INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the study
In today's interconnected world, English has become essential for communication across economic, cultural, and political domains, making its teaching and learning crucial in global education systems While learners primarily focus on speaking and communication skills to pursue opportunities abroad and work for international companies, writing skills often receive less emphasis However, effective English writing is vital for exchanging information through emails, reports, and other forms of communication As Hyland (2003) noted, writing skills are integral to language development, requiring learners to master cohesion, logical organization, and engagement in their written work (Jacobs & L, 1981; Hall).
Although there has been much innovation in English Teaching Methodology, students usually meet difficulties in writing comprehension in the target language
In many classrooms, teachers often employ their own methods of instruction, lacking the enthusiasm needed to effectively motivate students While they provide background knowledge, facilitate discussions, and pose related questions, students still struggle with writing comprehension in a second language Furthermore, many learners display passivity, showing reluctance to engage in activities or collaborate in pairs or groups Both students and teachers frequently overlook the benefits of cooperative learning, which can significantly enhance writing skills.
This study aims to enhance writing skills among first-year students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy by exploring the current use of cooperative activities in writing lessons and assessing student attitudes towards these methods As an English teacher committed to motivating students, the research seeks to identify effective strategies to integrate collaborative activities into writing sessions, ultimately fostering a more engaging learning environment.
Objectives of the study
Investigating the current situation of using cooperative activities in writing classes for non – English major first year students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy
Identifying students’ attitudes and teachers’ ones towards cooperative activities in writing classes
To enhance motivation among first-year non-English major students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy, several cooperative activity recommendations are proposed These strategies aim to foster engagement and improve language skills through collaborative learning experiences To guide this exploration, three key research questions have been formulated.
Which cooperative activities are currently used in writing classes for non – English major first-year students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy?
What is the situation of using these cooperative activities in writing class?
Which cooperative activities are the students’ preferences in writing class?
Significance of the study
This study investigates the use of cooperative activities and students' attitudes towards them at Hanoi College of Pharmacy It aims to highlight the benefits of these activities for both students and lecturers, encouraging students to recognize their value in writing lessons and collaborate with peers to achieve shared goals Additionally, the research seeks to assist teachers in enhancing their instructional methods and serves as a valuable reference for researchers and stakeholders interested in cooperative learning strategies.
Scope of the study
This study examines the effectiveness of cooperative activities in writing classes at Hanoi College of Pharmacy, specifically targeting non-English major first-year students The research aims to identify students' preferences and effective strategies to enhance their writing skills through these collaborative methods.
The study examines a cohort of 120 first-year non-English major students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy, along with insights from 7 English language lecturers involved in teaching these students.
Method of the study
The research utilized both qualitative and quantitative methods to assess participants' performance in writing lessons A survey was conducted with 120 first-year non-English major students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy, employing close-ended and open-ended questionnaire items alongside a rating scale Additionally, qualitative data was gathered through semi-structured interviews with seven lecturers from Hanoi College of Medicine and Pharmacy, enhancing the overall data analysis.
Organization of the thesis
This study consists of three main parts:
Part one named Introduction, is the introduction which presents the rationale of the study, significance of the study, objectives, research questions, scope and method of the study
Part two called Development, consists of four main chapters:
Chapter one, literature review, deals with theoretical background about writing skills and cooperative learning
Chapter two of the study provides an overview of the implementation of cooperative activities in writing classes for first-year non-English major students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy It examines both students' and teachers' attitudes towards these collaborative methods, highlighting their perceptions and experiences in the classroom.
Chapter three, data analysis and discussion, focuses on analyzing the data
Chapter four, recommendations, suggests some cooperative activities to apply in writing classes
Part three, conclusion, is the last part, summarizes the main contents of the study
In addition, the pedagogical implications, achievement and limitations of this study are discussed clearly
Besides, other parts of the study are the list of references and the appendixes.
DEVELOPMENT
Academic writing is essential for knowledge construction and processing Klimova (2013) emphasizes its unique role in language teaching, as it integrates listening, reading, and speaking skills Writing is a complex skill that encompasses various sublevels, as noted by Adamzik and Pieth (1997), who distinguish between text competence and writing competence Text competence involves the ability to handle texts effectively, while writing competence includes knowledge of text types, strategic and pragmatic skills, and discourse competence This means that students must understand they are writing for a broader audience, not just for their instructors.
