Rationales for the study
The 21st century has seen a rising demand for essential skills such as critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity, collectively known as "21st-century skills." To cultivate these abilities, educational institutions must innovate their teaching methods, enabling students to engage in active knowledge acquisition (Loh & Ang, 2020) This shift emphasizes a move from traditional teacher-centered approaches to more learner-centered strategies, with Cooperative Learning gaining popularity worldwide across various subjects and age groups (Johnson & Johnson).
Cooperative Learning is a student-centered approach where learners collaborate in groups to achieve common goals and enhance individual learning While it is considered to create a more engaging and meaningful learning environment, its effectiveness largely hinges on students' perceptions If students view Cooperative Learning as ineffective or inefficient, it can negatively impact the classroom atmosphere and hinder its implementation Therefore, it is crucial for teachers to understand their students' perspectives on Cooperative Learning to ensure its successful application in the classroom.
In addition, according to Palupi (2018), a person’s perception about
Students' experiences significantly impact their perceptions of learning methods, particularly in Cooperative Learning within EFL social speaking classes Positive experiences in group learning can lead to favorable outcomes, making it essential for researchers to explore these experiences as valuable insights into students' views on the effectiveness of this approach.
Research has examined students' perceptions of Cooperative Learning in various educational settings, but there is a lack of in-depth analysis specifically within the context of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes in Vietnam Given that students have long been accustomed to traditional teaching methods, adapting to new approaches may be challenging Therefore, this study is essential to understand how students in Vietnamese language universities perceive and experience Cooperative Learning, particularly as they prepare for careers that require proficient English skills.
The necessity for this research stems from the compelling reasons outlined, leading to the study titled “Cooperative Learning and Its Benefits in EFL Social Speaking Classes: Insights from Second-Year English Majored Students.”
Research aims and research questions
This study is conducted to:
- Explore second-year English-majored students’ perceptions of Cooperative Learning’s characteristics and benefits in EFL social speaking classes
- Explore second-year English-majored students’ experiences with
Cooperative Learning’s characteristics and benefits in EFL social speaking classes
The research is expected to answer the following question:
- What are students’ perceptions of Cooperative Learning and its benefits in EFL social speaking classes?
- How do students experience Cooperative Learning and its benefits in EFL social speaking classes?
Scope of the study
This study explores the characteristics and benefits of Cooperative Learning in EFL social speaking classes, focusing on the perceptions of second-year English-majored students enrolled in the course English for Social Purposes 4A/4A* at a language university in Ha Noi The term "perception" in this context refers to the students' awareness and understanding of Cooperative Learning, highlighting the importance of their experiences within the limited scope of the research.
Viet Nam during the time of the research that falls in February 2021.
Expected contributions of the research
This study aims to enhance the understanding of Cooperative Learning in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes, both in Vietnam and globally It seeks to provide university educators with insights into students' awareness and experiences with Cooperative Learning in social speaking contexts, enabling them to implement effective strategies for improvement.
This chapter reviews the literature on the term Cooperative Learning (CL) It first provides definitions of CL, underlying theory of CL, and some key features of
This article explores the concept of CL (Collaborative Learning) within English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms It will also review existing research on the topic to highlight gaps in the current studies.
Cooperative Learning
Definition of CL
As Cooperative Learning (hereafter called CL) is becoming a widely-used instructional method, there have been a large number of definitions given
According to Oxford (1997), cooperative learning (CL) is a group learning activity that highlights the importance of interdependence among students in sharing information It emphasizes accountability for individual learning as well as for the learning of peers, all while striving to achieve collective educational goals.
Laal & Laal (2012) define cooperative learning (CL) as an educational approach where groups of learners collaborate to solve problems, complete tasks, or create products However, the specific methods for effective collaboration in cooperative groups to achieve these goals remain unclear.
Collaborative Learning (CL) is defined by Johnson & Johnson (1999) as a process where students work together to achieve shared goals, enhancing both their own learning and that of their peers Through group discussions, students aid each other's understanding and motivate one another to strive for better performance than they would achieve individually.
Underlying theory of CL: Social interdependence theory
Underpinning the term CL is Social interdependence theory that is developed by Johnson & Johnson (2008) Their theory is going to be summarized in this section
Firstly, they state that “Social interdependence exists when the
The achievement of individual goals is influenced by the actions of others, highlighting the concept of social interdependence, which can be either positive or negative Positive interdependence fosters cooperation, as individuals recognize that their success is tied to the success of their group members In contrast, negative interdependence leads to competition, where individuals believe they can succeed only if their peers fail Collaborative learning (CL) is fundamentally built on the cooperation encouraged by positive interdependence.
In the context of social interdependence, interaction patterns can be categorized as promotive or oppositional Positive interdependence fosters promotive interactions, where individuals support and encourage each other to achieve a shared goal Conversely, negative interdependence leads to oppositional interactions, characterized by individuals undermining each other's efforts to ensure their own success According to the theory, the outcomes of the learning process hinge on these interaction patterns, highlighting that the promotive interactions stemming from positive interdependence are crucial for achieving successful cooperation and collaborative learning (CL) outcomes.
Johnson & Johnson's theory highlights the impact of psychological processes shaped by interdependence Positive interdependence fosters beneficial psychological outcomes, such as enhanced group dynamics, mutual support among members, and a willingness to influence and be influenced, ultimately driving effective goal achievement Conversely, negative interdependence hinders collaboration, deteriorates relationships, and creates barriers to influence, undermining group efforts Establishing positive psychological processes is essential for building collaborative learning environments (CL).
