhances both the individual‟sand group‟s self-esteem

CL helps not only to increase students‟ self-esteem, but also reduces students‟ anxiety(Oxford, 1990, 1997) In a traditional classroom, fear of failing is a constant thread to eachstudent The reason for this is that any mistakes or incorrect answers become to subject toscrutiny by the whole class In contrast, in CL situation, students have an opportunity to try

out their contributions with each other before presenting it to the whole class They havetime to think, opportunities to rehearse and respond the answers, thus it enhances thegreater likelihood of success This helps reduce anxiety in the language learning On theother hand, CL establishes an atmosphere of cooperation and helping school-wide(Deutsch, 1975) It creates a positive learning environment for all participants According

to Kagan (1994), if people are anxious, but allowed to affiliate, their anxiety level isreduced Therefore, Oxford (1990) included that CL as a classroom procedure can loweranxiety in the language classroom In brief, CL helps to create a relaxing and comfortableatmosphere in the classroom, and as a result, the self-esteeme is strengthened This isbecause CL creates a strong social support system in which learners feel respected andconnected to one another (Cohen & Willis, 1985)

What‟s more, CL helps to develop students‟ thinking skills and social skills CLdevelops higher level thinking skills (Webb, 1982) In CL, students tend to participatemore frequently, instead of passively listening to the teacher It gives students chances towork together so as to represent the most effective form of interaction (Schwartz, Black,Strange, 1991) CL also fosters the development of high level reasoning and problemsolving skills (Sharan & Sharan, 1976) The self-learning in groups requires students to

“grasp information, examine it, evaluate it for soundness, and apply it appropriately”(Johnson & Johnson, 1987, p.36) While working together to accomplish a task, groupmembers need to formulate their ideas, discuss them, make decisions, defend positions andresolve differences of opinion, and solve problems Hence, CL enables students to developtheir critical thinking

By getting envolved in CL, students also develop their social skills simply because one

of the requirements of CL is the skills and attitudes to work in teams Thus, CL givesstudents a chance to develop the interpersonal skills needed to succeed at school, work, andwithin the community Students work with classmates who have different learning skills,cultural background, and personalities Therefore, they are able to understand theirdifferences and to learn how to deal with conflicts and interact with others Trainingstudents in dealing with conflicts is a major component of learning training (Aronson 1978;Slavin 1987) Moreover, CL fosters students‟ interaction at all levels (Webb 1982)

Both students of high ability work and students of lower ability can understand theirdifferences and learn how to capitalize on them rather than use them as a basis forantagonism through warm-up and group building activities According to Kessler andMaCleod (1985) “CL promotes positive societal responses … reduces violence in anysetting … eliminates fear and blame, and increases honor, friendliness, and consensus.” (p.219) In reality, CL has helped to improve students‟ social skills.

In short, CL approaches play a vital role in language acquisition CL brings about manybenefits: academic achievement, self-esteem, development of higher order thinking,development of social skills The positive effects from the cooperation make CL one of themost valuable instructional tools for educators

1.2.3 Review of previous studies related to CL

CL mode has been applied to maximize student learning through student-studentinteraction rather than direct teacher-student interaction (Ilola, Power & Jacobs, 1989).However, little has been explored about CL

Johnson and Johnson (1987) compare three different types of learning: CL, IndividualLearning and Comparative Learning In each kind of learning, their nature and appropriateuse and the skills students need to implement those kinds of learning were referred Also,they emphasize the student acquisition of collaborative skills and how the teachers teachstudents those skills Finally, they drew out some teacher‟s concerns about classroommanagement in CL

Hollingsworth et al (2007) and Al Haidari (2006) point out that CL as a method ofteaching turns out to be a valuable tool to help students learn comprehension strategieswhile encouraging positive interactions among peers The students achieve academicsuccess by increasing their reading levels and knowledge of comprehension skills, andthere is also an increase in enthusiasm and motivation towards reading CL is a way tohave students work together to better comprehend what they are reading What matter inthese activities is that students should have the desire to communicate and to replicate realcommunication

Jalilifar (2010) warns that simply putting students in groups does not guarantee positiveresults “Central components of effective CL must be in place so that students can come tofeel that they are positive contributors, not only to their teams, but to the class as a whole”(p 104).

