7

Chapter I: Introduction English language is eminent in the Arab countries. English language acquisition is considered a desirable goal as it is seen as the language of international communication as well as the language of technology and business, (Andrew OSullivan, 2002). Arab countries differ in their need for English due to many factors. In the UAE, learners of English seem to have better opportunities to use authentic English outside the classroom than their fellow Arabs in other countries. The situation is different in the United Arab Emirates, for example, where people use English in their daily lives because of the multilingual nature of the residents. (Rababah 2003: 15) English is widely used in modern UAE society; media, press, internet, daily life, which provides good environment for learners to use English for communication. However, level of English in the classroom is quite poor and many students find it too difficult to learn English and use it as a means of communication locally. According to
Kharma and Hajjaj (1989:2) the problem behind this is that English: is a school subject rather than a means of communication. The pass mark is often very low which means that students can precede to a higher class without mastering all the skills they have to master. Jill Hadfield (1992: 7) reported that the most common complaint of teachers who are teaching English as a second or foreign language is that the group doesn't gel or the same students are always relied upon for providing answers while quieter or reluctant students rarely get opportunities to speak in class. David Nunan (Celce-Murica, 2001) demonstrated challenges that EFL and ESL teachers confront. His survey of EFL teachers showed that the most challenging aspects of teaching EFL are: 1. lack of motivation; 2) getting students to speak; and 3) use of first language in the classroom.

the

As educators of 21st century students, teachers are expected to reflect on and re-evaluate their instructional practices. There have been many world changes that make it imperative for teachers to analyse and reflect on their traditional practices in schools. Kagan (1994) has suggested that one important question is are teachers preparing students for full engagement in the rapidly changing, information-based, high technology and interdependent global economy and society? (p. 2:1). He advocates that schools must

produce students who are capable of using higher-level thinking skills and effective communication and social skills. Cooperative learning is a form of instruction in which students work in small groups to achieve a shared goal but are also required to make individual contributions. In this way individual students can seek outcomes that are beneficial to themselves and to the other group members (Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec, 1998). Many studies have looked at cooperative learning as a way of preparing students learners for a continually changing society. Cooperative learning has been shown to have a positive impact on classroom environment in terms of fostering social interaction, developing communication skills, higher-level thinking skills, a more internal locus of control, role taking abilities, time spent on task, attendance at school and improved attitudes to school and learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Kagan, 1994). It is hypothesized that using cooperative learning strategies can necessarily lead to more students' self -independence and great achievement improvement. Although hundreds of studies have been done on cooperative learning since the beginning of the century according to Johnson and Johnson (1999), there have been 550 experimental and 100 correlation studies conducted, and although those studies indicate that cooperative learning supports positive interdependence, interpersonal relationships, achievement, psychological health, and social competence (Johnson and Johnson, 1989, 1999), I believe there is a need to have more studies to be conducted that indicate the above mentioned benefits of cooperative learning in Arabic speaking countries which have different educational settings and social backgrounds. Kagan (Kagan, 1994; Kagan and Kagan, 1998) has developed a range of classroom "structures which may be thought of as steps to classroom activities. These structures stress positive interpersonal peer relationships, equality, self-esteem, and achievement. Students can work together by following the steps of the structure, using material or content selected by the students themselves or by the teacher. These structures are built on four main principles: Positive Interdependence, Individual Accountability, Equal Participation and

Simultaneous Interaction (Kagan 1989). In this research study the researcher will use a number of Kagans Cooperative Structures (KCS) as examples of cooperative learning strategies. Although Cooperative grouping, in which EL students work cooperatively with native speakers of English, increases students opportunities to hear and produce English and to negotiate meaning with others (Diaz-Rico, L., & Weed, K. 2002, p. 178), I believe there is a need to investigate how possible it is for Arab learners of English, who are used to use their mother tongue language in learning English, to communicate in cooperative learning setting which might hinder the targeted language. Students learn English in government school in the UAE as a foreign language. In primary levels English is given not more than 17 % of the total number of weekly classes. All other subjects are taught in Arabic. The majority of students and their parents consider English a difficult-to-learn language although it has become widely used in the UAE by local and non local people. Students show very little interest in learning English and using it. For them it is considered as one of the subjects that students study and need only to get pass mark in, which is usually very low, to move to a higher class, (Kharma and Hajjaj, 1989:2). Mustafas(2002) research based on interviews with UAE school teachers and school graduates reveals that much of school based language teaching is based on outmoded methodology and that students blame this for their failure to develop positive attitudes towards the language. Mustafa characterizes the situation in UAE schools as teachers using the transmission model to deliver information to exam takers. I believe learners of EFL should be exposed to real life situations where they can think together, negotiate and share ideas, help and ask for help to achieve apparent goals stated in the plans as well as the immeasurable social skills, which can hardly be assessed in the UAE's educational setting where students are mainly assessed through written exams of reading and writing. I have been using cooperative learning strategies in teaching English for more than 8 years, but I have never evaluated my work formally. As part of my professional development, I have received training courses in using cooperative learning strategies which helped me have more control over my classes and get students feel more enthusiastic about their

10

learning. It was a great chance for me to conduct this study and have in-depth investigation to find out more about the KCS that I have used over those years. I believe this study would add a lot to my experience as a teacher and a researcher. I.1: The Purpose of the Study Through the researchers reflections on his own practices in the classroom and the involvement of all students when cooperative learning strategies were used, and his observations as a teacher of English and a coordinator, and his visits to colleagues in the classrooms, he felt there is a need to enhance the teaching strategies by using cooperative learning strategies in the classroom. Most teachers complain that students are demotivated and lack the interest to learn. Some colleagues and I who attended a training program on cooperative learning, multiple intelligences and learning styles are aware that the problem does not lie in the students themselves, it lies in the way we want them to learn. Statement of the Hypotheses The study aims at testing the following three hypotheses/questions: 1. Can KCS help EFL learners improve their oral and communication skills in a way that helps them to feel more interested in learning English? 2. Do Kagans Cooperative Structures (KCS) have the potential to make the class work more interesting and the students more motivated to learn? 3. Can KCS immerse students in meaningful activities that help them improve socially and academically? I have chosen this particular study to find out how cooperative learning strategies can be used in English language teaching to enhance teaching and learning practices. Rationale for the Hypotheses Although a lot of research was conducted on the effects of Cooperative language learning and the chances it provides to learners to produce language in an authentic manner, those positive effects need more research to be proven in an EFL setting in an Arab country where young learners have been exposed to classical teaching strategies and have rarely used English to communicate outside the classroom. Would it be possible for the KCS to change the traditional classroom setting where discourse is usually initiated by the teacher

