STUDENTS’
ATTITUDES TOWARD COOPERATIVE
LEARNING STRATEGY IN ENGLISH CLASSROOMS
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Tetta Rakasiwi 112012020
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
vii
A. Students’ attitudes and students’ engagement ... 4
B. Cooperative leaning strategy in regard to students’ academic performances and social relations ... 6
C. Principles of Cooperative Learning Strategy ... 8
D. Students’ challenges on Cooperative Learning Strategy Implementation ... 11
THE STUDY ... 12
A. Students’ affective aspects on cooperative learning strategy ... 18
B. Students’ opinion about Cooperative learning Strategy... 24
viii
CONCLUSION ... 39
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... 42
REFERENCES ... 43
ix
LIST OF TABLE
x
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: Students’ individual feeling on CLS ... 18
FIGURE 2: Students’ preference on individual works ... 19
FIGURE 3: Students’ inferior feelings in CLS ... 20
FIGURE 4: Students’ feeling regarding “hitchhikers” ... 21
FIGURE 5: Students’ feeling regarding diversity in opinions & personalities ... 22
FIGURE 6: Students’ view about CLS and Social relationship ... 24
FIGURE 7: Students’ opinions regarding group works and better grades ... 26
FIGURE 8: Students’ opinions in regard to group works & individual tasks .... 27
FIGURE 9: Students’ opinions regarding better understanding on materials ... 28
FIGURE 10: Students’ opinions regarding individual tasks ... 30
FIGURE 11: Students’ behavior in group works engagement ... 32
FIGURE 12: Students’ behavior in regard to their jobs in the group works ... 34
FIGURE 13: Students’ behavior in regard to the helping behavior ... 35
1
STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES
TOWARD COOPERATIVE
LEARNING STRATEGY IN ENGLISH CLASSROOMS
Tetta Rakasiwi
ABSTRACT
The study examines students’ attitudes toward cooperative learning strategy in English classrooms. The research was conducted in 2016 in a private senior high school: SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga, Indonesia. There were seventy-five eleventh graders participated in filling in 4-type Likert Scale questionnaires. Moreover, the study found that the students had positive attitudes toward cooperative learning strategy which was done as group works. Students tended to show positive attitudes where they could get numerous benefits that could be attributed to cooperative learning, such as building students’ social relationship and academic life, including enhancement in mastery of the materials as well as improvements on students’ academic performances. The study also indicated that students also saw the strategy as an opportunity to gain understanding of materials and to express their ideas by engaging in heterogeneous groups. Most of the participants felt happy, helpful, and optimistic having to complete such mandatory group works. However, the study suggests that cooperative learning strategy has its strengths and weaknesses. Students’ needs, interests, culture values, beliefs, and teaching effectiveness should be more considered in the teaching and learning processes. Therefore, further research could be conducted to generalize the findings for a larger population and make the study more complete.
Key words: senior high students, attitudes, group work, cooperative learning
INTRODUCTION
2
and learning processes. Cooperative learning is viewed as “a valuable instructional strategy that strengthens active learning at school and promotes the cognitive and social development of students” (Krol, Veenman, &Voeten, 2002 as cited in Kouros & Abrami, 2006, p.3). Cooperative learning strategy is also used in senior high school classes in which the strategy fits the school’s curriculum.
From previous studies, there are many researchers (e.g. Gross, 1993; Springer, Stanne, & Donovan, 1999; and Porter, 2006) suggested many benefits of cooperative learning strategy. It can encourage the students “to explore or discuss an assigned
topic, or to complete cases, projects and group assignments, to answer a few challenging questions, or to engage in an exchange of ideas, and share some insights with group members” (Holter 1994; Porter 2006 as cited in Campbell & Li, 2006). It
can also help students to enrich and develop their understanding on the content of knowledge and course materials (McKeachie, Pintrich, Lin, & Smith, 1986; Kimber, 1996; Bacon, 2005 as cited in Hamer & O’Keefe, 2013). Furthermore, Colbeck, Campbell, & Bjorklund, (2000); and Coleman (1996) as cited in Hamer & O’ Keefe (2013), have also shown that taking part and being involved in a group work will enhance students’ group skills which later will be beneficial for their career activities.
3
Despite the benefits which are stated in Hamer & O’Keefe (2013), Altun (2008), and Campbell & Li (2006), it is obvious that there would be conflicts and some diversity of thoughts, opinions, and expectations among the academic group work members regarding how to complete the group works (Martinez, Cheng, Smith, Smith, & Yoon, 2002). Students have various reasons why they like or dislike group works. Butts (2000) as cited in Martinez et al., (2002) stated that “it is common for students not to enjoy group work (p.3).” Meanwhile, if the students often dislike group works, these negative attitudes might affect their performance and the effectiveness of the group works (Martinez et al., 2002). The other problem is there will be dominant students and passive students. These different attitudes might affect students’ engagement. Furthermore, the challenges on implementing cooperative
learning strategy become an issue which is related to students ‘participation.
Based on the researcher’ experiences, students who were assigned to do group
4
This study aims to answer the research question: What are senior high school students’ attitudes toward cooperative learning strategy in English classrooms? The
eleventh graders of senior high school were chosen as the participants of this study based on several reasons. First, the eleventh graders are exposed to assigned English group works for many times. It means that the students have more experiences in doing the group works compared to elementary and junior high school students. It is acknowledged by Baines, Blatchford, & Kutnick (2003) as cited in Gillies & Boyle (2009) who found that “elementary children rarely worked together in cooperative
groups.”
