Students' attitudes towards cooperative learning at Nghe An teachers' College and Implications for teacher Education programs Thái độ của sinh viên trường CĐSP

2.5.1 Students‟ preferred habits and learning styles 15 2.5.2 Students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL 16 2.5.4 Students‟ engagement and preferences in CL 24 2.5.5 Students‟ sugges

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

2.5.1 Students‟ preferred habits and learning styles 15 2.5.2 Students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL 16

2.5.4 Students‟ engagement and preferences in CL 24 2.5.5 Students‟ suggestions to improve CL 28

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 group

Table 2.9: Teachers‟ ways of rewarding groups of students

Table 2.10: Students‟ evaluation of teachers‟ way of rewarding groups of students Table 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 learn from 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, thereby making use of each other‟s resources

Over the last few decades, Cooperative Learning (CL) has become a popular practice in both mainstream education and in second/ foreign language education There has been empirical evidence to justify the effectiveness of CL in promoting mastery of knowledge and skills among students of various abilities and ages Regarding second/foreign language learning, students, through cooperation, become more actively involved in their lessons and thus, they have more chance to use the target language than they are in the whole class arrangement

Despite its documented benefits, CL has not been adequately researched in Vietnamese educational settings So, one of the unresolved questions is to what extent the contextual variables 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 context where students come from remote rural areas and are taught largely with traditional methods as it does in other, especially in Western, contexts This question motivates me to undertake this study, which aims to explore the possibility of applying the principles and techniques of CL in a Junior Teachers‟ Training College in one central province of Vietnam The focus of my study is to find out the college students‟s attitudes toward CL in the 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 through students‟ 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 in the college, of the possibilities for using cooperative techniques in their teaching I believe that any innovative teaching strategy or technique the teacher is trying to use is likely to fail if the students do not have a positive attitude toward it Therefore, it is critical to understand the students‟ attitudes before implementing innovation Another dimension of the study is to gain insights into how teachers in the College have used CL through students‟ 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 examine the impact of CL on students‟ learning outcomes Neither is it intended to explore teachers‟ attitudes toward, and perceptions of, CL The study was carried out within one Junior 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 present study:

● A questionnaire to investigate students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL as well as their 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 Data were 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 research methods 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 the study is created by reviewing the relevant literature with a focus on Attitudes, and CL techniques

Chapter II, The Study, presents the methods and procedures used in the study, which

consists of a survey questionnaire and follow-up interviews This chapter also includes Result and Discussion which presents the method of data analysis as well as the results derived from the data analysis Results are presented under themes as coded from the data analysis

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

Part C: Conclusion, summarises the main remarks of the study and suggest some ideas for further 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‟ is provided This will be followed by a discussion of the nature of CL as well as its advantages 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 respond positively 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 is understood as „learning attitude‟ The construct of „Attitude‟ has long been considered as one 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 impacting motivation in language learning Gardner (1985) states that positive attitudes and motivation are related to success in second language learning

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

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

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

Chamber (1999) asserts that learning occurs more easily, when the learner has a positive attitude towards the language and learning Positive attitudes on the part of the language learners can enhance an integrative motivation, and attitudes upon success in language learning is widely acknowledged Gardner and Lambert (1972) in their extensive studies 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 their subject The overall findings show that positive attitudes have a strong impact on the success 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 of second language pedagogy There are many educational factors affecting students‟ positive attitude, such as teacher-student relationships, a positive psychological classroom atmosphere, or the use of authentic teaching materials and activities Probably, one of the best method to help students develop their positive attitudes towards learning English as a foreign language should be the CL techniques since these techniques help to develop positive student-teacher attitudes, create a cooperative community of practice, and bring about 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 covers the 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 of reponses to it Therefore, before plan is made to apply CL models, it is critical that students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards the intended pedagogical models be investigated Moreover, although the benefits of CL have been well documented in the literature, the students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes to CL models remain scarely researched

1.2 CL

1.2.1 Definitions of CL

There are different perspectives and approaches in the development of CL However, there are also many similarities among different CL approaches that is categorized as CL Olsen and Kagan (1992) define CL as “a group learning activities organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learners

in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his or her own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others”

