1 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES HỒNG THỊ BÍCH THỦY STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS COOPERATIVE LEARNING AT NGHE AN TEACHERS’ COLLEGE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS (Thái độ sinh viên trường CĐSP Nghệ An hoạt động học mang tính hợp tác hàm ý cho việc đào tạo giáo viên) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10 HANOI - 2010 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES -HỒNG THỊ BÍCH THỦY STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS COOPERATIVE LEARNING AT NGHE AN TEACHERS’ COLLEGE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS (Thái độ sinh viên trường CĐSP Nghệ An hoạt động học mang tính hợp tác hàm ý cho việc đào tạo giáo viên) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10 Supervisor: Lê Văn Canh, M.A HANOI - 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Candidate’s statement i Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii List of Tables vi List of Abbreviations vii PART A: INTRODUCTION 1 Rationale Aims of the study Research questions Scope of the study Research methodology Organization of the study PART C: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Attitudes 1.2 Cooperative Learning 1.2.1 Definitions of Cooperative Learning 1.2.2 Benefits of Cooperative Learning in foreign language learning 1.2.3 Review of previous studies related to Cooperative Learning 10 1.2.4 Cooperative Learning and Vietnamese Learning Culture 11 CHAPTER II: THE STUDY 13 2.1 Research questions 13 2.2 Participants 13 2.3 Instruments 13 2.3.1 The Questionnaire 14 2.3.2 Follow-up interviews 14 2.4 Data analysis 14 2.5 Results and Discussion 15 2.5.1 Students‟ preferred habits and learning styles 15 2.5.2 Students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL 16 2.5.3 Teachers‟ use of CL 19 2.5.4 Students‟ engagement and preferences in CL 24 2.5.5 Students‟ suggestions to improve CL 28 CHAPTER III: IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 30 3.1 Challenges of Cooperative Learning in foreign language learning 30 3.2 Teaching implications 31 3.3 Suggestions 35 PART C: CONCLUSION 38 Conclusions 38 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies 39 REFERENCES 40 APPENDIXES APPENDIX APPENDIX LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CL : Cooperative Learning EFL: English as a foreign language ESL: English as a second language LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Students‟ preferred learning styles of learning English Table 2.2: Students‟ attitudes towards CL Table 2.3: Students‟ perceived benefits of CL Table 2.4 : Students‟ difficulties in CL Table 2.5: The frequency of using of CL in and outside classroom Table 2.6: Teachers‟ ways of assigning students to groups Table 2.7: The number of students teachers assign to a group Table 2.8: Students‟ evaluation of teachers‟ way of assigning to a group Table 2.9: Teachers‟ ways of rewarding groups of students Table 2.10: Students‟ evaluation of teachers‟ way of rewarding groups of students Table 2.11: Group size preferred by students Table 2.12: Students‟ working in groups Table 2.13: Students‟ interest in some activities 10 PART A: INTRODUCTION Rationale Co-operative learning has attracted a great attention in the last few decades for its value as one of the startegies which help to provide students with more opportunities to learn from each other By cooperating with each other in solving learning tasks in the classroom, the students at the same time create a favourable and active learning atmosphere, thereby making use of each other‟s resources Over the last few decades, Cooperative Learning (CL) has become a popular practice in both mainstream education and in second/ foreign language education There has been empirical evidence to justify the effectiveness of CL in promoting mastery of knowledge and skills among students of various abilities and ages Regarding second/foreign language learning, students, through cooperation, become more actively involved in their lessons and thus, they have more chance to use the target language than they are in the whole class arrangement Despite its documented benefits, CL has not been adequately researched in Vietnamese educational settings So, one of the unresolved questions is to what extent the contextual variables such as students‟ social background and learning culture affects the success of CL For instance, it is