In brief, Social interdependence theory provides a framework for cooperation
Cooperative learning (CL) is fundamentally shaped by social interdependence, which emphasizes cooperation through positive interdependence, promotive interaction, and beneficial psychological processes As highlighted by Johnson & Johnson (2008), social interdependence theory serves as a foundational framework for CL, identifying key elements that enhance the understanding of this collaborative learning process in educational settings.
Essential elements of CL
Collaborative learning (CL) goes beyond merely grouping students; it focuses on fostering interdependence among group members (Johnson, 1984) Research has explored key factors that contribute to the effectiveness of CL (Chan, 2004).
Slavin (1995) provides the theory of six characteristics of CL, including
Cooperative learning (CL) emphasizes essential components such as group goals, individual accountability, and equal opportunities for success, while also fostering team competition and task specialization to adapt to individual needs (p.12) Chan (2004) highlights three critical elements of CL: positive interdependence, individual accountability, and group goals (p.48) Additionally, Johnson & Johnson (2008), recognized as leaders in cooperative learning, propose a model that further elucidates these key elements, reinforcing the importance of collaboration in educational settings.
The theory proposed by Johnson & Johnson (2008) serves as a foundational model for this study, supported by various studies, including those by Johnson et al (2014), Ling (2015), and McLeish (2009) This research aims to investigate students' perceptions and experiences regarding the characteristics of cooperative learning (CL), as outlined in Johnson & Johnson's framework.
Collaborative learning (CL) is founded on five essential elements: positive interdependence, individual accountability, promotive interaction, effective social skills, and group processing Each of these components plays a crucial role in fostering an engaging and productive learning environment, which will be explored in detail.
Positive interdependence is crucial for effective cooperative learning (Johnson & Johnson, 2008) To foster this interdependence within a group, it is essential for members to be interconnected, ensuring that the success of each individual relies on the achievements of their peers.
Positive interdependence is essential for effective collaborative learning (CL), as it fosters a sense of unity among group members through mutual goals, joint rewards, and shared resources (Johnson et al., 2014; Johnson & Johnson, 2008) This structure cultivates a collective mindset of "one for all, all for one," enhancing group cohesion and cooperation (McLeish, 2009).
Individual accountability is a crucial aspect of cooperative learning (CL), where each member is responsible for their own contributions as well as supporting the efforts of their peers (Johnson & Johnson, 2008; McLeish, 2009) This dual responsibility ensures that learners not only master their own material but also actively assist others, fostering a collaborative environment (Luu, 2010) Teachers play a key role in this process by assessing each group member's performance and providing feedback, which reinforces individual accountability and promotes overall group success (Johnson & Johnson, 2008).
Promotive interaction is crucial for the success of cooperative learning (CL) as it involves verbal exchanges where individuals share information, discuss challenges, and motivate each other towards achieving common goals (Johnson & Johnson, 2008) Engaging in face-to-face interactions during CL activities allows students to gain valuable insights from their peers while also inspiring them to generate significant contributions (Ling, 2015).
Element 4: Appropriate use of social skills
A vital aspect of cooperative learning (CL) highlighted in the theory is the effective application of social skills (Johnson & Johnson, 2008) These social skills encompass how students engage with one another in group settings, including leadership, decision-making, trust-building, conflict management, and the encouragement and praise of peers (Luu).
2010) To successfully work in cooperative learning groups, students need guidance
8 on how to appropriately use those skills by their teachers (Johnson & Johnson, 2008)
An essential component of effective cooperative learning (CL) is group processing or reflection, as highlighted by Johnson & Johnson (2008) It is crucial for group members to consistently evaluate their learning journey by recognizing both beneficial and detrimental behaviors during collaboration This reflective practice enables the group to determine which actions should be maintained or modified Ultimately, this process enhances each member's effectiveness in contributing to the group's shared objectives.
The collaborative learning (CL) model proposed by Johnson & Johnson (2008) is widely recognized and supported among various theories This model's components serve as a foundation for identifying how students perceive and experience the characteristics of collaborative learning in their classrooms (Nguyen, 2019, p.38).
Cooperative Learning in EFL classes
Collaborative Learning (CL) offers numerous advantages for teaching and learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) across diverse educational settings (Nguyen, 2019) Effectively applying the five key components of CL can result in a variety of outcomes, which can be classified in multiple ways by different theorists.
According to Slavin (1980), the benefits of CL fall into three broad categories:
Collaborative learning (CL) offers significant advantages for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students, particularly in Vietnamese classrooms While some authors highlight its pedagogical and social benefits, others overlook critical factors such as increased school engagement, enhanced self-esteem, and improved perspective-taking abilities This study emphasizes Johnson & Johnson’s three broad categories of CL benefits—effort to achieve, academic achievement, and race relations—while advocating for a deeper understanding of CL's positive impacts on learners By focusing on mutual concern among students, the research aims to illuminate the comprehensive advantages of CL in fostering a supportive learning environment.
The quality of relationships and psychological health are essential components of cooperative learning (CL), as highlighted by Johnson & Johnson (2008) These elements encapsulate the benefits identified by Slavin, Dalziel & Peat, and Almulla regarding CL Additionally, the anticipated outcomes of CL, as proposed by Johnson & Johnson, have garnered support from numerous researchers, including Hilk (2013), Laal & Ghodsi (2012), and Pedersen & Digby (2014).
