VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES HOÀNG MAI HIỀN QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COLLABORATIVE LEARNING METHOD VERSUS COOPERATIVE LEARNING METHOD ON ENGLISH READING AND SPEAKING SKILLS OF GRADE 3 STUDENTS IN A PRIMARY SCHOOL IN HANOI (Nghiên cứu ngụy thực nghiệm nhằm đánh giá hiệu quả của phương pháp học tập cộng tác so với phương pháp học tập hợp tác trong kỹ năng đọc và viết Tiếng Anh đối với học sinh lớp 3 của một trường Tiểu học tại Hà Nội) M.A MINOR THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 8140231.01 Hanoi, 2023 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES HOÀNG MAI HIỀN QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COLLABORATIVE LEARNING METHOD VERSUS COOPERATIVE LEARNING METHOD ON ENGLISH READING AND SPEAKING SKILLS OF GRADE 3 STUDENTS IN A PRIMARY SCHOOL IN HANOI (Nghiên cứu ngụy thực nghiệm nhằm đánh giá hiệu quả của phương pháp học tập cộng tác so với phương pháp học tập hợp tác trong kỹ năng đọc và viết Tiếng Anh đối với học sinh lớp 3 của một trường Tiểu học tại Hà Nội) M.A MINOR THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 8140231. Huỳnh Anh Tuấn Hanoi, 2023 DECLARATION This thesis entitled “Quasi-experimental research to evaluate the effectiveness of collaborative learning method versus cooperative learning method in reading and speaking skills of English language on grade 3 students in a primary school in Hanoi” is a result of my original research work for the Degree of Master of Arts at the University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the library for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper. Signature Hoàng Mai Hiền Approved by SUPERVISOR (Signature and full name) Dr.
Huỳnh Anh Tuấn i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Huynh Anh Tuan for his useful comments, remarks as well as his enthusiasm, patience and engagement throughout the process of writing this minor M. Second, I am also grateful to the teachers at the Olympia Schools for giving me valuable knowledge and experiences from their practical and helpful lectures. Besides, I like to thank the grade 3 students who willingly cooperated with me so that I could conduct the study successfully.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends who have given me encouragement during the process of researching and writing this graduation thesis. ii ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to explore the impact of using collaborative learning method versus cooperative learning method on students’ academic achievements in reading and speaking practicing regarding to the relevant topics in the subject of English language. Specifically, the study aims to obtain two objectives: To assess the influence of collaborative learning method versus cooperative learning method on students’ academic achievements in reading and speaking practicing and to identify the students’ preferences to some features of collaborative learning method and cooperative learning method. To fulfill the objectives, a quasi-experimental research project was carried out.
The participants of the study were 44 primary students enrolled in an English course at a private school in Hanoi, Vietnam. The data were gathered through survey questionnaires, interviews, and the analysis of students’ pre-tests and post-tests. The results of the study indicated that cooperative learning method seemed to exceed collaborative learning method in enhancing students' speaking skills whereas collaborative learning method seemed to outperform cooperative learning method in terms of improving student’s reading skill. Besides, most of students in the two groups showed their preferences with the absence of teachers in class in order that students have their own freedom of communicating with peers and facilitating activities in class.
Students in both groups also showed positive attitudes towards the ability and contribution of the fellow when collaboratively working with each other. A minor number of students demonstrated their hesitation to the absence of teachers in class since they still want to have the management of teachers regarding to students’ behaviors. About the orientation of the lessons, they revealed that it should be student-oriented rather than teacher-oriented. The students would like to hold the active role in class for designing learning activities and collaborating to solve the learning tasks.
iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION. iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .vii LIST OF TABLES. viii LIST OF FIGURES. Rationale of the study.
Aims and objectives of the study. Scope of the study. Significance of the study. Method of the study.
Structure of the thesis. Collaborative learning and cooperative learning. Collaborative versus cooperative learning. Definition of reading.
Approaches to teaching reading skills. Definition of speaking. Approaches to teaching speaking skills .4 Data collection instruments. Students’ pretest and posttest .5 Data collection procedures .6 Data analysis procedures.
Students’ pretest and posttest. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS. The influence of collaborative learning method versus cooperative learning method on students’ academic achievements in reading and speaking skills. The influence of collaborative learning method versus cooperative learning method on students’ academic achievements in reading skill.
The influence of collaborative learning method versus cooperative learning method on students’ academic achievements in speaking skill. The students’ preferences to some particular features of collaborative and cooperative learning method. The students’ preferences to some particular features of collaborative leaning method in Group 1. The students’ preferences to some particular features of cooperative leaning method in Group 2.
