Enhancing third-year non-English major students' participation in speaking lessons through collaborative activities at Hanoi University of Business and Technolo

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS HUBT: Hanoi University of Business and Technology ESL/ EFL: English as a second or foreign language CL: Cooperative learning/ Collaborative learning CLL: Collaborat

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

-  -

NGUYỄN THỊ MINH HÀ

ENHANCING THIRD-YEAR NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN SPEAKING LESSONS THROUGH COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES AT HANOI UNIVERSITY OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY

(Tăng cường sự tham gia của sinh viên năm thứ ba không chuyên trong

các giờ học nói thông qua các hoạt động cộng tác tại trường

Đại học Kinh doanh và Công nghệ Hà Nội)

M.A Minor Programme Thesis

Field: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 60 14 10

HA NOI – 2010

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

-  -

NGUYỄN THỊ MINH HÀ

ENHANCING THIRD-YEAR NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN SPEAKING LESSONS THROUGH COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES AT HANOI UNIVERSITY OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY

(Tăng cường sự tham gia của sinh viên năm thứ ba không chuyên trong

các giờ học nói thông qua các hoạt động cộng tác tại trường

Đại học Kinh doanh và Công nghệ Hà Nội)

M.A Minor Programme Thesis

Field: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 60 14 10

Supervisor: Đỗ Bá Quý, MEd

HA NOI - 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rational and statement of the problem for the study 1

2 Aims of the study 2

3 Scope of the study 3

4 Research questions/ hypothesis 3

5 Method of the study 4

6 Organization of the thesis 4

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 6

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 5

1.1 Theoretical backgrounds of speaking 5

1.1.1 Nature of speaking 5

1.1.2 Characteristics of a successful speaking activity 5

1.1.3 Problems with speaking and speaking activities 6

1.2 Theoretical backgrounds of collaborative learning (CL) 6

1.2.1 Definitions of CL 6

1.2.1.1 Definition 6

1.2.1.2 Collaborative learning versus competitive learning 8

1.2.1.3 Collaborative learning versus cooperative learning 8

1.2.2 Key factors of successful CL 8

1.2.3 Benefits of CL 11

1.2.4 Types of grouping 13

1.2.5 Learner’s roles 14

1.2.6 Teacher’s roles 14

1.2.7 Role of instructional materials 15

1.2.8 Collaborative activities (CA) 15

1.2.9 Previous studies on the topic 16

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 18

2.1 Background of the study 18

2.1.1 The teaching and learning conditions 18

2.1.2 The syllabus 18

2.1.3 The description of the material used 19

2.1.4 The learners 19

2.1.5 The teachers 20

2.1.6 The participants 20

2.1.7 Teaching practice at HUBT 21

2.2 Data collection instruments 22

2.2.1 Classroom observation 22

2.2.2 Students’ reports 23

2.2.3 Questionnaires 23

2.2.4 Interviews 23

2.3 Data collection procedures 23

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 25

3.1 Students’ attitude towards speaking practice in class and pair and group work activities 25

3.1.1 Students’ attitude towards speaking practice in class 25

3.1.2 Students’ attitude towards pair and group work in speaking activities 26

3.2 Factors affect their involvement in speaking activities 27

3.2.1 Topic of the discussion 27

3.2.2 Leadership 29

3.2.3 Proficiency level 31

3.2.4 Grouping 32

3.2.5 Conflicts during discussion 34

3.2.6 Shyness 35

3.3 Students’ distribution of participation in CA 35

3.3.1 In “Case Study” lessons 35

3.3.2 In presentation project 38

3.4 Students’ nature of participation in CA 38

PART C: CONCLUSION 40

REFERENCES 43 APPENDIX

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

HUBT: Hanoi University of Business and Technology

ESL/ EFL: English as a second or foreign language

CL: Cooperative learning/ Collaborative learning

CLL: Collaborative language learning

CA: Collaborative activities

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Some matters related to grouping before and after the application of CA

Table 2: Conflicts during discussion before and after the application of CA

Table 3: Students’ distribution of participation- class 1

Table 4: Students’ distribution of participation- class 2

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Cooperative learning outcomes

Figure 2: Students’ attitude towards speaking practice in class before the application of CA Figure 3: Students’ attitude towards speaking practice before and after the application of CA Figure 4: Students’ attitude towards pair or group work before and after the application of CA Figure 5: Students’ desire for leadership in pair or group work

Figure 6: Students’ distribution of participation- class 1&2

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale and statement of the problem for the study

In the globalization age today, English is considered as a means of international communication and an important instrument to link many countries all over the world The demand for teaching and learning English in the world as well as in Vietnam is increasing Among four main skills, speaking skill plays an important role in English teaching in the context of Vietnam For many students, speaking is by far the most important of the four skills

in a second language in general and in English in particular However, many EFL students find this skill most difficult to obtain

Through working together in speaking class, students have opportunities to strengthen both their academic language proficiency and basic interpersonal communication skills However, through my own teaching experience and my class observation, there are some problems in building up well-functioning groups or pairs in speaking class such as students‟ unwillingness

to involve activities, inequality in students‟ participation in speaking group work, overwhelming Vietnamese use in English discussion, students‟ attitudes to repeated or boring activities in class, students‟ lack of cooperative skills, etc Therefore, for such a young teacher

as the author of this research, to create and control pair work or group work effectively in speaking lessons for the third-year non-English major students is really a challenging work

To my surprise, even though all of my students in two classes got accustomed to group work

in second language learning, most of them still suppose that working in pairs or groups in speaking lessons is merely the action of putting all participants in groups, then each member try to complete their task mainly individually and competitively then they combine the results

of each individual‟s to make the final one After the first lessons with each class, I found out that the most problematic issue of getting efficient speaking lessons is students‟ participation and their working attitude towards team work Furthermore, this situation was obviously serious when I discovered that in all four classes of third-year students I taught, about half of the groups (often with four to six members) felt disappointed with their group work effectiveness and found this kind of learning activity so tough to deal with smoothly and productively; one-third of the groups were quite happy with the common work they achieved together; and only one-sixth of them were truly satisfied with their mutual team work

efficiency and found a little difficulty in practicing speaking English together Nevertheless, all of the learners complained their peers‟ participation in group work Most of the complaints focused on team members‟ laziness, „hijacking‟ attitudes, lower English proficiency and the bad working habits due to the lack of collaborative skills Especially, the team leaders criticized the ineffective collaboration among teams in which every member competed against each other to get the easy tasks, so most of the hard ones would fall on the heads of the groups Meanwhile, many teammates felt annoyed as other members (often the higher proficiency learners) overwhelmed them Consequently, there was less time for them to practice speaking English and they had not many opportunities to raise their voices