Three aspects of CL’s benefits included in the theory by Johnson & Johnson
(2008) are also going to be reviewed as follows
Previous research is in good agreement with the theory by Johnson & Johnson
(2008) in terms of CL’s positive results in students’ academic achievement Firstly,
Cooperative Learning (CL) enhances speaking skills and contributes to higher academic achievement by promoting longer retention of knowledge When students engage in group discussions, they find learning more accessible and retain information more effectively This method encourages focused and responsible communication towards shared goals during language learning tasks, leading to increased engagement Additionally, CL fosters motivation among students, further enhancing their learning experience.
& Johnson, 2008) generated through their participation in meaningful communication with others (Nguyen, 2019)
Collaborative learning (CL) fosters positive interpersonal relationships among students, leading to increased class attendance According to Railsback (2004), a primary cause of absenteeism and dropouts is the presence of negative relationships with teachers or peers By promoting harmonious interactions, CL helps students develop and sustain meaningful connections, ultimately enhancing their attendance and encouraging greater personal responsibility.
Cooperative learning (CL) enhances group goals and fosters a supportive learning environment, contributing to the success of all members (Johnson & Johnson, 2008) It promotes peer acceptance, allowing students to build meaningful friendships within their groups (Alghamdy, 2019) Additionally, CL encourages participants to actively engage in challenging tasks and to defend their group against external criticism, reinforcing their commitment to teamwork (Johnson & Johnson, 2018).
Researchers recognize that collaborative learning (CL) enhances the psychological well-being of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students, as outlined in Johnson & Johnson's theory (2008) Alghamdy (2019) notes that students demonstrate increased self-confidence when engaging with challenging tasks, participating in discussions, and sharing their opinions.
In English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes, collaborative learning (CL) significantly enhances students' self-confidence, particularly when they tackle problems (Farzaneh & Nejadansari, 2014) This increased self-confidence empowers EFL students to trust in their abilities and successfully complete assigned tasks.
CL holds students in high self-esteem during its implementation (Modaber & Far,
Collaborative learning (CL) enhances students' awareness of their roles within a group, fostering a sense of self-worth and value (Nguyen, 2019) Additionally, CL significantly reduces anxiety, as students feel supported and engaged in learning tasks, leading to a more enjoyable classroom experience (Suwantarathip & Wichadee, 2010) Furthermore, participation in CL activities in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes promotes the development of essential social skills (Giedrė & Svetlana, 2006; Johnson & Johnson, 2008, 2018; Nguyen, 2019; Alghamdy).
2019) Significant social skills mentioned in the research are leadership, decision- making, trust-building, and conflict management
All of the abovementioned benefits (or expected outcomes) of CL in EFL classes are summarized in the following table
7 Peer group acceptance and friendships
8 Willingness to undertake group difficult tasks
9 Willingness to protect the group against extrinsic attack or criticism
Table 1: Benefits of Cooperative Learning in EFL classes
Previous studies have demonstrated the benefits of Collaborative Learning (CL) through experiments and action research However, there is a lack of research focusing on its outcomes in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes from the students' perspectives This study aims to explore students' perceptions and experiences regarding the outcomes of CL when implemented in EFL social speaking classes.
Related studies about CL and its benefits in EFL speaking classes from students’ perceptions and experiences
Previous research has established students' perceptions and experiences with collaborative learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking classes, both globally and in Vietnam However, there is a lack of studies that comprehensively address all five key elements and anticipated outcomes of CL from the students' viewpoints in the existing literature.
One significant study that investigated multiple aspects of Cooperative Learning in EFL contexts from Vietnamese university students’ perceptions and
In the study titled "EFL Collaborative Learning in a Vietnamese University: Perceptions and Experiences of Students and Teachers" by Nguyen (2019), it was found that while collaborative learning (CL) was implemented in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes, students had limited awareness of its presence This lack of recognition stemmed from their insufficient understanding of the term and its key characteristics, making it difficult for them to identify CL when it was applied in lessons.
Students recognized various benefits of group work, including improved linguistic and communicative skills, enhanced knowledge of English and learning content, and a supportive learning environment that provided more opportunities for language practice However, the study equated "CL" (Cooperative Learning) with "group work," indicating that students' perceptions might reflect their experiences with pair/group work rather than a true understanding of CL While students reported both positive and negative aspects of their experiences, such as increased vocabulary, greater motivation for learning English, and improved relationships with peers, they did not perceive the frequent changes in their roles during group work as beneficial Ultimately, the research (Nguyen, 2019) highlighted that despite experiencing the advantages of CL in EFL classes, students lacked a comprehensive understanding of the concept.
Nguyen & Nguyen (2020) highlighted the positive impact of Cooperative Learning (CL) on Vietnamese students' English speaking classes, emphasizing that it enhances their learning experiences and motivates them to put in greater effort to achieve success.
Cooperative Learning (CL) fosters positive attitudes towards learning English, enhances speaking performance, and boosts creativity in group tasks The study found that CL improved student participation in class activities, strengthened peer relationships, and increased socialization and cooperation among students Additionally, it contributed to better psychological health, as students displayed greater confidence when speaking English However, the research did not explore how students perceived the characteristics and benefits of CL in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking classes or whether they experienced its key elements during implementation The current research aims to investigate students' attitudes and views on the benefits of using Cooperative Learning in the classroom, linking these perceptions to their experiences.