Many universities overlook the necessity of academic writing guidance, as lecturers often assume that students possess the essential skills for effective writing Consequently, establishing clear procedures for the writing process is crucial for enhancing learning outcomes.
Writing process approaches are based on the idea that writing is an iterative process (Murray, 1987) Nunan (1991) emphasizes that this approach highlights the importance of the steps involved in creating a written work, enabling writers to refine their skills and achieve greater perfection through the cycles of producing, reflecting, discussing, and revising multiple drafts.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical background of writing
Academic writing is essential for knowledge construction and processing, as emphasized by Klimova (2013), who notes its unique role in language teaching, intertwining with listening, reading, and speaking skills Writing is a multifaceted skill, and Adamzik and Pieth (1997) identify sublevels such as text competence and writing competence Text competence refers to the ability to handle texts both receptively and productively, while writing competence encompasses knowledge of text types, strategic and pragmatic skills, and discourse competence This means that students should recognize they are writing for a broader audience beyond just their seminar tutors, even while at university.
Many universities overlook the necessity of academic writing guidance, as instructors often assume that students possess the essential skills for effective academic writing To enhance learning outcomes, it is crucial to establish clear procedures for the writing process in educational settings.
Writing process approaches, as noted by Murray (1987), view writing as an "iterative process." Nunan (1991) emphasizes that this approach prioritizes the steps involved in creating a written work, enabling writers to refine their skills Through producing, reflecting, discussing, and revising multiple drafts, writers can progressively enhance their text towards perfection.
For more explanation, Murray (1987), in his study, diagrams the process of writing as shown below:
Figure 1: The writing process approach
As Figure shows, the process approach includes different stages These stages of writing process can happen at different points Curry, (1996) claimed that
“Lecturers can help clarify student’s misconception about writing by explicitly teaching the stages of the writing process Some procedures of writing process approach can be discussed below:
Prewriting strategies like brainstorming and freewriting are essential for students, as they help generate ideas, gather information, and organize thoughts effectively While seasoned writers may develop their concepts during the writing process, students benefit significantly from jotting down their ideas beforehand to create a more structured and coherent final text.
Writing is an iterative process that allows students to revise their work based on feedback from peers and instructors According to Murray (2003), re-drafting reduces the chances of plagiarism since instructors may have seen earlier drafts In the official draft, writers should focus on developing meaning using ideas gathered during prewriting Murray also emphasizes that writers, including non-native English speakers, should not overly focus on linguistic accuracy if it hinders their ability to convey meaning Ultimately, revising drafts enables students to internalize reader responses to their work.
A crucial aspect of the writing process involves gathering and responding to feedback from others during the drafting stage Feedback can be provided in both oral and written formats by peers or instructors Students often perceive lecturers' comments as more valuable due to their academic expertise Engaging in the review process allows students to enhance their critical thinking skills and understand diverse perspectives on their writing Peer review can take place in pairs or groups, facilitating collaborative assignments over time.
Reflection, as defined by Murray (2003), involves allowing a piece of writing to rest while considering feedback from peers or instructors This process can help writers identify and address linguistic gaps within their text structure, ultimately enhancing the quality of their work.
The final stages of the writing process involve editing, proofreading, and polishing the text, as highlighted by Murray (2003) During this phase, writers concentrate on the mechanics of writing, which includes formatting, references, footnotes, and ensuring linguistic accuracy Additionally, students benefit from collaborating in pairs to review each other's work, enhancing the overall quality of their writing.
The process approach to teaching writing emphasizes the importance of the writing process over the final product This method involves several key steps: "prewriting," which includes brainstorming and gathering ideas; "drafting," where students seek feedback from peers or instructors; and "revising," which focuses on collecting feedback and reevaluating the organization of the text.