not clear whether CL can bring about similar success in the context where students come from remote rural areas and are taught largely with traditional methods as it does in other, especially in Western, contexts This question motivates me to undertake this study, which aims to explore the possibility of applying the principles and techniques of CL in a Junior Teachers‟ Training College in one central province of Vietnam The focus of my study is to find out the college students‟s attitudes toward CL in the classroom Aims of the study This study sets out to achieve the following aims: 11 ● to know the degree to which teachers use CL in their classroom through students‟ self-reports ● to investigate into college students‟ attitudes and perceptions toward CL It is hoped that the result of the study will inform teachers, first of all those working in the college, of the possibilities for using cooperative techniques in their teaching I believe that any innovative teaching strategy or technique the teacher is trying to use is likely to fail if the students not have a positive attitude toward it Therefore, it is critical to understand the students‟ attitudes before implementing innovation Another dimension of the study is to gain insights into how teachers in the College have used CL through students‟ verbal reports Research questions To achieve the aims of the thesis, the following research questions were proposed: What are the English language students‟ preferred learning habits and learning styles? How teachers use CL both inside and outside the classroom according to students‟ self-reports? What are their attitudes towards, and perceptions of, CL as well as their suggestions for the use of CL? Scope of the study As it has been stated above, the study is carried out to investigate college students‟ attitudes toward CL, and therefore, it is a survey by nature It is not intended to examine the impact of CL on students‟ learning outcomes Neither is it intended to explore teachers‟ attitudes toward, and perceptions of, CL The study was carried out within one Junior Teachers‟ Training College only This means that no generalisation of the findings is intended Research methodology 12 Due to the aim and scope of the study, two research methods are used in the present study: ● A questionnaire to investigate students‟ attitudes and perceptions towards CL as well as their preferences The questionnaire is designed, primarily, to find out what students think of CL And how they prefer to have CL activities in their foreign language classes Data were analyzed mainly by means of descriptive statistics ● Follow-up interviews were conducted to get better insights into students‟ attitudes, perceptions, and preferences Organization of the thesis The thesis is structured into parts: Part A: Introduction, which introduces the rationale, the aims, the scope, the research methods and the organization of the study Part B: Development which consists of chapters: Chapter I is a Literature Review In this chapter, a basic theoretical background for the study is created by reviewing the relevant literature with a focus on Attitudes, and CL techniques Chapter II, The Study, presents the methods and procedures used in the study, which consists of a survey questionnaire and follow-up interviews This chapter also includes Result and Discussion which presents the method of data analysis as well as the results derived from the data analysis Results are presented under themes as coded from the data analysis Chapter III, Implications and Suggestions, presents some suggestions on how to apply CL techniques in the classroom to achieve better impact Part C: Conclusion, summarises the main remarks of the study and suggest some ideas for further study Limitations of the study will also be acknowledged in this chapter 13 PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter reviews the literature on CL In the first place, a definition of „attitude‟ is provided This will be followed by a discussion of the nature of CL as well as its advantages in foreign language learning Finally, previous studies on CL will be reviewed to identify a research niche for the present study 1.1 Attitudes In general understanding, attitudes are defined as a disposition or tendency to respond positively or negatively towards a certain thing such as an idea, object, person or situation This is often referred to as attitude object, but in the