Effect of Cooperative Learning on Chinese
Graduates’
L2 
1English Communication Competence
首都师范大学 姜育
Abstract:Cooperative learning, one of the advanced learning approaches based on the communicative approach, is promoted more and more in the L2 English classroom.Chinese graduates’ L2 English is becoming more adaptable to advanced teaching approaches.This study examines the effect of cooperative learning on Chinese graduates’ L2 English communication competence.The researcher respectively implements formal and informal cooperative learning with two graduate L2 English classes and the results are discussed from three aspects:use of social skills, multiple strategies in the discussion and teachers’ intervention in the learning process.The study provides practical references for future L2 English teaching of Chinese graduates.
Keywords:Cooperative learning; Chinese graduates’ L2 English; Communication competence
1.Introduction
Cooperative learning is found on the basis of social interdependence theory that involves cooperation, competition and individualistic efforts, which has been validated by hundreds of research studies（Johnson & Johnson 2009）.The idea was promoted into regular classroom teaching practice by American educator, John Dewey in the early 20th century in the U.S.and it was further developed in public schools in the 1960s and 1970s.It has been recognized that peer-mediated learning can promote learning in pedagogical practice from preschool to tertiary education both in formal and casual social meetings.Cooperative learning allows students many opportunities to learn and develop a greater understanding of each other with diverse interpersonal adjustment and learning needs（Shachar 2003, Stevahn & King 2005）.The approach was suggested as one of the greatest educational innovations in recent years by Slavin（1999）and it has been used in every subject area with students of every age.
2.Theoretical perspectives on cooperative learning and L2 graduates’ English learning in China
2.1 Cooperative learning
Cooperative learning is regarded as a way of promoting communicative interaction in the L2 language-teaching classroom and it is a learner-centered approach（Richards & Rodgers 2003）.Three types of cooperative learning were proposed:formal, informal and cooperative base groups（Johnson & Johnson 2008）.Because of limited space and the relevance of the current study,formal and informal cooperative learning will only be reviewed in the following paragraphs.
In formal cooperative learning, students work together to achieve shared learning goals and complete joint tasks or assignments.Teachers provide guidance and assistance during the learning, including making preinstructional decision, explaining the instructional task and cooperative structure, monitoring the students’ learning and intervening to provide assistance,assessing students’ learning and helping students to process their group functions.Formal cooperative learning could be conducted for a specifi c task and it can last from one class period to several weeks.
In informal cooperative learning, teachers keep students focused on discussion before and after the lesson, and intersperse pair discussion throughout the lesson.Two important aspects are suggested, making task and instruction explicit and precise and requiring the groups to produce a specifi c product, such as a written answer.The procedure is as follows:
1）Introductory focused discussion:assigning students to pairs or triads and explain the task;
2）Intermittent focused discussion:dividing the lecture into 10-to 15-minute segments;
3）Closure focused discussion:giving students an ending discussion task.Informal cooperative learning can last from a few minutes to a class period.
2.2 .Brief review of previous fi ndings
The central role of social interaction is primarily advocated in cooperative learning.Learners develop communicative competence in languages by conversing in socially or pedagogically designed situations.Appropriate use of social skills can greatly infl uence members’ achievement and productivity especially on a long-term basis and in free exploratory activities（Johnson &Johnson 2008）.Group members take the opportunity to look closely at the group process and find their role in it.When individuals define themselves in terms of their group membership,they are more willing to contribute more toward the public good（De Cremer & Van Vjugt 1999）.Furthermore, an individual’s performance affects the success of group members and also seems to create“responsibility forces”that increase the individual’s efforts for achievement, completing one’s share of the work and facilitating the work of other group members.The“responsibility forces”create the concept of“ought to”to group members’ motivation:one ought to do one’s part, pull one’s weight, contribute and satisfy peer norms（Johnson 2003, Johnson & Johnson 2005）.
Cooperative learning can be fitted in any particular form of language syllabus.Group discussion, group work and pair work are generally used to increase the amount of learners’participation in lessons especially when they are designed in a collaborative way.Webb &Mastergeorge（2003）studied helping behavior within peer-directed groups and found that precise questions and persistence in seeking help would lead to effective learning in small group learning activities.In addition, McDonnell（1992）proposed many reasons why learners are more profi cient in language as a result of group work, including more comprehensible input through peer interaction, progressing to a more varied and complex use of language, having longer conversational turns than in the whole-class teaching situation, etc.
