~slecSlllwongllntemotlonol Englllh ConftrtnCl

SIEC JOURNALA publication on the teaching and learning of English

SIEC JOURNAL is published in the month of November 2014, it focuses thefields of English as a second or foreign language, English language teaching andlearning, English language teachers' training and education, and English languageand literacy studies.

Editors:

Rahmat

Metty Agustine Primary

Nuraeni

Yusup Supriyono

Junjun Muhamad Ramdani

Arini Nurul Hidayati

Asri Siti Fatimah

ISSN: 9772407375005

Copyright ©20 14 by English Education Department UNSIL Press

All right reserved. No part of this publication may be produced, stored in aretrieval system, or trasmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permissionof English Education Department, University of Siliwangi.J1. Siliwangi No.24 Tasikmalaya, West Java, IndonesiaPhone: 0265 323532 en lishfki unsil.ac.id

Published by:English Education Department, UNSIL PressJ1. Siliwangi No.24 Tasikmalaya, West Java, IndonesiaPhone :(0265)323532Email: englishfkip@unsil.ac.idWebsite: www.eng.unsil.ac.id

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover I

Preface 111

Table of Contents IV

I Dini Hadiani Analysing Students' Communication 1Strategies in Oral Presentation

2 Fahriany Leamer Autonomy and English Profeciency 123 Fazri Nur Yusuf Feedback and Teaching Competence: 20

Integration?

4 Herawaty Abbas Challenges in Translating Cultural Aspects 34of Helen Gamer's Postcards from Surfersinto Indonesian

5 Jo-Ann Netto- Engaging English Language Teachers in 45Shek Professional Development

6 Johari Nur The Effect of Using Experience Text 62Relationship (ETR) Method on StudentsReading Comprehension

7 Nia Nuryanti Students' Perception Towards 70Pennata Collaborative Learning in ESP Classroom

8 Nuraeni Practicing the Theory and Theorizing of 84Practice: A Professional Learning ofStudent Teachers in Language TeacherEducation

9 Puryanti Broadcasting News Based on Local Facts: 96An Inspiration to Engage Students inActive Learning

10 Yayu Heryatun Exploring EFL Readers' Metcognitive 109Awareness in Reading Comprehension

IV

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014STUDENTS' PERCEPTIONS TOWARDS COLLABORATIVE

LEARNING IN ESP CLASSROOM

Nia Nuryanti PermataPoliteknik Manufaktur Negeri Bandung

Email: nianp2000@yahoo.com

Abstract

This study tries to explore students' perceptions towards Collaborative Learning(CL) conducted in their ESP classroom in a state polytechnic in Bandung. CL iscommonly used in some learning in ESP classroom in the polytechnic, howeverthere is no study concerning its students' perceptions. The study employs aqualitative research design, which is a case study. The data are obtained fromquestionnaire (adapted from Brown, 2010) and also interviews. The findingsreveal that most students feel they get the academic advantages (94.7%), acquiregeneric skills (93.2%), and also have social advantages (89%). Almost all studentsthink that the method should be continued. This concludes that students'perception of CL in the state polytechnic is in line with the findings in otherstudies. It is recommended that CL in the ESP classroom program should becontinued and improved.Keywords: Collaborative Learning, ESP Classroom

INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, Collaborative Learning has been used widely in the classrooms. It is

suggested by many researchers and practitioner. Collaborative Learning is grown

by the rise of demand for students to graduate with good interpersonal skills,

knowledge of group dynamics, the flexibility to work in teams, the ability to lead,

to problem-solve and to communicate effectively (Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers,

2000).

There are three main reasons for adopting group work or Collaborative Learning,

as stated by White (2007); 1) group work or Collaborative Learning is an effective

form of learning; 2) it promotes teamwork skills that employers require and value;

and 3) efficiency in the use of staff time. They are some advantages that we can

have from implementing the Collaborative Learning.

Furthermore, according to Brown (2010), the more interesting Collaborative

Learning activities are, the more likely the acquisition of targeted skills. Then he

68

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014 _added that Collaborative Learning is designed to be a lively instructional method.