Some suggestions from students’ attitudes. Some suggestions from teachers’ attitudes.I vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CAF: Complexity, Accuracy, Fluency L2: Second Language EFL: English as a Foreign Language ESL: English as a Second Language SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences STAD: Student Team Achievement Division vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Instructional Contents and Performance Assessment Techniques .27 Table 2: Sample distribution .28 Table 3: Difference between mean scores of Group 1 and Group 2 in reading skill on pretest .40 Table 4: Difference between mean scores of Group 1 with regard to achievement in reading on pretest and posttest .40 Table 5: Difference between mean scores of Group 2 with regard to achievement in reading on pretest and posttest .41 Table 6: Significance of difference between mean scores of Group 1 and Group 2 in speaking on pretest .43 Table 7: Significance of difference between mean scores of Group 1 .44 with regard to achievement in speaking on pretest and posttest.44 Table 8: Significance of difference between mean scores of Group 2 with .45 regard to achievement in speaking on pretest and posttest. Students’ marking for their preferences to some features of collaborative learning method in Group 1 .47 viii LIST OF FIGURES Chart 1.
The learning process. Difference between mean scores on pretest and posttest in reading skill in Group 1. Difference between mean scores on pretest and posttest of reading skill in Group 2. Difference between mean scores on pretest and posttest of speaking skill in Group 1.
Difference between mean scores on pretest and posttest of speaking skill in Group 2. INTRODUCTION The first chapter aims to introduce the fundamental concepts of the study to provide the readers with an overview of the study. This chapter consists of seven sections. In the beginning, the rationale of the study is mentioned.
Next, the objectives of the study are presented. Then, the research questions, the scope, the significance and methods are displayed one after another. Finally, the organization of the study is shown to give an overlook of the entire paper. Rationale of the study The present study examined how cooperative learning method is implemented in Vietnamese classrooms and how local teachers and students perceived this approach to learning.
An authentic form of cooperative learning has long existed in the foundations of Vietnamese education. Similarly, another method named collaborative learning has been used by several teachers as a set of teaching and learning strategies promoting student collaboration in small groups in order to optimise their own and each other’s learning. Meanwhile, the differences between collaborative learning and cooperative learning method may not be recognized by a huge number of English language teachers in Vietnam. There are some key differences between these two learning methods.
With collaborative learning, students make individual progress in tandem with others. Cooperative learning involves more inherent interdependence, promoting greater accountability. They both use groups, both assign specific tasks, and both have the groups share and compare their procedures and conclusions in plenary class sessions. The primary distinction between cooperative and collaborative is that cooperative deals exclusively with traditional knowledge while collaborative is associated with the social constructivist movement, asserting that both knowledge and authority of knowledge have changed dramatically in the last century.
The students of a large class have to cover the syllabus in a limited period of time. Although English language teachers usually aim to give individual attention to 1 all the students, the gap between weak and strong students still exist in most classes. When it comes to students working together, the terms collaborative learning and cooperative learning are often used interchangeably. Student engagement and attainment is recently a high priority for many schools.
While the purpose of these pedagogical methods is the same to provide students with opportunities to engage with each other in thoughtful learning, teachers must be aware of the contrasts between them to effectively use the two approaches in the classroom. It goes along with the global era; communication holds one of the most significant positions in the world. Besides, there is an increasingly high relationship between reading, listening and speaking skills. One important notion of developing reading skills and speaking skills is to use the language for learning as well as communication.
Empirically, speaking is easier than reading. Speaking is being capable of speech, expressing or exchanging thoughts through using language. “Speaking is a productive aural/oral skill and it consists of producing systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning (Nunan, 2003, p.” (Harmer, 2001) notes down that from the communicative point of view, speaking has many different aspects including two major categories – accuracy, involving the correct use of vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation practised through controlled and guided activities; and, fluency, considered to be ‘the ability to keep going when speaking spontaneously’. In the process of learning to speak, Richard and Renandya (2002:205) stated some factors that affect learners’ oral communication ability including age or maturational constraints, sociocultural factors, and affective factors.
Specifically, there is a great difference of retrieving language proficiency between a child and an adult. Additionally, in order to speak a language, one needs to understand how it is employed in particular social contexts. Sociocultural factors include the pragmatic perspectives in which linguistic communication occurs in structured social context. The last factor they mentioned, affective factors, is related to emotion, self-esteem, empathy, anxiety, attitude, and motivation.
Daar (2020) pointed out some obstacles 2 that students might possess when learning to speak a language. They are having lack of learning interest and motivation, having lack of basic knowledge and vocabulary mastery, and having lack of self-confidence to speak. These obstacles make the students fear to involve in practice with their interlocutors. In terms of improving reading ability for students, it does not only require students to correctly pronounce the vocabulary, but to understand the semantic structures of the English language and the dictionary definitions.
According to Kiew, S. (2020), reading skill demands the learners not only to pronounce the words correctly, but also to comprehend the meaning of the diction used or semantic structures of the English language. This is also supported by Chang et al. (2018) when he agreed that reading comprehension is an active cognitive process that require an individual to interact with the reading materials.