Extensive research explored the development of cooperative learning in L2 language learning, in which the key role of teachers in implementing the approach is regarded as one of the important parts（Kessler 1992, Gillies, Ashman & Terwel 2008）.Gillies（2008）proposed that teachers played a critical role in promoting interactions and facilitating discussions among students.The researcher specifically explored teachers’ and students’ verbal behaviors in cooperative learning.Through comparing teachers’ verbal behaviors between cooperative learning and small group learning, the results showed that students in cooperative learning engaged in more helping behaviors.Furthermore, teachers received additional training in the communicative skills presented by more mediated-learning behaviors in the teaching, and students in trained teachers’ classes also showed more interactive learning behaviors.
2.3 Chinese graduates’ L2 English learning
Since the communicative approach and communication competence were highlighted in the new education reforms, the curriculum and course design have been adjusted.Even so, there are still many diffi culties and constraints in the implementation of the advanced teaching approach（Ryan 2011, Jiang 2013）.
As to English teaching at the graduate level, L2 English has been assigned as one of the compulsory subjects for all year-1 graduates in China regardless of the students’ majors.Students generally take two-hour English classes each week, which are given by local English teachers or by both local English teachers and English teachers from English-speaking countries.Most students started formal English learning in primary school and thus had more than 10 years’formal English learning before their graduate study.However, students’ English proficiencies differ because they were recruited from different areas of China based on different requirements for choosing different majors.According to the updated Non-English Major Graduate Student English Course Syllabus, one of the English language subject’s aims is to improve students’communication competence, take advanced teaching approaches and develop students’ learning autonomy.English teaching at graduate level has thereby drawn more and more attention from researchers in recent years.
One of the recent studies is by Yu（2009）, which explored cooperative learning approaches in advanced L2 English teaching with English major students.The study found that cooperative learning cultivated the learners’ autonomy and developed the learners’ communication competence.The researcher advocated that cooperative learning can improve current teaching practice in the advanced English classroom of English majors, in which the traditional approach prevailed.Compared with advanced L2 English teaching, non-English major English teaching, including graduate-level English, is also dominated by the grammar-translation and teachercentered practice.Thus, it is helpful to explore advanced teaching approaches for graduate L2 English teaching.
2.4 Rationale of the study
The cooperative learning approach is based on the communicative approach.Group activities and pair work, as the major mode of learning, have often been advocated in teaching practices because group work can maximize students’ interaction and facilitate students’ contribution to each others’ learning.If cooperative learning works in advanced L2 English classes, as Yu（2009）suggested, it is worthwhile to explore whether this approach works in other levels of L2 English classes.Therefore, the current study aims at examining the effect of formal and informal cooperative learning on Chinese graduates’ L2 English communicative competence, which will enrich the fi ndings of this approach with Chinese L2 English teaching in different teaching environments and the results will also provide practical references for the teaching practice with Chinese graduates’ L2 English teaching in the future.
3.Studies on formal and informal cooperative learning respectively
The research tries to explore the effect of formal and informal cooperative learning on Chinese graduates’ L2 English learning through comparing two L2 English classes, which applied formal and informal cooperative approach respectively.The study was conducted in November 2016.All participants were year-1 postgraduate students, majoring in different subjects,including arts, education, engineering, history, psychology, etc., 52（8 males, 44 females）in formal cooperative learning class and 51（9 males, 21 females）in the counterpart’s class.The participants in formal cooperative learning class had built stable group membership since the very beginning of the term; the participants in informal cooperative learning class were usually divided into groups randomly in previous classes but they were re-grouped according to the order of their IDnumbers only for this research.The classes lasted 90 minutes and were given by the same teacher.The teacher tried to minimize the variables between two studies, including choosing the same classroom, using the same teaching materials, giving the class at the same time within two days, etc.The teacher followed the procedures of formal and informal cooperative learning based on Johnson & Johnson（2008）when she carried out the teaching with two classes.
3.1 Formal cooperative learning class
The teacher firstly divided the class into groups of four and also assigned a group leader for each group.After distributing the teaching materials to each group, the teacher explicitly explained the tasks which each group needed to fi nish.The teacher used the cooperative lesson planning form as a guidance that was proposed by Johnson & Johnson（2008）.During the discussion, the teacher had time to check whether each group member had the role in completing the assignment and whether each group was on the right direction in doing the assignment.At the same time, the teacher monitored the rate of the discussion process of each group, reminded the students of social skills which the students were expected to use, provided assistances, assessed the individual’s and the group’s productivities and gave positive feedbacks to individuals’ work.At last, the teacher asked group leaders to provide a general report for their assignments so that all students reached an agreement for the answers.After fi nishing the assignments, the teacher had the students briefl y discuss how effectively they worked together and brought closure to the lesson by putting forward suggestions for further improvement next time.
