VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
  

TRAN QUYNH HUONG A STUDY ON APPLYING GROUP WORK TO INCREASE
QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF STUDENTS’ LANGUAGE
USE AT HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIFTED STUDENTS

NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ VIỆC ÁP DUNG HOẠT ĐỘNG NHÓM NHẰM TĂNG
CƯỜNG VIỆC SỬ DỤNG TIẾNG ANH Ở TRƯƠNG TRUNG HỌC PHỔ THÔNG
CHUYÊN SƯ PHẠM- ĐẠI HỌC SƯ PHẠM HÀ NỘI MINOR M.A. THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60.14.10

Hà Nội - 2013
PART A: INTRODUCTION
(1) Rationale for the study……………………………………………1
(2) Aims of the study …………………………………………………2
(3) Scope of the study ……………………………………………… 2
(4) Methods of the study …………………………………………… 3
(5) An overview of the rest of the paper …………………………… 4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT………………………………………… 6
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………… 6
1.1. Group work in the History of ELT…………………………… 6
1.2. Concept of group work ……………………………….……… 9
1.2.1. Group ……………………………………………….…….9
1.2.2. Group work ………………………………………… …10
1.3. Classification of group work ………………………………… 10
1.4. Advantages and disadvantages of Group work …………… 11
1.5. Features of a good group work …………………………… 12
1.5.1. Positive Interdependence……………………………… 13
1.5.2. Individual and group accountability …………………….14
1.5.3. Face to face promotive interaction ………………… 15
1.5.4. Interpersonal and small group skills …………………….15
1.5.5. Group Processing …………………………………… 16
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ………………………………… 17
2.1. Data collection ………………………………………………… 17
2.1.1. Participants ………………………………………………… 17
2.1.2. Data collection instruments ……………….……………… 17
2.1.2.1. Questionnaire ……………………………………………17

2.1.2.2. Interview ……………………………………………… 18
2.1.3. Data collection procedure ………………………………… 18
2.2. Data analysis …………………………………………………….19
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………21

Figure 4. Students‟ improvement in Group work skill…………… 27
Figure 5. Students improvement in separate skills after GW……….28

PART A: INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, the problem and the rationale for the study, together
with the aims, objectives and the scope of the whole paper are clearly stated
and explained. Above all, this chapter also builds the research questions to
work as clear guidelines for the whole research.
1. Rationale for the study:
According to the statistics issued by the Vietnamese Ministry of Education
and Training in 2003, English was widely chosen by 98.5% of Vietnamese
secondary students as their foreign language. This enormous proportion,
however, reflects the considerable demand for English rather than the quality
of language learning and teaching itself. In fact, English teaching and
learning in Vietnam have confronted a number of obstacles, one of which is
identified by as students‟ low motivation and limited opportunities to
practise communicating in the target language
Michael, H, L & Patricia, A. P., (1985) declared that “the use of group
work in classroom second language learning has been supported by sound
pedagogical arguments” (p.207). In other words, no one can deny the
effectiveness of group work in language teaching. Therefore, following this
educational trend, teachers and professors are trying to extensively exploit
group work in teaching with the aim of “promoting communicative language
skills for the largest number of students in class” (Shevin et al., 1994, cited
by Richard & Roger, 2001). However, in our country, Grammar translation
methods have been applied in language learning for many years, which leads
to students‟ limited group work, presentation skills and inactive learning

Last but not least, it is noteworthy that the samples of the study were
restricted to classes of only one senior secondary school in Hanoi, namely
High school for Gifted Students. Nevertheless, the students would be
deliberately chosen so that the survey results would be as highly
representative of the whole picture of language learning and teaching as
possible.
4. Methodology of the study:
4.1. Data collection methods:
The combination of the two data collecting methods: qualitative
and quantitative and the one of two data collecting instruments:
questionnaire and interview were fully employed in this study. Going
into more detailed, a set of questionnaire was delivered to 276 students
so that the data would be collected from different viewpoints.
Moreover, after this survey, some semi-structured interviews were
applied to get further information from 6 students who had finished the
questionnaires in the previous stage. All of the participants here would
be chosen in light of the „stratified random sampling‟ with the aim of
varying the data of different kinds of students.