“proofreading”, and “publishing” the final text In order to teach writing successfully, it is necessary that lecturers should take consideration into these useful writing process approaches
1.1.3 The factors affecting student’s motivation to writing skill
Writing is a complex skill that presents significant challenges in both learning and teaching, particularly in the context of a second language This complexity contributes to the difficulties educators face in addressing students' low motivation during writing assignments.
The following table lists out summary of factors affecting to students’ motivation to writing through personal experience and consulting previous researchers
Table 1: Factors affecting students’ motivation to writing skills
Factors affecting student’s motivation to writing skill Reseachers
- Teacher’s knowledge and ability to motivate students
- Learner’s shortage of inceptive skills, motivation and pratice and effects of L1
- Internal factors: cognitive and affective attributes
- External factors: knowledge, exposure to the language, background and surrounding
- Internal factors: insecurity, unwillingness to use the target language, lack of knowledge and languages transfer
- External factors: time allocation and the teachers’ methodology
- The impact of students L1 into the target language writing
A group of authors: Belkhir, A and Benyelles, R (2017) the control the teacher had over almost all activities, and student beliefs about learning in this context
- The control of teacher on all activities
- Student’s beliefs about learning environment
- Materials, media, classroom activities, classroom management, teaching approach, and teaching strategy
- Materials, media, classroom activities, classroom management, teacher’s strategy and teacher’s approach
This research aims to identify key factors influencing students' writing skills in the classroom, drawing insights from Yasin's concepts The diagram below illustrates the various elements that affect students' motivation to write effectively.
Figure 2: Factors affecting students’ motivation to writing skill
In summary, this study will examine classroom activities and related factors to assess their impact on student motivation at Hanoi College of Pharmacy in the following section.
Theoretical background of Cooperative learning
Since the dawn of education, teachers and pedagogical experts have sought the most effective methods for teaching children Numerous practices and research efforts have yielded varying degrees of success, leading to significant advancements in teaching approaches Among these, the introduction of group work in classrooms has sparked ongoing debate, particularly regarding Cooperative Learning This approach remains a contentious topic, with diverse perspectives on its effectiveness and implementation.
According to a journal on Best Teaching Practices published on June 2014,
Cooperative learning is a dynamic teaching strategy that goes beyond mere group work, requiring a deeper understanding of its principles and practices It involves structured collaboration among students, fostering engagement and enhancing learning outcomes.
Students’ motivation to writing skill
According to Richard, J.C., Plat & Platt (1997), cooperative learning is a teaching approach that organizes classrooms for students to collaborate in small teams This perspective highlights the structured nature of cooperative learning, emphasizing its effectiveness in fostering teamwork among students The subsequent discussions aim to clarify and define the key concepts of cooperative learning, making it more accessible and recognizable.
Johnson – Johnson (1999) in his study has claimed that “Cooperative learning is a teaching practice that breaks students into groups of 3-4 with each student having a particular role within the group”
In a June 1992 journal article, the authors described cooperative learning as an effective teaching strategy where small groups of students with varying abilities engage in diverse activities to enhance their understanding of a subject Each participant is accountable not only for their own learning but also for supporting their peers, fostering a collaborative educational environment.
“creating an atmosphere of achievement” Ideally, the above definition mentions to the structure; objective and function of the approach
Similarly, in their work, Johnson & Johnson and Smith, (1989) stated that:
Cooperative learning involves the use of small groups where students collaborate to enhance their own learning and that of their peers This approach emphasizes two key aspects: the supportive group environment and the individual roles of each member By fostering a setting where members strive for mutual benefits, cooperative learning promotes both personal and collective academic success.
In summary, diverse perspectives on Cooperative Learning emphasize the importance of group dynamics and the collaborative environment in which students engage, aiming to enhance both their own learning and that of their peers.
Cooperative learning and Competitive learning
Cooperation involves collaborating in small groups to achieve a shared objective, which contrasts with competitive learning To gain a deeper understanding of Cooperative learning, the following section will explore the distinctions between Cooperative learning and Competitive learning in the context of language teaching.
According to Johnson and Johnson (2003), Cooperative learning focuses on the instructional use of small groups to enhance collaboration, whereas Competitive learning emphasizes individual performance within a group setting.