3.2 Informal cooperative learning class
According to the procedure of informal cooperation learning in Johnson & Johnson（2008）,the teacher gave relevant homework to all the students for preparation before the next class.In the class, the teacher fi rstly assigned the students to triads and started the lesson by asking the students to present what they knew about the topic in a 4-to 5-minute period.Then the teacher began the lecture by playing a video and asking the students to focus on the questions given.After students each formulated their own answer, they were asked to share their answer with their partners.They would often create a new answer, which could be superior to their initial formulation after the discussion.During the discussion, the teacher had time to move around the class and listen to what the students were saying.Then the teacher asked two students by volunteering them for providing their answers so as to make sure that the students reached an agreement on the answers.The second step was repeated twice till the targeted lecture was finished.In each session, the teacher made sure that the students were actively involved and understood what was being presented.Thirdly, the teacher asked the students to have a final discussion on what they had learned from the whole lecture.To end the lecture, the teacher fi nally assigned homework for the next class.
3.3 Data collection
The classes were videoed and the data were collected through observation and interview.According to McDonough & McDonough（2000）, the interpretation of observation can be made with the collaboration of the participants and the researcher through stimulated recall, which can reveal what had been going on in the class and their perceptions at that point.Besides, after-class interviews were conducted so as to find out the participants’ instant feedback about the class.The questions include 1）Which part of the class do you like most? 2）Which part of the class is helpful to you? 3）How much did you get involved in the discussion activities? etc.All answers were coded and categorized for discussion.
4.Results and Discussion
4.1 Use of social skills
The observation and stimulated recall showed that the participants in the two classes had effective communication on the assigned task.They rehearsed and practiced oral presentations with each other and asked for feedback from other members.They strongly felt“responsibilities”for their assigned work and did not want their individual part to hamper the whole group’s performance.This result agreed with previous findings by De Cremer & Van Vjugt（1999）,Johnson（2003）and Johnson & Johnson（2005）.Furthermore, the students in formal cooperative learning class indicated that they could get the task done faster than previously because they spent less and less time assigning work among members.If a member did not follow the instruction or encountered diffi culties in doing his or her task, he or she did not hesitate or feel shy in asking for help from other team members.The students in informal cooperative learning class indicated that they could have effective communication, but sometimes they were afraid of making mistakes or tried to avoid any embarrassing situation.If they were confused, they preferred to“wait and see,”instead of asking for help straight away.Johnson & Johnson（2008）mentioned that students involved in long-term learning experiences trusted each other and communicate accurately and unambiguously.Students in informal cooperative learning classes were regrouped before the class so the group members were not familiar with each other or even did not work together before the class while their counterparts in formal cooperative learning had stable group membership and teamwork experiences before the class.However, all students indicated that they accepted and supported each other, and at the same time, they also contributed to building more positive relationships during the discussion.
4.2 Multiple strategies in exchanging needed information
Some participants self-reported that they had better and better listening skills and also received immediate responses from other members more frequently the longer they worked together.They also tended to actively build on talk, consultation or conversation to seek opinions or information in order to complete the given tasks.They mostly focused on the meaning of conversation, rather than on accuracy, spelling or pronunciation of the language.Participants with lower English profi ciencies tried to speak less but still could positively interact with other members, even use extralinguistic supports to aid understanding, such as facial expression,drawing, gestures, etc.All members in group discussions tried to provide each other with efficient and effective help and assistance, exchanging needed resources, providing feedback in order to improve the subsequent performance of their assigned tasks.This result agreed with the fi ndings of Yu（2009）and McDonnell（1992）.Moreover, it was suggested that frequent use and extended interaction in the target language is necessary for L2 language acquisition（Coelho 1992）.Students interacted on meaningful tasks in L2 English, which provide students with more opportunities to use their L2 English.All of the aforementioned cooperative activities can improve students’ communication competence in L2 English.
4.3 Teacher’s intervention
All participants agreed that the teacher’s explicit illustration and individual explanation to each group are important to promote their discussion during the learning.However, participants in informal cooperative learning classes showed more dependence on the teachers’ explanations as assistance in the discussion while their counterparts in formal cooperative learning classes mostly regarded the teachers’ explanation as a support to their own remarks in the discussion.Most agreed that the teacher’s consultation with individuals or each group was more specific and helpful to their learning.Furthermore, some learners from both classes were found modeling teachers’ discourses in the discussion.Gillies（2008）mentioned that teachers in cooperative learning used more mediate-learning and questioning behaviors, which inspired students’ thinking and learning.Also, teachers’ verbal behaviors play a critical role in promoting interaction among students and involving them in the learning process.