This aspect is a beneficial point for the use of Collaborative Learning in ESP

(English for Specific Purposes) classroom. In ESP classroom, as in Polytechnic,

the topic learnt in English should be meaningful and very relevant with the

students' disciplines. About the defmition of ESP, Hutchinson and Waters (1987)

theorized, "ESP is an approach to language teaching in which all decisions as to

content and method are based on the learner's reason for learning". So, it is likely

that the Collaborative Learning is a suitable methodology to be used in ESP

classroom.

Furthermore, the teaching of English in Polman Bandung, which is -technical

English (ESP), has also employed the Collaborative Learning methodology for

some topics in classrooms. So, this situation, at a glance, gives benefit to the

students. However, no study has analyzed the perceptions of Polman Bandung

students concerning the use of Collaborative Learning in their ESP classroom.

Therefore, this study intends to fmd out students' perceptions towards

collaborative learning in ESP classroom.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Collaborative Learning

Collaborative Learning (CL) is a bit different with cooperative leaning. Brown

(2001) states in cooperative learning models, a group learning activity is

dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learners.

Meanwhile, in Collaborative Learning, the learner engages "with more capable

others (teachers, advanced peers, etc.), who provide assistance and guidance"

(Oxford 1997, as cited in Brown (2001).

Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers (2000) say CL is learning that occurs as a result of

interaction between peers engaged in the completion of a common task. Students

are not only 'in' groups, they 'work' together in groups, playing a significant role

in each other's learning (Ingleton, Doube and Rogers, 2000).

69

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014Collaborative Learning (CL) can be conducted in a small group work. Small

groups of around five students provoke greater involvement and participation than

larger groups, and they are small enough for real interpersonal interaction, yet not

so small that members are over-reliant upon each individual (Harmer 2001,

p.117).

Advantages of Collaborative Learning

Brown (2010) informs that CL improves the educational and psychological

outcomes for students as (1) cognitive (academic), (2) social constructivism, and

(3) motivational (genericllife long learning skills).

Working in the group work has a greater chance of different opinions and varied

contributions than in pair work (Harmer 2001). This promotes the cognitive aspect

of the students.

CL shares a sense of the social nature of learning, and emphasizes a social

approach to the development of learning skills, work skills, and life skills

(Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers, 2000). So, the social aspect of students can be

developed through the CL.

According to Harmer (2001), group work (CL) encourages broader skills of

cooperation and negotiation then pair work, and yet is more private than work in

front of the whole class. This shows that CL can help the social aspect and build

generic skills of the students.

In other area, Harmer (2001) mentions group work promotes learner autonomy by

allowing students to make their own decisions in the group without being told

what to do by the teacher. Here, autonomous learning can also be established

through CL.

Moreover, Gokhale (1995) states CL fosters the development of critical thinking

through discussion, clarification of ideas, and evaluation of others' ideas. The

critical thinking also supports the -generic skills of students.

70

Disadvantages of Collaborative Learning

Some shortcomings also come to CL. One of them is some students think that it is

wasting of time to explain the material to others (Gokhale, 1995). It is happened

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014because in a group, students have varied capacity, so then some should help or

even 'teach' their friend(s) in the CL activities.

Moreover, Harmer (2001) explains that they are some disadvantages of group

work (CL). They are:

It is likely to be noisy

Not all students enjoy it since they would prefer to be the focus of the

teacher's attention rather than working with their peers.

Individuals may fall into group roles that become fossilized, so that some

are passive whereas others may dominate

Groups can take longer to organize than pairs

Furthermore, if the teacher did not care about the group process, individual

process, and students' feeling, free riding became inevitable (Li and Campbell,

2008). Free ridings are those who are not working in the group but they get the

same result. They corrode other team members' trust, motivation, morale, and

confidence (Li and Campbell, 2008).

In order to decrease the disadvantages of CL, it is important to ensure the students

that the group activities are going to be a success. Beside that, the procedure of

the learning activities must be well informed and managed.

Procedures for CL

Students need to understand what they are going to do, and they need to be given

an idea of when they will have fmished the task they are going to get involved in

(Harmer, 2001). Moreover, Li and Campbell (2008) recommend that teacher

should inform students of the learning objectives, purposes and benefits of group

assignments and their relevance to workplaces.