Therefore, this research is important because its findings may help teachers to be more aware of students’ attitudes toward cooperative learning strategy during the English class. Afterwards, the teachers can discover and create other methods or teaching strategies, and create variety of classrooms activities which make the students totally engage in the teaching and learning processes.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Students’ attitudes and students’ engagement
Basically, there will be diverse attitudes which represent an evaluation response towards certain objects. Bohner & Wanke (2014) acknowledged “attitude as a summary evaluation of an object of thought” (p.2). While Eagly, Alice, & Chaiken
(1998) stated that attitude is “a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor” (p.3). Attitudes comprise
5
separated and do not necessarily represent three independent factors (Bohner & Wanke, 2014).
Here, students’ performances on cooperative learning strategy are influenced by the learners’ attitudes. There are negative and positive attitudes which might
influence their engagement on group works in English classrooms. For instance, as cited in Hamer & O’Keefe (2013), learners tend to express negative attitudes in group activities and constantly express complaints, negative feelings and opinions on the assigned group works. According to Felder & Brent (2001), as an example for students’ negative attitudes on cooperative learning is students can be relegated or
will relegate themselves to a passive role in group works. Moreover, students sometimes find themselves as the minorities and isolated in workgroups.
As another example, students’ negative attitudes on group works appear
because of the group members. According to Felder & Brent (2001), students tend to express complaints during group works when some of their members are slackers. It means that their teammates dominate or even do not involve on group discussion and generally become obnoxious or annoying. It also means that the teammates are not doing what they are supposed to be doing.
Furthermore, Felder & Brent (2001) added that group conflicts are also included in students’ negative attitudes in which students might have different
6
(2013) added that “conflicts impact the day-to-day performance of the group and
almost certainly impact the individual evaluations of members by other teammates and in the end, the overall project outcomes” (p.2).
Despite those students’ negative attitudes, their positive attitudes also influence them to get involved in the group works. Students who show positive attitudes on cooperative learning strategy might tend to willingly participate in the group works. Moreover, students will take their responsibilities to the group to achieve the same goals. Furthermore, learners’ positive attitudes help them to get learning experiences by working in homogeneous and heterogeneous groups.
Furthermore, learners’ personal opinions and affective aspects on the group might influence their involvement on group works (Gillies & Ashman, 2003). Positive opinion on getting higher achievements by working in groups will increase their motivation to get involved and engaged in the groups. While individuals have the same opinion to achieve higher accomplishments, they tend to help other learners to achieve the same common goals. It means that a helping behavior helps learners in accomplishing the group works. Also, learners’ attitude of being helpful to each other
might help students to increase their performances and engagements in the groups.
Cooperative Learning Strategy in regard to students’ academic performances and social relations
Cooperative learning strategy is one of student-centered approaches which is commonly used in teaching and learning processes. Johnson & Johnson (1999) acknowledged that cooperative learning strategy is “the instructional use of small groups in which students work together.” Cooperative learning strategy is aimed to
7
and increase the accuracy of long-term retention” (Koppenhaver & Shrader, 2003 as cited in Farzaneh & Nejadansari, 2014). Therefore, many studies prove that this approach tends to be highly effective for enhancing students learning and promoting higher achievement (Johnson, Johnson, & Stanne, 2000; Gillies & Ashman, 2003).
Cooperative learning or workgroups might enhance students’ academic
performances and social relationship through peer tutoring in the groups. Peer tutoring happens when more expert students or smarter students help the less expert students to understand materials better and achieve the objectives while they are working in groups. From a social psychological view, “social isolation might be reduced, the functionality of the subject modeled, and aspiration rose” (Topping, 1996, p.6). Here, peer tutoring will help students to engage with their peers or teammates in order to achieve the same goals. According to Moust and Schmidt (1994a) as cited in Topping (1996), students who were working in a small group and doing peer tutoring felt that peer tutors were interested in their mates’ lives and personalities. It gains intimacy among teammates and decreases the feeling of being isolated.
Furthermore, peer tutoring in group works might be one of the ways for students to increase students’ academic performances. Gillies & Ashman (2003)
acknowledged that peer tutoring can enhance learners’ achievements and their academic purposes. “Peer tutoring is fully understood through social interactionists view of cognitive development” (Topping, 1996, p.3). Peer tutoring which can be
8
peers. Through peer tutoring, the learners also assist one another to learn. Topping (1996) also added that peer tutoring in small group works helps students to participate in learning process, give and receive peer feedback, do swift prompting, and decrease anxiety. At the end students get input from their peers and achieve knowledge and skills which can be applied in the new real situation. Moreover, peers will tend to facilitate each other on academic performances. Therefore, opportunities for learning will be increased through peer tutoring in small groups.
Thus, we can draw a conclusion that cooperative learning strategy helps students to enhance their academic performances through peer tutoring. It is because peer tutoring in small groups will reduce their anxiety to engage in the learning process. It will also laid students to increase their academic performances and gain more knowledge and skills from doing simplification, clarification, and exemplification with their peers during peer tutoring. Peer tutoring in small groups will increase individual attention and self-esteem. In addition, peer tutoring in small group works will increase students’ social relationship. It is because intimacy among the teammates is high. Thus, it increases the opportunity for closeness among the teammates and develops helping and giving behavior for better social relationship.
Principles of Cooperative Learning Strategy
There are five essential elements which should be included to design cooperative learning activities in classroom, (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). The five principles are as follows.
1. Positive Interdependence
9
unless they do” (p.71-72). Here, students are aware of their own learning for the success of the group. Moreover, Yager (2000); Jensen, Moore & Hatch (2002) as cited in Dat-Tran (2013) acknowledged that positive interdependence means that in cooperative learning situations, students are required to work together as a cohesive group to achieve shared learning objectives. In this aspect, building positive goal interdependence in group works is important to enrich group members’ performances. Achieving
positive interdependence requires the group working towards a reward or final learning objectives. Furthermore, Johnson & Johnson (2009) also added that “learning situations are not cooperative if students are arranged into groups
without positive interdependence” (p.102). In the process, students must be
responsible for their own learning and for the success of other group members’ learning Slavin (2011) as cited in Dat-Tran (2013).