In Competitive learning, students focus on individual goals rather than collaborating towards shared objectives, contrasting with Cooperative learning where teamwork is essential According to McIntyre (1992), evaluation methods differ significantly; Cooperative and individualistic learning utilize criteria-referenced assessments, while Competitive learning relies on norm-referenced evaluations This distinction highlights the varying approaches to student assessment in different learning environments.
Table 2: The difference between Cooperative learning and Competitive learning
Source: McIntyre, T., Retrieved at www.BehaviorAdvisor.com
- One student serves as leader
- Social skills assumed or ignored
Cooperative learning and Collaborative learning
Cooperative learning and collaborative learning are interconnected concepts that enhance educational experiences Collaborative learning involves students working together to achieve shared goals, fostering communication and teamwork skills According to Laal and Ghodsi (2011), this approach encourages active participation and engagement, allowing learners to benefit from diverse perspectives and collective problem-solving Understanding the relationship between these two learning strategies is essential for optimizing educational outcomes.
Collaborative learning is an educational strategy where learners work together in groups to tackle problems, complete tasks, or develop projects According to a workshop by the Educational Broadcasting Corporation (2004), this teaching method encourages students to come together to investigate important questions or produce meaningful work Examples of collaborative learning include students engaging in discussions about lectures or collaborating online with peers from different schools.
From the perceptive points of view, some researchers have been trying to differentiate collaborative and cooperative learning by pointing out the similarities and the differences of these two terms
Cooperative learning, as defined by the Educational Broadcasting Corporation (2004), is a structured form of collaborative learning where students engage in small groups on specific activities In this approach, each student is accountable not only for their own contributions but also for the success of the group as a whole Unlike general collaborative learning, which can occur in any setting where students work together, cooperative learning is characterized by its organization and focus on structured projects within a shared space.
Numerous linguistics researchers, including Cloud (2014), Dixx (1998), Orr (1992), Brame and Biel (2015), have explored this issue Despite varying perspectives, many studies, journals, and articles, such as those by Nunan (1992), Richards, Platt, & Platt (1997), Winter (1999), Canh (2003), Thanh (2010), and Ha (2010), often use these approaches interchangeably.
Briefly, the relationship between Collaborative and Cooperative learning can be illustrated as below:
Figure 2: The relationship between Cooperative and Collaborative learning
To effectively implement Cooperative and Collaborative learning in language teaching, it is essential for researchers to carefully consider the specific teaching context and the objectives of their educational practices.
In summary, extensive research has been conducted to clarify the concepts of cooperative learning in language education This study particularly values the definition provided by Johnson & Johnson and Smith (1989), which describes cooperative learning as the "instructional use" of small teams where students collaborate to enhance both their own learning and that of their peers.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Settings
Hanoi College of Pharmacy, a newly established institution, has three main branches located in Hanoi, Bac Ninh, and Hai Phong This research focuses on data collected from the Hanoi branch, which collaborates with numerous hospitals, making it a key training ground for healthcare professionals across Vietnam The college offers various majors, including pharmacy, sanatorium, midwifery, and examination It utilizes a credit-based assessment system, grading students as A (excellent), B (credit), C (fair), D (poor), and F (fail) First-year students are required to complete three credits in English before progressing to pharmacy-related language courses To graduate, students must accumulate the necessary compulsory credits; those who do not complete their studies on time will be required to remain enrolled until they fulfill their academic requirements.
Despite its accomplishments, the university faces challenges in foreign language education, particularly in English, which is crucial for engaging with modern science and global advancements Unfortunately, English has not received the necessary focus, and while innovative teaching methods have been introduced, many students struggle to attain proficiency in writing and accuracy Consequently, writing skills remain a significant hurdle for students.
Each year, Hanoi College of Pharmacy selects students from various regions across Vietnam, allowing them to choose their desired subjects without the need for an entrance examination Students come from diverse provinces, including urban areas like Phu Tho and Hai Phong, as well as mountainous regions such as Yen Bai and Lai Chau, resulting in varying levels of English proficiency Many students from these mountainous areas have limited opportunities to study English, often beginning their education in high school rather than secondary school, which contributes to their struggles with the language Additionally, differences in background knowledge, grammar, and vocabulary present significant challenges for all students.