During group work (CL) Harmer (2001) explains that teacher can stand at the

front side of a class and keep an eye on what is happening, then decides whether

to go over and help the group, or teacher can go round the class watching and

71

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014listening to specific groups, then stays for a period of time and then intervene if

the teacher thinks it is appropriate and necessary.

After the group work finishes, the teacher has to organize feedback, furthermore,

constructive feedback on the content of student work can greatly enhance

students' future motivation (Hanner, 2001).

MEmODOLOGYThe study used descriptive method. Data were obtained from questionnaire and

interviews with some students.

The questionnaires were collected from 6 classes of English (ESP) conducting

Collaborative Learning in its process. The topic learnt was meaningful and very

relevant with students' disciplines. Basically, in the CL activities, the students had

a group of 4. Then, they were asked to make a technical writing which they chose

the topic by them selves and then to present it in the classroom. The CL was

conducted in several meetings.

The questionnaire was used to determine the students' perception on the CL used

in their ESP classroom. It uses a likert scale which the students have to choose

one option for each statement that is in accordance with their perception (Strongly

Agree henceforth 'SA', Agree henceforth 'A', Disagree henceforth 'D', Strongly

Disagree henceforth 'SD').

Items in the questionnaire that support the academic advantages, social

advantages, generic skills, and also negative aspects which are taken from Brown

(2010) are:

Items for Academic Advantages

-Helped understanding/comprehension

-Fostered exchange of knowledge,

information and experiences

-Received useful/helpful feedback

-Got fresh insight

-Enabled learners to help weaker learners

in the group

72

SIEC Journal Volume I Number I November 2014, , ,-Improved performance

-Learners actively participated in the

teaching/learning process

Items for Social Advantages

-More relaxed atmosphere

-It was fun

-Made new friends

Items for Generic /Life long Learning

Skills

-Made problem-solving easier

-Stimulated critical thinking

-Focused on collective efforts rather than

individual effort

-Greater responsibility-for myself and the

group

-Enhanced communication skills

-Fostered team spirit

Items for Negative Aspects

-Waste of time explaining things to others

-Difficult getting members to actively

participate in tasks..The questionnaire was administered after the CL was conducted. Almost all

students answered the questionnaire immediately. Meanwhile, classroom

observation and interviews were used to justify the data obtained from the

questionnaire.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Generally, the research results provided valuable insights on the students'

perception towards the CL in the ESP classroom in the Polytechnic. There were

145 questionnaires collected from the students as participants. The questionnaire

gained information about the advantages and the disadvantages of CL based on

73

SJEC Journal, Volume J, Number J, November 2014students perception. The fmdings from the questionnaire and also interviews are

discussed below.

Students' Perceptions on Advantages of CL

According to Brown (2010), the advantages ofCL are in the form of Academic

Advantages, Social Advantages, and GenericlLife long learning skills.

74

Academic Advantages

According to the fmdings, the answers from 145 students on academic advantages

are shown in the table below.

Statement Numbers

Percentage (%)

Working in

groups: SA A D SD

Helped

understanding! 41 4

comprehension (28.3%) 100 (69%) (2.8%) 0(0%)

Fostered

exchange of

knowledge,

information and 59 81 3 0

experiences (41.3%) (56.6%) (2.1%) (0%)

Received

usefullhelpful 33 102 7 2

feedback (22.9%) (70.8%) (4.9%) (1.4%)

Got fresh 51 87 6 0

insight (35.4%) (60.4%) (4.2%) (0%)

Enabled

learners to help

weaker learners 55 78 11 0

in the group (38.2%) (54.2%) (7.6%) (0%)

SIEC Journal Volume I Number I November 2014. . .Improved 38 93 12 0

performance (26.6%) (65%) (8.4%) (0%)

Learners

actively

participated in

the

teaching/learnin 36 100 8 0

g process (25%) (69.4%) (5.6%) (0%)

To sum up the result in the academic advantages, the data show that 94.7%

students agree with the statement the students get academic advantages throughCL.

Category Agree Disagree

Academic advantages 94.7% 5.3%

According to the interviews, through CL students get more knowledge and

information from their discussion concerning a specific topic. Because working in

group work has a greater chance of different opinions and varied contributions

than in pair work (Hanner, 2001) it is likely that the students process more

information in CL. Based on the questionnaire, 97.9% students think that CL

fostered exchange of knowledge, information and experiences. This takes the

biggest percentage of all items.