2. Individual Accountability
The purpose of CLS is to make each member of the groups stronger and to ensure that every group member is strengthened. “Individual accountability
exists when the performance of each individual student is assessed and the results are given back to the group and the individual (ibid, p.71).” The
10
required to share their ideas and opinions, do their part well, ask for assistance, help one another, and make the group run well.
3. Face-to-face Promotive Interaction
In this interaction, “individuals promote each learner’s success by helping, assisting, supporting, encouraging, and praising each other’s efforts to achieve
the objectives” (p.71). In face-to-face promotive interaction, students promote each other’s learning, and afterwards they can get involved in the groups to
discuss materials and solve problems. Students are also required to interact verbally with one another on learning tasks, exchange opinions, explain things, teach others and present their understanding. Therefore, those activities will help them to develop cooperative learning skills and support one another in their learning process (Dat-Tran, 2013).
4. Social Skills
Social skills require interpersonal and small group skills in which learners “are taught the leadership, decision-making, trust-building, communication, and conflict-management skills” (p.71). Therefore, each group member should know how to manage the group, how to make decisions and how to solve conflicts that arise among group members. If these skills are not taught, cooperative learning activities are rarely successful (Slavin, 1996). In addition, Killen (2007) as cited in Dat-Tran (2013) stated that social and interpersonal skills, such as listening attentively, questioning cooperatively and negotiating respectfully need be taught, to help students cooperate effectively in the group” (p.103). Thus, the more socially skillful participants are, the more
11
participants receive on their use of the skills, the higher the achievement and productivity of the cooperative groups tends to be. Not only do social skills promote higher achievement, they contribute to building more positive relationships among group members (Dat-Tran, 2013).
5. Group Processing
The group processing occurs when “group members discuss how well they are
achieving their goals and maintaining effective working relationships” (p.71). Therefore, when the face problems while doing the group works, they need to adjust themselves to engage in the group processing, define, and solve the problems together effectively. Moreover, the purpose of group processing is to clarify and improve the effectiveness of the members in contributing to the joint efforts to achieve the group’s goals (Dat-Tran, 2013).
In brief, cooperative learning groups will exist if the groups are structured in ways they cooperate to each other and help one another’s learning. Moreover,
cooperative learning environment will be successful if the groups fulfill the five principles of cooperative learning strategy. At the end, students will achieve better, demonstrate superior learning skills (Johnson & Johnson, 2008 as cited in Dat-Tran, 2013), and experience more positive relationships among group members, and between students and the teacher, and more positive self-esteem and attitudes toward the subject area (Slavin, 2011 as cited in Dat-Tran, 2013).
Students’ Challenges on Cooperative Learning Strategy Implementation
12
struggle with the implementation of cooperative learning strategy in classroom activities.
Gillies & Boyle (2009) acknowledged that in doing a group work, some learners are often passive or act as “hitchhikers”. According to Kaufman, Felder, & Fuller (1999), the “hitchhikers” are team members who avoid their responsibilities to
the group. This kind of students tends to be passive recipients of the knowledge rather than being active. The passive students or the “hitchhikers” might have problems regarding motivation and immaturity or simply because they are too shy to get involved in the groups. As another term of “hitchhikers” is the teammates who become “free-riders”. Davies (2009) noted that, “free-riders” are the team members who do not give any effort, but reaps the benefits of the group’ accomplishments
As another issue, the heterogeneous groups might be the challenge on engaging in the groups. Learners who have diverse background knowledge, characteristics, emotions, opinions, behaviors, and social skills might cause difficulties for them to get involved and take an active part in the group learning itself.
THE STUDY
The context of the study
13
English. They may also have different characters and personalities. Those diversities were considered to have fitted the principles of cooperative learning strategy which was often practiced in the school. Furthermore the school is accessible regarding time constraint, distance constraint, and the legal approval from the school.
Participants
The study involved 75 eleventh graders of SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga who were selected by using cluster sampling technique. The 75 participants included 40 male students, and 35 female students who were around 15 up to 17 years old. The participants’ demographic info was stated in the Table 1.
By using cluster sampling, the researcher chose the eleventh graders from three different classes. Those three classes were from Science, Language, and Social classes. The researcher chose the three classes because the reseracher was going to explore various attitudes of students who were studying in different majors. Even though the participants came from three different classes, the participants would represent senior high school students as a whole.
Table 1: The participants' demographic info
MALE FEMALE
AGE
15 years old 16 years old 17 years old
SCIENCE 14 10 1 20 3
LANGUAGE 14 14 0 16 12
SOCIAL 12 11 0 12 11
14
Furthermore, the researcher chose the participants based on several considerations. The first was because eleventh graders were exposed to many English group projects. It means that the learners had more experiences on engaging in group works compared to tenth, twelfth graders, elementary and junior high school students. It is also due to the fact that tenth graders were rarely assigned to group works, while the twelfth graders were also the same due to final examination which focuses more on individual tasks and test drillings.
Furthermore, the eleventh graders are considered more mature to give various thoughtful answers and reasons regarding the questionnaires. The learners also seem to have more capabilities to reflect on their behavior, feelings, and opinions toward cooperative learning.
Instrument of Data Collection
Initially, the researcher constructed 4-point type Likert scale questionnaire that allowed the participants to state their degree of preferences. The Likert scale questionnaires were adapted from Farzaneh & Nejadansari (2014) and Hamer & O’Keefe (2013). Its underlying reason was because the data which were obtained by
using the items from both previous studies represent three aspects of attitudes (cognitive, affective, and behavior) to be elicited.
