What factors limit the ability of 11th grade students to effectively interact in group work activities?
20
0
0
Texto completo
(2) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Acknowledgements “But what happened to the Nautilus? Did it withstand the Maelstrom's clutches? Is Captain Nemo alive? Is he still under the ocean pursuing his frightful program of revenge, or did he stop after that latest mass execution? Will the waves someday deliver that manuscript that contains his full life story? Will I finally learn the man's name? Will the nationality of the stricken warship tell us the nationality of Captain Nemo? I hope so. I likewise hope that his powerful submersible has defeated the sea inside its most dreadful whirlpool that the Nautilus has survived where so many ships have perished! If this is the case and Captain Nemo still inhabits the ocean-- his adopted country--may the hate be appeased in that fierce heart! May the contemplation of so many wonders extinguish the spirit of vengeance in him! May the executioner pass away, and the scientist continues his peaceful exploration of the seas! If his destiny is strange, it's also sublime. Haven't I encompassed it myself? Didn't I lead ten months of this otherworldly existence? Thus to that question asked 6,000 years ago in the Book of Ecclesiastes--"Who can fathom the soundless depths?"-- Two men out of all humanity have now earned the right to reply. Captain Nemo and I.” (Final words in Twenty thousand leagues under the sea by Jules Verne). I would like to thank so many people that this page would be larger than my study. So I will try to be short and clear. First, I would like to thank my mother Loreto, who has supported me and helped me becoming the woman I am now since I was born. She was, is and will be one of the most important pillars in my life and this work would have not been possible without her there believing in me to become a good person and teacher. I also want to thank my brothers Israel & Alonso, whose laughs and support have been a gateway when some days were darker than others. These two specimens are the most intelligent people I have ever met, they have taught me everything I know about science and other very relevant stuff, and their love and caring for me, and between each other as well, is the greatest brotherly love I know. I would like to write some words to my boyfriend Bryan, because without him helping me these years and especially this one, I would not be able to finish this semester, thank you for being there always when I needed and for understanding my moods throughout this process of the research, I know the next year will be better for you and I will be there for supporting you. I have tried being short and clear and I have failed, but I have to say thank you to my family who were there with me always, to my friends who really care about me and always remember me and to my University friends who are finishing this process with me and the ones who still have to battle one more year in the jungle. Thank you to all of you. Finally, I would like to thank my father Pablo, to whom I dedicate the final words of Jules Verne’s novel, for him to finally finish the book. Even though you try to be present and sometimes fail in it, I want to let you know that you are always present, whether in a book that I read, or in a song, or in a conversation during dinner, you are always present, and I want to dedicate these words and this study to you as well, because with these words, I promise to make you and my mother feel proud of the woman and the teacher I am going to be. Thank you and I love you.. 2.
(3) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Abstract This classroom-based research investigated the factors that limit the ability of 11th grade students to effectively interact in group work activities. In this study a qualitative approach was used and the classroom was observed holistically, in the sense of reflecting and observing how every reality converged when students worked in groups. The tools used to collect data were a student survey, which sought opinion regarding group work; an observation checklist focused on when students worked in groups and a focus group with all the participants to deepen into students’ opinions about the topic. As a result of this study, students’ proficiency level, the unbalanced and unclear roles in the group works and the types of activities when it comes to group work tasks were found as limitations that made difficult students’ interaction. Further research can be done in this subject, or it can be considered to plan strategies that can help classrooms with a similar topic to understand the nature of students’ interaction.. Keywords: group work, interaction, students’ limitations, EFL activities.. 3.