Besides, to some extent, the students‟ attitudes on the way the institute, particularly the English department assess their achievement in acquiring a second language, have great influence on their effort in participating in group work It means that there are not a few learners consider practicing English just a compulsory on-task activity and just take part in group work more enthusiastically if they are going to be marked what they do in the group Additionally, as a matter of fact, marks for speaking skill only occupy a small percentage of the total mark at the end of each module (7.5%); thus, the motivation to be more involved in practicing English in group is still questionable with very practical English learners

For such reasons, I pick up collaborative activities and tried to apply them in my own EFL speaking lessons in hope of bringing students better study environment and opportunities to take part in speaking lessons as well However, it is still very challenging for both teachers and students To build up such environment is an essential part of teacher‟s role in class so that good team players can become more willing helpers and prompters for weaker ones in the groups Also, there are good opportunities for not very good members to participate in-group discussion with more confidence, enthusiasm and creativeness

Accordingly, the author of this study takes it into consideration and conduct an action research

titled “Enhancing third-year non-English major students’ participation in speaking lessons

through collaborative activities at Hanoi University of Business and Technology”

2 Aims of the study

This is an action research project It is aimed at, firstly, investigating the effectiveness of using collaborative activities in teaching speaking to the third- year students at HUBT Secondly,

based on the results of the study, the research aims to provide some practical suggestions for better use of collaborative activities in speaking classes

Theoretically, the study supplies the English language teachers with the understanding of collaborative activities in terms of their types, advantages and disadvantages The study also suggests some ways to successfully exploit collaborative activities during the stages of teaching speaking

Pedagogically, the findings and comments of this study are believed to be relevant to improving the teaching of speaking skill to students at HUBT The study may help teachers to make their speaking classroom more active and effective so that they can help their students develop speaking skill as well as other language skills

3 Scope of the study

In terms of collaborative activities, the researcher just applied some of them according to Kagan (1986, 1995) such as Numbered Heads Together, Jigsaw, Peer Tutoring, Cooperative Projects, Think – Pair – Share in speaking lessons

In terms of language skills and participants, the author of this study only focused on speaking skill integrated with other language skills Apart from the first speaking lesson, the five other ones (in the section Case Study of the current course book) were implemented at HUBT for two classes of third-year non-English major students in the second semester (school year 2009 – 2010)

4 Research questions/ hypothesis

The study aims to test the effectiveness of collaborative activities as a teaching technique to motivate students to participate in speaking lessons Thus, the hypothesis is that collaborative activities can be used to enhance students‟ participation in speaking lessons To test the hypothesis, there are three research questions:

1 How are the students usually involved in speaking activities?

2 What are the factors affecting their involvement in speaking activities?

3 To what extent do collaborative activities increase students‟ involvement in speaking activities?

5 Methods of the study

The research is conducted basing on both qualitative and quantitative methods

Firstly, quantitative approach was utilized to investigate fully the participants‟ performance in collaborative activities in speaking lessons The data collected will go through analysis and yield conclusion about the subjects of the study In each speaking lesson, group discussion is observed directly by group leaders and mainly by the researcher The checklists and field notes are carefully noted down to show what really happens in group discussion using collaborative activities The observation forms are based on the model initiated by Wallace (2001) and Hopkins (1993)

In addition, questionnaires which aim at investigating students‟ attitudes towards speaking lessons, their learning habits in previous lessons and their opinions of the effects of collaborative activities on their involvement in speaking lessons Closed questions and rating scale responses are used to help the researcher have detailed countable data

Besides, qualitative approach is also involved in the process of data collection The learners‟ ideas in their reports after each lesson or in the semi-unstructured interviews with their teacher (either face-to-face interviews or online chatting) contribute much to the data analysis Then the researcher can process the data and draw conclusions on that matter that to what extent CA can help students enhance their participation in class

6 Organization of the thesis

This paper is designed with three main parts namely Introduction, Development, and Conclusion

The first part, Introduction, briefly introduces the general background information of the study

such as the rationale and statement of the problem for the study, the aims and significance, scope, research questions and the method dealt with in the study The second part of the thesis is

Development, which include three chapters Chapter One provides the literature review relevant

to the study on the two major issues: collaborative learning approach and speaking skill Then some key information about the teaching practice at HUBT, the participants, data collection

instruments, methods of data analysis and procedure of the study are presented in Chapter Two The last chapter, Chapter Three, describes the analysis of a range of data, and discusses and interprets the findings of the study Finally, the Conclusion discusses conclusions drawn from the

study, comments on the limitations of this research and makes some recommendations for further studies as well as the author professional development after the research

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

The study bases on the theoretical foundation of speaking skill and collaborative learning approach This chapter reviews the relevant literature and provides some key information of the current research findings to see how this research contributes to the field

1.1 Theoretical backgrounds of speaking

1.1.1 Nature of speaking

Speaking is a skill which requires the master speak with confidence to carry out a lot of their most transaction Bygate (1987) discusses the nature of speaking comprehensively that to speak a foreign language, micro-linguistics skills are necessarily required to understand grammar, vocabulary, and the rules of word order in sentence building Moreover, he shows the two sub-skills of interaction skills speaker often use, namely routine skills and negotiation skills

1.1.2 Characteristics of a successful speaking activity

According to Ur (1996:120), a successful speaking activity requires four typical characteristics: learners talk a lot; participation is even; motivation is high; and language is

of an acceptable level These characteristics are closely related to the theme of this study in hope that learners involve much more, more actively and enthusiastically in speaking lessons First and foremost, they need a motivation to be eager and encouraged to speak, for example, they have something new to share, want to contribute to the task achievement

or just they are fond of the topic Then, when taking part in speaking practice, learners, on the one hand, should try their best to talk as much as possible in an available period of time; on the other hand, opportunities to raise their voices should be fairly equal to every learner Besides, learners can express themselves in relevant and comprehensible ways with acceptable accuracy