scale of my study, attitude is understood as „learning attitude‟ The construct of „Attitude‟ has long been considered as one of the affective variables beside motivation in the realm of language learning as well, (e.g., Gardner and Lambert 1972) According to Oxford and Shearin (1994), attitude is one of the factors impacting motivation in language learning Gardner (1985) states that positive attitudes and motivation are related to success in second language learning Holmes (1992) believes that people develop attitudes towards languages, which reflect their views about those who speak the languages, and the contexts and functions with which they are associated He claims that attitudes in the context of language learning are defined as the way people look at the language, the class and the people, and the culture of language Lambert (1967, cited in Macnamara, 1973: 37) mentions two types of attitudes: „integrative‟ and „instrumental‟ attitude to language learning He claims that an integrative attitude (desire to know and become friendly with speakers of a language) is more likely to lead to success in learning a second language than an instrumental attitude (desire to better oneself materially by means of the language) 45 Step 2: Pairing: The teacher asks students to work in pairs and discuss what they have been thinking about Step 3: Sharing: In the third step, the teacher asks the pairs to share with the whole class what they have been talking about 3.3.1.3 Numbered Heads Together (Kagan) According to Kagan (1994), this approach was developed in 1993 to involve more students in the review of materials in a lesson and to check their understanding of a lesson‟s content Numbered Heads Together is particular appropriate for reviewing grammatical structures, vocabularies, or factual items from a reading or audio-visual text In this activity, the teachers use the following four step structures: Step1: Numbering: The teacher establishes a team of four members Each member is given numbers of 1, 2, 3, Step 2: Questioning: The teacher asks students a question Questions can be specific and in question form Step 3: Heads Together: Students put their heads together to figure out and make sure everyone knows the answer Step 4: Answering: The teacher calls out a number (two) and each two from each group raise their hands and provide answers to the whole class 3.3.1.4 Group Investigation Sharan (1984) and his colleagures described the following six steps of Group investigation approach Step 1: Topic selection: Students choose specific subtopics within a general problem area Student then organize into two-to-six- member task-oriented groups Step 2: Cooperative planning: Students and the teachers plan specific learning procedures, tasks, and goals consistent with the subtopics of the problem Step 3: Implementation: Students carry out the plan with a wide variety of activities and skills The teachers can give them assistance when needed Step 4: Analysis and synthesis: Students analyze and evaluate information obtained and plan to display or present to their classmates 46 Step 5: Presentation of final product: Some or all of the groups in the class give an interesting presentation of the topics Step 6: Evaluation: Students and the teachers evaluate each group‟s contribution to their work Evaluation can include either individual or group assessment, or both 3.3.1.5 Roundtable Roundtable is the activity from Structure Approach of Kagan (1994) In this activity, students take turns giving answers, providing information or sharing ideas In a Roundtable, students offer their written contributions, sharing one piece of paper and a pencil and passing them so that each student provides a written contribution Turns continue until everyone has run out of ideas or time is called Summary This chapter summarizes the main challenges in using CL in Nghe An Teachers' College according to students' perceptions These challenges include students' learning habits and learning styles which may lead to their reluctance in learning cooperatively, group conflicts and the habits of using L1 in groupwork In order to address these challenges, some practical suggessions for classroom practices are also presented The next chapter presents the conclusion of the study 47 PART C: CONCLUSION This part presents conclusions of the study Then the limitations of the study are acknowledged Finally, suggestions for further studies