CL is the instructional use of small groups working on specific tasks so that students enhance not only the individual learning but also the whole group learning (Johnson et al, 2003) Also, Brown and Thomson (2000) define CL as “… a teaching approach that organizes classroom activity by arranging students in small groups so that they can support each other‟s learning” (p 105) CL shares the idea that students working together to learn are responsible for their teammates‟ learning as well as their own (Slavin, 1990) This view echos the way Davidson (1990) describes, CL as the task for group completion, discussion, and (if possible) resolution It is required to create an atmosphere of cooperation and mutual helpfulness within each group, so that students work together to maximize their own and each other‟s learning Such a view is included in Jacobs et al.‟s (1997) definition that CL involves concepts and techniques used with a view to maximizing students‟ cooperation for mutual benefits Thus, a student seeks an outcome that is beneficial to both himself and all other teammates

According to Calderon (1987), CL can be defined as “a strategies for the classroom that 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 to encourage collaborative social skills”(cited in Christison (1994: 140) In CL situation, students are motivated to use the language more extensively and they can develop their language proficiency

Currently, CL is perceived as a generic term for a number of instructional techniques and 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 work together in small heterogeneous group”, it is governed by “the principles of positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face promoting interaction and group processing” In other words, CL is not simply assigning students to groups in which one student 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 of performance work together in small groups toward a common goal which encompasses instructional techniques such as Student Team-Achievement Divisions (STAD), Team-Game-Tournaments (TGT), Team-Assisted Individualization (TAI), Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), Jigsaw, Learning Together, and Group Investigation (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 students work in small groups, taking the responsibility for their own learning, thereby helping one another 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 the classroom In addition, CL increases interaction opportunities among learners and promoted autonomous learning (Thomson, 1998) According to Long & Poster (1985), CL, like other group work, creates a more positive affective climate into classroom, while it also individualizes instruction and raises students‟ motivation Therefore, CL is gaining the major 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) assert that CL includes a variety of strategies that utilize students‟ collaboration to maximize interaction 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 demonstrate individual accountability and personal achievement in order to control for any potential free ride effect on the efforts of others Furthermore, learners in CL may also get equal opportunities 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 tasks that 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 than traditional learning methodologies Slavin (1984, cited in Andrew, 10.1.94)) found that 63% 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 and participation among students because one or two better students may dominate the others This kind of group work does not create interdependence and accountability among learners CL methods attempt to structure group activities so as to increase students‟ responsibility and encourage group member to actively participate, improve motivation and contribute to the atmosphere of cooperation in the class As a result, CL helps to gain academic achievements in a quickly way

Affectionately, CL enhances students‟ self-esteem which in turn motivate students to participate in the learning process (Johnson & Johnson, 1989) Also, Slavin (1990) says that 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‟s and 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 each student The reason for this is that any mistakes or incorrect answers become to subject to scrutiny 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 have time to think, opportunities to rehearse and respond the answers, thus it enhances the greater likelihood of success This helps reduce anxiety in the language learning On the other 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 is reduced Therefore, Oxford (1990) included that CL as a classroom procedure can lower anxiety in the language classroom In brief, CL helps to create a relaxing and comfortable atmosphere in the classroom, and as a result, the self-esteeme is strengthened This is because CL creates a strong social support system in which learners feel respected and connected to one another (Cohen & Willis, 1985)

What‟s more, CL helps to develop students‟ thinking skills and social skills CL develops higher level thinking skills (Webb, 1982) In CL, students tend to participate more frequently, instead of passively listening to the teacher It gives students chances to work 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 problem solving 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, group members need to formulate their ideas, discuss them, make decisions, defend positions and resolve differences of opinion, and solve problems Hence, CL enables students to develop their 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 gives students a chance to develop the interpersonal skills needed to succeed at school, work, and within the community Students work with classmates who have different learning skills, cultural background, and personalities Therefore, they are able to understand their differences and to learn how to deal with conflicts and interact with others Training students 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 their differences and learn how to capitalize on them rather than use them as a basis for antagonism through warm-up and group building activities According to Kessler and MaCleod (1985) “CL promotes positive societal responses … reduces violence in any setting … 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 many benefits: academic achievement, self-esteem, development of higher order thinking, development of social skills The positive effects from the cooperation make CL one of the most 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-student interaction 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, Individual Learning and Comparative Learning In each kind of learning, their nature and appropriate use 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 teach students those skills Finally, they drew out some teacher‟s concerns about classroom management in CL