Students have a variety of majors to choose from, including Pharmacy and Nursing, and must complete all required credits for their respective programs While English is not a mandatory subject, students are still required to pass over 60 periods to fulfill their academic requirements.
Moreover, each class is quite crowded The number of student verifies from 60 to
A total of 70 students are enrolled, with the majority having studied English since grade 6, while the remainder began their studies in grade 10 Based on their performance over three years in high school, the overall English proficiency of these students is approximately at the beginning of the intermediate level Notably, due to the college's focus on medicine and pharmacy, female students constitute 80% of the student population.
Many students lack self-confidence in learning English, resulting in only a few being active participants High school graduates often struggle with basic self-introductions and frequently make writing errors Consequently, their writing test scores tend to be low.
The English department comprises seven main teachers, aged between 25 and 42, including five females and two males This diverse group features both official and exchange lecturers from various universities, with five teachers pursuing M.A degrees while the others hold B.A degrees in English teaching Each teacher has a minimum of three years of experience and manages classes with over 40 students, teaching one main class each Despite their enthusiasm and well-trained teaching methods, there are challenges posed by teachers from other disciplines, leading to inconsistencies in responsibilities and duties.
The English teaching program at this college aims to ensure that students master grammar structures and vocabulary from the textbooks by the end of the course Students will be able to apply their English knowledge in the context of their pharmacy major and utilize all four language skills in real-life situations All first-year students use the same compulsory textbook, without classification into different classes or levels.
In addition, beside the main course books, English teachers can use other documents (from other books, internet ) to supplement for the main one
Each week, students participate in two lessons and six 45-minute periods Their achievement is evaluated through test results and class participation, with each student taking two tests: one mid-term and one final The mid-term test accounts for 30% of the total score, while the final test contributes 60%, and class participation makes up the remaining 10% Students who miss more than three lessons will be ineligible to take the final test.
Lifelines Elementary by Tom Hutchinson (fourth edition) serves as the primary textbook for first-year students, providing essential background knowledge and skills in reading, writing, speaking, and listening, which are crucial for their pharmacy studies After completing 3 credits of this textbook, students will progress to pharmacy-related materials in their second year The course book features 14 units covering various topics, allowing students to expand their understanding, with mid-term tests following every seven units and a final test after unit 14 Additionally, supplementary materials provided by teachers enhance students' English proficiency and knowledge.
The college, being newly established, has varying quality in its classroom facilities Each classroom is equipped with essential tools, including a projector, a computer, and a radio to enhance listening skills Additionally, the classrooms feature a blackboard, two air conditioners, and adequate tables and chairs for student comfort.
The participants
The study investigates 120 non – English major first-year students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy In addition, 7 lecturers of teaching English in these classes will be included in this research
Many students from mountainous regions face challenges in learning English, often starting their studies in high school rather than secondary school, which affects their proficiency This lack of foundational knowledge, combined with difficulties in English grammar and vocabulary, presents significant obstacles for these learners.
Many students struggle with low self-confidence in learning English, leading to mistakes across all skills, especially in writing This lack of interest in the subject often stems from their feelings of inadequacy, as they are compelled to take the class despite their challenges.
Data collection instruments
The data of this research were collected via questionnaires, class observation and interviews The class observation was implemented and recorded during writing periods of those classes
The survey questionnaire consists of three main sections: "Background Information," "Multiple-choice Questions," and "Students’ Opinions." The first section gathers participants' personal details, including age, gender, years of studying English, and the authentic textbooks used in writing classes The second section focuses on participants' attitudes toward Cooperative activities and their frequency of use in writing classes The final section aims to gather student feedback on the impact of Cooperative activities on their motivation in writing classes, while also inviting students to provide recommendations for enhancing the use of these activities to further motivate them.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven English teachers at the college, taking place after writing periods and at the end of the course during summer holidays These interviews involved both recorded dialogues and detailed notes to capture as much information as possible, and all discussions were held in English.
To improve the reliability of data obtained from questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, the researcher conducted class observations across seven different classes These observations spanned 10 writing periods, each lasting 45 minutes, allowing the researcher to focus on various teacher and student activities without recording them Specific projects observed during these sessions are detailed in the Appendix.