As for the procedure, the set of questionnaire was distributed to
students to see whether the textbook content can meet students‟ needs
and levels. Then, after collecting the surveying data, the interview
questions were revised to ask for more information which had not been
clearly stated in the questionnaire. Then, the in-depth interviews would
be applied to get further information of those students.
4.2. Data analysis methods:
The collected data were utilised to answer all three research
questions.
Then, for each research question, data would be summarized into
tables and charts to facilitate the synthesis and generalization of the

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
This second chapter is totally devoted to the literature review,
especially to the key concepts and related studies to the research topic. At
first, the overall picture of background is provided with some key concepts
of group work in details. At the mean time, related studies from all over the
world in general and in countries in particular are deeply analyzed to
illustrate the concepts more clearly.
1.1. Group work in the history of ELT:
It is common knowledge that not until the emergence of
Communicative Language Teaching was Group work applied to teaching
language in class. However, in fact, Group work has been taken use of in
different versions since the early stage of Language Teaching Method with a
typical representative, Grammar Translation Method.
According to Richard J. C. & Rodgers, T. S., (2001), even before
English totally overthrew Latin to become the international language in the
early 19th century, the Grammar Translation Method had become a standard
and dominant approach in Language Teaching. “Grammar Translation
Method is a way of studying a language that approaches the language first
through detailed analysis of its grammar rules, followed by application of
this knowledge to the task of translating sentences and texts into and out of
the target language.” (Richard & Rodgers, 2001). Although this method
focuses on widening linguistic knowledge “about the Language not the

language itself” (p.5) for individual students, some original version of Group
work was still recognized during class hours from the observation of Nadz
DisiNi (2010) when “A student read out loud “when did Mark Twain live?”
Another student replied “Mark Twain lived from 1835 to 1910” and after
that students come back to “work quietly by themselves”. This example
reveals the fact that role- playing structure- based dialogues are one common
technique in Grammar Translation Method, which laid the foundation for

According to To et al. (2008), Cooperative learning “stresses “team
work” as the nature of the classroom and emphasizes cooperation as opposed
to competition” (p. 55). This definition demonstrated the nature of
“cooperative learning” when opposing it to “competition”. With the similar
way of creating concept of Cooperative learning, Roger T. & David W. J.
(1988) make a comparison among three ways of students‟ interaction
including “competition” when “they can compete to see who is "best"”,
“individualistic”; they can work individualistically on their own toward a
goal without paying attention to other students; and “cooperative” when
“they can work cooperatively with a vested interest in each other's learning
as well as their own.” These two explanations shared the same strategies of
defining “cooperative learning” through its alternatives “competitive and
individual learning” in order to figure out the most outstanding features. For
a more correct and comprehensive definition of this term, the researcher
would like to introduce the definition of cooperative learning by Johnson et
al. (1998) which directly specified its three main features 1. “shared goals”

when all the members of groups work together to achieve one shared goal, 2.
equal outcomes to everyone which means “beneficial to themselves and
beneficial to all other group members”, 3. “the instructional use of small
groups”. This definition was proved to be the most successful way of
defining Cooperative learning, which could cover almost all of its important
features in a very brief and logical way. In sum, despite the differences in
defining “cooperative learning”, none of these definitions can deny the
essential and indispensable role of “group work” in teaching English in the
modern times.
1.2. Concept of group work
1.2.1. Group
In turning to the concept of Group work, it is very necessary to
demonstrate what is meant by Group itself. While there are very different

In the light of Cooperative learning which is “designed to foster
cooperation rather than competition” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001), the most
important feature of Group work is to be designed as a teaching technique to
“make group members cooperative” (Jacobs, G. M. & Ball, J., 1996, p. 99).
In other words, the prerequisite of a successful group work is it has to be a
cooperative one.
1.3. Classification of group work
In terms of Group work duration, Johnson et al. (1994, cited by Richard
& Rodger, 2001) divided Group work into three main types: 1. Formal

Cooperative learning groups which “last from one class period to several
weeks”, 2. Informal cooperative learning groups which “last from a few
minutes to a class period”, 3. Cooperative base groups which “last for at
least one year and consist of heterogeneous learning groups with stable
membership”.
In terms of tasks used in group, Long (1990, cited by Jacobs & Ball,
1996) classified group work into: Closed and Open tasks. Closed tasks are
those which often require “predetermined correct answer or small set of
answers” while in Open tasks, “there is no correct answers”. In his book,
Long asserted that the Close tasks enhanced cooperation among students
than the Open ones because students would try their best to discuss with the
aim of finding out the best answer without concerning about the other
alternatives.
1.4. Advantages and Disadvantages of Group work
In spite of being regarded as an indispensable teaching technique in
Language Teaching, group work still consists of both strengths and
weaknesses as others.
Firstly, coming into details about the advantages of group activities in
class, Jacobs & Ball (1994) cited five benefits: “increase quantity of
students‟ language use, enhanced quality of the language that students use,