Slavin (1990) states that CL may yield different benefits including students‟ esteem, more time-on-task and classroom behavior, a positive attitude toward the class andclass members He also initiates some forms of CL such as STAD (Student TeamsAchievement Division), TGT (Teams-Games-Touraments), Group investigation, andJigsaw

self-Chamot and O‟Malley (1987) maintain that small cooperative students groups working

on a task can practice language skills which are directly pertinent to the task Jalilifar(2010) examines the effect of CL techniques on college students‟ reading comprehension

by conducting an experimental study with 90 female Iranian college students divided intothree homogenous groups The results showed that CL techniques helped to improvestudents‟ reading achievement The results suports what Ghaith (2003), Myer (2006),Tracey and Barbara (2003), and Wilson (1991) found about the positive effect of CL onstudents‟ L2 reading comprehension Jalilifar (2010) concludes that

Group work, pair work, and peer work in CL are common terms that are heardfrequently in ESL/EFL circles Actually they have occupied a certain amount ofspace in communicative language teaching coursebooks In teacher trainingprogrammes, novice teachers are advised to inject cooperation into their teaching asskillfully and artistically as possible, but every technique becomes effective if therealities of the classroom and the cultural background of the target country areconsidered (p 107)

1.2.4 CL and Vietnamese Learning Culture

It is claimed that Vietnamese students prefer working individually even when they areput in groups They tend to compete with one another Johnson and Johnson (1999)describes this classroom practice as an individualistic structure, which places greatemphasis on individual students working alone toward the goal independently of other

students Due to the influence of traditional Confucian philosophy, students believe thatknowledge comes from the teacher, not from their peers As a result, they are reluctant toaccept group members as their collaborators, let alone tutors They do not appreciate peercorrection and peer rating, which are essential aspects of interdependence in CL (LuuTrongTuan, 2010).

Vietnamese learners are concerned with the consequence of their speech and how itmay be accepted, which also derives from Confucian philosophy, which stresses theimportance of care in words (Scollon, 1999: 18) They try to represent themselves well inaccordance with the “maxims of modesty” (Littlewood, Liu & Yu, 1996: 81), and to avoidgroup conflicts, an element honoured by CL in order to help students develop conflictmanagement skills in group interactions

Luu Trong Tuan (2010) conducted an experimental study with 77 first-year EFLstudents in a university in Ho Chi Minh City Findings showed that in the first few weeks

of the experiment, the students were resistant to CL, but later on they became morepositive toward this approach to learning By the end of the course, a majority of thestudents reported that CL helped them understand the course materials better Theachievement test result also showed that the experiemental students scored higher thanthose in the control group

This literature review shows a wide gap of research on CL in Vietnamese contexts,both in the secondary school and college or university settings This study, therefore, is anattempt to make a modest contribution to this research gap

Summary

In this chapter, I have reviewed the literature on CL which includes the major featuresand the benefits of CL in language classroom As it is revealed in this literature review,very little has been done to investigate students‟ attitudes toward CL I believe thatpeople‟s behaviours are shaped by their attitudes As a result, investigating students‟attitudes should be the first step toward the application of CL strategies in the realclassroom This is the motive of the present study The next chapter will present theresearch methods which were employed in this study

CHAPTER II: THE STUDY

In this chapter I will describe the present study First I will present the methods andprocedure used in the study to find out the students‟ attitudes towards CL at Nghe AnTeacher‟s College, which include a survey questionnaire administered to the students andfollow-up interviews Then the results of the study will be presented and discussed

3 What are their attitudes towards, and perceptions of, CL as well as their

suggestions for the use of CL?