Conclusions This study aims to investigate students‟ attitudes towards CL at Nghe An Teacher‟s College Firstly, the results and findings obtained from this study also reveal that the learning styles of the majority of second- year students remained in that they preferred working invididually This learning style appeared to persist even when they worked at home or outside the classroom Such learning styles may prevent them from getting involved in CL Secondly, students have a positive attitude towards CL Such a positive attitude may be resulted from their perceptions of the benefits of CL For example, they provided more oppotunities for learning from peers, created a relaxing and friendly learning environment, developed their critical thinking skills and enhanced their self-esteem However, they reported some challenges in participating in CL activities According to their responses to the questionnaire, those challenges included disagreement among group members while doing groupwork, negative attitudes towards group cooperation, and the preference for L1 use among group members Next, students also reported that cooperative learning techniques such as groupwork or group discussion were not regularly used by the teachers since teachers were not involved in this study, and no classroom observation was made, what was reported by the students regarding teachers' use of CL needs to be justified empirically in other stydies However, it is possible to hypothesize that teachers' infrequent use of CL in the classroom may be due to their unfamiliarity to this teaching approach After all, CL is a western teaching appoarch, which has just been introduced into Vietnam very recently Finally, students suggested some solusions for themselves as well as for the teachers in order to improve CL more effectively In short, these findings show that although the students were positive to CL, they may inform teachers of the potential opportunities and constraints in applying CL principles in the context of Nghe An Teachers‟ College 48 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies Although the research has made effort toward conducting this thesis, there undoubtedly exist some limitations First of all, the limitations were found in the small number of participants: only 83 students were answered in survey questionnaire and only students were interviewed Therefore, further studies with larger population (both teachers and students) should be carried out to show more convincing results Secondly, the study employed the questionnaire as the main instrument of data collection, information may tell just the tip of the iceberg The interviews were too brief too yield in-depth information about teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes In other words, the findings may not fully reflect the students‟ attitudes as well as the teachers‟ attitudes and use of CL Although the findings of the study illuminate to some extent the students‟ attitudes toward CL in terms of the benefits and challenges of this teaching model as well as the students‟ preferred CL activities, generalisation of these findings should be made with caution As indicated above, the following recommendations are made for further researches A larger-scale survey involving a larger sample size is needed to find out the pattern of students‟ attitudes toward CL Also studies that employ qualitative methods such as observation and interviews are strongly recommended to gain insights into how both teachers and students perceive of the benefits and challenges of CL and the extent to which traditional pedagogy and learning culture affect their perceptions Another research direction is to find out the correlation between CL and students‟ academic achievements This can be achieved through experiemental studies Summary This part presents the conclusion of the study In general, the students had a positive attitude towards CL, but challenges of using CL, which are derived from students' traditional learning styles are also reported These challenges can be effectively addressed 49 REFERENCES Al Haidari, M S (2006), The effectiveness of using cooperativelearning to promote reading comprehension, vocabulary, and fluencyachievement scores of male fourth, and fifthgrade students in a Saudi Arabian school, Unpublished doctoral disseratation, The Pennsylvanian State University Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M (1980), Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Andrew M Dahley 10.1.94, Cooperative learning classroom research from http://alumni.media.edu/~andy‟d/mindset/design/clc.rsch.htlm Aronson, E., Blaney, N , Stephan, S., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M (1978), The jigsaw classroom, Beverly Hills: Sage Brown, D; & Thomson, C (2000), Cooperative learning in New Zealand schoo,l Palmerston North: Dunmore Press Brown, H D (2001), Teaching by principles, An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.), New York: Longman Chamot, A.U., O'Malley, J M (1987), The cognitive academiclanguage learning approaches: A bridge to the mainstream, TESOL Quarterly, 21(2), 227-249 Chambert, G.N (1999), Motivating language learners, Clevedon Multi-lingual Christion, M.A (1994), Cooperative learning in the EFL classroom, Teacher development: making the right moves, United States Information Agency, Washington, D.C, 141-147 Cohen, S & Willis, T (1985), Stress and social support and the buffering hypothesis, Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357 Davidson, N (1990), Enhancing thinking through cooperative learning, NewYork, Teachers College Press Deutch, M (1975), Equity, equality and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice, Journal of Social issues, 31, 137-149 Gardner, R (1985), Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation, London: Edward Arnold Gardner, R.C & Larmbert, W.E (1972), Attitudes and motivation in second language learning, Rowley, MA: Newbury House 50 Ghaith, G M (2003), Effects on the learning together model of cooperative learning on English as a foreign language reading achievement, academic self-esteem, and feelings of alienation, Bilingual Research Journal, 27(3), 451-473 Hasan, R (1991), Questions as a mode of learning in everyday task, in T.Le & M.Mc Causland (Eds), Language education: interaction & development, Tasmania: University of Tasmania Holmes, J (1992), An introduction to socialinguistics, London: Longman Hollingsworth, A., Sherman, J., Zaugra, C (2007), Increasing reading comprehension in first and second grades through cooperative learning, Unpublished MA Thesis Chicago: Saint Xavier University Ilola, L.M., Power, K.M & Jacobs, G.M (1989), Structuring student interaction to promote learning, English Teaching Forum 27 (3), 12-16 Jacobs, M.G & Hall, S (1994), Implimenting cooperative learning, methodology in language teaching: An anthodology of current practice, eds J.C, Richards & W.A, Renandya, NewYork: CUP Jacobs, G.M., Gilbert, C.C., Lopriore, L., Goldstein, S., & Thiragajali, R (1997), Cooperative learning and second language teaching: FAGs Perspective/TESOL-Italy, Vol.23, pp.55-60 Jalilifar, A (2010), The effect of cooperative learning techniques on college students‟ reading comprehension, System, 38 (1), 96-108 Johnson, D.W; & Johnson, R (1987), Learning together & alone, (2nd ed), Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc Johnson, D W., & Johnson, R T (1994), An overview of cooperative learning, IN J Thousand, A Villa, A Navin (Eds.), Creativity and collaborative learning, 1-20, Baltimore:Book Press Johnson, D W., Johnson, R.T & Smith, K A (1998) Cooperativelearning returns to college, Change, 30(4), 26-35 Johnson, D W & Johnson, R T (1999), Building community through cooperative learning, Theory into Practice, 38(2), 67-73 Johnson, D W., Johnson, R.T & Stanne, M.B (2000), Cooperative learning methods: A meta analysis, Retrieved october operation.org/pages/cl_meyhods.html 10, 2003, from http://www.co- 51 John et all (2003), Cooperative learning: increasing college faculty instructional productivity, Retrieved october 10, 2006, from http://www.ntlf.com/htlm/lib/bib/ggzdig.html Johnson, R.T., & Johnson, D.W (1989), Cooperation and competition theory and research Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co Littlewood, W., Liu, N., & Yu, C (1996), Hong Kong tertiary students‟ attitudes and proficiency in spoken English, RELC Journal, 27(1), 70-88 Long, M.H & Poster, P.A (1985), Group work, interlanguage talk & second language accquisition, TESOL Quarterly, 19 (2), 207-228 Luu Trong Tuan (2010), “Infusing CL into an EFL classroom”, English Language Teaching, 3(2), 64-77 Kagan, S (1986), Cooperative learning and sociological factor in schooling In Carlos Cortes (Ed) Beyond Language: Social & cultural factors in schooling language minority students, Los Angeles, CA: California State University Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center Kagan, S (1994) Cooperative learning San Clemente: Media Lithograppes Kessler, R., & McCleod, J (1985), Social support and mental health in community samples, in Cohen and Syme (Eds) Social Support and Health New York: Academic Press Macnamara John (1973), Attitudes and learning a second language, Editors: Rogerw Shuy and Ralph W Fasold, Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C 2007 Myers, D (2006), The national evaluation of reading comprehension intervention: Design Report, Princton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc Nguyen, T H (2002), Vietnam: Cultural background for ESL/EFL teachers, The Review of Vietnamese Studies,2(1),1-6 Retrieved December 4, 2008 from http://hmongstudies.com Oanh, D T H (2006), Learner autonomy in an Asian context: Independent learning and independent work at the university level (Vietnam), In T.S.C Farrell (Ed.), Language teacher research in Asia (pp 35-46) Virginia: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc O‟Malley, J M & Chamot, A U (1990) Learning strategies in second language acquisition, New York: Cambridge University Press 52 Olsen, R.E.W-B: & Kagan, S (1992), About cooperative learning, in C.Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative learning: A Teacher‟s resource book, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1-30 Oxford, R (1990), Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know, New York: Newbury House Oxford, R (1997), Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and interaction: Three communicative strands in the language classroom, Modern Language Journal, 81, 443456 Oxford, R., & Shearin, J (1994), Language learning motivation: expending the theoretical framework, Modern Language Journal, 78, 12-28 Schwartz, D.L., Black, J.B., & Strange, J (1991), Dyads have fourfold advantage over individuals inducing abstract rules, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Ass, Chicago, II, Aprill Scollon, S (1999), Not to waste words or students – Confucian and Socratic discourse in the tertiary classroom, In E Hinkel (Ed.), Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp 13-27), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Slavin, R E (1982) Cooperative learning: student teams What research says to the teacher? Washington, DC: National Education Association Slavin R.E (1987), Cooperative learning : Student teams 2nd Ed Washington, DC: National Education Association Slavin R.E (1990), Cooperative learning: theory, research, and practice, Boston: Allyn & Bacon Sharan, S & Sharan, Y (1976), Small group teaching, Englewood Cliff, NJ: Educational Technology Publications Sharan, S., Kussell, P., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., Bejarano, Y., Ravin, S., & Sharan, Y (1984), Cooperative learning in the classroom: research in Deseregated schools, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Thomson, C.R (1998), Junior Teacher Intership: Promoting cooperative interaction and learner autonomy in foreign language classrooms, Foreign Language Annals, 3(4), 569583 53 Thủy, L.T.B (2006), An action research on the application of cooperative learning to teaching speaking to the second year students at the department of English, Gia Lai teachers‟ training college, Un published MA Thesis, Vietnam National University in Hanoi Tracey, C., & Barbara, H (2003) Improving reading comprehension through cooperative learning, Un published MA Thesis, Sainte Xavier University (ED 478463) Webb (1992), Group composition, group interaction and achievement in small group, Journal of Educational Psychology, June 74, (4), 475-484 Wilson, S R (1991) The effects of cooperative learning on reading comprehension Available at http://www.proquest.umi.com Retrieved 23.04 2009 54 APPENDIX 1: PHIẾU ĐIỀU TRA NGHIÊN CỨU Phiếu điều tra thiết kế nhằm thu thập số liệu cho đề tài nghiên cứu thái độ sinh viên Ngoại Ngữ hoạt động học mang tính hợp tác trường CĐSP Nghệ An Xin bạn vui lòng trả lời câu hỏi cách khoanh tròn đáp án mà bạn lựa chọn, xếp thứ tự đáp án theo hướng dẫn, cho ý kiến riêng (nếu có) Các câu trả lời mà bạn cung cấp quan trọng cơng trình nghiên cứu Các liệu điều tra sử dụng cho việc nghiên cứu, khơng mục đích khác Xin chân thành cảm ơn hợp tác bạn! Bạn thích học Tiếng Anh nào? a Học với bạn khác nhóm b Học với người bạn mà bạn thấy tương đồng suy nghĩ phương pháp học c Học Bạn cảm thấy thoải mái học nhiều bạn… a Làm việc theo nhóm b làm việc theo cặp c làm việc độc lập Bạn có tham gia tích cực thầy u cầu bạn làm việc theo nhóm khơng? a Tích cực b Bình thường c Khơng tích cực Bạn có thấy cần thiết để thực hoạt động học theo nhóm khơng? a Rất cần thiết b Cần thiết c Không cần thiết d Không cần thiết Bạn có thích hoạt động học theo nhóm khơng? 