group work cooperative or fostering cooperation in group work sets the first
foundation for the success of group work in learning process.
According to Johnson et al. (1998), there are 5 criteria for a group work
to foster cooperation including positive interdependence, individual and
group accountability, face-to-face promotive interaction, interpersonal and
small group skills, and group processing.
1.5.1. Positive interdependence:
In terms of defining “positive interdependence”, there are various
concepts taken full use of in many studies, among which Dr. Spencer
Kagan‟s one is considered to give the most detailed information by defining
“positive” and “interdependence” separately. With the eyes of a linguist, Dr
Kagan (1999) deduced that “positive” in “positive interdependence” meant
positive correlation in the outcomes “Our outcomes go up or down
together”. This positive correlation in outcomes helped students
“spontaneously tutor each other and encourage each other” (Kagan, S.,
1999). As a result, all the students can study and get some knowledge from
working together. Similarly, “interdependence” in the term “positive
interdependence” is defined as “lack of independence in the outcomes”
(Kagan, S., 1999) or lack of the situations when students can work
independently without cooperating with each other to reach their goals. In
conclusion, Dr Kagan states that positive interdependence “drives
cooperation” and is the principle or prerequisite for the success of group
work.

Although Dr. Kagan‟s definition gives the most detailed information
about positive interdependence, the most common concept which has been
cited by many researchers in different linguistic research comes from
Johnson et al. (1998) “Positive interdependence is linking students together
so one cannot succeed unless all group members succeed. Group members

th
edition,
p. 1014). In cooperative learning, “promotive interaction” among students
means helping each other, which often includes “peer tutoring, temporary
assistance, exchanges of information and material, challenging of each
other's reasoning, feedback, and encouragement to keep one another highly
motivated.” (Biehler, 1997 cited from Houghton Mifflin‟s website).
Investigating into the features of this element, Biehler discerns that “Face to
face promotive interaction” evolves from positive interdependence “This
element is made necessary by the existence of positive interdependence”
(Biehler, 1997 cited from Houghton Mifflin‟s website). In other words, Face
to face promotive interaction originates from Positive interdependence but it
actually happens only in the working process of group work.
1.5.4. Interpersonal and small group skills
Differing from these three previous elements, “interpersonal skills” are
not a requirement for the group work itself but for the students or the
participants of group work to gain after taking part in Group activities. As
explained by Johnson et al. (1998) “Social skills must be taught to students
just as purposefully and precisely as academic skills.” because these small

group skills can help empower students to manage both teamwork and task
work successfully in the future.
1.5.5. Group Processing
The last principle for a successful cooperative group work fits in the
stage after group works‟ completion. In so many words, in order to achieve
their goals, students are expected to maintain “the careful analysis of how
members are working together and determining how group effectiveness can
be enhanced.” (Johnson et al., 1998, p. 4). According to (Johnson et al.,
2006, cited by NDSL from group processing plays
the role of evaluating or reflecting on “how well group members are

The research was conducted with the support of one set of
questionnaire for the students who are studying English at High school for
Gifted students. In order to avoid the unnecessary misunderstanding from

the respondents, the questionnaire paper including both close-ended and
open ended questions were designed in Vietnamese.
The questionnaire (Appendix 1& 2) included two pages. The top part
of the first page also served as a pre-face with a brief introduction, concise
explanation of the research topic. The main content of questionnaire was
divided into two main parts: “Information background” and “Group work
in class”. “Information background” included one important question to
see whether students had worked in groups before going to this school or
not, which would affect the research results. Meanwhile, “Group work in
class” part was divided into 14 smaller questions with the aim of partly
answering the second research question and fully investigating the third
one.
2.1.2.2. Interview:
Interview is the most suitable cooperative assistant to minimize the
abstractness of the answers in Questionnaire. Therefore, one set of
interview for students was designed in a semi-constructed format, which
meant flexibility depending on the different flows of particular interviews
(Appendix 3& 4). Using Vietnamese language helped the interviewees feel
more comfortable and confident to answer the interviewer‟s questions.
Some of the interviews were recorded under the permission of the
interviewees.
2.1.3. Data collection procedure:
The procedure of collecting data for the research was conducted in 3
phases:

Phase 1: Designing and Piloting questionnaires

problems of students and the solutions as suggested by them.
All the data collected from the questionnaires and the interviews were
classified according to the research questions. Noticeably, they would be
analyzed and then demonstrated for comparison and interpretation.
Besides, some of the quotes from the interviews with teachers and students
would be cited by summaries and quotation into qualitative data to support
the points here and there in the research.

Summary
This chapter has justified the methodology of the study by elaborating
on the participants including the students at High school for Gifted
Students, as well as the two data collection methods: questionnaire and
interview. Clarification has also been given to the data analysis methods
and process. The presentation and interpretation of findings from such
analysis are going to be made clear in the next chapter.