11

artificially? Can those learners in such a setting become more competent to use English normally as means of communication through the use of KCS? I.2: The Importance of the Research The success of this study is of great interest to teachers of EFL by making them aware of the impact of using cooperative learning strategies in teaching English. This recognition is necessary to encourage them to use these strategies in their own teaching of English as well as to promote further research. The paper is expected to foster understanding of the importance and value of cooperative learning strategies in teaching EFL to improve communication and social skills as well as achievement and discipline. The study plays a fundamental role in encouraging and adopting new teaching strategies by teachers of EFL to enable students of dealing with world future tools of openness, communication and understanding. The study will be an important contribution to teaching English as a foreign language in the Arabian Gulf. Students have been exposed to a new approach of learning English in a meaningful way. They have shown enthusiasm towards the new teaching strategies and expressed their opinions freely. Also, they had the chance to take part in the study which made them feel more responsible for their learning. I believe their participating in the study added a lot to their experience and knowledge. Chapter II: Literature Review I.1. What is cooperative learning (CL)? The literature indicates that students are too passive and need to become more involved intellectually in classroom activities (Good et al., 1987). Apart from listening to the teacher passively, what students actually need is to act on concepts themselves and to share their thinking with teachers and peers. Olsen and Kagan (1992) define cooperative learning as a group learning activities organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learners in groups and in which each learner is held accountable for his or her own learning and is motivated to increase the learning of others. It is a teaching arrangement

12

that refers to small, heterogeneous groups of students working together to achieve a common goal (Kagan, 1994). According to the Johnson & Johnson model (1998): Cooperative learning is instruction that involves students working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that include the following elements: Positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face promotive interaction, appropriate use of collaborative skills and group processing. Cooperative learning is a form of instruction in which students work in small groups to achieve a shared goal but are also required to make individual contributions. In this way individual students can seek outcomes that are beneficial to themselves and to the other group members (Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec, 1998). Starting from 1960s some cooperative learning methods appeared to existence. They started to be developed and tested in many different educational settings and contexts. In an historic overview (Johnson & Johnson, 1999) nine methods of cooperative learning are listed. Johnson and Johnson developed Learning Together and Alone and Constructive Controversy, DeVries & Edwards created Teams-Games-Tournaments (TGT), Sharan & Sharan developed Group Investigation, Aronson developed the Jigsaw Procedure, Slavin created Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD), Team Accelerated Instruction (TAI) and Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), and Kagan developed Cooperative Learning Structures. Cooperative language learning has been proclaimed as an effective instructional approach in promoting the cognitive and linguistic development of learners of English as a Second Language (ESL) or English as a Foreign Language (EFL) (Kagan, 1995; Kessler, 1992; McGroarty, 1989, 1993). Few decades ago, CL was introduced and treated as a framework in second language teaching as it maximizes authentic communication among students (Shaaban & Ghaith, 2005). It provides means of integrating four language skills (McCafferty, Jacobs & DaSilva Iddings, 2006). I believe learners of ESL or EFL lack the opportunity to get involved in

13

authentic and meaningful activities that enable them to use English as a means of communication not only a school subject that they have to get a pass mark in. II. 2. Kagan Cooperative Structures: Kagan cooperative structures were developed after years of experimentation with children from many parts of the world, (Kagan, 2003). Kagan started applying work in classrooms after years of continuous research which revealed that the situation in which kids are placed in is the most powerful motive for them to cooperate. Thus they can be highly cooperative or highly competitive based on which situation they are placed in. Based on the research there was a need to invent suitable situations in the classroom that could elicit cooperation among students. Kagan (2003) argues that if teachers create the right kinds of situations for students, they foster a range of positive outcomes among students including cooperativeness. Placing students in groups is very essential in cooperative learning. Forming a team of four students, heterogeneous team: a low achieving student, two middle, and one high, is the most popular formation in cooperative learning. Including a mix of gender and ethnic mixture to reflect the classroom population should also be taken into consideration. Having heterogeneous formation is argued to ensure the greatest opportunities for peer support and tutoring. Occasionally, random or special interest teams could be formed to maximize student talents or meet a specific student need (Kagan, 1994). II. 3. PIES concepts: KCS are based on the PIES factors. These concepts are essential to Dr Kagan's structural approach to cooperative learning (Kagan, 1994): (P) positive interdependence; (I) individual accountability; (E) equal participation; and (S) simultaneous interaction. Positive interdependence means that the success of every student is linked to the success of others in the group and in the class. Every student should have that positive impact on the others. The greater this positive impact is, the greater the gains will be. Learners in this learning setting are put in a situation that makes everyone needs the other to succeed which

14

in turn urges them to be more responsible for each other's learning. It is a must that all members of the group should cooperate well. In this relationship of positive interdependence failure of one student is a failure of a group. Ensuring that everyone has learned becomes the students' responsibility rather than the teacher's. The relationship among the students is no more a competitive one where a gain of a student becomes a loss for another; a loss of a student becomes a gain for another. Individual accountability means a procedure to ensure that each participant individually contributes a fair share to a group effort. It might also mean there is a way to evaluate the quality of the effort or result of each member. Equal participation means that all students receive the same chances and incentives to be involved in class. Kagan's approach uses careful task design (e.g. the task has equal sized and equal status roles for all participants in the activity, or if roles are not equal status, such as leader and checker, roles are randomly assigned and would be rotated over the course of the term), rewards, and accountability procedures to encourage equal participation. Simultaneous interaction means that all students are actively engaged at the same time during the class. An example would be 20 pairs of students in a 40-person class all talking/listening simultaneously, as opposed to one student out of 40 answering a teacher's question, while all the others are or are not listening or participating.