However, if students cannot communicate in reality, they will not be supposed to be successful Thus, Pattison (1992:7-8) lays great stress on four conditions to develop speaking ability as follows:

 Learners choose what they want to say by giving them a list of different situations

or topics (with one or some grammar points for elementary level)

 Type of drills in which learners respond mechanically without thinking about what they are saying is left out

 Teachers should pay more attention to fluency than accuracy and do not interrupt

to correct mistakes or errors

 Pair or group work is employed

1.1.3 Problems with speaking and speaking activities

Ur (1996) points out some problems existing in practicing speaking activities

 Inhibition: learners often have a shy a nervous feeling while speaking, especially

in front of class or other people;

 Nothing-to-say situations: when learners do not have anything to say due to the lack of knowledge and low language proficiency or no motive to express themselves;

 Low or uneven participation: when only a few participants dominate discussion

 Mother-tongue use: learners often share the same mother tongue and abuse it in second language learning class because they feel free and easier in using their first language

1.2 Theoretical backgrounds of collaborative learning (CL)

1.2.1 Definitions of CL

1.2.1.1 Definition

Currently collaborative learning or cooperative learning (CL) has been used widely all over the world There are also various ways to define CL, so in order to understand it clearly, it is suggested that some explicit definitions be presented

In Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (Richards, J C.,

Platt, J., & Platt, H 1997), cooperative learning or collaborative learning is defined as “an approach to teaching and learning in which classroom are organized so that students work together in small cooperative teams” The above definition just mentions the structure of the approach Besides, the phrase “collaborative” is repeated, so it seems not to explicit the

definition clearly very much The following definition may be the most recognizable one

as it is cited in a deal of other research: “Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other's learning” (Johnson, D W., Johnson, R T., & Smith, 1991) It indicates the two key features: structure and objective of such learning aproach

Moreover, Kagan (1990, cited in Panitz, 1996) has an excellent definition of CL by looking at general structures that can be applied to any situations:

"The structural approach to cooperative learning is based on the creation, analysis and systematic application of structures, or content-free ways of organizing social interaction in the classroom Structures usually involve a series of steps, with proscribed behavior at each step An important cornerstone of the approach is the distinction between "structures" and "activities"

"To illustrate, teachers can design many excellent cooperative activities, such as making a team mural or a quilt Such activities almost always have a specific content-bound objective and thus cannot be used to deliver a range of academic content Structures may be used repeatedly with almost any subject matter, at a wide range of grade levels and at various points in a lesson plan."

This means teachers designs a series of cooperative activities that have “a specific content bound” for students to finish together In conclusion, definitions vary in words, but they all direct to group environment in which each member of a team is accountable for learning what is taught and helping teammates learn, thus creating an atmosphere of achievement Besides, CL can be defined as a learner-centered instructional process in which small, intentionally selected groups of three to five students work interdependently on a well-defined learning task Students themselves have individual accountabilities for their own performance, at the same time the instructor serves as a facilitator or consultant in the group learning process (Cuseo, 1992) According to this researcher, cooperative learning can be defined operationally in terms of six procedural elements

Canh (2003) shows that collaborative or cooperative learning is closely connected with a variety of concepts and techniques with the aim at fostering the interaction between learners The theory and practice of cooperative learning operate on the basis of the

principle that learners not only learn form the teachers but also from each other He stresses that teacher‟s role is to create sufficient classroom opportunities to organize such learning In this way, learning is considered as social interaction

1.2.1.2 Collaborative learning versus competitive learning

It is better to distinguish CL from Competitive Learning In competitive learning, in order

to succeed, other learners must fail, meanwhile in CL, learners must work together to succeed and personal success only springs from group success It is the reason why CL is used more in teaching and learning English; and when it is applied correctly, it will improve information acquisition and retention, higher- level thinking skills, interpersonal and communication skills, and self- confidence (Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1998) Many people may argue that competition rather than cooperation motivate students to work harder to do the best job, but Good and Brophy (1987:437-8) do the research on collaborative as opposed to competitive learning and then suggests: “[…] although the effects of cooperative learning on achievement appear to be basically motivation, the key

is not motivation to win competitions against other teams but motivation to assist one‟s team as a whole will do well” In fact, only a small number of students in a class think they can get the highest score, if teachers consider competition is motivation of working harder and achieving success, many other students in the class will think they have no chance in the world Therefore, in stead of competing, cooperating and supporting each other sounds

to be a better way

1.2.1.3 Collaborative learning versus cooperative learning

There are several studies try to distinguish collaborative learning and cooperative learning

by pointing out the similarities and differences of the two terms (Oxford, 1997; Myers, 1991; Palmer, Peters & Streetman, 2008) However, they are written and used interchangeably in articles or books such as Richards, Platt, & Platt, 1997; Canh, 2003; Nunan, 1992, the author of this study decided to take them as one

1.2.2 Key factors of successful CL

Collaboration happens in everyday life, in most of daily situation such as doing business, making social events, doing research etc; however, in learning, particularly in language

learning, collaboration is still not really an usual activity Collaborative learning is possible but challenging, so to get it successful is not easy This process requires some key factors

In a previous review of cooperative learning, Slavin (1983) found two components necessary for cooperative learning to be effective in producing achievement gains: group rewards and individual accountability

According to Le Van Canh (2003), there are two key issues which need addressing to make collaborative learning successful in second and foreign language teaching They are

collaborative kills and cooperative atmosphere The former must be taught explicitly as it

is the language skills which is essential for learners‟ academic careers and their future lives

as well The latter is vital to get all learners involved in a “community of practice”

There are five factors necessary for successful collaborative learning (cf D W Johnson

and R.T Johnson 1987, 1989; D W Johnson et al, 1990, 1998; Brandt 1987)

The very first factor is “positive interdependence” It is a sense of working together for mutual benefits with a common goal and caring about each other‟s learning The work in collaborative team should be structured for all members to have the feeling of belonging to each other by establishing a mutual goal, sharing the same resources or joining rewards Learners care about the team and the other‟s success as well as their own Thus, all team members are on the same boat and “sinking or swimming together” is an essential consideration to each member Obviously, collaborative learning is closely related to learner autonomy since they can be more independent of the teacher when participating in collaborative learning with peers in second or foreign language acquisition However, it does not mean that learners can always depend on their teammates That is why we need to stress the aspect “positive” Because of common goals, the team members have to “share”, without one member, hardly can the goals be achieved with full capacity Meanwhile, each should be aware of “personal independence”