Furthermore, by using Likert Scale questionnaires, the researcher might be able to obtain and specify the participants’ preferences or degree of agreement
15
items number 6 up to 10 elicited students’ opinion on the strategy. At last, items number 11 up to 15 elicited students’ behavior on the strategy.
The researcher adapted some statements of the questionnaires from the previous studies (e.g. Farzaneh & Nejadansari, 2014 and Hamer & O’Keefe, 2013), Dat-Translated those statements into Indonesian, and adjusted the context to ensure that all participants could completely understand the meaning of each statement. Therefore, the statements would be more appropriate for the participants.
Before distributing the questionnaires, the researcher piloted the statements to 13 eleventh graders of SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga to ensure that the statements were clear enough to be understood and precise enough to elicit the data. The 13 students included 9 male students and 4 female ones who were from XI IPS 3 (Social Class). The participants who were around 16-17 years old only participated on piloting session, so they would not be the main participants for the study. After collecting the questionnaires, the researcher interviewed three participants in order to know their responses to the questionnaires. It was done in order to make sure whether or not the format of the questionnaires and the statements were clear.
16
be revised by changing the ideas of the statements. In addition, the researcher added a phrase “in English classroom” in every statement to keep the participants focusing on
their attitudes toward CLS in English classroom only instead of in general classes. It would help the participants to avoid “jumping memory” when they reflected their
attitudes toward CLS. Therefore, those statements were revised in order to make them more understandable and precise for the participants.
Data Collection Procedures
The researcher, afterwards, did the data collection following the procedures below. Firstly, the researcher asked the Headmistress of SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga for permission to conduct the research. Therefore, when the date and time were already set, the researcher entered the classrooms and explained the purpose and goals of filling in the questionnaires. Afterwards, the researcher also explained to the participants how to fill in the questionnaires and facilitated the participants if they had any questions or problems regarding the questionnaires. This procedure was done in each class.
The researcher administrated the questionnaires to 75 participants during the class time. The participants were from XI BAHASA, XI IPS 2, and XI IPA 1. The data was collected on Thursday, 21st January 2016 at 11.20 a.m.-11.40 a.m.; Thursday, 28th January 2016 at 01.15 p.m. - 01.40 p.m.; and Friday, 29th January 2016 at 09.40 a.m.-10.15 a.m. respectively.
Data Analysis Procedures
17
represented students’ affections or feelings on CLS, statements no.6 up to 10 represented students’ opinions on CLS, and statements no.11 up to 15 represented students’ behaviors on CLS. Afterwards, respective diagrams were created to show
the summary of the results.
After grouping the result and the diagrams, the researcher looked for certain concepts and relationships between each statement in each group. Afterwards, the researcher described each diagram and related it with the previous studies and theories from experts. Then, the researcher drew a conclusion by discovering the relationships between the three subthemes and organized them into an explanatory scheme. Therefore, the results would be described, interpreted and analyzed by using the theoretical frameworks provided.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The research aimed to answer the research question: What are students’ attitudes toward Cooperative Learning Strategy in English classrooms? In answering the research question, the researcher defined the students’ attitudes into three aspects. Those are students’ feelings, opinions, and behaviors. Therefore, in this part, the
researcher aimed to display the research results based on the three aspects. To attain the goal, this study used a questionnaire as the research instrument, namely 4-point type Likert Scale questionnaire.
Furthermore, the researcher would discuss the results obtained from the questionnaire data that would demonstrate students’ attitudes on cooperative learning
18
A. Students’ affective aspect on cooperative learning strategy
After collecting and processing the data, the results would be presented in the following explanation. The explanation is related to the result on students’ affective
aspect on cooperative learning strategy.
Figure 1 shows the results of the participants’ responses to the first statement
“I feel happy when I am assigned to do group works in English class”. It can be seen
from Figure 1 that 93.34% of the participants agreed with the statement, while 6.66% did not. It indicates that most of the participants approved that they were happy in doing group works in English classes. This result is in line with Campbell’s finding
(2006) in his study, which showed that students felt happy for doing group works. Concerning such a happy feeling in doing group works, Johnson & Johnson (1986) proposed that it may be because they simply like to work in groups and are willing to participate in the groups.
FIGURE 1
Students’ individual feeling on CLS
Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 34.67%
58.67%
5.33%
1.33%
Q1
19 FIGURE 2
Students’ preference on individual works
Figure 2 summarizes the finding based on the second statement in the questionnaire, “I would prefer to do individual works”. The result from Figure 2 shows that 58.66% of the participants disapproved the statement. Interestingly, the participants who agreed with the statement were also quite high. There were 41.34% of participants who still like doing individual works. Therefore, the range of the results is not too far.
20
FIGURE 3
Students’ inferior feeling in CLS
Figure 3 summarizes the finding based on the third statement in the questionnaire, “I feel inferior when I am working in groups”. The result from figure 3 shows that 82% of the participants disapproved the statement while only 18% of the participants agreed with the statement. The result shows that the majority of the participants opposed the statement, “I feel inferior when I am working in groups”. Regarding the principles of CLS, it indicates that the participants had positive interdependence on group works when all members of the groups are responsible for the success or the failure in their group (Dat-Tran, 2013).
It confirmed Johnson & Johnson (1999) who stated that there would be the perception that the group members were connected to one another in such a way that each individual will not succeed unless other members do. It means that when the participants have positive interdependence toward the group works, they might decrease their inferior feelings. Students will decrease their inferior feelings since they will learn and work together for the success of the group.
21
Meanwhile, a few participants (18%) still felt inferior when they were working in groups. Feeling inferior might happen because students found themselves as the minorities and isolated in the groups (Felder & Brent, 2001). They might also feel like having less ability and knowledge or feel like they could not give any contribution to the groups. This attitude, as Martinez (2002) argued, may negatively influence their individual performance while doing the group works, and in turns affect the group’s success.