II.4. CL and achievement: CL has been compared to individualistic competitive instruction in hundreds of studies which showed contradicted and no clear-cut results. Some studies proved that student performance is significantly increased when CL is used, while others' results were in favour of competitive instruction. Although teachers have cooperative learning as an instructional methodology, it is not widely used by them; it is currently the least frequently used (Johnson & Johnson, 1991; van Wyk, 2007). More than 85% of the instruction in schools consists of lectures, seatwork, or competition in which students are isolated from one another and sometimes forbidden to

15

interact (Humphreys, Johnson, Johnson & Roy, 1984). Goodlad (1984) stated that "teacher talk" consumes most of classroom time. I believe the outdated teaching strategies used nowadays play a significant role in deteriorating the levels of achievement and motivation in schools. In a summary report of the study about cooperative learning strategies, Johnson, Johnson, & Stanne (2000) state that cooperative learning strategies are widely used because they are based on theory, validated by research, and almost any teacher can find a way to use cooperative learning methods that are consistent with personal philosophies. In 67 studies of the achievement effects of cooperative learning 61% found significantly greater achievement in cooperative than in traditionally taught control groups. Positive effects were found in all major subjects, all grade levels, in urban, rural, and suburban schools, and for high, average, and low achievers (Slavin, 1991). He also reported that CL has a positive effect on academic achievement, mainstreaming, intergroup relations, and self-esteem. In another summary of a meta-analysis of 158 studies, Johnson & Johnson report that current research findings present evidence that cooperative learning methods are likely to produce positive achievement results. Kagan's Cooperative Learning Structures were not specifically investigated in these studies. II.5. CL and motivation: Woolfolk and Hoy (2006) define motivation as an internal state that arouses, directs and maintains behaviour. Whether it is intrinsic or extrinsic, it is the main factor of success for every individual. Sometimes it appears very essential to use incentives to motivate students to achieve their assigned tasks. However, building intrinsically motivated learners, I believe, is more important and its positive impacts last longer. Motivation is rarely a problem for ESL students studying in English speaking countries; it is the major problem for EFL students studying English in their home countries (Wigzell & Al-Ansari, 1993).

16

A teacher may have a positive influence on his/her students motivations and beliefs over time, but students needs at the beginning of a foreign language class require more immediate intervention and support (Horwitz, 1986; Rogers, 1983; Young, 1999). Since teachers are in a position of authority, they can establish cooperative learning groups to provide this support (Slavin, 1991). According to Slavin (1987), there are two major theoretical perspectives related to cooperative learning -- motivational and cognitive. The motivational theories of cooperative learning emphasize the students' incentives to do academic work, while the cognitive theories emphasize the effects of working together. A major influence on students' achievement is their feeling and perception that they can achieve. It was noted by Eggen, Jacobsen, Kauchak (2006) that teachers facilitate the internalization process and they do so effectively by designing learning activities that promote a positive, academic and cognitive self concept. Reward and goal structures are the main focus of cooperative learning motivational theories. One of the elements of cooperative learning is positive interdependence, where students perceive that their success or failure lies within their working together as a group (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1986). From a motivational perspective, cooperative goal structure creates a situation in which the only way group members can attain their personal goals is if the group is successful (Slavin, 1990, p. 14). Therefore, students play an essential role in encouraging their group members to attain their personal goals; they need to encourage members within the group to do their best and succeed in achieving the group task. So, according to the preceding review, the ultimate goal of motivating students should not be only urging them to work and achieve the stated tasks, it should be increasing and guiding their intrinsic motivation by providing them with opportunities of working cooperatively to make them feel a sense of responsibility, achievement and trust that they can learn with minimal help or guidance from the teacher. Thus, they can have more control over their behaviour and direct it to the benefit of themselves and their classmates.

17

II.6. CL and social and communication skills Social skills encompass communicating, building and maintaining trust, providing leadership, and managing conflicts (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1993). So teaching these skills is important to guarantee the success of teaching and learning process. Cooperative learning has been shown to have a positive impact on classroom environment in terms of fostering social interaction, developing communication skills, higher-level thinking skills, a more internal locus of control, role taking abilities, time spent on task, attendance at school and improved attitudes to school and learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Kagan, 1994). Research shows that students are more positive about school, subject area, and teachers when they work cooperatively (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). In a classroom setting, cooperative groups give students opportunities to learn from and teach one another under real world conditions. The field of cooperative learning is built upon the premise that it can be used to enhance both academic excellence and social and emotional development (Schmuck & Schmuck, 1997). Moreover, according to Johnson & Johnson (1995) and Slavin (1995) cooperative-learning students were more likely than other students to use the cooperative behaviours they were taught when they worked with new classmates which confirms the transferability of the cooperative learning social and communication skills gains. Chapter III: Methodology In this chapter the researcher will describe the research methodology, the subjects of the study, materials used in the study, measuring instruments, procedures and study design. III.1: Research Methodology Action research is a form of collective self-reflective inquiry undertaken by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own social or educational practices, as well as their understanding of these practices and the situations in which these practices are carried out (Kemmis and McTaggart 1990, p5). However, I have

18

chosen to use a different type of research paradigm, practitioner action research. In this research paradigm, the concept of practice as knowledge production for participants is essential in that it can both include the value of individual development and move beyond the local and private context to add more to societal and educational development (Zeichner & Noffke, 2001). Lewin (1948) has argued that social practices could only be understood and changed by involving the practitioners themselves throughout an inquiry. Fischer (1996) notes that teacher researchers often pursue their own interests in their classroom. Practitioner enquiry is an extremely effective means of pursuing and supporting professional development, (Burton & Bartlett 2004, p. 12). Practitioner research is a term that can be conceptualized as a process whereby teachers are looking critically not only at their own practice but at broader educational questions, (Burton & Bartlett 2004, p. 2). Burton and Bartlett (2004, p. 16) point out that practitioner research is fundamental to developing a greater understanding of the work of teachers and what happens in the classroom but it should also enable teachers to broaden their thinking as educationalists. There are some arguments in support of practitioner research in social work (Show, 2005) two of the most common are: 1.being the professional obligation to be self-evaluating, and 2. the belief that both research and practice employ similar skills. These two supporting arguments of practitioner research were expressed by McIvor when she says, The starting pointis the twofold belief that practitioners should be encouraged to engage in the evaluation of their own practice and that they possess many of the skills which are necessary to undertake the evaluative task. (McIvor, 1995: 210) Much of practitioner research involves the careful study of the participants in educational practice, very often involving the students or children - what and how they learn (Zeichner, & Nofke, 2001).