Moreover, “individual accountability and personal responsibility” is another key factor to promote successful collaborative learning That means every team member should have a sense of “joint responsibility” to build a well-functioning cooperative group Everyone in the team is responsible for his or her own work as well as the teammates‟, and the team leader always feels in charge of the entire group When it is necessary, supporting each

other is always a good team activity for a better team result For example, sometimes, with tough tasks, they can translate the target language into their mother tongue to make sure all members have a clear view of what they are supposed to do; or one may explain difficult ideas to the teammates in simple words so that all are able to understand thoroughly the task Therefore, equally active contribution of all group members to the group is a key to success The concept “individual accountability” always goes with “joint responsibility”, which suggests no “hitchhiking” or freeloading” for anyone In fact, this matter is of great concern with the focus of enhancing students‟ participation in speaking lessons

Another factor making collaborative learning successful is “abundant verbal, face-to-face promotive interaction” It give students opportunities to explain, argue, describe in a more detailed way and link what they have already known or learned in previous lessons to the current or new material

Furthermore, effective collaborative learning cannot be mentioned without interpersonal and small group social skills or so-called collaborative kills (Canh 2003) When learners participate in collaborative activities in pairs or group, it is very helpful for them to be armed with such social skills as appropriate communication, leadership, interpersonal skills, trust and conflict resolution skills, etc These skills are of great importance for well-functioning collaborative teams since they bring the learners required and necessary ability

to deal with all problems that may happen during the lessons As Goodwin (2003) says:

“Cooperative learning strategies can be successful with students of all ages, learning styles, and ethnic backgrounds However, students who have never been taught the prerequisite social skills cannot be expected to work together effectively”

The final factor is “team reflection” or “group processing” Periodically, the teams assess what they gain from the lessons and their peers, how well they are doing collaborative activities together and the suggestions for the next time learning team This is one kind of reports delivered to each student for comments after each lesson Thus, the entire group or each individual can recognize their own strengths or weaknesses and make them better off next time

Here is the relationship between some factors given by Rebecca (2009):

Figure 1: Cooperative learning outcomes

In short, these five elements are crucial for students to make collaborative learning in groups successful Students need to utilize and combine many skills to achieve good results We can see that it is not a simple and easy way and requires many factors from both learners and instructors The roles of learner and teacher will be discussed in the next part “Collaborative Language Learning”

1.2.3 Benefits of CL

Cooperative learning has been a subject of interest to researchers for the past several decades, and many research findings indicate that cooperative learning is an effective tool for improving academic achievement (Johnson, Marayama, Johnson, Nelson, & Skon, 1981; Slavin, 1984; Watson, 1991)

Well-developed instructional strategies such as CLL offer many potential benefits to learners Ted Panitz (1996) lists over 50 related benefits In the Palmer, G., Peters, R., & Streetman, R (2008), the authors summarize these benefits into four main categories: social, psychological, academic, and assessment Additionally, schools utilizing this strategy report an increase in student attendance because students feel that they are a valuable and necessary part of their groups (McBrien & Brandt, 1997)

Dr.Theodore Panitz (1999) questions whether CL can be a positive motivator for a diverse student population or not and attempts find the answer to that question First, according to this author, CL can improve learners‟ attitudes by creating a favorable disposition towards the learning experience through personal relevance and choice A primary benefit of CL is that it enhances students' self-esteem that in turn motivates students to participate in the learning process (Johnson & Johnson, 1989) Cooperative efforts among students result in

a higher degree of accomplishment by all participants (Slavin, 1987) Students help each other and in doing so build a supportive community which raises the performance level of each member (Kagan, 1986) Besides, another obvious effect on learners is developing students' social interaction skills By asking group members to identify what behaviors help them work together and by asking individuals to reflect on their contribution to the group's success or failure, students are made aware of the need for healthy, positive, helping interactions (Panitz, 1996; Cohen, 1991) Furthermore, CL can help learners‟ engender competence It creates an understanding that learners are effective in learning something they value For instance, CL develops higher level thinking skills (Webb, 1982) Last but not least, students can enhance meaning much through challenging, thoughtful learning experiences including learner's values and perspectives and contribute

to an equitable society

CLL can help to increase students‟ learning as mentioned in Longman Dictionary of

Language Teaching and Applied Linguistic (1997):

 It is less threatening for many students

 It increases the amount of student participation in the classroom

 It decreases the need for competitiveness

 It reduces the teacher‟s domination in the classroom

In brief, Roger Johnson in an interview with Panitz, B (1997) drew three basic “baskets”

of benefits in cooperative learning from more than 700 research studies back to the late 1800s First, effort-to-achieve basket shows that cooperative learning can increases learners‟ achievement The second basket is interpersonal relationships in which learners care about each other more and they are interested in each other's success and wellbeing and most of them feel more accepted The last area is psychological health Students have

higher self-esteem, greater social confidence; their social skills are higher, and their abilities to relate to other people and work in teams are considerably higher

1.2.4 Types of grouping

In CL, students working together in small groups to achieve common learning goals and cooperative learning teams provide an effective environment of new understandings In encouraging small group, learners feel freer to talk in an exploratory and tentative way to share their ideas to each other Moreover, grouping is the first step to create a well-functioning collaborative group later

According to I-Jung (2004:3-4), grouping methods fall into three categories: Random grouping, student-selected grouping, and teacher-formed arrangement First, randomly assigned groups can be established by seat arranging, counting off, giving out numbered pieces of paper, or just according to the numbers in the list of students (To, 2006:4) Thanks to its convenience and readiness, random groups are often used in class Since students are chosen unintentionally, their language proficiency level, abilities, interests, needs, learning styles, gender, personalities, etc are consequently in random difference This type of grouping can somehow fill the gap between low and high achieving students Student-selected grouping is the second type, in which students have their own choice in selecting their partners and teammates Often, those with similar proficiency level, abilities, interests, etc group together Despite some advantages of being comfortable and safe among friends, there is a risk if students can be too relaxed together Lastly, teacher-formed grouping is also done and teachers‟ thorough consideration in advance is highly required to create a heterogeneous Such deliberately heterogeneous teams including two

to four members appear the favorable option in cooperative learning However, teams larger than four may lead to passive participation (Harmin, 1994; I-Jung, 2004) Advantageously, heterogeneous learning teams can be facilitate to work independently when learners still help each other