(4) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Introduction This classroom-based research was undertaken with an 11th grade in Colegio José Antonio Lecaros in Estación Central. This class is composed by 33 students in which their age move from 16 to 18 years old. In regards to their English proficiency, most of students were able to communicate in basic structure sentences and understand short texts in the foreign language. Therefore, it can be proposed that these students generally have a level in English closest to A2 level of proficiency according to the Common European Framework of Reference (2001). In English classes, when students were assigned to do a group work activity, they tended to gather in groups to work and finish the activity given. However, during the group work activity, most of students tended to work individually and in silence, that is to say, they divide the activity and worked alone. As a result of this, most of students avoided discussions and they did not interact with each other. For instance, when students had to work in groups to create a mind map to present it to the class, in some groups students spoke to each other in their mother tongue, however not about the work. This meant, one or two students in the group tended to finish the task (i.e. create the mind map assigned). This issue is significant to understand since these students were not interacting appropriately when working in groups, most of them were not communicating in the foreign language nor paying attention to the task. It is important to consider that group work activities are useful for students to learn a foreign language since it provides “opportunities for student initiation, for face-to-face give and take, for practice in negotiation of meaning, for extended conversational exchanges, and for student adoption of roles” (Brown, 2001, p. 178). In fact, communication and interaction are an important part of learning a foreign language. For. 4.
(5) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. this reason, this is a relevant issue to study in this classroom, in order to understand what may limit their interaction and consequently communication when students are working in groups. If we understand what underpins students’ decisions in group work activities, we will be able to more effectively plan strategies for them to develop their interaction skills when they work in groups, in order to improve their proficiency level, as well as their interaction and communicational skills. Consequently, the research question for this study was defined as: What factors limit the ability of 11th grade students to effectively interact in group work activities? Methodology This study used a qualitative approach in order to understand the nature of the issue in this particular reality, owing to the fact that it can help to “understand people’s reactions, beliefs, and behavior more clearly” (James, Milenkiewicz & Bucknam, 2008, p. 69). Therefore, the first step was to think of the core of the question for this study and then reflect on and understand the realities of this classroom holistically, that is, observe and comprehend how every reality inside the classroom coexists and conveys among them. In order to find and understand such factors, students were the most important part for this study, considering that they were the ones who can provide information about this issue. However, we have to take into account how to obtain such information from students; thus three different tools were used for this classroom-based research as data collection, thinking of categories that were related to the topics of the question. These categories were limitations about group work, interaction in group work, and factors such as types of activities or language proficiency that may limit interaction in group work activities. Three different tools were conducted with 11th grade students in this study; these were a survey,. 5.
(6) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. an observation checklist and a focus group, such tools are going to be discussed in the following paragraph. Firstly, a survey was designed to seek student opinion regarding their perception of group work activities, that is, their opinion about it and the importance of group work activities inside the classroom, and how they think they interact when working in groups. A copy of this survey is at Appendix A. Secondly, an observation using a structured checklist was undertaken during classes in order to observe student reactions when working in groups. This observation was undertaken by a peer classmate, in order to critically observe students’ communication during group work, as well as reduce subjectivity in such observations. The purpose of this observation was to contrast to what extent students’ opinions varies to their performance when working in groups, and to understand how performance hinders students’ interaction in group work activities, you can see the observation checklist in Appendix B. Finally, a focus group was undertaken with students as a final tool for this study. The aim of this focus group was to deepen insights students’ point of view, regarding the categories already mentioned and their answers of the survey. The questions used for this focus group questions are at Appendix C. In regards of ethics and permissions for this study, all 33 students agreed on participating in this research, by signing an informed consent with all the information of the study for them to be aware of the whole process of the investigation. A copy of this informed consent can be found on Appendix D. The process of collecting data started on September 28th with the informed consent signed by students, and finished on November 10th when the focus group questions were conducted. Due to time issues in the school, the survey was conducted to 11 students of the class; consequently, issues of limited generalizability have to be taken into account for the analysis of this study.. 6.
(7) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. In order to analyze the data, thematic coding was the key to find patterns in students’ answers and categorize their answers, in relation to prescribed categories and others that came up later during the analysis. This process was made to holistically understand the multiple realities in the classroom, by using the same categories and patterns in every tool used for this study. Therefore, as Gibbs (2007) stated regarding data analysis, a mixed method of analysis was applied, in which the process included the use of datadriven and concept-driven coding, owing to the fact that during the analysis, new categories appeared in the data collected. The observation checklist was the first tool to be used in this study and during the whole process as well. The comments in the observation checklist were analyzed using the categories from the list, in order to observe which patterns students repeated the most when they worked in groups. Then, the survey was done and analyzed using students’ answers. The analysis of the survey helped to create the questions for the focus group, in order to deepen into students’ opinions regarding group work activities. Finally, in the focus group, students were given a piece of sheet with the questions when they discussed about the findings of the survey, plus the discussion was audio recorded for a deeper understanding of their answers. Findings The key findings of this study were three main themes with some sub-topics found during the analysis. A factor found that may limit students when working in groups was their proficiency level in English. In this theme it was found three sub-topics related to students’ proficiency level. The first two sub-topics are related to students’ preference to speak in the target language and the reasons behind their choices. Even though the majority of students preferred to communicate in Spanish than English, there were some students who rather speak in English than Spanish in order to improve their level of proficiency.. 7.