Besides that, they feel more confident in the learning activity including the

speaking activity. It makes the students more active to participate. Moreover the

learning material is relevant with their disciplines and they are free to access to

several learning resources. It can be related to the aspect of autonomous. Group

work promotes learner autonomy because students are allowed to make their own

decisions without being told what to do by the teacher (Hanner, 2001).

To make group work has equality in the class, and also to make sure that transfer

of knowledge among students happens, it is needed to distribute the 'above

75

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014average students' and the 'below average students' in every group. This is

suggested by the students. Furthermore, heterogeneity is better than homogeneity

for promoting learning (Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers, 2000).

Social Advantages

The result of social advantages can be seen below.

Statement Numbers

Percentage (%)

Working in

groups: SA A D SD

More relaxed 47 76 20 2

atmosphere (32.4%) (52.4%) (13.8%) (1.4%) .

It was fun 49 89 7 0

(33.8%) (61.4%) (4.9%) (0%)

Made new 32 94 17 2

friends (22.1%) (64.8%) (11.7%) (1.4%)

It can be seen that in average, 89% of students agree that they gain social

advantages through CL.

Category Agree Disagree

Social advantages 89% 11%

Students feel that it is fun to learn with CL. By having their friends learning a

specific area, they feel no boundaries between them and the learning. They feel

free to ask questions, to transfer their thought, and to communicate their own

words. It can be said that it is a more relaxed atmosphere. The anxiety of students

about speaking or performing in public is likely to be reduced because of the

sustained long term interaction with others (Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers, 2000).

This is line with the questionnaire findings. This actually can help the students in

learning the second / foreign language.

76

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014The students think that they can strengthen the relationship with their friends

through CL. They know better their friends characteristics. Then, they feel more

confident about their friends. Here, CL enhances interpersonal skills. Another

social advantage in students' view is they feel that they can give motivation

among them, they can cover the weaknesses they have. Actually it shows that CL

runs against a well-entrenched ethos of competition (Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers,

2000). CL tutors the students to do team work or collaboration, not competition.

GenericlLife Long Learning Skill

The next table shows the fmdings about students' perception about CL which

supports the GenericlLife long learning Skills.

Statement Numbers

Percentage (%)

Working in

groups: SA A D SD

Made problem- 0

solving easier 36 99 8 (0%)

(25.2%) (69.2%) (5.6%)

Stimulated 53 80 10 2

critical thinking (36.6%) (52.2%) (6.9%) (1.4%)

Focused on

collective

efforts rather

than individual 86 12 2

effort 45(31%) (59.3%) (8.3%) (1.4%)

Greater

responsibility-

for myself and 37 92 9 4

the group (26.1%) (64.8%) (6.3%) (2.8%)

Enhanced 63 79 3 0

communication (43.4%) (54.5%) (2.1%) (0%)

77

SIEC Journal Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014,skills

Fostered team 42 93 8 1

spirit (29.2%) 64.6%) (5.6%) (0.7%)

Regarding the students' perception that their GenericlLife long learning skills are

strengthened through CL, 93.2% students agree with it.

Category Agree Disagree

Generic/life long

learning skills 93.2% 6.8%

According to the interviews, students say that by CL, problems they face in the

learning process can be overcome easier than by individual since they discuss it in

groups. In fact this is one of aspect in Life long learning skill since Collaborative

Learning emphasizes the learning aspect of working together (Ingleton, Doube,

and Rogers, 2000).

Students' Perceptions on Disadvantages of CL

The disadvantages of CL in this study follow the Negative Aspects that are stated

by Brown (2010).

The findings can be seen in the following table.

Statement Numbers

Percentage (%)

Working in

groups: SA A D SD

Waste of time 5 20 78 38

explaining (3.5 {l4. (55. (27

things to others %) 2%) 3%) %)

Difficult getting 15 58 64 6

members to {l0.5 (40. (44. (4.2

78

SIEC Journal Volume 1 Number 1 November 2014, , ,actively %) 6%) 8%) %)

participate in

tasks

In summing up the disadvantages of CL, 34.4% of students' agree with it.