Putting CL in a more specific context of EFL speaking classes, Palupi (2018) documented Indonesian university students’ positive reflections on the benefits of
At Sanata Dharma University, CL in English play performance classes significantly enhanced students' speaking skills, leading to increased fluency and frequency of English usage Engaging in English through practical activities motivated students to participate actively, fostering collaboration and shared responsibility in problem-solving The study highlighted that CL encouraged acceptance of diverse opinions among peers and effectively boosted students' confidence in expressing their ideas Additionally, frequent social interactions through CL improved social skills and created a sense of happiness when achieving goals, which contributed to a greater enjoyment of school and reduced stress levels It is important to note that the term "perception" in this study refers to students' viewpoints on CL in their English speaking classes, rather than their awareness of the learning process.
Summary
Overall, this chapter has reviewed the literature on the field including CL’s key elements, main benefits for learners in EFL classes, and previous research on the
This study aims to provide a solid foundation for understanding students' perceptions and experiences with Collaborative Learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes Despite extensive research on students' opinions regarding the benefits of CL, there remains a significant gap in exploring their understanding of CL, its expected outcomes, and experiences with its key features Previous studies have highlighted students' limited knowledge about CL, leading to a lack of awareness regarding its implementation in EFL classes; however, specifics about their awareness levels remain unclear Therefore, this research seeks to illuminate how students perceive and engage with the features and advantages of CL in EFL social speaking environments.
In this chapter, details about the research context, design, samplings, methods and procedure of the data collection and data analysis process are going to be clarified.
Research context
The study was conducted at an English faculty within a language university in Hanoi, which comprises six divisions and serves around 2,000 English-major students These students engage in a comprehensive four-year program that includes mandatory courses in English skills acquisition during their first two years, focusing on both academic and social purposes The curriculum is designed to integrate all four essential English skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing.
The faculty consists of 23 classes with around 600 second-year English majors in their fourth semester, enrolled in the English for Social Purposes 4A/4A* course This course is divided into two tracks: 4A for standard program students and 4A* for fast-track students Notably, six of these classes have been confirmed by their teachers to have engaged in Collaborative Learning (CL) during their social speaking sessions.
Research design
The research utilized an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, integrating both quantitative and qualitative approaches to effectively address the research questions (Creswell, 2014) This design involved collecting and analyzing quantitative data, leveraging previously analyzed quantitative results to inform qualitative data collection, and subsequently analyzing qualitative data to provide insights into the initial quantitative findings (Creswell, 2012) The choice of this mixed-methods approach was deemed most feasible for gaining a comprehensive understanding of students’ perceptions and experiences with collaborative learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes.
Research samplings
In Phase 1 of the study, approximately 120 second-year English-majored students from six classes were selected through stratified sampling, focusing on those whose teachers confirmed their experience with Collaborative Learning (CL) during English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes This research targeted these participants specifically, as by February 2021, they had engaged with CL in the English for Social Purposes 4A/4A* course for nearly two months, providing them with sufficient time to develop an understanding of CL in their speaking classes.
In Phase 2, participants were chosen through typical sampling methods (Creswell, 2014), allowing for a diverse representation of key trends and opposing viewpoints This approach facilitated semi-structured interviews with subjects who shared varied perceptions and experiences, ultimately enhancing the researcher's understanding of the findings from Phase 1.
Data collection
Data collection instruments
The data of this research was collected using two different instruments which were: a structured questionnaire in the quantitative stage and a semi-structured interview in the qualitative stage
To gather extensive data on students' perceptions and experiences with collaborative learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes, the researcher utilized a structured questionnaire Leveraging the Internet and Google Forms enabled efficient and cost-effective surveying of the entire student population, as noted by Creswell (2012) This method was particularly suitable for sophomore students, as the questionnaire required minimal time to complete, thereby increasing the likelihood of a high response rate Additionally, the software program facilitated data collection, organization, result generation, and reporting, enhancing the overall research process (Creswell, 2014).
The structured questionnaire titled “Cooperative Learning and its Benefits in EFL Social Speaking Classes from the Perceptions and Experiences of Second-Year English-Majored Students” was developed based on a thorough literature review of the five key elements of cooperative learning and its anticipated outcomes in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes.
Appendix 1 ) was divided into three main parts The first part collected data on students’ background information The second part used a nominal scale which included several “response options” (Creswell, 2012, p.165) for students to tick the boxes that indicated their perceptions of CL and its benefits in EFL social speaking classes This part identified whether students were aware of and how they understood
The article discusses the role of Collaborative Learning (CL) in addressing the first research question, while the latter section focuses on students' experiences with CL's features and benefits in EFL social speaking classes, collecting data for the second research question A six-point Likert scale was employed to measure responses, ranging from "never" to "always" in the first sub-part and from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree" in the second, which minimized the tendency to choose a neutral option and enhanced the accuracy of the survey results (Thompson, 2018) This even-numbered scale facilitated data analysis by clearly distinguishing between favorable and unfavorable responses, with scales 1-3 indicating negative opinions and 4-6 indicating positive ones The validity of the instrument was reinforced by grounding the questionnaire in established CL theories and ensuring that the items directly addressed the research questions.
A summary of the questionnaire can be found in the table below:
Part one Background information Questions 1-6
Part two Perception of Cooperative Learning in
Part three Experience with Cooperative Learning
(or group work) in speaking classes during the course of English for social purposes 4A/4A*
Table 2: A summary of the questionnaire
To address the issue of low response rates in web-based questionnaires (Creswell, 2012), the researcher distributed the surveys through class monitors to encourage participation Additionally, participants received a small gift as an incentive to complete the questionnaire and to express gratitude for their cooperation.