Regarding group size, three categories are presented: pair, group and the whole Cooperative teams may have two, three, or four students; it depends on available time, task type and learner‟s ability Pairing is ideal because it maximizes students‟ participation It is obvious that staring to work in pairs is quite easy and involvement can be retained

Occasionally pairs tend to make less noise than larger teams However, there are some activities in which pairs are sometimes unable to complete by themselves There are times when more input is needed than a pair is likely to be able to generate When a task calls for much creativity or many different perspectives, teams of three or four should be used Sometimes, the whole class can be a group so that they can brainstorm, then share their ideas at the beginning of the activities (Valentino, 2000) or present their results and assess other partners at the end of the lessons

1.2.5 Learner’s roles

A difficulty is that students always think teacher is the only person who is in role of providing them knowledge and skills, and they are receivers not doers That is the traditional way of learning and teaching Obviously, it takes a long time for students to get familiar with the new learning and teaching method As mentioned above, there are five key elements making successful CL Thus, to achieve in cooperative learning, apart from getting taught by the teachers, students should train themselves with these features: positive interdependence, individual accountability, promotive interaction, interpersonal skills and ways of processing the team

1.2.6 Teacher’s roles

When mentioning any learning and teaching methods or approaches, never can we forget the position of the teacher with different roles Even though CLL is a student-centred approach, or in other words, its focus is on students and their study proficiency progress during their language acquisition, teachers are still of great importance In CLL, it is very important that teachers organize and structure learning activities that encourage and provide opportunities for collaboration (Johnson, D., & Johnson, R., 1993)

Some teachers may mistakenly think that putting students into small groups and letting them do their group work or sometimes walking around the class to see what the learners are doing is cooperative learning During cooperative activities, the professor is not aimlessly meandering around the room He or she is conducting purposeful performance assessment Thus, a professor should monitor each group with some care and look not only for what answer group members are going to settle on but what other answers they are considering along the way - not only on the outcome of the conversation but on the process

used to get there In cooperative learning, the instructor is viewed as a facilitator and consultant in the group learning process Therefore, the instructor‟s duties are not just sitting seeing all groups discuss, but instead, circulating among the groups in order to offer encouragement, reinforce positive demonstrations of cooperative learning, clarify task expectations, catalyze dialogue or issue timely questions designed to promote elaboration and higher-order thinking Additionally, teachers should prepare and design the materials creatively and appropriately before teaching at class so that collaborative learning can work

1.2.7 Role of instructional materials

According to David Johnson (cited in Panitz, B., 1997) a lot of research shows that the more complex and technical the teaching material get, the harder it is to understand and the greater the superiority of cooperative learning is over competitive and individualistic techniques There are complaints that some tasks are too demanding for some average or weak students, so they find speaking in a group hopeless Meanwhile, some students at better proficiency are not happy with speaking tasks at lower level which they may do repeatedly before, or in other words, they need more challenging tasks To balance between the two extremes is not easy Actually, it is rather tough for ESL teacher to choose appropriate kind of group material to satisfy all students in class who are available

at mixed English levels

As a result, instructional materials for CLL (collaborative activities) should be designed with modification basing on learners‟ interest, proficiency, and needs The activities can be borrowed, created or combined from existing materials

1.2.8 Collaborative activities (CA)

Collaborative activities are the activities in which teacher use structures and techniques to guide learners to work together in small group effectively to reach the shared goal There are quite a lot of collaborative activities developed such as Numbered Heads Together, Team Interview, Jigsaw, Think-Pair-Share, Rallytable, Roundtable, Roundrobin Brainstorming, Team Pair Solo, Three-Step Interview, Teammate Consult, Mix-N-Match, Showdown, Partners, etc These are some examples often used in CLL in the study, basing

on Kagan‟s book (1994) and Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied

Linguistic (1997)

 In Jigsaw, each member of a group has a piece of information needed to complete a group task Jigsaw is a good way to ensure individual responsibility while using collaborative learning

 Number Heads Together is the strategy in which students work together and check that all group members can explain what their group has done To do it, team members, usually composed of four individuals, count off 1, 2, 3, and 4 The instructor poses a question, but requiring some higher order thinking skills Students discuss the question, making certain that every group member knows the agreed upon answer The instructor chooses a specific number from a team randomly as group spokespersons

 Peer Tutoring is done by getting students help each other learn, taking turns tutoring or drilling each other

 Cooperative Projects is when students work together to produce a product, such as a written paper or group presentation

 Cooperative Interaction is when students work together as a team to complete a learning unit, such as discussion, role-play

 Three-Step Interview is an activity in which each student chooses a partner and shares some ideas with him or her by asking questions, then they change the role and finally they share their ideas with the whole group Students can develop questioning skills thanks to this activity

 Think – Pair – Share is a structure having three steps Students are given chances from working individually in step 1 to working with a partner in step 2 and lastly sharing with others what was discussed This strategy encourages students, helps without giving answers, asks for help, explains, and suggests ways of learning, reflecting

1.2.9 Previous studies on the topic

In Vietnam National University, Hanoi, four M.A studies related to applying cooperative learning in ESL classes have been conducted Each of them focuses on the different skills, subjects at various proficiency, and aspects of learning effectiveness All the studies were conducted in four local universities or colleges such as Tay Bac University, Thai Nguyen

University of Education, Vinh University, Gia Lai Teachers‟ Training College, etc in different provinces nationwide in Vietnam In terms of skills, meanwhile two of the researchers applied cooperative learning in speaking lessons (Le, 2006; Hoang, 2005), only one of them carried out the research on writing skills (Tran, 2009) and Dang (2006) did a research on cooperative learning in English class in general without pointing English skill involved Regarding the subjects of the studies, three of the studies used cooperative learning for classes of English major students and only one research on non- English major ones in mixed level class (Dang, 2006) Despite different kinds of skills or classes mentioned, the results yielded in the studies reveal that the application of cooperative learning can bring about desirable benefits to both learners and teachers and it seems to be

a powerful teaching tool which can boost students‟ interest, participation, proficiency and responsibilities for their own learning Basing on the results of these previous studies, the author of this research would like to apply this learning approach to another type of subjects (non-English third year students) in another educational institute (HUBT) in Hanoi in speaking lessons to help the students involve much more in practicing speaking English in class