The answer to these questions would serve to give some insights into college student‟sattitudes towards CL as well as their preferences for CL activities in language classroom

2 2 Participants

Participants in this study were 83 second year English major students, aged from 18 to

21 at Nghe An Teachers‟ College They had learnt English for nearly 5 years or more, 3years at secondary school and nearly two years at the English Department of the College.All of them come from the countryside At the time of the study, they were in the secondsemester of the second year of the three-year teacher training programme These studentswill become lower secondary school teachers of English upon their graduation

2 3 Instruments

To obtain data for the study, two different instruments were employed: a surveyquestionnaire and follow-up interviews

2 3.1 The Questionnaire:

A 20-item questionnaire was administered to 83 students from three different classes.All questions were written in Vietnamese to guarantee students‟ accurate understanding aswell as their full confidence in their responses (see Appendix 1)

The questions focus on the following categories:

● Students‟ preferred habits and learning styles of learning English (Q1)

● Students‟ attitudes towards CL (Q2, Q3, Q4, Q5, Q6)

● Students‟ perceptions of benefits of CL (Q7)

● Students‟ perception of difficulties of CL (Q8)

● Students‟ self-reports of teachers‟ use of CL (Q9, Q10, Q11, Q12, Q13, Q14, Q15, Q16)

● Students‟ engagement and preferences in CL (Q17, Q18, Q19)

2.4 Data Analysis

The questionnaire data were analysed quantitatively by means of descriptive statistics.After the questionnaire was returned, responses were categorised and tabulated.The samemethod of data collection was employed for the interview data

2.5 Results and Discussion

All the collected data were then analyzed and discussed as bellows in order to find outstudents‟ attitudes toward CL

2.5.1 Students’ preferred habits and learning styles

Question 1 in the Questionnaire asked the students about their preferred learning styles

It is revealed from their responses that nearly two-thirds of them (61.4 %) reported thatthey usually studied independently by themselves This is against the 21.7% of thosereporting that they usually studied in groups, and 16.9% said that they usually studied with

another who had a similar way of thinking and learning styles (see Table 2.1 below).

The students’ preferred ways of learning English No of Percent

responses

learning styles)

Table 2.1 Students’ preferred learning styles of learning English (N=83)

The results from the data analysis showed that the majority of 2nd students at Nghe AnTeachers‟ College seemed to prefer a traditional method, i.e learning alone This learningstyle appeared to persist even when they worked at home or outside the classroom It islikely that this learning habit was formed by their experiences with the traditional teachingmethods where instruction is largely teacher-fronted and students are expected to takenotes, then do exercises Learning is assessed individually following a norm-referencedapproach This way of learning has been critiqued by many scholars (Nguyen, 2002; Oanh,2006)

2.5.2 Students’ attitudes and perceptions towards CL

2.5.2.1 Students’ attitudes towards CL

Five questions (Question 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6) in the Questionnaire were designed to findout students‟ attitudes towards CL

Comfort with Engagement in Perceived need of Attitudes towards group work group work group work group work

Table 2.2: Students’ attitudes towards CL (N=83)

Table 2.2 shows that a large number of the students (78.3%) felt more comfortable andlearned more when they work in groups while only 21.7 % of the students felt so whenthey work alone When asked about perceived need of group work, almost students saidthat it is very necessary to organize group work activities Only 12% of the students felt notvery necessary to do it Also, the students‟ responses to question 5 showed that moststudents have a positive attitude towards group work More than eighty per cent of thestudents said that they were interested in these activities Obviously, group work couldincrease students‟ interest in the lesson when most students found group work activitiesnecessary and interesting, so that 62.2% of them enthusiastically participate in group-work.However, the number of the students (37.8%) is not very active in participation