To gain insights into students' perceptions and experiences with Collaborative Learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes, semi-structured interviews were conducted with selected participants from phase 1 The use of open-ended questions empowered interviewees to express their thoughts freely, enabling the collection of rich and detailed information that was not captured in the initial survey (Creswell, 2012) An interview protocol was developed based on the quantitative phase results, facilitating a deeper understanding of students' views and experiences with CL (Creswell, 2014).
Data collection procedure
The process of data collection included two distinct phases as described in the figure below:
The researcher developed a questionnaire for students, informed by literature on collaborative learning (CL) elements and outcomes in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes A draft was piloted with three second-year English majors, leading to revisions for clarity and comprehension Once finalized, the web-based questionnaire was distributed to 120 second-year English majors via email, with an anticipated response of around 100, representing over 80% of the population, which aligns with Fincham's (2008) definition of a high response rate.
The researcher developed interview questions to delve deeper into specific areas from students’ perspectives Six students were chosen based on their diverse and contradictory responses to the quantitative data, and invitations for online semi-structured interviews were sent to them The invitations clarified the study's purpose, the duration of the interviews, and how the results would be utilized, ensuring consent from participants During the interviews, the researcher recorded audio and video, while also taking brief notes on the interview protocol, using Zoom Cloud Meetings for convenient video recording.
Data analysis
Data analysis instruments
The structured questionnaire employed multiple-response and ordinal questions, making Statistical Analysis the ideal method for analyzing the quantitative data To evaluate the categorical multi-select questions in the second part of the questionnaire, the researcher used the Multiple-Response Frequency function in SPSS to identify the most significant results.
The study identified 20 perceived characteristics and benefits of collaborative learning (CL) among students To analyze the responses from the Likert-scale questions in the third part of the questionnaire, the researcher utilized Descriptive Analysis, focusing on central tendency measures such as mean, mode, and standard deviation.
Content Analysis was utilized to analyze qualitative data from participant interviews, as the responses were not in numerical form The interviews were coded to facilitate easy reference to previously analyzed quantitative findings and to provide a logical explanation of those results.
Data analysis procedure
The process of data analysis included two distinct phases: Quantitative data analysis and Qualitative data analysis
Following the collection of quantitative data through questionnaires, the researcher meticulously analyzed the responses to ensure their validity Subsequently, scores were assigned to each response option for comprehensive analysis.
In 2012, the researcher utilized SPSS, a widely-used analysis software, to input and analyze survey data coded for quantitative research The findings were presented in tables and figures, enhancing clarity for both the researcher’s discussion and the readers' comprehension.
The interviews were recorded and transcribed for detailed analysis, utilizing qualitative content analysis as outlined by Creswell (2012) Significant quotations from these interviews were highlighted to illustrate the findings To ensure participant confidentiality, pseudonyms such as S1, S2, and S3 were assigned to each individual involved in the study.
In brief, the research context, research samples as well as selected methods for this mixed-methods study were presented in detail A two-phase data collection
21 and data analysis were sequentially and carefully conducted to provide a basement on which the analysis of the data was grounded in the following chapter
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter systematically examines and interprets data gathered from various instruments, presenting findings aligned with the two research questions It aims to elucidate students' perceptions of Collaborative Learning (CL) by incorporating their experiences within classroom settings Additionally, this chapter includes discussions that contextualize these results.
Findings
Personal information
A survey of 102 respondents revealed that 47.1% were under 20 years old, while 52.9% were aged 20-25, with no participants over 25 The gender distribution showed that 74.5% were female, 15.7% were male, and 9.8% preferred not to disclose their gender, reflecting the demographic trends at a foreign language university in Vietnam Notably, all respondents reported having participated in group work during speaking classes 4A/4A*.
4.1.2 Research question 1: Students’ perceptions of CL and its benefits in EFL social speaking classes
The analysis of students' survey responses and follow-up interviews reveals their awareness of Collaborative Learning (CL), highlighting its characteristics and benefits within English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes.
Figure 2: Students' awareness of CL
2.9% Yes, I know exactly what it is.
Yes, I know it but not very clearly.
I have heard about it but do not know what it is.
I have never heard about it but I can guess what it is.
I have never heard about it.
A significant number of students are familiar with the concept of "Cooperative Learning," as indicated in Figure 1 While most students had heard of the term and could make educated guesses about its meaning, only 14% felt they truly understood it More than 60% recognized the term but lacked clarity on its precise definition In an interview, one student, S5, shared her interpretation of "Cooperative Learning" based on her understanding.
Cooperative Learning involves collaboration in groups of three or more, fostering an environment where each member is encouraged to actively participate in the collective effort This approach promotes strong connections among team members, allowing them to share their insights, knowledge, and unique perspectives.
In contrast, S6 had never read anything about “Cooperative Learning”; however, she tried to define the term by translating it into Vietnamese S6 considered
CL as activities in small groups where students exchanged knowledge, discussed problems, and reported the results back to the teachers
In a recent survey, 10.8% of students were aware of the term "CL" but lacked understanding of its meaning, while 8.8% could make educated guesses about it despite never having encountered the term before Additionally, 2.9% of the students indicated that they had no knowledge of what "CL" refers to at all.