55 a Rất thích b Thích c Khơng thích d Khơng thích tý Bạn có thường tham gia hoạt động theo nhóm khơng? a Ln b Thường xuyên c Thỉnh thoảng d Hiếm Bạn thích việc học theo nhóm việc học theo nhóm giúp bạn…(bạn chọn nhiều đáp án cho câu hỏi này) a có thành học tập tốt b nâng cao tự đánh giá thân c phát triển khả suy nghĩ phân tích vấn đề d nâng cao kỹ xã hội khác e cảm thấy tự tin lo lắng mắc lỗi f thực hành kỹ giao tiếp Tiếng Anh nhiều g học hỏi nhiều điều bổ ích từ bạn bè h có khơng khí học vui vẻ, thoải mái hòa đồng Ngồi lợi ích từ việc học theo nhóm trên, bạn thấy bạn đạt lợi ích khác, xin bạn vui lòng viết thêm vào Lợi ích khác: ………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… Bạn gặp khó khăn làm việc theo nhóm? (bạn chọn nhiều đáp án cho câu hỏi này) a có bất đồng ý kiến xảy nhóm b có bất hợp tác hay hợp tác khơng nhiệt tình bạn nhóm c có hạn chế khả ngôn ngữ Tiếng Anh nên hay sử dụng Tiếng Việt d tập trung lớp học trật tự lộn xộn e khó di chuyển trao đổi thơng tin với thành viên nhóm hay nhóm khác đồ đạc bàn ghế lớp đặt cố định f có q thời gian cho hoạt động nhóm 56 g thiếu trợ giúp giáo viên Ngồi khó khăn việc học theo nhóm trên, bạn thấy bạn có gặp số khó khăn khác, xin bạn vui lòng viết thêm vào Khó khăn khác: ……………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… Thầy bạn có thường tổ chức hoạt động theo nhóm học khơng? a Thường xuyên b Thỉnh thoảng c Hiếm d Khơng 10 Thầy bạn có thường tổ chức hoạt động theo nhóm ngồi học không? a Thường xuyên b Thỉnh thoảng c Hiếm d Khơng 11 Thầy bạn có thường bạn tự lựa chọn thành viên nhóm khơng? a Thường xun b Thỉnh thoảng c Hiếm d Không 12 Thầy cô thường chia nhóm nào? a Nhóm có trình độ b Nhóm khác trình độ c Nhóm có sở thích d Nhóm e Sinh viên tự chọn nhóm 13 Thầy thường chọn người nhóm? a b c d người 14 Thầy cô thường thưởng sau nhóm hồn thành? a Cho điểm cộng cho nhóm b Khen ngợi e 57 c Cho quà d Khen ngợi cá nhân trội nhóm Cách khác: ……………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… …… 15 Bạn có đồng ý với cách chọn nhóm thầy cô không? a Đồng ý b Không đồng ý c khơng đồng ý 16 Bạn có hài lòng với cách thưởng thầy cô không? a Rất hài lòng b Khơng hài lòng c Khơng hài lòng tý Lý do……………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………… 17 Bạn muốn có người nhóm học? a b c d 18 Bạn học nhóm mình? (bạn chọn nhiều đáp án cho câu hỏi này) a Chia sẻ nhiệm vụ với bạn b Khơng dám lên tiếng sợ bạn khác nhóm cười nói, viết sai c Cùng trao đổi cung cấp thông tin cho d Giải mâu thuẫn ý kiến với tính chất xây dựng e Khơng có hội lên tiếng bạn tranh lượt nói bạn f Dùng Tiếng Việt để thảo luận g Thỉnh thoảng tán gẫu làm việc riêng thay thảo luận Một số cách khác (nếu có) 19 Bạn thích hoạt động học số hoạt động sau đây? a Thảo luận nhóm theo chủ điểm học b Đọc nghe giảng vấn đề ngôn ngữ làm tập theo yêu cầu c Đóng vai theo tình d Chơi trò chơi ngơn ngữ 58 e Tóm tắt học, đọc câu chuyện theo nhóm f Tóm tắt học, đọc câu chuyện theo cá nhân g Thực tập lớn, tìm hiểu chủ đề khác Tiếng Anh, nộp cuối kỳ Các dạng hoạt động khác 20 Bạn có đề nghị cho hoạt động nhóm có hiệu hơn? Hiện bạn sinh viên lớp: Bạn bắt đầu học Tiếng Anh từ lớp mấy: Cảm ơn hợp tác bạn! 59 APPENDIX 2: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS How many members you prefer in your groups? Can you give some reasons why you chat or use Vietnamese while working in groups? What activities you like most? Why anh why not? What should you to improve CL? According to you, what should the teachers when implimenting CL activities? ... NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES -HỒNG THỊ BÍCH THỦY STUDENTS ATTITUDES TOWARDS COOPERATIVE LEARNING AT NGHE. .. Johnson and Johnson (1987) compare three different types of learning: CL, Individual Learning and Comparative Learning In each kind of learning, their nature and appropriate use and the skills students. .. English language students preferred learning habits and learning styles? How teachers use CL both inside and outside the classroom according to students self-reports? What are their attitudes towards,