(8) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. First, the students who preferred to speak in Spanish, according to the survey, suggested that, as they do not know English they would not be able to understand each other when working in groups (Survey, October 25). In contrast, there were some students who find important to speak in English in group work activities, due to the improvement of their proficiency level when they share with others, according to the survey and the focus group questions. As a third sub-topic, it was found that most of students were reluctant to speak or to participate when working on an activity. Despite the fact that, in the survey and in the focus group questions students responded that they preferred group work activities, owing to the fact that they can improve their confidence, in the observation instances students were doing things that were not related to the activity, such as playing the guitar, finishing other subjects’ tasks or speaking about other issues (Observation 3, October 20). Another factor that emerged was the unclear roles inside a group work task. Despite the fact that the majority of students rather work in groups than individually, there were a few students who have a preference of working individually, and the reasons behind their decision were the unbalanced roles inside a group. In other words, these students responded that, when a group task is assigned, there are some students who have to do the entire activity alone, while the others do not work, or wait until the more proficient students explain the activity to them. This situation was observed as well in the data collection when most of students stated that they prefer group work activities because it is faster due to the division of the task within the members (Focus Group, November 10). Then, as roles are not clear inside the groups, the balance of interacting among them to fulfill the task is inconsistent, owing to the fact that, according to students’ answers, they do not organize themselves to work together, but they divide the task and work alone, or in this case, some. 8.
(9) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. students do the whole work and some students do not work inside the group (Observation 4, November 3). Another finding of this study was the types of activities students preferred to undertake in this EFL classroom. Most of students in responding to the survey and in the focus group discussion observed that they rather work on interviews or discussions about a specific topic than other types of activities, such as grammar exercises or reading comprehension questions. However in the observation checklist, students were working on a different type of activity, which was to create an NGO. Consequently, it is observable that students react differently to different types of activities in the English lessons, and that may limit their reluctance to work and interact among their classmates (Observation 1, October 4). Implications In regards to the outcomes of this study (and in relation to this 11th grade in particular), there are observable limitations when students interact among them. Such limitations have to be considered when making students work in groups, owing to the fact that if students do not know how to interact effectively in group work activities, students will not be able to work together to fulfill the task. Additionally, and considering the rationale behind this study, if students do not communicate among themselves, their proficiency level in English will not improve; consequently interaction and learning opportunities to improve the target language will be diminished inside the classroom. In her study, McDonough (2004) explains that, in group work activities, students who had more participation in such activities demonstrated an improvement in their proficiency level in L2. Therefore, it is feasible that the ones who interact and communicate among others, generally improve their level in English, then with these 11th grade students, it is needed a. 9.
(10) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. strategy or an action plan that involves communication and interaction to make them improve their proficiency level according to the limitations found in this study. In addition, there is an important issue regarding reluctance to communicate among students. According to the data obtained from students, as they think they have a low proficiency level in English, most of them rather not to speak with their classmates but in Spanish, due to shyness, and, according to them as well, they do not know English, therefore, they will not be able to understand each other (Survey, October 25). In their research, Carson & Nelson (1996) found similar outcomes, in which students who are less proficient in the target language, do not participate nor interact with their classmates. According to this study, the reasons behind this decision are related to a sense of vulnerability in those students who are less proficient. However, in this context, students relate their choice to being non-proficient in the language, and the misunderstanding that this low proficiency level can obstruct their communication in the group work activities. Consequently, it is important to consider students’ reasons behind their behavior; as there can be multiple answers to a single behavior in students. Therefore, further research in this topic is needed in order to better comprehend students’ choices regarding this issue. Secondly, the unclear roles observed in the data collection are an interesting issue in this analysis, due to the importance of roles and turn-taking in group work activities. In other words, how students interact when working in groups is difficult to understand, owing to the fact that some students prefer to work alone, and the ones who prefer to work in groups, according to some participants, they divide the work and work individually as well, or do not work on the activity, and wait until the more proficient ones finish the task. Consequently, the unclear roles of each student inside a group created obstacles, because as every student is doing something different to achieve the same goal, communication and. 10.