Data collection procedure
The process of collecting data was carried out by four following stages:
Firstly, 120 copies of survey questionnaires written in Vietnamese were hand in to
A study involving 120 first-year non-English major students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy was conducted before the course concluded Out of these, 34 students did not return or complete the survey, resulting in a total of 86 responses available for data analysis.
The researcher conducted seven semi-structured interviews with English teachers at Hanoi College of Pharmacy at the conclusion of the course Prior to the interviews, a set of questions was prepared and distributed to the teachers.
During the semi-structured interviews, additional questions were incorporated, and all sessions were recorded with notes taken for reference The interviewees expressed their consent to being recorded and photographed.
To improve data reliability, the research involved class observations across seven different lessons, with observations noted rather than recorded A checklist created by the researcher documented the findings, and classes were selected randomly Both students and teachers willingly participated in the observations, with some consenting to have their learning process photographed.
The survey data and class observations were analyzed to assess the current state of Cooperative activities, along with students' attitudes and preferences regarding these methods Based on the findings, recommendations for effectively implementing Cooperative activities in classes at Hanoi College of Pharmacy are provided.
In summary, this chapter has addressed key aspects of the study's settings, participants, instruments, and data collection procedures The forthcoming chapter will focus on the analysis, discussions, and findings derived from the data.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Cooperation and Cooperative activities
3.1.1 Teachers’ and Students’ understanding about cooperation
Cooperative activities play a crucial role in language teaching, particularly in enhancing writing skills A survey conducted at Hanoi College of Pharmacy aimed to clarify the concept of cooperation among teachers and students Data analysis revealed that over 81% of students correctly understood the definition of cooperation, while a small minority had misconceptions Similarly, five-sevenths of the teachers agreed that cooperation involves working together in small groups within the same location to achieve common goals.
- T1: I think cooperation is working together to accomplish shared goals
- T3: Ss work together on common tasks or learning activities
- T5: Cooperation is working together to accomplish shared goals
- T6: Cooperation means work together to finish a task
- T7: C.A is an interesting activity which motivates Ss in class and inspires them to cooperate in groups to achieve common results
Understanding the concept of cooperation is essential for effectively applying and implementing cooperative activities in the classroom This article will explore various cooperative activities and key factors related to their implementation in educational settings.
The chart highlights a range of cooperative activities integrated into writing periods, with discussions/debates (59.3%), problem-solving (26.7%), and games (22.1%) being the most prevalent In contrast, activities like group report creation account for only 5.8%, while other activities make up 9.3%, and providing marks and comments represents 6.7%, indicating they are the least common practices.
In a recent survey of teachers, 57% indicated that group or pair discussions were prevalent in their writing sessions, fostering collaboration among students Additionally, 43% noted that techniques such as "peer-check" and "think-pair-share" further promoted cooperation during writing tasks While 29% of teachers acknowledged the effectiveness of group reports in these sessions, an equal percentage expressed that cooperative activities were neither engaging nor essential for writing periods.
- (T4): I sometimes use it because it wastes a lot of time, bad sts may be talk to each other or do other work when applying cooperative activities
- (T6): They always do not want to work cooperative activities help motivate students Yes, but not much
At Hanoi College of Pharmacy, a variety of cooperative activities are utilized in writing classes, with discussions, problem-solving, and games being the most prevalent In contrast, group reports and peer evaluations, such as giving marks and comments, are less frequently employed Despite the significance of writing in language education, certain cooperative activities, particularly report-making and peer-checking, receive insufficient attention Conversely, engaging activities like group discussions and problem-solving games are regularly incorporated into the curriculum, highlighting a disparity in the focus on different cooperative methods in writing instruction.
3.1.3 The frequency of using Cooperative activities in writing periods
Figure 9: Frequency of using Cooperative activities in writing periods
The pie chart reveals that approximately 50% of students engage in activities "2-3 times per week," significantly outpacing the 22% who participate "4-5 times per week" and the nearly 17% who do so "once per week." Notably, the preference for "2-3 times per week" is double that of "4-5 times per week" and triple that of "once per week." Additionally, those opting for "once every two weeks" and "never" account for only 5% and 6%, respectively, indicating a clear trend towards more frequent engagement among students.