19

The researcher used practitioner action research approach to conduct this study bearing in mind that practitioner action research is research carried out by practitioners for the purpose of advancing their own practice (McLeod, 1999). He intended to use this strategy to assist him reflect on his practices systematically and learn from his own practice. The research is personal, because it represents not only the search for general principles or theories of school curriculum or classroom instruction but also the search for understanding and improving ones everyday practice. My colleagues and I, through our observations and discussions, realized there are problems to be solved. There is a need for careful study of the participants in educational practice and involving the students to know and improve how and what they learn. Fischer (1996) suggests that some of the reasons for a teacher becoming involved in practitioner action research include: an interest in knowing more about how students learn; wanting to try something new, to innovate in a curriculum area; a desire for change in ones teaching; and a search for connections and meanings in ones work. (p. 39). My colleagues and I are convinced that our practices need to be changed or modified so that our students become more motivated, positive and enthusiastic about learning and improving their English language skills. We decided to make our practices more effective to help our classrooms become attractive places for our students. Since this is the main purpose of action research, I seized the opportunity to lead the change process in my educational institution. I understand what it means to be a change agent and how crucial this role is in every educational institution. This role can not succeed without taking action and trying new solutions based on theories and research. Since the core aim of this research is to improve students motivation and performance in English and to make their learning experience a journey of success and excellence, and to investigate the applicability and usefulness of cooperative learning strategies for English language learning and, potentially, for other subjects, choosing practitioner action research approach as research paradigm is an appropriate approach for this study. My main question in this study is: How can I improve the quality of English language instruction for upper primary grades (4, 5,6) in a non English speaking school by using Kagans Cooperative Structures? My imagined solution for the concerns that I have in my

20

educational setting has led me to think of using KCS. This demands that I have to take .action and become committed to finding solution for the stated concern or problem The questions, which are asked in a certain professional context, emphasize the importance of a researchers values as an expert working on an issue to which he is devoted to solve and find a solution, (McNiff, Lomax and Whitehead 1996). In this project I will follow Kemmis and McTaggart Action Research Planner (1988) in which there are four fundamental aspects of the action research; developing a plan of critically informed action to improve what is happening, implementing the plan, observing the effects of the critically informed action in the context in which it occurs and reflecting on these effects (p. 10). The study utilized both quantitative and qualitative methods. It included a questionnaire which contained 18 items divided into three main categories; communication skills, achievement and motivation and classroom environment. Also the researcher had an interview with the participants which contained two types of items; closed, fixed-response questions and two open ended questions. III.2: Identification of Participants This study included thirty grade four, five and six students at a government school in Abu Dhabi, UAE, ten from each grade level. The school belongs to a group of schools called the model schools which are privileged by the distinguished school buildings and all the needed facilities which might not be available in other government schools. The students come from different social and economical backgrounds. All the thirty students are UAE citizens. All of them are boys aged between 10 and13 years old. They all started learning English from grade one. The participants' level of English ranges from poor to very good according to the diagnostic test given to them at the beginning of the year. About half of the participants' oral and communication skills in English are poor due to the different programs implemented at the model schools in the last few years and the instability of objectives and goals stated for them in English and other subjects.

21

Permissions were obtained from Abu Dhabi Educational Zone and the school administration as pre-requisites before gaining permissions from the participants. Then the researcher sought permission from both, the participants and their parents and they were obtained according to the stated regulations. The researcher discussed the project with teachers of grade four and five who agreed to help willingly. The two teachers and the researcher explained and discussed the procedures with the whole students. The researcher explained to the students how beneficial it would be to take part in the research. The selection of the participants was randomly made. Then volunteers from each grade level were called for. A detailed letter in Arabic and a permission to be signed were sent to parents along with the students' permissions. The students were given three days to discuss the matter with their parents and bring back the signed permissions before any step in the study was started. The first ten students to submit the signed approvals in each grade level were chosen as subjects of the study. Regardless they participated in the research or not, all the students in the classes involved in the research received the same teaching of their normal English programme. All students had to do the same activities and had equal opportunity to share and participate in those planned activities. Every student was given the same rights and no credit or extra privilege was given to the chosen group of participants. Students were assured by the researcher that their assessment results would not be affected by participating in the research. The researcher also explained the nature of research techniques which ensures highest degrees of privacy, anonymity and confidentiality. It was made clear for the participants that their names will not be mentioned in the research by any means, and their right to withdraw from the study at any time was assured as well. The researcher explained that all participants should express their opinions freely in the questionnaire and the interview. They were informed that their responses would be of great value and importance to the research and its results. III.3: Participants' English Programme The model school, that the researcher has implemented the study in, is a boys' school that is run by Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) who has a plan to change the schools into

22

bilingual schools. It is located in Abu Dhabi, the capital city of the United Arab Emirates. The model schools and Public Private Partnership schools of Abu Dhabi have been implementing a new curriculum since 2007. This curriculum was developed by a team of experts from different countries; Australia, USA, UK, New Zealand and other countries. The aim of (ADEC) behind this change and reform was to ensure that students have a relevant and engaging curriculum that meets the needs and interests of students in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and prepares them to be global citizens. ADEC's aspiration is that principals, teachers and parents work together to guarantee students have every opportunity to achieve their academic potential, and to ensure that their education and time spent at school are both positive and productive experiences. ADEC issued the Standards which are concise, clear descriptions of the knowledge, understanding and skills that each student should develop in each grade from K9. The Standards are built up in a way that ensures a continuum of learning for students from Kindergarten to Grade 9. The Standards provide parents and teachers with a clear description of what must be taught and what students can be expected to learn in each grade and subject. The K9 English language arts curriculum aims at teaching students to communicate in English effectively, compose and respond to texts in a range of modes and media and value and enjoy English as a language in which to express their ideas and feelings. It is based on the following three interrelated Strands which form the knowledge base for the Curriculum. 1. Talking and listening: students are expected to talk in English and to listen to and understand English. Interaction skills are very important in classroom discussions and group work. Oral presentation skills are important in a world where people are increasingly judged on their ability to talk effectively in a range of situations. Furthermore, talk is an important learning tool because students use talk to form their ideas and think through their reading and writing. Students learn listening skills, including grasping the main point of a spoken text, identifying details and having a personal opinion about what they hear. 2. Reading: In this strand, students learn to use contextual, semantic and grammatical information when reading a text in English, and they learn to recognise sounds and to relate them to the written symbols for those sounds. Students read widely in order to become