In short, some basic theoretical backgrounds of speaking and collaborative learning have been provided in this chapter Basing on the benefits and the key factors affecting successful CL, the author of this study has applied CL, particularly CA in speaking lessons The details of the research method, the application and its findings are presented and discussed in the next chapters

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents some key information about the teaching practice at HUBT, the participants, data collection instruments, methods of data analysis and procedure of the study

2.1 Background of the Study

2.1.1 The teaching and learning conditions

Hanoi University of Management and Business was established in June, 1996, by Professor Tran Phuong (Chairman of economic science Vietnam, former Vice Chairman of the Ministerial Council) as Director By expanding the target training to areas of technology, the university was renamed Hanoi University of Business and Technology (HUBT) in May, 2006

As its name suggests, the subjects like accounting, finance, corporate administration, foreign trade, etc are the main ones in the training program Besides, English is regarded as a very important subject because it serves a means of international communication and it is helpful to the students after graduations, who are supposed to be successful businessmen in the future Due to the great importance of English, good conditions for English teaching and learning have been usually provided Overhead projectors, videos, cassette and CD players are available so that teachers and students can perform their teaching and learning There are also English books, newspapers, magazines and computers with Internet access in the library of the university However, the students rarely have opportunities to communicate with foreigners, particularly English native speakers

2.1.2 The syllabus

The final goal of English teaching program at HUBT is that the students are able to communicate with foreigners both in spoken and written English at intermediate level and pass the TOEIC tests at the end of the seven-semester English course To those students, English is not their major but a compulsory subject in the courses The training program is diversified into two kinds according to the students‟ English proficiency The students had been classified into English classes before they started the official course at HUBT by an English entrance exam The first kind is all of the students who have relatively equal English

proficiency level (beginner or elementary), so they are taught with the textbook New English

File (elementary) and then Market Leader The other type is for those who have elementary

English proficiency level or over They are taught with a series of Market Leader (elementary,

pre-intermediate and intermediate) – business English course books In the last semester, the students are trained with TOEIC and pass a TOEIC test

The students have two English lessons each week Each lesson lasts for approximately four hours (equal to five periods of 45 minutes) The students are accessed with the two tests, mid-term test and final one In the mid-term test, they have to perform a test with four language skills – listening, reading, writing and speaking The result of the mid-term test accounts for 30% of the total score The final test, computer-based multiple-choice, is in charge of the rest 70% The English course lasts for seven semesters (about three and a half years)

2.1.3 The description of the material used

The course book is Market Leader Intermediate by David Cotton, David Falvey and Simon Kent, Pearson 2004 According to Cotton, D., Falvey, D., & Kent, S (2004), Market Leader Intermediate is for “tomorrow's business leaders” It introduces intermediate English level students to the professional communication and language skills necessary for a wide range of business situations such as participating in meetings, negotiation and, socialization, etc Thus, speaking skill is at the heart of this course with the part of discussion, individually or in groups,

is present at mostly every part of each unit such as: Starting up, Vocabulary, Language Review, Reading, Listening, especially in Skills and Case Study where students work in pairs

or groups to play a role in many different business situations The book uses authoritative authentic sources to explore topical business issues It helps to build the professional standard

of language needed to communicate in the modern business world

2.1.4 The learners

The students of HUBT are often aged from 18 to 22 There are about 25 – 30 students in each English class However, the number of male and female students in the class is of great difference due to their majors, the females outnumber the males Two fields of Banking and Finance, and Accounting gain the domination by female students meanwhile other fields like Corporate Administration, Information technology, Mechanic engineering, and Architecture are dominated by male students

Generally speaking, their English proficiency level is low and of mixed ability Many of them come from remote religions of rural areas where they did not have many chances to learn

English at high schools or have only studied English for three years; not many of them have seven years learning English Hardly can they communicate in English Thus, the students often feel shy or afraid of making mistakes because of their poor English and the lack of social knowledge as well Consequently, in English classrooms, the students usually keep silent and unwilling to take part in class activities That is the reason why for majority of students, using English to communicate is a tough challenge

The students at HUBT are quite active and dynamic; many of them have strong personalities related to their majors‟ features – economics They study English with specific and practical motivation For instance, the majority of them study English just to pass all English exams and graduate from university However, more importantly, because of global integration among economies, English plays an essential role in their future job as business; hence, with good English knowledge, students are more likely to the have better opportunities as well as do a good job after their graduation

2.1.5 The teachers

HUBT has 87 teachers of English who are dedicated and enthusiastic to devote their time and energy to teaching there More than half of them have acquired an M.A degree or they are following a postgraduate course or an M.A one However, only three of them have attended a training course in English speaking countries

There may be now a problem of English teachers in HUBT Due to sharply increasing number

of both full-time and in-service training students, 116 teachers themselves cannot fulfill the demands of English teaching Thus, they have to invite a lot of visiting lecturers of English (approximately 150) introduced by official staff of HUBT Moreover, the turnover of those teachers is quite high This leads to, sometimes, inconsistent and unstable English teaching of HUBT

2.1.6 The participants

The research will be carried out at Hanoi University of Business and Technology (HUBT) The participants in this study is 58 non- English major third-year students They are from two classes whose major is Accounting of K12 The ages of the participants range from 19 to 22

To those students, English is not their majors but a compulsory subject in the courses During four-year course at HUBT, students have to attend about 216 English lessons in class The

students have two English lessons each week Each lesson lasts for four hours It needs to note that speaking is taught integrated with other language skills All of them have very different English proficiency level or in other words, they form the non-English Major multilevel classes (about 10.3% Intermediate, 41.4% pre-intermediate, 24.2% elementary and 24.1% beginner) with similar educational background Meanwhile, according to the aims of the English course, third-year students of HUBT are assumed to be of intermediate English level

at the end of the 11th module with Market Leader, Intermediate

2.1.7 Teaching practice at HUBT

The teaching practice of English at HUBT is based on the students‟ specific needs, their ability and English proficiency, the aims and goals of the course and then the English book sets As a

teacher mainly teach the book set Market Leader, and as the research scope with the third-year students who study the course book Market Leader (Intermediate), I just discuss the English

teaching practice in the boundary of the related things During my teaching years, there are a deal of opportunities for me to know the English teaching practice of other teachers who also

mainly teach third-year students with Market Leader (Intermediate) through direct observation,

discussion, informal talks or indirectly through informal talks with students I also gain some teaching experience from them