In a recent survey, participants indicated their frequency of using cooperative activities during writing periods, with 4 to 5 times per week being the most common response Some reported using these activities 2 to 3 times per week, while others engaged in them once a week or once every two weeks Notably, a few respondents confirmed that they never utilized cooperative activities in their writing classes, highlighting a varied approach to collaborative learning among educators.
- (T2): Cooperative activities are an effective way for students to improve their learning I often use it in the writing lessons
- (T3): I usually ask Ss to work in group of 3, 4, 5 or 10 Ss to finish a task from teacher
- (T4): I sometimes use it because it wastes a lot of time…
- (T5): […] I usually use in my class
Cooperative activities are frequently utilized in writing classes at Hanoi College of Pharmacy; however, participants' responses reveal inconsistencies in the implementation of these activities during writing sessions.
Students’ attitudes to Cooperative activities and materials
3.2.1 Students’ attitudes to writing periods
Table 5: Students’ attitudes to writing periods
Statements Strong like Like Neutral Dislike Strong dislike
10 I really enjoy writing lessons in our class 4 33 39 9 1
At Hanoi College of Pharmacy, only 37 students, or approximately 43%, displayed positive attitudes towards writing periods, while over 57% (59 students) expressed neutral or negative feelings about the lessons This trend aligns with feedback from interviewed teachers, nearly all of whom noted that their students generally do not enjoy writing lessons, with only one-sixth indicating that a few students have a preference for them.
- (T3): No, they aren’t They feel bored, do not want to do any tasks
- (T4): Some of them are interested
- (T7): Generally speaking, most of ss are not
Various cooperative activities were employed in the classes to enhance student engagement and motivation during writing lessons However, the study's findings reveal that students exhibited negative attitudes towards writing periods.
In summary, data analysis reveals several key factors that enhance students' preference for writing periods, including engaging cooperative activities, teachers' expertise, authentic materials, a positive classroom atmosphere, and motivational support from instructors Notably, cooperative activities emerge as a crucial element in motivating students during writing classes, which educators at Hanoi College of Pharmacy should prioritize.
3.2.2 Students’ attitudes to Cooperative activities
Students’ preferences for Cooperative activities
Figure 10: Student’s preferences for Cooperative activities
Problem solving Giving marks and comments
The bar chart illustrates the preferences of students at Hanoi College of Pharmacy regarding various cooperative activities during writing periods Notably, 59.3% of students favor games, significantly surpassing the 22.1% who prefer discussions/debates and problem-solving activities Additionally, 16.3% of students express a preference for giving marks and comments, while 11.6% favor making group reports, and only 3.5% are interested in other activities This data highlights a strong inclination towards games compared to other cooperative methods.
Surveys and interviews reveal notable discrepancies in findings, particularly regarding students' preferences for activities Interviewed teachers indicate that games do not rank as the most favored activities among their students, with only one-third of them—equivalent to two teachers—believing that games effectively boost motivation during writing sessions.
- (T2): Group work is preferred I think games are most interested activities in my class
- (T7): May be, game is the most interesting activity and they didn’t like making reports
Through class observations, the researcher finds that students of two classes were attractive; attentive and cooperative when taking part in games
- (T4): They all tried to finish the duty …All students took part in the activities
- (T5): Students are cooperative, active They cooperate well
The pie chart reveals that 22.1% of students express interest in discussions, debates, and problem-solving activities However, only one-sixth of the observed classes demonstrated that students focused more on these areas Additionally, interviews with teachers indicated a consensus that discussions and problem-solving are not their preferred activities during writing periods in these classes.
At Hanoi College of Pharmacy, discussions emerged as the most common activity during writing periods, accounting for 59.3%, while games ranked third at 22.1% Notably, games were the preferred choice among first-year non-English major students, with discussions and problem-solving activities following closely as their second favorites This highlights a discrepancy: despite the frequent use of cooperative activities in writing classes, their implementation appears to be inadequate.