5.Conclusion
Providing students with opportunities for language usage is a primary concern in current graduate L2 English teaching.Cooperative learning approaches could allow students to explore English and develop their linguistic capacity from richer classroom-based learning experiences.The amount of time for oral interaction was increased for each student and the quality of the interaction was greatly improved.Students benefi ted from pair work or group discussion.The more opportunities students have for talk or practice, the better communicative skills students will acquire.At the same time, they developed learning autonomy and positive interpersonal relationships in the discussion with their peers.Johnson & Johnson（2008）proposed that successful cooperative learning experience could lead to higher level reasoning and problemsolving, greater efforts to achieve, enhanced relationships among group members and even improve psychological health.
6.Limitations and further research
Gillies（2008）found that teachers’ discourse is enhanced after they obtained specifi c training in communication skills in cooperative learning.Although the teacher in the current study is an experienced language instructor and linguist, specific training would probably improve her teaching skills in some way.While considering the research purpose, this will not affect the results of the current study.However, specifi c training of communication skills for teachers is strongly recommended because it will benefi t the implementation of the approach.Secondly, it is not measured whether there are gender differences, because each class was only around one-sixth male.The researcher evenly distributed male participants into different groups so as to minimize the effect which gender factors could cause.Furthermore, Richard & Rodgers（2003）suggested that cooperative group activities can be associated with other approaches in teaching practices.It is worthy to explore the combination of cooperative learning with other approaches in the future,which probably contributes more benefi ts to graduates’ L2 English learning.
References
［1］Coelho E.Cooperative Learning：Foundation for Communicative Curriculum［M］.Cooperative Language
Learning：ATeacher’s Resource Book.New Jersey：Prentice-Hall，1992：31-50.
［2］De Cremer D, Van Vjugt M.Social Identifi cation Effects in Social Dilemmas：ATransformation of Motives［J］.European Journal of Social Psychology，1999，29：871-893.
［3］Gillies RM.Teachers’ and Students’ Verbal Behaviors During Cooperative Learning［M］.The Teacher’s Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the Classroom.Boston：Springer，2008：238-257.
［4］Gillies RM，Ashman AF，Terwel J.The Teacher’s Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the Classroom［M］.Boston：Springer，2008.
［5］Jiang Y.Gender Differences and the Development of L2 English Learners’ Motivational Self System and International Posture in China［D］.London：University of London，2013.
［6］Johnson DW.Social Interdependence：The Interrelationships Among Theory，Research，and Practice［J］.American Psychologist，2003，58（11）：931-945.
［7］Johnson DW，Johnson R.New Developments in Social Interdependence Theory［J］.Genetic，Social and General Psychology Monographs，2005，131（4）：285-358.
［8］Johnson DW，Johnson RT.Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning:The teacher’s Role［M］.The Teacher’s Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the Classroom.Boston：Springer，2008：9-37.
［9］Johnson DW，Johnson RT.An Educational Psychology Success Story：Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning［J］.Educational Researcher，2009，38：365-379.
［10］Kessler C.Cooperative Language Learning：ATeacher’s Resource Book［M］.New Jersey：Prentice-Hall，1992.
［11］Mcdonell W.Language & Cognitive Development Through Cooperative Group Work［M］.Cooperative
Language Learning：ATeacher’s Resource Book.New Jersey：Prentice-Hall，1992：51-64.
［12］Mcdonough J，Mcdonough S.Research Methods for English Language Teachers［M］.Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，Edward Arnold（Publishers）Limited，2000.
［13］Richards JC，Rodgers TS.Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching［M］.Combridge，UK：Cambridge University Press，2003.
［14］Ross J，Cousins J.Giving and Receiving Explanations in Cooperative Learning Groups［J］.The Alberta Journal of Educational Research，1995，41：103-121.
［15］Shachar H.Who Gains What from Cooperative Learning：An Overview of Eight Studies［M］.Cooperative Learning：The Social and Intellectual Outcomes of Learning in Groups.London：Routledge，2003：103118.
［16］Slavin R.Comprehensive Approaches to Cooperative Learning［J］.Theory into Practice，1999，38：74-79.
［17］Stevahn L，King J.Managing Confl ict Constructively.Evaluation：The International Journal of Theory［J］.
Research and Practice，2005，11：415-427.
［18］Terwel J，Gillies R，Van Den Eden P，Hoek D.Cooperative Learning Processes of Students：ALongitudinal Multilevel Perspective［J］.British Journal of Educational Psychology，2001，71：619-645.
［19］Webb N.Testing a Theoretical Model of Student Interaction and Learning in Small Groups［M］.Interaction in Cooperative Groups.Cambridge，UK：Cambridge University Press，1992：102-119.
［20］Webb N，Mastergeorge A.Promoting Effective Helping in Peer-directed Groups［J］.International Journal of Educational Research，2003，39：73-97.
［21］Yu CZ.Cooperative Learning in Advanced English Classroom［J］.Education and Teaching Research，2009，23（7）：87-89.
注释
[1]The term, L2 English, is used as a common expression of English as a second language throughout this article.