According to the course book, communicative approach is required since it views language as communication to create a realistic context for language acquisition in the classroom in order

to develop what Hymes (1972) calls “communicative competence” With speaking skill, the tasks are often in form of group discussion, group negotiation or role-play, which needs student to work in pairs or groups together and use English as a tool of communication to solve a so-called-authentic problem or situation Therefore, collaboration in language learning is essentially required

However, in reality, the teachers mostly group student and allow them to work out but fail to instruct them to work collaboratively and effectively together Sometimes, that teachers guide too much in terms of generating ideas, translate the background of the situation in the tasks into Vietnamese or dominate students in discussion and force them to obey his or her ideas drops student‟s talking time as well as their independence and confidence That is the reason why even though both teachers and learners put a great deal of efforts in learning English at

HUBT, hardly did it result in effective collaboration in communicative language learning and teaching

2.2 Data collection instruments

The results of the study were collected and developed via classroom observation, students‟ reports, questionnaires and interviews with participants The period of data collection is implemented during all the speaking lessons in two classes in the second semester of the third school year The understanding and knowledge of method to carry this action research is based

on what the researcher gained from Wallace (2001)

2.2.1 Classroom observation

The focus of the observation is on the students to identify the way they work, interact and respond to peers and their on-task as well as off-task behavior, etc when working in groups during speaking lessons

Who does the observing? First, the researcher herself handled observing of the class during the entire speaking class periods Since the focus of the observation is her own students, it was not very difficult for her to do the observation In addition, students themselves were the observers, especially the leader of each team when they work in groups Students are third-year ones and the researcher found them mature enough for the observation After each lesson, all students in the class were given checklists to evaluate their performance in the lessons A few students, for example, group leaders were also provided observation sheets to follow each member‟ participation during the collaborative activities in speaking lessons Students‟ participation was marked thoroughly so that all the mark would be transferred into numbers and percentage later in data analysis It worked and brought the teacher a great deal of help

In the speaking classes, recording is used as observation technique, in which real-time observation by marking checklists or simply taking notes, audio taping and video taping are usually taken advantages of There were two observation forms used when the researcher did real-time observation They are regular one-minute sweeps to check students‟ distribution of participation and interaction categories to record their nature of participation in the group work of collaborative learning The latter way was very useful to help teacher decide to allocate roles to different members of the group to see how far and how this can actually change the nature of the group interaction

2.2.3 Questionnaires

Survey questionnaires consist of pre-task questionnaire and post-task one with only close questions The pre-task questionnaire with two smaller parts is aimed to identify students‟ attitudes towards speaking lessons, their learning habits in the previous speaking lessons The post-task questionnaire has one more part in order to find out the effects of Collaborative Activities (CA) on participants‟ involvement in speaking lessons

2.2.4 Interviews

The final instrument is semi-structured interviews with students These were done before and after speaking classes or during short breaks In the interview, the researcher make as many simple notes as possible, sometimes, if it is necessary and the interviewees felt comfortable and agreed to record, audio and video records via camera camcorder and mobile phones were used Often, the interviews were conducted in Vietnamese (teacher and students‟ mother

tongue) so that the students can feel free to response fully the interviewer‟s questions

2.3 Data collection procedures

The study was done through the following steps:

After teaching 58 third-year students at HUBT a speaking lesson, the researcher asked them to complete the pre- task survey questionnaire Some follow-up semi-unstructured interviews were conducted to find out the problems existing in the class in speaking lessons and the students‟ requirements or needs in studying English Some translation was done to make sure all respondents understood the ideas, so they could reply at easy

The researcher applied and adapted some collaborative activities in speaking lessons (except for the first lessons) given in the textbook in four months‟ time of the second semester During

speaking lessons, with each collaborative activity, the researcher tried to observe thoroughly and use checklists to record or take notes carefully If there were any problems, the research attempted to find out the causes and adjust to apply collaborative activities in speaking classes

as effectively as possible

Besides, semi-unstructured interviews with students were taken place before and after speaking class or during short breaks to get the learners‟ critical comments Sometimes follow-up interviews were implemented on the internet through yahoo or gmail chatting at the end of the day the speaking lessons took place or at the end of module because of limited time

in class The researcher based the key questions in the questionnaire to ask the participants and tick the checklists at the same time The questions were focused on the reasons or explanation for their opinions

The data from field notes were analyzed to synthesize what really happened in collaborative activities in speaking classroom and their participation through students‟ performance The participants‟ names were coded from S1 to S58 to make them anonymous The results along with findings from the records and class observation were interpreted and discussed to discover to what extent collaborative activities could enhance the students‟ participation Then, students did the post- task survey questionnaires which were delivered to these 58 students to find out the effectiveness of collaborative activities on the learners‟ participation in speaking classes While the questionnaires were answered, some translation was done to make sure all respondents could grasp the ideas Because of three students‟ absence from the last lesson (revision), the interview forms were sent by email to them so that the researcher could collect the full data for the study

To sum up, this chapter has covered the issues relating to the context of the study, the participants, data collection instruments and procedures as well as the method to get the data The next chapter will present the data, data analysis, findings and discussion in order that the three research questions posed at the beginning of the study can be well-answered

CHAPTER 3: DATA, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter first analyses the data gathered for the study through four data collection instruments (observations, interviews, students‟ reports and questionnaires) and then discusses its findings against the three research questions

3.1 Students’ attitudes towards speaking practice in class, and pair and group work activities

3.1.1 Students’ attitudes towards speaking practice in class

Very little Not at all

Figure 2: Students’ attitudes towards speaking practice in class before the application of CA (1)

It is clear from the pie chart that the greatest proportion of students who was not very interested in practicing speaking English in class was 50% Those with no or little interest made up a significant percentage of the students, at 22.3% Those who had passionate interest

in this skill amounted to 27.6%, which was substantially fewer than the total number of the don‟t-like ones (72.4%) This was actually a quite negative result that the teacher had to confront In the first speaking lesson in the two classes, the teacher used pairs and groups to get students involved in English speaking lessons Unfortunately, the students seemed not to cooperate with each other very well, even with the teacher They directly showed their unenthusiastic attitudes towards speaking English in class