23

better readers and to learn how writers use English for different purposes, including entertaining, persuading and informing (Text Types). They learn that, as they are reading a text, they are making links between that text and other things, including their own previous experiences and cultural background, other texts and what they know about how texts are structured. In addition to reading written texts, students learn skills and strategies for interpreting visual images and film and television productions. 3. Writing: Students learn that writing in English involves drafting, revising and talking about their writing with others, sharing it with others, and getting feedback. They learn to write for a range of purposes and situations, for example to entertain, explain to someone how something works, provide information, argue a position and explore the world of the imagination. They learn to write well-structured sentences, use grammar correctly, spell accurately, punctuate, and handwrite neatly and legibly. This new academic year 2010-2011, an English Continuous Assessment Rich Task program (ECART) was implemented in all the schools of Abu Dhabi. ECART requires students to explore a specific theme, develop a focus statement for inquiry and research the focus statement. They have to learn to apply skills of deep thinking, inquiry, research, analysis, synthesis and evaluation, consider the most effective ways of presenting information consideration for multiple intelligence perspective, work collaboratively and independently and to be responsible/reflective life-long learners. ADEC curriculum and the new approach of teaching and learning process require hard work on the side of the student as well as the teacher. Students need to learn new techniques and strategies to achieve the set goals. The new strategies the student is supposed to learn imply research skills, analyzing and synthesizing, decision making, considering own preferred learning style, and presenting new knowledge to audience. III.4: Instruments: The researcher used qualitative and quantitative techniques to obtain data. Interviews, questionnaires, and students' observation have been used as they have been proved to be effective techniques. A structured interview with all the participants was conducted although in-depth unstructured interview has the potential to establish a more thorough

24

picture of the participants' perspective. The researcher preferred structured interview to unstructured interview due to the age and nature of participants who would feel stressed and perplexed to sit for a relatively long period of time answering questions individually as they are still very young, and it is the first time to take part in a study. The researcher planned to utilize the participants' direct, straight forward responses which enabled him to gain insight of the participants' feedback and point of view towards the use of KCS. Another effective tool that the researcher used is the questionnaire. It enabled the researcher to obtain large scale numerical data over a short period of time. Again, the researcher aimed at collecting the needed data regarding the participants' points of view, behaviour and attitudes on cooperative learning in the classroom within their group members. As an essential part of the data collection in action research, classroom observations can play an important role in this process. In this phase the participants will be closely observed, as part of classroom observation during interactive activities. The observation notes collected in the implementation phase will be analyzed to identify how each participant responded to the new instructional techniques and activities. Since action research will always be limited by constraints of reality, careful observation is a must (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988, p13). Moreover, observation should be planned, responsive, open-eyed and open-minded, so that there will be a clear documentary basis for subsequent reflection (p. 13). For all the above reasons keeping a research journal was considered essential to the researcher to help improve observation skills, focus observation, provide a record of observations, to yield research questions and further information on the research topic, or to focus research questions, (Rust, F., and Clark, C. 2007). All observations and notes were record in a notebook with dates and timing of these observations. During observation time, the researcher jotted down notes about what the participants were doing and saying. Some questions were posed to participants during the activities to get explanations of what or why they were behaving in a certain way, and to get an immediate response of how they felt about the new strategies and what they liked most about them. The researcher asked the participants about their opinion regarding the new strategies and if they could suggest any modifications or improvements to enhance them. The researcher then reflected on the observations after class while they were still

25

fresh in mind. Also, a planned observation sheet (appendix A) was used to measure certain aspects of the implemented activities and how the participants worked during those activities. The researcher planned to take notes at least twice a week and jot down any remarks that may add to the data collected using other instruments. The main focus of the classroom observations was the change in the environment and the relations among participants as peers or groups and how every participant behaved in different phases of the activities. By the end of the implementation, the- researcher wrote a summary of the journal's most remarkable notes that would help in the data analysis process. In addition, the researcher adopted an achievement pre-test (appendix B) and post-test which were redesigned to be used in this study. The pre-test was administered to all participants a day before the implementation of the study and the post-test was administered on the last day of the implementation of the program. The test included the four strands, reading, writing, and listening and talking. The researcher aimed at including all levels of cognitive performance described by Bloom (1956). The reading part consisted of 30 items. The students were given five notices to match with only five out of the eight given signs. They were also given conversations to complete by choosing one response for each of them out of eight given responses. They were also given five items of multiple choices questions to complete the sentences with a word out of three alternatives. The reading comprehension part of the pre-test consisted of two reading passages of two different text types; an information report about penguins, and a recount of a trip around the world. The reading comprehension part of the post-test included two passages of two different text types; an information report about an Indian farmer, and a recount called "The Lost Ring". The writing part included one part of two choices for the student to choose from and write about. The students were supposed to write a paragraph either about their school, teachers, subjects, friends, activitiesetc, or their family, activities, chores, tripsetc in the pre-test. In the post-test the students were supposed to write a paragraph about one day trip with the family, or their favourite free time activities

26

The listening and talking pre-test and post-test took the form of interview which consisted of twenty questions ranged from simple direct questions to more complicated ones. The questions of the test were designed to measure the participants' ability to give quick responses, organize ideas in a simple way, and show competency in communication skills. To measure these competencies a rubric of four main areas was used. It included body language, eye contact, poise and voice. The criteria of each area was detailed and graded from 4 to 1. This test was designed to cover the learning outcomes of oral competencies and any improvements that have occurred during the period of the study implementation. The targeted outcomes were presentation skills; body language, eye contact, poise and voice, (Appendix C). Students' interviews about the use of KCS in English language teaching and learning processes were analysed to identify changes in students perception of CL as a new strategy. III.5: Instructional Material The students of the school study a course book called Parade which is used in the new curriculum as a resource. Teachers use it selectively and choose from it what works with them according to the stated theme and text type. The main focus of Parade is on listening and speaking. There is little reading and writing. Students have six periods of English per week and each period lasts for 40 minutes. The study, which lasted for three weeks, was conducted while the students of grade four were supposed to study one of the text types as stated in the term plan, recount, and the theme was 'Famous People'. Grade five students were supposed to study another text type called exposition and the theme was Environment. Grade six students were supposed to study a text type called narrative and the theme was Adventure. So students had to read short adventure stories, short articles about the environment, biographies and autobiographies. Different tasks were prepared by teachers to match the given text types; timeline, summary, mind map, story map, reading comprehension questions, Oral pre presentations, dialogues. Grade four studied some biographies of famous people and short recount passages. Grade five studied reading passages about saving the trees, protecting the