It is clear from the above data analysis, the numbers of the students who have positiveattitudes toward CL far more outweighs the number of the students who have negativeattitudes In other words, these students appeared to be more favour of CL Furthermore,most of the students tended to be enthusiastic about group-work although a rather largenumber of the students still keep silent and contribute very little to their group-work It can

be interpreted that although CL is perceived as being beneficial to most of the students,there are students who were not aware of the benefits of CL This is understandablebecause students differ in their learning styles, and not all of them perceive of a particularclassroom activity or teaching style in the same way (O‟Malley & Chamot, 1990)

2.5.2.2 Students’ perceived benefits of CL

Question 7 in the Questionnaire asked the students about their perceptions of thebenefits of CL In this questions, 8 different benefits of CL, which are adapted from theliterature about CL, are listed and the students chose whatever that they agreed with (seeTable 2.3).

Group work helps……

1 gain better academic achievements 31

6 provide more opportunities for communication in English 41

7 provide more opportunities for learning from peers 69

8 create a relaxing and friendly learning environment 52

Table 2.3: Students’ perceived benefits of CL (N=83)

As shown from Table 2.3, more than half of the students responding to thequestionnaire agreed that CL provided more opportunities for them to learn from theirpeers (N=69) and created a relaxing and friendly learning environment (N=52) In addition,nearly half of them (N=46) thought that CL helped to reduce their anxiety so that they feltmore confident in participating in learning activities More opportunities for developingtheir critical thinking skills and practicing communication in English were two otherbenefits which were opted for by respectively 48 and 41 out of 83 respondents whileapproximately half of them (N=48) felt that their critical thinking skills could be developedthrough CL This supports Webb‟s (1982) claims about the benefits of CL However, onlyabout one-third or 31 of the respondents thought that CL helped them to gain betteracademic achievements Similarly, almost the same number agreed that CL helped todevelop their social skills (N=34) or enhance their self-esteem (N=36) This implies thatstudents are well aware of getting more benefits from CL and in fact, CL is reallybeneficial to the students of learning English They thought CL helped to create a relaxing

atmosphere which lowers their anxiety (Oxford, 1997) As the result, the question set outfor both teachers and students here is how to make all students get more and more benefitsfrom CL because CL has been proved to be very useful in learning English in general, and

in developing the students‟ communicative competence, which is considered to be the finaltarget of teaching and learning English

2.5.2.3 Students’ difficulties in CL

More frequent use of the mother tongue because of poor ability of 56

English

Difficulties in exchange information because of physical classroom 0

arrangement

Table 2.4: Students’ difficulties in CL (N=83)

The figures provided in Table 2.4 reveal the difficulties that students reported to haveencountered when they worked in groups The most serious problem to the students was aconflict occurring within the groups (N=68) Fifty-six students reported the dominance ofthe mother tongue by group members in group discussions In addition, they reported thatreasons that accounted for their failure in group work include lack of time (N= 32), theunwillingness of some students (N=36), lack of the help from their teachers (N=15) Thissupports Brown‟s (2001) idea that CL may be a challenge to some students because ofpersonality differences However, only a small number of the students (N=9) complainedabout noisy classes None of the respondents claimed they had difficulties when theymoved around the classroom to swap information with other groups

This information is useful in that it helps teachers who are keen to apply CL in theirclassroom to work out strategies to address these issues for the success of CL.

2.5.3 Teachers’ use of CL

Question 9 and 10 in the Questionnaire (Appendix 1) are designed to ask students abouttheir opinions about frequency of teachers‟ use of CL in language classroom and outsideclassroom Question 11, 12, and 13 refer to teacher‟s ways of assigning students to groups.Question 14 refers to teacher‟s way of rewarding groups of students In order to ask thestudents to evaluate their teachers‟ application of CL activities in language classroom, twoquestions (Q15 and 16) were designed in the Questionnaire

3.5.3.1 The frequency of using of CL inside and outside classroom

Teachers’ use of CL Often Sometimes Rarely Never

Table 2.5: The frequency of using of CL inside and outside classroom (N=83)