Meanwhile, 65.6% disagree that CL has the disadvantages.

Category Agree Disagree

Negative aspects 34.4% 65.6%

Students are aware that they have varied ability of English. So those who are more

outstanding or better in English (high achiever) tend to dominate the group,

however, others think that all the group members have equal status. By having

some members are the high achiever and having motivation, while others are low

achiever and having low motivation, it may fall to the situation which there is

some students playas free riders. They say that the free riders are the burden in

the group. According to questionnaire, 51.1% students think that it is difficult to

get members actively participate in task. This shows that this is a big challenge for

student. One solution to overcome this problem is peer assessment. Students who

know that their work will be evaluated by peers are unlikely to 'free-ride'

(lngleton, Doube, and Rogers, 2000). Peer assessment can be used in evaluation.

Actually, there are some suggestions proposed by some experts in assessing CL,

such as self assessment, peer assessment, and staff (teacher) assessment.

In fact, students also suggest that the scoring should not only given by the teacher,

but peer scoring should be done since they know each member contribution in the

group. This is actually to limit the shortcoming of the existence of free riders. So

basically, students agree that they need the existence of peer assessment in CL.

On the other hand, students admit that they give more time and effort to assist or

even to 'teach' the low achiever in their groups. In fact based on the

questionnaire, 17.7% students think that it is a waste of time explaining things to

their friends. However, CL is actually an exercise for students to have a team

work skill and also the life skill, they must be patient in working in the group

79

SJECJournal, Volume 1, Number J, November 2014since there must be varied ability of the members. In CL situations where students

must generate explanations to others, their ability to comprehend and recall at a

later date is increased (Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers, 2000).

Students suggest that the control of the teacher is necessary in order to make the

group work run, and to make sure that all students participate and give

contribution in the group. Furthermore, some students think that the group should

consist of 3 students rather than 4, so that all members will give more contribution

or at least will speak more. But this is also questionable since with 3 members it's

easy for one to be left out (Ingleton, Doube, and Rogers, 2000). It can depend on

the complexity of the task given to the students.

CONCLUSION

The fmdings reveal that most students feel they get the academic advantages

(94.7%), acquire genericlLife long learning skills (93.2%), and also have social

advantages (89%). Meanwhile there are disadvantages that the students

experience from CL (34.4%).

Generally, students perceive CL as learning activity that is very useful for them

and this implies that the method should be continued.

In CL, teacher plays an important role to make the activities run well. It is the role

of teacher to make well preparation before the CL is conducted as informing the

students the learning objectives, purpose, and the benefit of CL, control the

implementation of CL, and organize the feedback.

Moreover as a recommendation, in building good CL in the classroom, teacher

should give motivation to students in order they perform well in the group work.

By that, hopefully all members in the group have strong motivation and

commitment in the learning.

80

SIEC Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, November 2014REFERENCES

Brown, H.Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach toLanguage Pedagogy, Second Edition. NY: Pearson Education.

Brown, F.A, "Collaborative Learning in the EAP Classroom : Students'Perceptions", (2010), retrieved on April 27 2011 from http://www.esp-world. info/Articles_171PDF /Collaborative%20Iearning.pdf

Harmer, Jeremy. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. England:Pearson Education Limited.

Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987). Englishfor Specific Purposes. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Ingleton, C., Doube, L., Rogers,T., Leap into ... Collaborative Learning, (2000),retrieved on July 18 2014 fromhttp://digital.library .adelaide.edu.auldspace/bitstrearn/2440/71211 /1/hdl_71211.pdf

Li, Mingsheng, Campbell, Jacqui. "Asian students' perceptions of group work andgroup assignments in a New Zealand tertiary institution", InterculturalEducation, 19:3, 203-216, (2008), retrieved on 21 April 2011 fromhttp://dx.doi.org/l0.l080/14675980802078525

White, F, Lloyd, H, Goldfried, J, "Evaluating student perceptions of group workand group assessment", (2007), retrieved on April 21 2011 fromhttp://ses.library.usyd.edu,aulbitstrearn/2123/2117/I/fransUniWhtie7.pdf

Gokhale, A., "Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking", Journal ofTechnology Education, (1995), retrieved on July 18 2014 fromhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v7nllgokhale.jte-v7n l.htm

81