27

Earth, and pollution. The short adventure stories were "The Mystery of Mrs Kim", "Cobsdown Cat Case" and "Saturday Adventure". The researcher prepared lesson plans for the three weeks lessons which were taught in the implementation phase of the study, (see a sample in Appendix D). Worksheets, evaluation sheets, observation records and other teaching materials were prepared and used during the implementation phase, (see a sample in Appendix E). III.6: Procedures Prior to the implementation of the program, and being aware of the importance of the students' readiness to cooperate and get fully involved in the study, the researcher had to motivate them and make them aware of the implemented strategies and their importance. To ensure the success of the implementation and to manage a good cooperative learning program, the researcher adopted a guidance of suggestions drawn from the works of the Johnsons and the Kagans. activities. it is the best formation of groups. Giving clear instructions and guidelines about what and how a task should be achieved, demonstrating the activity, if possible, and giving students enough time to understand the cooperative structures are crucial elements in implementing this cooperative learning program. the team are participating. Clear assessment criteria and peer evaluation techniques are provided and explained. Being available to supervise and provide help by prompting or offering direct assistance can ensure that all members of Teams of 2-4 learners were formed heterogeneously with respect to abilities and experiences, as it was proven that The researcher explained the importance

of cooperative group work and that every member has an essential role in all

28

According to Jere Brophy (2004 p.307), apathy, not discouragement, is the ultimate motivational problem facing teachers. Some students show 'learned helplessness, failure syndrome', (Brophy, 2004); they sometimes lose focus on learning. Others might show lack of interest and enthusiasm in learning and participating in classroom activities. They resist learning as a whole and refuse to be members in a group or take roles in doing any activities. According to Brophy, both types of students need special motivational treatment to be resocialized to stop the spread of their impact in the classroom and maintain a friendly, motivating learning environment. He suggests a number of strategies that a teacher should adopt to resocialize and involve those students in the classroom activities and make them a vital part of the class and even the school community. Brophy suggests the following points that the researcher took into consideration before the implementation of the program. Show the students what it means to engage in academic activities with motivation to learn, nurture their desire to do so, and follow up with appropriate structuring and scaffolding of their learning efforts. Become your own most valuable motivational tool by building close relationships with students and establishing yourself as a supportive and helpful resource person. Consider contracting and incentive systems, as they can provide built-in opportunities for teacherstudent collaboration in negotiating expectations and rewards. Discover and build on existing interests and values The researcher also took into consideration the following duties that he should perform to provide a motivating learning environment that enables all students to work and learn effectively. Creating encouraging and challenging atmosphere by designing well Encouraging students to think and discuss issues in the classroom. Praising and encouraging every single improvement or achievement and planned, age-appropriate activities.

providing positive feedback.

29

Transferring the responsibility of students' learning to them by taking the

role of the helper and facilitator. The sample of thirty students was chosen randomly, as mentioned above, depending on their desire of participating in the study. They were given the chance to discuss the issue of participating with their parents and after a detailed letter had been sent to the parents explaining the nature of the program and the rights of the participants and all other issues regarding the program. It was made clear for the participants that their participation in the study would have no effect on their formal assessment and that they had the freedom to withdraw at any time of the study. The study was designed to last for three weeks and the participants' English program was to be taught using KCS. The researcher taught grade six students and other two colleagues of his, who teach grade four and grade five students, volunteered to participate in the study provided the researcher prepares the needed lesson plans using the new strategies. The daily planning included the following four cooperative structures and some other structures based on the phase of the lesson and the thematic unit. 1. Inside-Outside Circle (Kagan, 1994) is a kinesthetic technique usually used for summarization. It involves all students in the class and facilitates short exchanges between students. It allows students to get up and move in the classroom. Students who would not usually talk or get involved in oral activities would find themselves motivated to express themselves and talk freely without being noticed by large audience. Even when they have so little to say, they can repeat what others say. Students form two concentric circles containing the same number of students. Every student in the inside circle faces a partner standing in the outside circle. Partners take turns to do the assigned tasks like asking questions, answering questions, summarizing, and adding details. Students take the same time for doing their tasks and then they reverse roles. Each student has to ask, listen, answer, report, or summarize. This activity can take a minute, and then the inside or outside circle turns one step to the left or to the right to enable each student to have a new partner and share the same concepts or ideas which were discussed with the previous partner. All the students get involved in the activities simultaneously. The teacher can stand in the

30

center of the circle, to easily monitor student responses. The last two steps can be repeated several times. 2. Numbered Heads together is a group activity by which the class is divided into small groups from two to five students per group. Every student in each group is given a number 1-4 or more or less according to the group members. The steps of the game help the members of each group to promote learning through active participation, cooperation, and individual accountability. The teacher poses a question and the students take a short Think Time to think how to answer the question. Then everyone privately writes an answer on a sheet of paper. Then Heads Together time for each group to share their answers and reach a consensus on the group answer that every one should know and be taught. After that a number is randomly selected by the teacher and students who have the same number in each group should stand up and be ready to answer independently. The teacher decides how the students should answer the questions. This structure has different variations; the teacher's target might sometimes be the oral skills, so the students work without using the writing step of the structure. 3. Round table: This structure is usually used for teambuilding, mastery, thinking, communication, and information sharing. In teams, students take turns generating written responses, solving problems, or making a contribution to the team project. They take turns writing on one piece of paper or completing a task. Every member in the team has to do part of the task and the others keep following to help and correct when this is needed. Every team member can use a different coloured pencil to show what everyone' contribution. 4. Round Robin: This structure is usually used for mastery, thinking, and communication. The students are given a question or a topic which require multiple answers. Each student should provide an answer or part of the topic orally, taking about the same amount of time for each student. When a member of the team has a difficulty, students coach him. Students have the right to provide constructive criticism if necessary, and, of course, praise and encourage good work. - Targeted Social Skills:

31

According to research, all the above KCS have the potential to build quite a good number of social skills. Among the following social skills: Patience, giving others time to work, coaching skills, Asking for help, offering help, giving and accepting praise, giving and accepting constructive criticism, working with appropriate noise level, active listening, the researcher chose only four skills to focus on during this study which are: 1. Active listening, 2. giving and accepting constructive criticism, 3. working with appropriate noise level, 4. Offering and asking for help. The program was implemented as planned in the three grade levels. More help was needed in grade four and some activities needed to be simplified. Some changes were made to the planned activities based on the students' remarks during the activities and the researcher's field notes. By the third week the students took the post-test, and then the questionnaire was distributed. The researcher had to be available with the students to explain the items of the questionnaire. The interview was done on the next day and the students were given enough time to think and respond to the stated questions. Chapter IV: Results and discussion: The hypotheses of this study were that the use of KCS would yield higher achievement results in oral and communication skills as well as make the class work more interesting and the students more motivated to learn. Also it was hypothesized that KCS would help students improve socially and academically. This study is intended to investigate the effects of KCS in promoting learners achievement in oral skills, enhancing the classroom environment in a way that makes it more interesting and motivating to learning English. The study did not yield statistically very significant differences between the pre test and post test of the written test of grade 5 and 6, and statistically more significant differences in oral post test. However, it did indicate that KCS are more effective than regular classical instruction in building social skills, and improving the classroom environment and motivation towards learning EFL of UAE upper primary students. This verifies findings of many researchers (Cohen, et al, 1990; Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991; Miller and Harrington, 1990; Ochi and Sugie, 2001; Slavin and Cooper, 1999) who have found the results of cooperative learning to build more positive peer relationships, and improve students' self esteem and academic

32

achievement. The findings of this study also suggest that working cooperatively in pairs, in groups can build better interpersonal relations and reduce tension and feeling of alienation especially when cooperative learning is used at the beginning of the year. Every member in a group has a role to play, so he feels how important he is to others, and how others are important to him since they all have the same group task to complete. Working towards achieving the same goal by a group gives feeling of responsibility, belonging, and loyalty to the group as a whole and consequently leads to better relations with the group members. The findings of this study reveal that academic achievement is not the most significant among other gains of cooperative learning, as proven in many studies. So, teachers who wish to focus only on academic results, rather than academic results as well as the psychological health of students and positive interpersonal relationships, may be uninterested in the approach (Nakagawa, 2003). IV.1. Results of quantitative analysis: pre-test and post-test The results of pre test and post test were analyzed using T-test for the thirty participants and Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was used in analyzing every grade level's results. IV.1.A. T-test Table IV.1 presents the analysis results of T-test of sample response between the oral and written pre & post tests of the whole participants (30 students). The data in Table 1 show there are statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) in both written & oral tests in favour of post tests. It also reveals higher differences in the oral post test (t = -5.795) compared to the written post test (t = -3.947).
Table IV.1: T-test results of sample response between pre & post tests

Mean Pair 1 Pair 2 Written pre-test Written post-test Oral pre-test Oral post-test 57.47 63.87 75.83 79.37

N 30 30 30 30

Std. Deviation 11.655 11.640 9.392 8.572

t -3.947 -5.795

df 29 29

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000

IV.1.B. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Table IV.2 shows:

33

There are no statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) between written pre test and post tests. There are statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) between pre & post oral tests in favour of post test.

Table IV.2: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test of Grade 4 pre and post-test results

Written pre-test Written post-test Oral pre-test Oral post-test

Ranks Negative Ranks Positive Ranks Ties Total Negative Ranks Positive Ranks Ties Total

N 2(a) 6(b) 2(c) 10 1(d) 9(e) 0(f) 10

Mean Rank 6.50 3.83 2.00 5.89

Sum of Ranks 13.00 23.00 2.00 53.00

a. Written post-test < Written pre-test c. Written post-test = Written pre-test e. Oral post-test > Oral pre-test

b. Written post-test > Written pre-test d. Oral post-test < Oral pre-test f. Oral post-test = Oral pre-test

Table IV.3 shows:

There are statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) between pre & post written tests in favour of post test. There are statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) between pre & post oral tests in favour of post test.
Table IV.3: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test of Grade 5 pre and post-test results

Written pre-test Written post-test Oral pre-test Oral post-test

Ranks Negative Ranks Positive Ranks Ties Total Negative Ranks Positive Ranks Ties Total

N (a)0 (b)7 (c)3 10 (d)0 (e)9 (f)1 10

Mean Rank 00. 4.00 00. 5.00

Sum of Ranks 00. 28.00 00. 45.00

a. Written post-test < Written pre-test c. Written post-test = Written pre-test e. Oral post-test > Oral pre-test

b. Written post-test > Written pre-test d. Oral post-test < Oral pre-test f. Oral post-test-test = Oral pre-test-test

34

Table IV.4 shows: There are statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) between pre & post written tests in favour of post test. There are statistically significant differences at ( = 0.05) between pre & post oral tests in favour of post test.

Table IV.4: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test of Grade 6 pre and post-test results

Ranks Written pre-test Written post-test Oral pre-test Oral post-test Negative Ranks Positive Ranks Ties Total Negative Ranks Positive Ranks Ties Total

N 2(a) 7(b) 1(c) 10 1(d) 9(e) 0(f) 10

Mean Rank 1.50 6.00 1.50 5.94

Sum of Ranks 3.00 42.00 1.50 53.50

a. Written post-test < Written pre-test b. Written post-test > Written pre-test c. Written post-test = Written pre-test d. Oral post-test < Oral pre-test e. Oral post-test > Oral pre-test f. Oral post-test = Oral pre-test

In general, there was considerable improvement in post test results compared to pre test results in oral skills and less improvement in written post test results for grade five and six and no improvement in written post test for grade four. IV.2: Results of qualitative analysis: IV.2.A: Student's questionnaire The number of points in the table of Student's Questionnaire are the result of the number of frequencies of the students responses multiplied by the number of points allotted for each response as follows: Strongly agree = 5 points, Agree = 4 points, undecided = 3 points, .Disagree = 2 points, Strongly disagree = 1 point