The follow-up interviews with the students in all five categories above revealed some reasons for their „like-or-don‟t-like‟ feelings Most of students who were not (very) fond of speaking

in class claimed that even though their mind was full of ideas, they did not know how to express them That was stemmed from their limited proficiency level, particularly the lack of

- (1):

The total percentage may not be 100% because of rounding

vocabulary Their vocabulary was not enough for them to express their thoughts and ideas as well in English However, some did not dare to raise their voice in spite of their quite good grammar and vocabulary When being asked in the interview, students also mentioned the problem raised from the topic of discussion or the situation and the role they played in such situations They sometimes had no or few ideas to share with others owing to the lack of background or (and) specialized knowledge That was why they liked to sit in silence rather than keep their mouth open to say something in English

However, there was a noticeable change in the students‟ attitudes towards the practice of speaking English in class over a four-month period with collaborative activities

Very little Not at all

56.9%

36.2%

Figure 3: Students’ attitudes towards speaking practice before and after the application of CA (1)

As can be seen from the two pie charts, the number of students who were very much keen on English speaking practice doubled from 27.6% to 56.9% and reached the first place in the categories meanwhile this first rank had belonged to the „don‟t-like‟ ones There was also a significant fall by 12% in the number of students with little or no interest in speaking It was really a positive result when at the end of the course no one complained about their interest losing in practicing speaking in class Obviously, the students got more excitement and willingness to take part in speaking activities Nevertheless, there were still 6.9% of the students did not like practicing in English speaking lessons at all or very little Their explanation for this matter in the follow-up interview mainly focused on their ability in using English This part often fell on the students of beginner English proficiency

3.1.2 Students’ attitudes towards pair and group work in speaking activities

Students‟ attitudes towards pair and group work in speaking activities after the application of collaborative activities dramatically increased in comparison with those four months before

Very little Not at all

79.3%

13.8%

Figure 4: Students’ attitudes towards pair/ group work before and after the application of CA (1)

After participating in collaborative activities in speaking lessons, the number of participants who enjoyed pair or group work very much occupied the greatest proportion, 79.3% At the beginning of the course, more than half of the students did not love pair or group work very much, but at the end of this course, this number plummeted from 55.2% to 13.8% The number of students who had little love for speaking in pairs or in groups also declined relatively from 20.7% to 6.9% As illustrated by the graph, while the first pie chart includes all

five categories, the second one drops the two last items, namely very little and not at all It

means 8.6% of the students were no longer fed up with pair and group work It was a fantastic improvement

3.2 Factors affecting their involvement in speaking activities

At the beginning of the course, two-third of the participants did not feel bored if they had to

speak English with another classmate (question II.3) While one-third of the students chose

“agree” in the response to the question II.2 of the survey, I feel more confident if I speak

English in a small group After four months of applying CA, none of them got the feeling of

boredom for group work and approximately 90% of them gained their confidence, at least in groups No one complained about their lack of confidence or any kinds of fear in group The other 10% were supposed to stay the same when responding that they did not know whether they got more confidence or not With question II.1, the number of participants thought working with others in groups in speaking lesson helped them to pay greater attention to the lesson increased by 31% Besides, 94.8% of them reported that they could speak English more

in a small group (question II.4) in comparison with 34.5% before the interference There were some problems related to the participants‟ involvement in speaking activities in pairs or groups

3.2.1 Topic of the discussion

As mentioned in 3.1.1, topic of the discussion is one of the reasons which have impact on students‟ interests in speaking English in class If there is a topic they may like, students will talk more with a great deal of enthusiasm and vice versa

 “I like traveling Whenever there is a discussion on this topic, I feel very excited I can

talk more because I have traveled much both in Vietnam and some foreign countries for holidays and I have some experience in this field.” (S44)

 “I like watching advertisement on TV It is very interesting when I can design a TV

commercial with other friends in the group at the same time I practice speaking English It’s really funny and useful too because we can show our creativeness.” (S3,

8)

 “I don’t like the topic of fashion very much, so I have little excitement I have to talk

and discuss this theme.” (S19, 20, 25)

Some students found that it was very hard for them to take part in discussion in groups with little background knowledge of the subject

 “I was unfamiliar with the topic about airport at all This topic is too difficult for me I

have never traveled by plane or have never been to any airports, even in Vietnam such

as Noi Bai or Tan Son Nhat airports, so in spite of my best effort, I cannot have enough background knowledge and English words to take my full part in the discussion of the whole group.” (S24 – Unit 10)

 “How can I talk about a new style in fashion and present an innovative fashion product

when I do not know much about the new materials, styles, etc in clothing industry.”

(S37- Unit 13)

According to the responses to the survey question II.10 (I only like working in groups when I

have something to share), 47 out of 58 students (strongly) agreed in the pre-task survey

questionnaire and 35 of them are convinced of it in the post-task survey questionnaire It

means that most of the students found background knowledge so important in discussion The other disagreed not because it is of no importance but because if they had little to share, they could listen to others

In fact, even though students were introduced and brought some basic information with some vocabulary about the topic of the discussion, it is still tough work for them, especially when they are not so keen on the topic Sometimes, this problem is related to the lack of vocabulary and the ways of expressing ideas

3.2.2 Leadership

Leadership is one of the keys to a successful group discussion Basing on the class observation and semi-unstructured interviews with students, leadership is one of the most-mentioned issues It is obvious that no groups can achieve success without a good leader and his responsibilities for the entire group A group needs a chairman who is respected by the other

in the team and able to connect all team members to build the solidarity of his or her team so that it would be easier to motivate the team to willingly cooperate and get involved in speaking activities

 “I highly appreciate my team leader She always encourages us to try our best and

makes us feel more confident and interested in what we discuss.” (S18)

 “The leader of my group is so lazy and irresponsible for not only his task but also the

group common task in the presentation project Even he is good at English, we do not like him very much and sometimes, it is very annoying if I have to cooperate with him.”

(S52)

The head of each group should give appropriate roles to each member in the group In fact, this duty was rather tough for each president of a team as he or she had to assign the roles to each member to play basing on their English proficiency, characteristics and other skills For instance, note taking is appropriate to the role of a secretary whose English ability, particularly listening skill should be better than some other team members‟ Although his duty was done with the support from the teacher, there were sometimes complaints