However, cooperative learning is actually designed to help students to decrease their inferior feelings because there is an interaction in which individuals promote each others’ learning by helping, assisting, praising, and encouraging each group member. Furthermore, it was also added by Kirby (2007) as cited on McLeish (2006) that through cooperative learning, students’ self esteem could be enhanced as they all helped one another. Therefore, face-to-face promotive interaction among group members while doing their works could help students to avoid feeling inferior.
FIGURE 4
Students’ feeling regarding “hitchhikers”
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 9%
27%
57%
7%
Q4
22
Figure 4 summarizes the finding based on the fourth statement in the questionnaire, “I don’t like working in groups because there will be group members who do not participate in the group”, Figure 4 showed that 64% disapproved the
statements. Even though there were some group members who did not pull their weight in the group works, most of the participants still like doing group works. However, there were still 36% of the participants who stated that the existence of “hitchhikers” (group members who are passive and do not get involved in the group)
made them dislike working in groups.
According to Campbell’s finding (2006), “hitchhikers” or “free-riders” were the source of stress and destructive force in group works. His results showed that many students would enjoy group works without any “free-riders” or “hitchhikers”. They viewed groups negatively and disliked working in the groups. However, according to Figure 4, the finding in this study seemed to oppose the finding in Campbell’s (2006) study. Here, students still liked working in groups while there were “hitchhikers” who did not take parts during group works.
FIGURE 5
Students’ feeling regarding diversity in opinions & personalities
23
Figure 5 shows the results of the participants’ responses to the fifth statement, “I feel that it’s difficult to work with people who have different opinion and personality,” Figure 5 shows that 72% of the participants disapproved the idea. It
meant that most of the participants might feel that it was easy to adjust themselves in heterogeneous groups. Even though the majority of the participants disapproved the idea, there were still 28% of them who felt that it would be difficult to work with people who had different opinions and personalities.
The results might indicate that students actually realized that they could not work merely with people who have the same opinions and personalities. Therefore, working with different people who had different thoughts and ideas, personalities and characters was not a surprise. The participants might see this as an opportunity to express their opinions and come up with a wide range of their ideas. It might also help them to see things from new perspectives while working with different people with their own thoughts.
Regarding the statements number 1 up to 5, it could be concluded that most of the participants have positive feelings about group work assignments. The majority of the participants tended to feel happy when they were assigned to work in groups. Their positive feeling seemed to be consistent when they faced the second statement on “I would prefer to do individual works”. More participants opposed to the
statement and it showed that they had positive feeling on group works. Furthermore, students’ positive feelings could be seen from the statement which showed that
24
might be several hitchhikers among the group members. It shows that although there were group members who do not pull their weight on the groups, the participants still enjoyed working in groups. In addition, even though the participants worked in heterogeneous groups, they still tended to show their positive feelings on group works. The participants might see the differences among the members as an opportunity to express their opinions and come up with a wide range of ideas.
The overall results above confirm Campbell’s findings (2006) which stated that participants value the significance of positive feeling on CLS, where they can interact with students from other backgrounds and personalities, improve their English language skills, enhance their achievement, develop communication skills, and secure possible opportunities to make friends.
B. Students’ opinions about cooperative learning strategy
In the following discussion, the result of students’ opinion on cooperative learning strategy will be explained.
FIGURE 6
Students’ view about CLS and social relationship
Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
43% 45%
12%
0%
Q6
25
Figure 6 summarizes the finding based on the sixth statement in the questionnaire, “I think working in groups helps me to get closer with my classmates”, Figure 6 showed that 88% of the participants agreed with the statement. It means that most of the participants could enhance their social relationship during group works. Interestingly, there were 12% of the participants who disapproved the statement. It showed that there were still few participants who might not get closer to their classmates during the group works.
During group works, there will be discussion among the members of the groups. This will be the opportunity for the students to meet and make new friends. There will be two possibilities in which students can strengthen their friendship or build new friendships. Wentzel, McNamara-Barry, & Caldwell (2004) as cited in Kouros & Abrami (2006) asserted that student friendships promote prosocial behaviour “because prosocial behaviour is inherently social and interactive, a friends’
behaviour will provide straightforward cues concerning what is appropriate and desirable, as well as provide a positive experience for the recipient” (p. 201).
26
Figure 7 shows the results of the participants’ responses to the seventh
statement, “I think I would get better grades by working in groups compared to
working individually”, Figure 7 explains that the majority of the participants agreed
with the statement. There are 80% of the participants who thought that working in groups helped them to get better achievements. Interestingly, there are still 20% of the participants who disapproved the statement. A few participants think that they might not get higher grades or better achievement by working in groups.
During group works, there might be opportunities for the students to work together, help and complete each other. The majority of the participants in this study showed that they tended to view group works positively by thinking that better grades will be achieved through working in groups. The result is opposed to Campbell’s
finding (2006) that most students viewed groups negatively as they thought they would not get fair grades due to the existence of the hitchhikers.
FIGURE 7
Students’ opinions regarding group works and better grades
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 41%
39%
17%
3%
Q7
27 FIGURE 8
Students’ opinions in regard to group works & individual tasks
Figure 8 shows the results of the participants’ responses to the eighth
statement, “I think group works are easier to be accomplished than individual works”, Figure 8 showed that 90% of the participants confirmed the statement. While only 10% of the participants disapproved the idea.