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

Jalilifar (2010) warns that simply putting students in groups does not guarantee positive results “Central components of effective CL must be in place so that students can come to feel 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 and class members He also initiates some forms of CL such as STAD (Student Teams Achievement Division), TGT (Teams-Games-Touraments), Group investigation, and Jigsaw

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 into three homogenous groups The results showed that CL techniques helped to improve students‟ reading achievement The results suports what Ghaith (2003), Myer (2006), Tracey and Barbara (2003), and Wilson (1991) found about the positive effect of CL on students‟ L2 reading comprehension Jalilifar (2010) concludes that

Group work, pair work, and peer work in CL are common terms that are heard frequently in ESL/EFL circles Actually they have occupied a certain amount of space in communicative language teaching coursebooks In teacher training programmes, novice teachers are advised to inject cooperation into their teaching

as skillfully and artistically as possible, but every technique becomes effective if the realities of the classroom and the cultural background of the target country are considered (p 107)

1.2.4 CL and Vietnamese Learning Culture

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

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

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

Luu Trong Tuan (2010) conducted an experimental study with 77 first-year EFL students 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 more positive toward this approach to learning By the end of the course, a majority of the students reported that CL helped them understand the course materials better The achievement test result also showed that the experiemental students scored higher than those 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 an attempt to make a modest contribution to this research gap

Summary

In this chapter, I have reviewed the literature on CL which includes the major features and 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 that people‟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 real classroom This is the motive of the present study The next chapter will present the research 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 and procedure used in the study to find out the students‟ attitudes towards CL at Nghe An Teacher‟s College, which include a survey questionnaire administered to the students and follow-up interviews Then the results of the study will be presented and discussed

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, 3 years 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 second semester of the second year of the three-year teacher training programme These students will 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 survey questionnaire 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 as well 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 same method 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 out students‟ 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 that they usually studied independently by themselves This is against the 21.7% of those reporting 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

responses

Percent

a (with others in the group) 18 21.7

b (with some who share the similar thought and

learning styles)

c (with no one - studying alone) 51 61.4

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 An Teachers‟ College seemed to prefer a traditional method, i.e learning alone This learning style appeared to persist even when they worked at home or outside the classroom It is likely that this learning habit was formed by their experiences with the traditional teaching methods where instruction is largely teacher-fronted and students are expected to take notes, then do exercises Learning is assessed individually following a norm-referenced approach 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 find out students‟ attitudes towards CL

Comfort with

group work

(%)

Engagement in group work (%)

Perceived need of group work (%)

Attitudes towards 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 and learned more when they work in groups while only 21.7 % of the students felt so when they work alone When asked about perceived need of group work, almost students said that it is very necessary to organize group work activities Only 12% of the students felt not very necessary to do it Also, the students‟ responses to question 5 showed that most students have a positive attitude towards group work More than eighty per cent of the students said that they were interested in these activities Obviously, group work could increase students‟ interest in the lesson when most students found group work activities necessary 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 positive attitudes toward CL far more outweighs the number of the students who have negative attitudes 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 large number 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 understandable because students differ in their learning styles, and not all of them perceive of a particular classroom 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 the benefits of CL In this questions, 8 different benefits of CL, which are adapted from the literature about CL, are listed and the students chose whatever that they agreed with (see Table 2.3)