(11) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. interaction among them are diminished as well as their chance to improve their proficiency level in L2. Chen & Hird (2006) found a similar outcome in their study, in which the same students in the same groups, but on a different day, can behave differently when working individually or in groups. The nature of students’ performance during EFL classes cannot be generalized, in fact it has to be understood as a reality that varies throughout each lesson and activity. Thirdly, in relation to the types of activities, as another factor that hinder interaction among the participants, students’ interaction in the observed lessons varies in relation to students’ survey, in terms of what students say and what students do. In other words, the connection between what students say and what students do differs due to students’ reluctance to work in some types of activities rather than others. Furthermore, it is important to take into consideration students’ opinion when planning group work activities, in terms of which activities are more suitable for some students in a given context. According to Peacock (1998), we should give students more autonomy when choosing activities in order to provide a wider range of opportunities to students to practice the language and interact among each other in the ways they prefer the most, in order to work with them to improve their communicative skills in the EFL classroom. Finally, there is an issue regarding limited generalizability in these outcomes, owing to the fact that not all students were able to participate in the survey when it was conducted. Additionally, the timespan was shorter than expected; therefore, more time needs to be considered for further research, as well as having more time to collect data from students and taking into account schools’ schedule, especially because in this study, the timespan was occasionally disrupted due to schools’ issues.. 11.
(12) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Conclusion This study was useful in understanding that group work dynamics are complex, owing to the fact that the nature of human interaction is multifaceted. For that reason, we cannot assume students’ actions if we do not understand the social reality that surrounds those students. This is why this study helps to the understanding of realities before making decisions, in this sense; this research can be helpful to other research in terms of reflecting before acting. Additionally, group work activities in the EFL classroom provide “students with many more opportunities to practice using the target language and to engage in direct interaction” (Pica & Doughty, 1985, p. 247). Thus, as students learn more from interacting with others, it is essential to work on this dynamic to make students perform effectively in group work tasks. Nevertheless, it is important to mention that we cannot generalize to every Chilean EFL context; however there might be some teachers that can find it helpful and can use it to improve students’ communicative skills in the English class.. 12.
(13) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. References Brown, D. (2001) Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to Language Pedagogy (2nd edition) White Pains NY: Longman. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996) Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction Journal of second language writing 5(1), 1-19. Chen, R., & Hird, B. (2006) Group work in the EFL classroom in China: a closer look. RELC Journal, 37(1), 91-103. Gibbs, G. R. (2008) Analyzing Qualitative Data. London: Sage. James, E. A., Milenkiewicz, M. T., & Bucknam, A. (2008) Participatory Action Research For Educational Leadership: Using data-driven decision making to improve schools. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. McDonough, K. (2004) Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities in A Thai EFL context. Urbana IL: Elsevier. Peacock, M. (1998) Exploring the gap between teachers' and learners' beliefs about “useful” activities for EFL International Journal of Applied Linguistics 8(2), 233248. Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985) The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition Studies in second language acquisition, 7(2), 233-248. Verhelst, N., Van Avermaet, P., Takala, S., Figueras, N., & North, B. (2009) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.. 13.
(14) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Appendix A Survey: Students’ opinions. 14.
(15) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. 15.
(16) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. 16.
(17) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. 17.
(18) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Appendix B Observation checklist. 18.
(19) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Appendix C Focus group questions. 19.
(20) LIMITATIONS OF STUDENTS’ INTERACTIONS IN GROUP WORK ACTIVITIES. Appendix D Informed Consent. 20.
(21)
Documento similar