In group work assignments, there will be opportunities for the students to help each other during the discussion among the members. Helping behaviour seems to appear in the group since they have the same common goal to be accomplished. Here, students have positive interdependence as they are responsible for the success of the group. Students will contribute their effort by dividing the task among the members to cooperate one another to accomplish the task successfully (Dat-Tran, 2013). Based on the result in Figure 8, students think that the group works are easier to be
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 48%
42%
9%
1%
Q8
28
accomplished, this is because students in group will divide the members’
responsibilities as the readers, summarizer, examiners, note-takers, and encouragers ((Knight & Bohlmeyer, 1990 as cited in Dat-Tran, 2013).
Therefore, accomplishing tasks together during group works also persuade members of the group to do peer tutoring. Here, students who are noticed as “brilliant students” or have better understanding and higher capability might help the students
who are less capable to accomplish the task in order to achieve the goal of the group. This result confirms Gillies & Ashman (2003) who asserted that peer tutoring can enhance learners’ achievements and their academic purposes. By doing peer tutoring
and accomplishing task together, it will help students to cooperate to each other. There will be students’ involving in cognitive challenge to do clarification,
simplification, and exemplification with their peers in the group. Therefore the tasks seem to be easier to accomplish when it can be done together.
FIGURE 9
Students’ opinion regarding better understanding on materials
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 27%
55%
17%
1%
Q9
29
Figure 9 summarizes the finding based on the ninth statement in the questionnaire, “I get better understanding on the materials through group works”, Figure 9 showed that 82% of the participants confirmed the statement. Even though the majority of the participants agreed with the statement, there were only fewer participants who disapproved the idea. 18% of them did not think that they could get better understanding on materials through group works.
Relating to the earlier result (Figure 8), students who were working in groups might help members of the group to achieve the group’s goal. Students who have
higher ability might help lower-level students by doing peer tutoring. Therefore, group works might be easier to be accomplished because the group members can get better understanding on the materials through peer tutoring.
30 FIGURE 10
Students’ opinions regarding individual tasks
Figure 10 summarizes the finding based on the tenth statement in the questionnaire, “I think individual works is faster to be accomplished”, Figure 10
shows that 59% of the participants disagreed with the statement. The result was still related to the previous ones (i.e. statements No.8 and No.9) in which students agreed that group works are easier to be accomplished and they help the students to understand the materials better. The result confirmed Farzaneh & Nejadansari’s finding (2004) which showed that group works were easy to be accomplished and it increased students’ level of understanding on materials.
During group works, students have opportunities to help their group members to achieve the group’s objectives. Here, helping behaviour among the group members
will exist since they try to achieve the same goal. The task can be faster to be
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 14%
27%
51%
8%
Q10
31
accomplished because one task is done by more than one or two people. It seems to indicate that the more brains are used, the faster the task can be accomplished.
Furthermore, the students’ level of understanding on materials will influence the speed in accomplishing the tasks. When students have better understanding during group discussion, they might have higher speed to finish the tasks. Moreover, the tasks which are done in group will increase the spirit to focus on achieving one same goal and objective.
In addition, the members of the group might help one another, as each member is given a role with a particular responsibility. For example, there will be a group member who acts as a secretary or a writer, leader, or a language consultant (Willis & Willis, 2007). By dividing the roles, it relieves the burden on having 4 roles in one individual. That is why the more brains are used, the faster the task can be accomplished.
In brief, concerning the results of the responses to statements number 6 up to 10, most of the participants had positive opinions regarding group works. Students tended to show their positive opinion because group works provide them with some benefits for their achievements. By working in groups, students could get better understanding on the materials. The better understanding on materials helped the students to finish the task faster. This is because students have positive interdependence to contribute their efforts and take their responsibilities by dividing the tasks among the members and help one another to accomplish it (Dat-Tran, 2013).
32
Johson, & Stane (2000) and Gillies & Ashman (2003) who acknowledge that the approach can enhance students’ learning and promote higher achievements. In addition, students believed that working in groups can help them to get closer with their friends and help them to make new friends as well. It also helped the students to enhance their social relationship because they can have face-to-face interaction with other classmates. In brief, the majority of the participants had positive opinion on group works or cooperative learning strategy since it has many benefits for their academic life and social relationship.
C. Students’ behaviour in cooperative learning strategy
The findings on students’ behaviour toward cooperative learning strategy will be
discussed in the following explanation.
FIGURE 11
Students’ behaviour ingroup work’s engagement
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 0%
15%
56%
29%
Q11
33
Figure 11 summarizes the finding based on the eleventh statement in the questionnaire, “I rarely participate in group works”, Figure 11 showed that 85% of the participants disapproved the idea. It shows that most participants might always get involved in group assignments. However, there were still 15% of the participants who agreed with the statement. The result confirmed McLeish, (2009) whose findings showed that students would always get involved in group works.
There were several key points why students were willing to get engaged in group discussions. It might simply be because students would get benefits by engaging in the groups. Students might recognize that there would be opportunities to express their opinions while doing group discussions (Gillies & Ashman, 2003). They could also gain useful insights and see things from new different perspectives. Furthermore, by involving in the groups, they could enhance their level of understanding on materials, and develop their abilities and skills.
Moreover, the desire to achieve the same common goals and objectives made students tend to always involve in the groups (Campbell & Li, 2006). As a group, students would recognize that there would be competitors from other groups which might influence them to dedicate their efforts and engage to the group to share the same goal and try to gain better achievements.
Furthermore, fewer students might rarely engage in the groups because of several reasons. It might be because their individual contribution to the group was not recognized in the mark allocation (Kouros & Abrami, 2006). In addition, the phenomena of “free-rider” and the “hitchhiker” might influence their desire to engage
34
to limit their effort and involvement when they find other members are only relying on them and taking advantages while they (“the free riders”) are doing nothing.