4.1.2.2 Students’ perceptions of CL’s characteristics
Figure 3: Students’ perceptions of CL’s characteristics
All respondents demonstrated some understanding of the features of Collaborative Learning (CL), although a few students were unfamiliar with the term itself.
No idea Group processing Appropriate use of social skills
Among 102 students surveyed, only 12 demonstrated a complete understanding of cooperative learning (CL) features While less than half recognized positive interdependence (44.1%) and group processing (43.1%) as key characteristics of CL, over 84% acknowledged its importance in collaborative educational settings.
Individual accountability is a crucial aspect of collaborative learning (CL) S4 highlighted the necessity of personal responsibility in ensuring that each group member fulfills their assigned tasks for successful group work Similarly, S5 noted that while working in groups, students collectively strive towards a common goal of problem-solving, which requires each member to effectively complete their specific roles S5 further elaborated on the importance of group members being accountable not only for their own contributions but also for supporting each other in their respective tasks.
To maintain coherence in a group project, it's essential that members ensure interconnection among their individual tasks When each person works in isolation without considering the contributions of others, it can lead to an illogical final product Therefore, group members must take responsibility for each other's work to ensure that everyone is aligned and progressing in the right direction.
4.1.2.3 Students’ perceptions of CL’s benefits
Figure 4: Students’ perceptions of CL’s benefits
No idea Social skills Reduced anxiety Self-esteem Self-confidence Willingness to protect the group
Willingness to undertake group difficult…
Peer group acceptance and friendships
Increased attendanceMotivation to learnOn-task communicationLong-term retentionHigher achievement
A significant majority of students (66.7%) recognized the benefits of Collaborative Learning (CL) in enhancing their performance in EFL social speaking classes One student, S2, noted that collaboration allowed them to gain valuable insights from their peers, which improved their individual presentations and overall scores Additionally, S5 emphasized that the success of group work is heavily influenced by the relationships and cooperation among group members; effective collaboration leads to better outcomes, while a lack of participation can result in poorer performance compared to working alone.
Students recognized the benefits of cooperative learning (CL) for enhancing social skills, with 64.7% acknowledging its positive impact Interviewee S5 noted that CL improved decision-making skills by encouraging all members to share their opinions, even when they conflicted, necessitating further discussion to reach consensus Additionally, S6 highlighted the development of conflict-management skills, as working in groups taught students to maintain harmony during disagreements and express their ideas constructively, ultimately leading to positive conflict resolution and improved interpersonal skills.
Over half of the respondents identified motivation to learn (56.9%), personal responsibility to the group (52%), and self-confidence (57.8%) as key benefits of collaborative learning (CL) In contrast, fewer than 50% of students recognized other advantages, indicating that these primary benefits were more widely acknowledged among participants.
Only 26.5% of students believed that collaborative learning (CL) could enhance attendance in their English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes, indicating a notably low perception compared to other factors Interviews with participants S1 and S5 highlighted that they considered class attendance to be voluntary, which contributed to their decision to leave the response blank.
The effectiveness of learning relies heavily on individual motivation rather than group influence If a person does not recognize the value of attending class or lacks the willingness to participate, they are likely to remain absent, regardless of their responsibilities or encouragement from peers.
4.1.2.4 Students’ awareness of the application of CL in class
A questionnaire was administered to students in classes 4A and 4A* to assess their awareness of collaborative learning (CL) during their speaking classes focused on English for social purposes The students were asked to evaluate their experiences with group work in these sessions.
4A/4A* was CL or not Results are shown in the pie chart below:
Figure 5: Students’ awareness of the application of CL in class
Research question 2: Students’ experiences with CL and its benefits in
4.1.3.1 Students’ experiences with CL’s characteristics
The questionnaire assessed students' experiences with characteristics of Collaborative Learning (CL) through ten items measured on a six-level Likert scale ranging from "never" to "always." The overall findings are summarized in the accompanying table.
Elements Items Mean Mode SD
Positive interdependence a share the same learning goals with others in group 3.82 4 0.93 b share the same rewards for the accomplishment of the group work
4.12 4 1.06 c share the same learning resources with others in group 4.15 5 1.05
Individual accountability d take responsibility for one part of the group work 4.75 5 1.04 e help others in groups to complete their parts 4.44 5 1.02
Promotive interaction f communicate face-to-face with others in group 4.52 5 1.01 g discuss problems with the group 4.57 4 1.01 h encourage and be encouraged by others to do the group work
Appropriate use of social skills i be taught social skills needed for group work (by teacher) 4.36 5 1.00
Group processing j together with others, reflect on how effective the group work is going
Table 3: Students’ overall experiences with CL’s characteristics
The analysis reveals that the mean and mode scores for all ten characteristics of Collaborative Learning (CL) in speaking classes 4A/4A* are notably high, with none falling below a score of 3, indicating frequent use of this teaching method The mean scores range from 3.82 to 4.75, reflecting varying levels of CL application as reported by students Notably, Individual accountability received the highest mean score at 4.75, while Positive interdependence and Group processing had the lowest mean scores, just under or around 4 Additionally, the relatively high standard deviation exceeding 1.0 for most items suggests significant variation in student responses.
Regarding the first element Positive interdependence, the result is presented as follows
In a collaborative learning environment, participants express a strong alignment with shared learning goals, achieving an average rating of 3.82 Additionally, the group emphasizes the importance of collective rewards for their accomplishments, reflected in a higher average score of 4.12 Furthermore, the sharing of learning resources among group members is highly valued, with an average rating of 4.15, indicating a commitment to mutual support and resource accessibility.
