1. The effectiveness of applying cooperative learning to the EFL classroom in a technological university 合作學習在科技大學外語教學之應用成效 Presenter: Shing-Yu Tsai Advisor: Dr. Chin-Ling Lee Date: December 24, 2009
3. Research Questions Purposes of the Study Problems of EFL Teaching in Taiwan Background of the Study Introduction
4.
5.
6. Background of the Study Grammar-Translation Method (GTM) Inadequate Learning Environments Reasons ( Chen, 2004; Huang, 1999 )
7. Problems of EFL Teaching in Taiwan GTM ( Lai, 2002; Tsai, 1998; Yu, 1995; Wei & Chen, 1993 ) Students have little team work. 1 Students are shy, passive and have no confidence. 2 Their scores are graded by individual. 3 Students can’t put what they have learned into practice. 4
8. Purposes of the Study To investigate the effectiveness of cooperative learning for business major college students to develop curriculum and pedagogy modification P1
9. Purposes of the Study To examine the differences on conceptual learning style preferences and learning motivation among students in cooperative learning and traditional learning To explore the perspectives of EFL learners in the two different classes through interview P2 P3
10. Research Questions Is there any difference between the effects of different teaching methods ( cooperative learning method and traditional teaching method ) on students’ learning achievement ? 2 Is there any difference between the effects of different teaching methods ( cooperative learning method and traditional teaching method ) on students’ conceptual learning style preferences ? 1
11. Research Questions Is there any difference between the effects of different teaching methods ( cooperative learning method and traditional teaching method) on students’ learning motivation ? What main elements consist of the perspectives of EFL learners ( in the cooperative learning class and traditional English class )? 3 4
12. Research Questions What variables affect the perspectives of EFL learners (in the cooperative learning class and traditional English class)? 5
13. Literature Review Communicative Competence C ooperative Learning Perceptual Language Learning Style Preference L anguage Learning Motivation
14.
15.
16. C ooperative Learning CL ( Liang, 2000 ) It reduced learning anxiety. 1 It increased the amount of students participating in learning activities. 2 It built a supportive learning environment. 3
17. C ooperative Learning social skills academic achievement Effectiveness ( Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Fenton, 1992; Putnam, 1997; Ye, 1993 )
18.
19.
20. C ooperative Learning Positive goal interdependence Resource interdependence Role interdependence ( Johnson et al., 1991 )
21. C ooperative Learning Face to Face Interaction ( Johnson & Johnson, 2000 ) Click to add Title 1 exchanging needed resources Click to add Title 2 encouraging their group members Click to add Title 1 explaining how to solve problems Click to add Title 2 checking for understanding Click to add Title 1 discussing concepts being learned Click to add Title 2 connecting present with past learning
22.
23. C ooperative Learning interact in leadership decision-making trust-building conflict-managements Social and Small Group Skills ( Karrie & Jennifer, 2008 )
28. Procedure of the Study Pilot Study Formal Study Control Group 1. Pre- test on listening and oral proficiency 2. Two questionnaires on students’ learning-style preference and learning motivation at the pre-test Pre-test Pre-test 1. Pre- test on listening and oral proficiency 2. Two questionnaires on students’ learning-style preference and learning motivation at the pre-test Experimental Group
29. Procedure of the Study Cooperative learning for one semester Traditional learning for one semester Semi-structure interview Post-test 1. Post-test on listening and oral proficiency 2. Two questionnaires on students’ learning-style preference and learning motivation at the post-test Post-test 1. Post-test on listening and oral proficiency 2. Two questionnaires on students’ learning-style preference and learning motivation at the post-test Semi-structure interview Data Collection & Analyzing Data Collection & Analyzing
30. Research Structure 1. Classes 2. Proficiency level Independent variables Experiment process 1.Experimental group: (cooperative learning: STAD & Jigsaw II) 2. Control group: (traditional learning) Control variables 1.Instructor 2.Instructional time 3.Teaching materials & aids 4. learners’ background Dependent variables 1. Learning achievement 2. Learning style preference 3 . Learning motivation
31. Participants 39 participants English conversation class Department of business Studying English for more than six years Participants 6 males; 33 females Two-year System College
32. Instruments 1. An academic achievement test 2. A questionnaire 3 . An English speaking evaluation form 4. An interview protocol
33. Academic achievement test ( LTTC at elementary level ) Picture description Statement response Questions ( 20 mins ) Read passage Repeat the words Answer questions ( 5 mins ) Listening Speaking
41. English speaking evaluation form Content:20% Grammar:20% Vocabulary:20% Fluency:20% Appropriateness: 20% English Speaking Evaluation Form
42.
43. Interview Protocol 2 high achievers 2 high achievers 2 intermediate achievers 2 intermediate achievers 2 low achievers 2 low achievers 15-20 mins Tape- recorded 15-20 mins Tape- recorded Chinese Chinese Experimental group Control group Interviewee Time Tool Language
46. Experimental Design Experimental Group: Control Group: ED 23 participants 16 participants Traditional learning Cooperative learning One semester One semester Two periods a week Two periods a week Same material Same material Same instructor Same instructor Heterogeneous grouping No heterogeneous grouping
47. Control Group Traditional learning: Students listen to and repeat dialogue. 1 Students work independently and compete with one another. 2 The teacher is the instructor while students are listeners. 3 3
48.
49. STAD STAD teacher’s lecture team study group recognition class presentation individual quizzes B E C D A
50. Jigsaw II teacher’s lecture cooperative groups preparation pairs practice pairs team performance
51. Data Collection A B C The scores of academic achievement tests: listening &speaking The results of questionnaire: learning style preference & learning motivation Individual interview: control & experimental group
52. Data Analysis Demographic Information Post-test of the learning achievement (Q1) The significant differences between two classes (Q2. Q3) Interview (Q4. Q5) Descriptive Statistics ANCOVA Independent Samples Test Constant Comparative Analysis
53. Suggestions 1. There are some grammar errors. 2. The interview questions would be designed to the research questions directly.