Group work helps……

1 gain better academic achievements

2 enhance self-esteem

3 develop critical thinking skills

4 develop social skills

5 lower anxiety

6 provide more opportunities for communication in English

7 provide more opportunities for learning from peers

8 create a relaxing and friendly learning environment

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

As shown from Table 2.3, more than half of the students responding to the questionnaire agreed that CL provided more opportunities for them to learn from their peers (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 felt more confident in participating in learning activities More opportunities for developing their critical thinking skills and practicing communication in English were two other benefits which were opted for by respectively 48 and 41 out of 83 respondents while approximately half of them (N=48) felt that their critical thinking skills could be developed through CL This supports Webb‟s (1982) claims about the benefits of CL However, only about one-third or 31 of the respondents thought that CL helped them to gain better academic achievements Similarly, almost the same number agreed that CL helped to develop their social skills (N=34) or enhance their self-esteem (N=36) This implies that students are well aware of getting more benefits from CL and in fact, CL is really beneficial 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 out for both teachers and students here is how to make all students get more and more benefits from 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 final target of teaching and learning English

2.5.2.3 Students’ difficulties in CL

Reluctant attitudes of some students in groups 36

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

English

56

Loss of concentration because of noisy class 9

Difficulties in exchange information because of physical classroom

arrangement

0

Lack of the help from the teachers 15

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

The figures provided in Table 2.4 reveal the difficulties that students reported to have encountered when they worked in groups The most serious problem to the students was a conflict occurring within the groups (N=68) Fifty-six students reported the dominance of the mother tongue by group members in group discussions In addition, they reported that reasons that accounted for their failure in group work include lack of time (N= 32), the unwillingness of some students (N=36), lack of the help from their teachers (N=15) This supports Brown‟s (2001) idea that CL may be a challenge to some students because of personality differences However, only a small number of the students (N=9) complained about noisy classes None of the respondents claimed they had difficulties when they moved 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 their classroom 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 about their opinions about frequency of teachers‟ use of CL in language classroom and outside classroom 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 the students to evaluate their teachers‟ application of CL activities in language classroom, two questions (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 (%)

Teachers‟ use of CL inside classroom 48.2 51.8 0 0

Teachers‟ use of CL outside classroom 12.0 67.5 10.8 9.6

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 outside classroom, 48.2 % of the students said that their teacher often used CL activities in language 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 their teachers sometimes used these activities, whereas 10.8 % and 9.6% of them stated that their teachers rarely or never used those activities respectively

It is obvious that CL activities were not used so often in English classes at Nghe An Teacher‟s College, while they were rarely used outside the classroom It can be inferred from 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 Luu Trong Tuan‟s (2010) study This may worsen the problem of large classes because one of the benefits of CL is it helps to increase students‟ interactions in the target language in large classes Due to its scope, the present study fails to provide an account of why CL is not popular to the teachers in the College However, the reason might be that teachers are not 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

1 Grouping students of the same ability 1 1.2

2 Grouping students of different abilities 0 0

3 Grouping students of the same interest 1 1.2

4 Assigning students to groups at random 35 42.2

5 Allowing students to choose their own groups 46 55.4

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 teachers often allowed students to choose their own groups (55.4%), and assigned students to groups at random (42.2%) The same number of the students (1.2%) said their teachers preferred to group students of the same ability or of the same interest None of them stated that the teachers grouped student of different abilities More interestingly, most students responding 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 to form their own group can create some advantages and disadvantages One of the advantages can be that all group members often get on well with one another, therefore they can find easy to express their own ideas Another advantage can be that they want to surpass the other groups so that they will try their best to finish the assigned work well on time and they can do so because all group members like each other so there would limit the conflicts or trivial rows among them In CL, students, through the collaboration with their

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 form large groups of 5-6 members And only 4.8 % of the students said their teachers would prefer a group of 4 or more than 6 members None of the students stated that their teachers assign 3 members in a group

The data could imply that most teachers thought that the suitable number of the group would be 5 or 6 Through the teaching experiences of the author, she can find out that if the

teacher forms the group of 4 or 6, the students will subdivide their groups into smaller groups 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 much more difficult to cooperate because their group is rather crowed This can cause some difficulties for the group leaders or the teacher to manage the group work Surprisingly, the data shows that no teachers form the groups of 3 In some cases, in reality, the groups of three can be the strong ones because the group members can find easy to work with one another But if the class is too crowed, it is not advisable to have groups of 3 because there will be too many groups

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

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 agree with teachers‟ way of assigning to a group whereas only 24.4 % of the respondents agree and 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 6 can 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

Table 2.9: Teachers’ ways of rewarding groups of students