Table 4: Students’ experiences with “Positive interdependence”
Generally, most students had frequent experience with the first element of CL,
Positive interdependence was evident, with mean scores for two of the three related items exceeding 4 The first two items showed that most students frequently shared the same learning goals and achieved joint rewards during group work, as indicated by a common score of 4 Additionally, the third item received a score of 5, reflecting that the majority of students experienced a high level of collaborative success.
The study revealed that participants typically worked collaboratively on shared resources, yet the lowest mean score (M=3.82) was noted for item a This low score can be attributed to S3's interview response, indicating that most group activities primarily involved discussions where students were only required to share their opinions on topics Consequently, there was a lack of problem-solving and minimal emphasis on creating tangible products during these group interactions.
The results indicated a significant standard deviation for the items related to group work rewards (SD=1.06) and shared learning resources (SD=1.05), reflecting varied student responses Interview insights revealed that S4 frequently experienced joint rewards and resource sharing, mentioning bonuses for mini-tests and encouraging her group to collaboratively seek diverse learning materials In her group, members often divided tasks to enhance efficiency Conversely, S5 reported limited experiences with these aspects, primarily receiving individual scores for speaking activities rather than group-based rewards, highlighting a stark contrast to S4's collaborative approach.
In our group work, we efficiently assign each member a specific part, allowing us to focus on individual learning resources rather than having everyone tackle the same materials When a member discovers a valuable resource, they share the link with the group, ensuring that everyone is informed This collaborative approach enables us to work on multiple resources simultaneously, enhancing our overall productivity and learning experience.
The table below presents results on students’ experiences with CL’s second element, namely Individual accountability
Items Mean Mode SD d take responsibility for one part of the group work 4.75 5 1.04 e help others in groups to complete their parts 4.44 5 1.02
Table 5: Students’ experiences with “Individual accountability”
Table 5 reveals that students demonstrated a high frequency of individual responsibility in group work, reflected in mean scores of 4.75 for "taking responsibility for one part of the group work" and 4.44 for "helping others in groups to complete their parts." However, the variation in frequency among respondents is notable, with standard deviations of 1.04 for item d and 1.02 for item e.
On being asked to explain her answer to items related to Individual accountability, S5 gave a detailed description of a group activity in her speaking class 4A*:
In a mini-presentation, each member is assigned a specific part to present, allowing for focused contributions If tasks are divided differently, members may handle information gathering, outline planning, and presentation duties It’s essential for me to support my teammates by understanding their research and the overall outline, enabling me to provide constructive feedback and ensure a smooth presentation.
S1 highlighted that in speaking classes 4A, she had no specific responsibilities, as her role was simply to share her opinions without pressure to contribute during discussions Additionally, the task of voicing the group’s opinions typically fell to the most active member, meaning participation was not mandatory for everyone.
Another explanation for the negative response to the experience with
Individual accountability was offered by S6 She revealed that only when the incompletion of other member’s work could affect the overall results of the group
31 would she have the responsibility to urge and support him/her to do it In contrast, if it did not affect the group’s results, she would not do it
Concerning the third element of CL, namely Promotive interaction, the results of the responses are shown in the following table
Items Mean Mode SD f communicate face-to-face with others in group 4.52 5 1.01 g discuss problems with the group 4.57 4 1.01 h encourage and be encouraged by others to do the group work 4.47 5 1.11
Table 6: Students’ experiences with “Promotive interaction”
Table 6 reveals mean scores of M=4.52, M=4.57, and M=4.47, indicating that most students preferred face-to-face communication and mutual encouragement for group work (mode=5), while group problem discussions occurred less frequently (mode=4) Despite these generally positive findings, the relatively high standard deviations (SD=1.01 for items f and g, and SD=1.11 for item h) highlight significant variability in student responses In an interview, S5 shared her experiences with both in-class and cross-class activities, noting that her groups engaged in face-to-face discussions to complete tasks within class time, whereas for longer projects, they relied on messaging platforms like Facebook for online discussions.
In a group setting, mutual encouragement plays a vital role among members Interviewees shared various experiences, such as S5, who emphasized the importance of both motivating one another and being attentive to each other's emotions Conversely, S4 highlighted the necessity for individuals to take responsibility for their own tasks to meet group deadlines In challenging situations, rather than relying on verbal encouragement, S4's group members opted for immediate assistance to support one another.
Regarding “Appropriate use of social skills”, it can be interpreted from the data in Table 7 that students frequently received guidance on how to work in groups
32 effectively from their teachers in speaking classes 4A/4A* with slight variation among responses (M=4.36, SD=1.00)
Items Mean Mode SD i be taught social skills needed for group work (by teacher) 4.36 5 1.00
Table 7: Students’ experiences with “Appropriate use of social skills”
In an interview, S4 highlighted the importance of the skill of "commenting on others' work," taught by her teacher This skill is closely linked to critical thinking and empowers students to provide constructive feedback on both their own and their peers' work, which is crucial for effective group collaboration.
Some interviewees, specifically S1 and S5, reported similar experiences where their teacher assigned tasks without providing adequate instructions for group work They speculated that the teacher believed they were sufficiently mature and experienced to collaborate effectively on their own.
S3 elaborated that their prior experience in a subject titled "Skills to Succeed in the University" equipped them with essential social skills, allowing their teacher in Speaking 4A to forgo additional guidance on effective teamwork in cooperative groups.