Grouping division in Cooperative activities
Figure 11: Group division in Cooperative activities
According to Figure 4, a significant majority of students (57.0%) prefer working in groups of 5 to 6 during writing periods, highlighting a clear preference for this group size over others In contrast, only 2.3% of students favor working in pairs, 32.6% in groups of 3 to 4, and 9.3% in larger groups This indicates that the number of students who prefer groups of 5 to 6 is nearly double that of those who prefer groups of 3 to 4, and four times greater than those who prefer smaller pairings.
Research indicates that when tackling complex tasks, larger groups of 10 or more are more effective, allowing for extensive participation from all members While students often prefer smaller groups of 5 to 6 in writing classes, it is essential for Hanoi College of Pharmacy to consider larger group sizes to effectively address challenging writing assignments This aligns with findings from a report by the Center for Faculty Excellence in October 2006, emphasizing the importance of group size in enhancing collaborative problem-solving.
Figure 12: Group forming in Cooperative activities
The pie chart reveals that a significant majority of students prefer to select their groups randomly (34.9%) or independently (32.6%), rather than being assigned by teachers or others Only 9.3% of participants favor teacher selection, while 8.1% prefer grouping based on shared interests Additionally, the data indicates that the number of students who choose to form groups based on their skill level and ability is nearly double that of those who select groups based on interests, and three times higher than those who consider other factors (16.3%).
A recent survey revealed that approximately 35% of students prefer random group selection, while five-sevenths of interviewed teachers reported using random grouping methods Only one-seventh of teachers allowed students to choose their own groups, despite 32.6% of students expressing a desire to select their own partners This indicates a preference among learners for both random and self-selected group formation While various grouping methods exist, including teacher-arranged and student-selected groupings, random grouping remains the most common approach These findings offer valuable insights for educators at Hanoi College of Pharmacy, highlighting the importance of adapting group formation strategies to enhance student cooperation and engagement during lessons.
Students’ cooperation in groups in Cooperative activities
Table 4: Students’ cooperation in Cooperative Activities (*)
Statements Strong agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strong disagree
1 We are cooperative in challenge tasks 40.7 37.2 17.4 4.7 0.0
2 Each member is aware of his role when taking part in a group 27.9 57.0 7.0 8.1 0.0
3 We respect and support others in challenging activities 47.7 41.9 5.8 4.7 0.0
4 We share our responsibilities to achieve a common goal 29.1 64.0 4.7 2.3 0.0
5 We are strongly motivated to out - perform and share equally 18.6 64.0 17.4 0.0 0.0
6 Cooperative activities enhance our motivation to our work 29.1 54.7 14.0 2.3 0.0
7 I learned a lot from activities such as team - based, critical thinking and creativity skills, etc 27.9 34.9 33.7 1.2 2.3
The data reveals that approximately 78% of students agree that their teams exhibit cooperation during challenging tasks, highlighting the importance of a shared common goal in motivating group members Over 85% acknowledge the significance of each member's awareness of their role in cooperative activities, while 90% express respect and support for their peers during difficult tasks Most students affirm that they share responsibilities to achieve collective objectives, and they feel strongly motivated to excel and contribute equally within their teams.
Research findings reveal key factors of "Cooperation" in the classroom, including "Positive interdependence," "Promotive interaction," and "Individual accountability," as discussed in the previous chapter.
6 Cooperative activities enhance our motivation to our work 29.1 54.7 14.0 2.3 0.0
7 I learned a lot from activities such as team - based, critical thinking and creativity skills, etc 27.9 34.9 33.7 1.2 2.3
According to the data presented, around 63% of students believe that participating in group activities enhances their team-based, critical thinking, and creativity skills Furthermore, approximately 84% of students feel motivated to collaborate and share ideas while engaged in these group activities.
These findings of the study show the fact that students are willing and comfortable to take part in Cooperative activities and share a common goal in their groups
Collaborative group work enhances students' motivation and cooperation, fostering a sense of shared responsibility This research provides valuable insights for educators at Hanoi College of Pharmacy, guiding them in organizing effective cooperative activities and motivating students in writing classes.
Figure 13: Student’s preferences for materials