Figure 12 summarizes the finding based on the twelfth statement in the questionnaire, “I always do my parts when I’m assigned to group works”, Figure 12
shows that 95% of the participants confirmed the idea. It means that the majority of the students agreed that they always did their jobs or parts during the group works and dedicated their efforts to the groups. When the group members have the same objective and purpose, they might try to take parts during the group works in order to accomplish the task and achieve the best result for the group. It confirmed Forrester (2010) who acknowledged that students would do their parts and work hard during group works to accomplish their goals. Moreover, it also shows that students have positive interdependence during the group works since they dedicated their efforts for the success of the group.
FIGURE 12
Students’ behaviour in regard to their jobs in the group works.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 31%
64%
5% 0%
Q12
35 FIGURE 13
Students’ behavior in regard to the helping behavior
Figure 13 summarizes the finding based on the thirteenth statement in the questionnaire, “I always help my group members to get better understanding on the materials”, Figure 13 shows that 87% of the participants confirmed the statement
while 13% of the participants stated that they rarely helped their group members to understand the materials better. The result confirmed Topping (1996) and Gillies & Ashman (2003) whose findings showed that most students always helped their teammates during the group works.
This finding indicates that the students realized they needed to help one another if they wanted to achieve their group’s goal/objective. As Topping (1996)
suggested, working in groups might help students to have less anxiety compared to when they are working individually. Therefore, the students who had lower level of
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 12%
75%
13%
0%
Q13
36
understanding might feel comfortable to ask their classmates to teach them in order to discuss the materials.
The finding shows that there is promotive interaction during the group works. It occurs as individuals encourage and facilitate each other’s efforts to accomplish the group’s goals, and interact verbally with one another on learning tasks (Johnson &
Johnson, 2008 as cited in Dat-Tran, 2013). Students can also help their teammates by exchanging opinions, explaining things, teaching others, and presenting their understanding.
FIGURE 14
Students’ behaviour in regard to group works avoidance
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 1%
8%
56%
35%
Q14
37
Figure 14 summarizes the finding based on the fourteenth statement in the questionnaire, “I always avoid working in groups”, Figure 14 shows that 91% of the participants tended to oppose the statement. It indicates that the majority of the students tended to join and engage in the group works instead of avoiding such activities. The result confirmed Gillies and Ashman (2003), and Johnson &Johnson (1999) who acknowledged that students would tend to join and take their parts or responsibilities instead of avoiding the group works. This finding also shows consistency with the finding of the students’ responses to the questionnaire statement
No.11, in which most of participants (85%) agreed that they tended to always participate in group works. Concerning such findings, Gillies & Ashman (2003) argued that students would like to engage in group works because they might get more benefits from their groups
FIGURE 15
Students’ behaviour regarding active contribution in group works
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree 15%
69%
16%
0%
Q15
38
Figure 15 summarizes the finding based on the fifteenth statement in the questionnaire, “I share my opinions and thoughts actively during the group works”, Figure 15 shows that while 16% of the participants disapproved the idea, 84% of the participants agreed to it. This result confirms Campbell & Li (2006), and Hamer & O’Keefe (2013) whose findings showed that students would tend to actively take parts
and get involved in group works.
According to Topping (1996), Johnson & Johnson (2003), and Gillies & Ashman (2003), students’ low level of anxiety and high self-esteem enabled them to actively share their ideas and opinions or thoughts while working in groups. When students faced their classmates in group works and studied or discussed certain topics together, they would feel more relaxed because they worked with their peers or persons who were in the same age (Topping, 1996). Therefore, the burden and pressure while studying were decreased, and it would make students be brave enough to share their thoughts among the members.
Following the discussions on students’ behaviors from statements number 11
up to 15, it can be concluded that students have positive behaviors during the group works. It shows that students who actively engaged in the group works would do their jobs in order to fulfil the groups’ goals and objectives. Furthermore, students often
39
group works. The results confirm Gillies & Ashman (2003); and Topping (1996) who acknowledged that by helping or tutoring each other, students might enhance their achievements and academic purposes.
Helping behaviour can also help students to participate in the group works, decrease anxiety, and increase their self-esteem during the learning processes (Campbell & Li, 2006). It also helps students to give and receive peer feedback during the group works (Kouros & Abrami, 2006).
CONCLUSION
Cooperative Learning Strategy (CLS) is viewed as “a valuable instructional strategy that strengthens active learning at school and promotes the cognitive and social development of students” (Krol, Veenman, & Voeten, 2002 as cited in Kouros
& Abrami, 2006, p.3). CLS is widely used in many classroom activities, including in the 11th grade of SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga.
This study attempted to explore eleventh graders’ attitudes toward cooperative
learning strategy in English classrooms. To attain the goal, this study used a 4-point type Likert Scale questionnaire as the research instrument.
40
members with different opinions and personalities did not influence their preference for working in groups.
Furthermore, students had positive opinions about CLS. They believed that CLS provides them with many advantages for their academic life and achievements, such as having better understanding on materials and better grades, as well as for their social relationship like being closer to their mates. In addition, students also had positive behaviors in which they tried to participate in group works, do their parts, and help each other to understand materials. Students might do this by doing peer tutoring during the group works. It will lead the students to have helping behavior while working in groups.
Therefore, by concerning the results of this study, teachers might be more aware on their students’ attitudes toward CLS since the majority of the students tend
to have positive attitudes on CLS. Teachers can also evaluate the strategy they use in English classroom activities and create a variety of activities to encourage students to get engaged in the classroom activities.
Although the research has reached its aim, there were some unavoidable limitations. First, because of the time limit, this research study was conducted only on a small size of sample: 75 eleventh graders in SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga, Indonesia from three different majors (Science, Social, and Language), but treated them as a whole. Further similar research may be done by involving more participants at different levels, majors and schools to investigate the possible different attitudes toward CLS. Second, this study only investigated students’ degree of agreement on
41
complete, it is suggested to conduct a similar study that employs classroom observations and interviews in addition to the Likert-scale questionnaire.