Finally, results related to the last element of CL, namely Group processing, indicate that students experienced group reflection quite frequently
Items Mean Mode SD j together with others, reflect on how effective the group work is going 4.18 5 1.18
Table 8: Students’ experiences with “Group processing”
Discussion
Research question 1: Students’ perceptions of CL and its benefits in
4.2.1.1 Students’ awareness of CL and its application
On the one hand, results of the study revealed students’ little awareness of
CL As explained by S6, this might stem from the fact that the teachers neither introduced nor explained the type of activities in which the class was participating
Despite their frequent experiences with Collaborative Learning (CL), students often lack a clear understanding of the concept Nguyen (2019) supports this observation, noting that students' limited awareness of CL stems from their insufficient knowledge of the term and its key characteristics.
The majority of students in classes 4A/4A* demonstrated awareness of Cooperative Learning (CL) in their speaking classes, contrasting with Nguyen's (2019) findings, which indicated that students had little awareness of CL's presence This study utilized the term "Cooperative Learning" instead of "group work," allowing participants to better understand and relate to the group activities they experienced For instance, one student, S6, expressed uncertainty about the term "Cooperative Learning," yet was able to connect it to her experiences in class.
Vietnamese, she could imagine what it was and guess that the group work in her speaking class 4A was CL
4.2.1.2 Students’ perceptions of CL’s characteristics
The research findings indicated that many key elements of Cooperative Learning (CL) outlined by Johnson & Johnson (2008) were not fully recognized by students, aligning with Nguyen's (2019) conclusions that students lacked awareness of CL concepts However, this study uniquely identified specific elements of CL that students perceived, revealing that Individual accountability was the most recognized feature, while Positive interdependence and Group processing were the least acknowledged characteristics of CL.
4.2.1.3 Students’ perceptions of CL’s benefits
The findings regarding students' perceptions of cooperative learning (CL) benefits in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes largely align with Nguyen's (2019) research, particularly highlighting higher achievement as a key benefit Nguyen identified three main advantages linked to academic improvement, while this study revealed four additional perceived benefits: improved social skills, increased self-confidence, enhanced motivation to learn, and a sense of personal responsibility within the group Conversely, increased attendance was considered the least significant benefit Notably, only five out of thirteen benefits of CL discussed in the literature were recognized by more than half of the students, suggesting a limited understanding of CL's potential outcomes in EFL settings, as theorized by Johnson & Johnson (2008).
The participants' limited awareness of CL's features and benefits indicates a lack of understanding of the term and its associated concepts, suggesting that their experiences may play a crucial role in shaping this knowledge.
CL in their EFL social speaking classes.
Research question 2: Students’ experiences with CL and its benefits in
4.2.2.1 Students’ experiences with CL’s characteristics
This study represents the first investigation into students' experiences with collaborative learning (CL) characteristics in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking classes Notably, students frequently engaged with most CL elements in the social speaking classes 4A/4A* These findings align well with earlier confirmations from teachers regarding the application of CL in these classes.
Research by Palupi (2018) highlights the significant influence of students' experiences on their perceptions of collaborative learning (CL) characteristics The data revealed that the most commonly experienced aspect of CL was the responsibility for individual contributions, aligning with the high perception of individual accountability Conversely, positive interdependence and group processing were identified as the least perceived features, reflecting their low mean scores among the five essential elements of students' experiences in collaborative learning.
4.2.2.2 Students’ experiences with CL’s benefits
This research aligns with previous studies highlighting the benefits of cooperative learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking classes Students reported experiencing personal responsibility towards their group, as well as fostering peer group acceptance and friendships, which are essential elements of effective collaborative learning (Johnson & Johnson, 2008).
(Alghamdy, 2019, Nguyen, 2019), and Self-confidence (Nguyen & Nguyen, 2020,
A comparison of students' experiences and perceptions regarding the benefits of Collaborative Learning (CL) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) social speaking classes highlighted notable contradictions Notably, higher achievement emerged as the least commonly experienced benefit among students, despite being previously regarded as a significant advantage of CL.
CL was favored by the majority of students, but S5 noted that despite recognizing its positive impact on academic performance, she had rarely participated in graded group activities, resulting in no noticeable improvement in her speaking skills Additionally, while personal responsibility and peer acceptance were the most commonly reported benefits in speaking classes 4A/4A*, few students believed that CL could offer similar advantages in EFL social speaking classes This skepticism stemmed from a general lack of understanding about CL and its potential benefits in their EFL learning environments.
Besides stated disagreement between the two variables, results signified a correspondence between students’ perception of and experience with the impact of
In an examination of students' perceptions regarding class attendance in EFL social speaking classes, it was found that a minimal number of students recognized increased attendance as a benefit of cooperative learning (CL) The results indicated a low level of agreement among students about CL's impact on improving their attendance Consequently, it can be concluded that students did not perceive any benefits from CL, as its implementation in their speaking classes did not lead to more consistent attendance This aligns with the notion that an individual's perception is shaped by their experiences (Palupi, 2018).
Summary
In conclusion, while most students reported positive experiences with Collaborative Learning (CL), many lacked awareness and understanding of its features and benefits This aligns with Nguyen's (2019) findings, which indicated that despite students experiencing CL and its advantages in their English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes, they did not possess a comprehensive understanding of the concept.
This concluding chapter summarizes the key findings of the study in relation to the research questions and discusses the implications derived from the analyzed results Additionally, the researcher recognizes the study's limitations, which provide a foundation for recommendations for future research.