When asked about the teachers‟ frequency of using CL activities inside and outsideclassroom, 48.2 % of the students said that their teacher often used CL activities inlanguage classroom while 51.8 % of them said that their teachers sometimes used them

It is noticeable that only 12.0 % of the students reported that their teacher often used

CL activities outside classroom More than half of the respondents (67.5 %) said that theirteachers sometimes used these activities, whereas 10.8 % and 9.6% of them stated thattheir teachers rarely or never used those activities respectively

It is obvious that CL activities were not used so often in English classes at Nghe AnTeacher‟s College, while they were rarely used outside the classroom It can be inferredfrom this information that CL has not been very popular in the College Individual work

seems to be dominant in the classroom This result was aligned with the findings of LuuTrong Tuan‟s (2010) study This may worsen the problem of large classes because one ofthe benefits of CL is it helps to increase students‟ interactions in the target language inlarge classes Due to its scope, the present study fails to provide an account of why CL isnot popular to the teachers in the College However, the reason might be that teachers arenot familiar with CL, a western teaching method.

3.5.3.2 Teachers’ ways of assigning students to groups

Teachers’ ways of assigning students to groups No of students Percent

Table 2.6: Teachers’ ways of assigning students to groups

As shown from Table 2.6, more than half of the students indicated that their teachersoften allowed students to choose their own groups (55.4%), and assigned students togroups at random (42.2%) The same number of the students (1.2%) said their teacherspreferred to group students of the same ability or of the same interest None of them statedthat the teachers grouped student of different abilities More interestingly, most studentsresponding to the question 11 in Questionnaire stated that their teachers often allowed them

to form their own groups

From the data analysis, it is possible for us to conclude that allowing the students toform their own group can create some advantages and disadvantages One of theadvantages can be that all group members often get on well with one another, thereforethey can find easy to express their own ideas Another advantage can be that they want tosurpass the other groups so that they will try their best to finish the assigned work well on

peers, enage “with more capable others who provide assistance and guidance” (Oxford,

2.5.3.3 The number of students teachers assign to a group

The number of students in a group No of students %

Table 2.7: The number of students teachers assign to a group

In regard to the group size, most students affirmed that their teachers prefer to formlarge groups of 5-6 members And only 4.8 % of the students said their teachers wouldprefer a group of 4 or more than 6 members None of the students stated that their teachersassign 3 members in a group

teacher forms the group of 4 or 6, the students will subdivide their groups into smallergroups of two This will enable them to work in pairs, not in groups, therefore, CL cannot

be successful But if each group has more than 6 members, the students will find muchmore difficult to cooperate because their group is rather crowed This can cause somedifficulties for the group leaders or the teacher to manage the group work Surprisingly, thedata shows that no teachers form the groups of 3 In some cases, in reality, the groups ofthree can be the strong ones because the group members can find easy to work with oneanother But if the class is too crowed, it is not advisable to have groups of 3 because therewill be too many groups

2.5.3.4 Students’ evaluation of teachers’ way of assigning to a group

Agreement Little agreement Disagreement

No of students 20 (24.4%) 58 (70.7%) 4 (4.9%)

Table 2.8: Students’ evaluation of teachers’ way of assigning to a group

As can be seen from Table 2.8, 70.7 % of the students reported that they little agreewith teachers‟ way of assigning to a group whereas only 24.4 % of the respondents agreeand 4.9 % disagree with it

From the above data analysis, we can find out that about two third of the students find

OK to work in groups of 5 or 6, about one fourth like so, and very few students do not like

to work in groups of 5 or 6 In short, according to the students, forming groups of 5 or 6can not be an very appropriate way in CL

2.5.3.5 Teachers’ ways of rewarding the well- done or finished group work.

Teachers’ ways of rewarding groups of students No of %

students

After students finish their work, teacher often reward with:

1 bonus points to the whole group 44 59.5

3 Nonacademic rewards (food, candy…) 1 1.4

4 Praises to individuals 16 21.6