42
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First, let me be thankful to The God Almighty who has accompanied and led me along the way to finish this thesis in the right time. Without His blessings and guidance, the thesis would not have been accomplished.
I would also like to express my gratitude and deepest appreciation to my supervisor, Anita Kurniawati H., M. Hum, who has supported and guided me during the process of writing the thesis until I had my thesis. I would not have been able to make a well-written thesis without her guidance. Furthermore, I am also very grateful to my thesis examiner, Gita Hastuti, S.Pd., M.A, who has shared some useful insights to improve the quality of my research study.
This acknowledgement is special dedicated to my great parents, Supriyatno and Juwarsi, who have supported me along the way and kept believing me to finish my study on time. Once again, thank you for the love and never-ending support; I owe my greatest gratitude to them.
43
REFERENCES
Altun, E. (2008, October). 6th, 7th, and 8th Graders’ Attitudes toward Online Homework Assignmnet Sites. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 7, Article 1. Retrieved September 25, 2015 from http://www.tojet.net/articles/v7i4/741.pdf
Bertram, D. (2008). Likert Scale are the meaning of like. CPSC 681-Topic report.1-8. Bohner, G., & Wanke, M. (2014). Attitudes and Attitudes Change. Psychology Press. Campbell, J., & Li, M. (2006). Asian Students’ Perceptions of Group Work and Group
Assignments in a New Zealand Tertiary Institution. Edith Cowan University Research Online. Retrieved September 25, 2015 from
http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1063&context=ceduco m
Dat-Tran, V. (2013). Theoretical perspective nderlying the application of cooperative learning in classrooms. International Journal of Higher Education 2(4), 101-115.
Davies, M.W. (2009). Group work as a form of assessment: common problems and recommended solutions. High Education58, 563-584.
Eagly, A. H., & Shelly, C. (Eds.) (1998). “Attitude Structure and Function.” In Handbook of Social Psychology. New York: McGowan-Hill.
Farzaneh, N., & Nejadansari, D. (2014). Students’ Attitudes towards using cooperative learning for teaching reading comprehension.Theory and Practice in Language Studies 4(2).
Felder R. M., & Brent, R. (2001). Effective strategies for cooperative learning. J.Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching10(2), 69-75. Gillies, R. M., & Ashman, A. F. (2003). Co-operative Learning- The social and
intellectual outcomes of learning in groups. London: Routledge Falmer.
44
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1999).Making cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice, 38(2), 67-73.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R.T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive and Individualistic learning (5th ed). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Stanne, B. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.
Kaufman, B.D., Felder R.M., & Fuller H. (1999). Peer Ratings in Cooperative Learning Teams. Annual ASEE Meeting. Retrieved September 25, 2015 from
http://www4.ncsu.edu/
Kouros & Abrami. (2006). The role of student attitudes and behaviors in cooperative classroom settings. Retrieved September 25, 2015 from
http://doe.concordia.ca/cslp/Downloads/PDF/SAGE2006Final.pdf
Martinez, R., Cheng, Smith, K., Smith, M., & Yoon. S. (2002). Indiana University Instructional Systems Technology (IST) Graduate Student Attitudes Toward Group Work. Running Head: Attitudes Towards Group
Work. Retrieved September 25,
2015fromhttp://www.indiana.edu/~educy520/sec5982/week_15/rmac ksmssy.pdf
McLeish, K. (2009). Attitude of Students Towards Cooperative Learning Methods at Knox Community,College: A Descriptive Study. University of Technology, Jamaica.
Porter, J. Y. (2006). Using learning communities to enhance counselling curriculum.
Retrieved September 25, 2015 from
http://counselingoutfitters.com/Porter.htm
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 69(1), pp.21-51.
Topping, K.J. (1996). The Effectiveness of Peer Tutoring in further and Higher Education: A Typology and Review of Literature. Higher Education 32(3), pp.321-345.
45 APPENDIX
Yang terkasih siswa-siswi SMA Kristen 1 Salatiga,
Saya merupakan mahasiswa Fakultas Bahasa dan Sastra (FBS) dari Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana (UKSW), Salatiga. Kuesioner ini bertujuan untuk meneliti perilaku dan pendapat para siswa terhadap kerja kelompok dalam mapel Bahasa Inggris. Para siswa diharapkan dapat berpartisipasi dalam penelitian ini dengan mengisi kuesioner secara jujur. Jawaban yang kamu berikan tidak akan mempengaruhi penilaian. Terimakasih.
Nama & Kelas :
Jenis kelamin (*Lingkari yang sesuai) : L / P
Usia :
Untuk mengisi kuesioner di bawah ini, berikan tanda centang (V) pada kolom yang sesuai dengan pendapatmu.
SS : Sangat Setuju TS : Tidak Setuju
S : Setuju STS : Sangat Tidak Setuju
No. PERNYATAAN SS S TS STS
1. Saya senang ketika bekerja kelompok saat belajar B.Inggris. pelajaran B.Inggris dapat membantu saya untuk lebih dekat dengan teman-teman.
7.
46 8.
Menurut saya, tugas-tugas B.Inggris akan lebih mudah diselesaikan dengan kerja kelompok.
Menurut saya, mengerjakan tugas B.Inggris secara individu lebih cepat diselesaikan.
11. Saya jarang berpartisipasi dalam kerja kelompok saat pelajaran B.Inggris.
12. Saya selalu mengerjakan bagian saya ketika bekerja kelompok.
13.
Saya selalu membantu anggota grup supaya lebih memahami materi B.Inggris yang diajarkan.
14. Saya selalu menghindari kerja kelompok saat mapel B.Inggris.
15.
Saya aktif memberikan ide dan pendapat saat kerja kelompok dalam mapel B.Inggris.