35

Table IV. 5: Student's Questionnaire Results No 1) Communication Skills 1 2 3 4 5 6

I listen to, and respect the ideas of others. I share the load of work I value the contributions of the other members of the group I resolve conflicts in a positive manner I try to help each member of my group do his set piece of work Working in groups helps me interact with and talk to other group members than before

5 130 70 125 105 50 75

4 16 64 20 32 80 48

3 0 0 0 3 0 3

2 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2) Achievement 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
I do my best to achieve success for the group I help the group find errors and/or mistakes and correct them It has helped me to understand the subject better. I share my information, and take into account the information of others I help in seeking solutions; I am suggestive. Cooperation among members gives a lot of knowledge compared to working alone. I enjoy working in a group. This way of learning is better than individual work. Competing with other groups is an enjoyable experience I feel enthusiastic to contribute to the group work This way of teaching has reduced troubles among students Working in different groups allows me to build good relations with more classmates

125 100 60 125 45 100

12 32 10 12 44 20 52 20 20 16 32 64

6 3 21 3 9 9 6 3 3 3 42 9

0 2 2 2 0 4 0 6 8 0 2 2

0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 1

3) Motivation and Classroom Environment 75 105 90 96 30 45

The student's questionnaire, which was divided into three main categories; communication skills, achievement, and motivation and classroom environment, has revealed quite interesting results about the greatest impact of KCS. It is clear form the chart below that the communication skills' gains were significant compared to achievement and motivation and classroom environment. It seems that achievement is not the most significant factor in cooperative learning gains. Many studies have even proved that cooperative learning has

36

less impact on students' achievement compared to individualistic or competitive learning. Yet, I believe, its impact on students' achievement is not direct or immediate. The positive impacts of cooperative learning are interrelated and support each other; more motivation on the side of the student, with better classroom environment, I believe, can lead to greater gains in students' achievement, which in turn lead to much better classroom environment and more motivation and so on.
840 820 800 780 760 740 720 700 680 Student's Questionnaire 2) Achievement 3) Motivation and Classroom Environment 1) Communication Skills

Student's Questionnaire's 3 main categories Chart

In the first category, communication skills, students' responses showed high scores in listening to each others and respecting others' ideas. This shows the immediate impact of cooperative learning on the students' personalities and the way they treat others, and how they want others to treat them. Resolving conflicts in a positive manner also was of big score which reveals deep understanding of the essence of cooperative learning; everyone has his own point of view and understanding of certain concepts, and by means of discussion and negotiation they can reach a unified, one agreed upon answer. The results of the second category of the questionnaire reveal less certainty about the effectiveness of KCS in improving achievement for some students. These responses can be explained by the limited period of the program implementation. Although most students were engaged to a high degree in the KCS, and played their roles, based on the field notes, it was clear that making the highest gains of the KCS needs more time and practice. Moreover, in the first week of implementation many students were highly energetic and enthusiastic to the extent that some low achieving students found it very difficult to coop and adapt to the nature of the new strategies. The teacher had to slow down the pace of the

37

activities and give enough time for every activity to be well practiced. Some low achieving students considered the participation in such activities an achievement although sometimes they were trained by their group members to repeat given statements or parrot what they hear from others. Some impacts of cooperative learning could be censored by the researcher but can hardly be measured using quantitative and qualitative research in relatively short period of time with young learners; like the development in character due to paradigm change in the way of thinking, the ability of learning from and working with others, and self esteem. IV.2.B: Student's interview
Table IV.6: Student's Interview Results
No 1 Interview Questions Overall, how positive were your cooperative learning experiences? When working in cooperative learning groups or teams you usually find yourself in the position of leader. How easy or difficult has it been for you to communicate your thoughts or opinions to the group? Did you enjoy working cooperatively with other students? Cooperative learning has helped me understand course materials? I prefer courses that have a cooperative learning component? In general, I got along well with other group members? I care for achieving success for the group no matter what role I am assigned? Cooperative learning is helpful in learning new useful skills? A Very Positive 33.33% strongly agree 93.33% Very easy 26.66% strongly agree 53.33% strongly agree 23.33% strongly agree 33.33% strongly agree 23.33% 8 strongly agree 60% strongly agree 73.33% 10 Cooperative learning has helped me to learn to work effectively in groups? strongly agree B Positive 63.33% agree 0% Easy 33.33% Agree 46.66% Agree 63.33% Agree 50% Agree 53.30% Agree 23.33% Agree 26.66% agree C undecided 3.33% undecided 0% Unsure 40% undecided 0% undecided 10% undecided 10% undecided 20% undecided 10% undecided 0 undecided D Negative 0% disagree 0% difficult 0% disagree 0% disagree 3.33% disagree 3.33% disagree 3.33% disagree 6.66% disagree 0 disagree E Very negative 0% strongly disagree 6.66% Very difficult 0% strongly disagree 0% strongly disagree 0% strongly disagree 3.33% strongly disagree 0% strongly disagree 0% strongly disagree 0 strongly disagree

70

26.66%

3.33%

38

The first question of the student interview revealed that about two thirds of the students found this cooperative learning experience positive, and only 3.33 % couldn't decide or express their opinion regarding this experience. The rest of the students, 33.33 %, found it very positive. This means that most of them had a good experience during this study. They expressed their wish to be able to practice the same and new similar activities all the year long. The second question about playing or practicing the role of leader was quite significant. 93.33 of the students found the new strategies of cooperative learning a great tool to enable them play this role through coaching peers, helping others or even performing their assigned tasks in administering the activities. The researcher's rationale behind this question was to find out more about students' tendencies of taking or playing leadership roles which shows the impact of CL on their personalities and observing how this would affect their relationship in the classroom. It was noticed through observation that there was considerable improvement in the students' interrelations and overall behaviour. Many of them have shown that they can really be good responsible leaders in their groups. So, I believe, having this great percentage of students finding themselves in the position of leaders while working in groups shows their tendency to show better manners and behaviours in the future, as well as higher motivation. The third question revealed the uncertainty of about 40 of the students of their ability in communicating their thoughts or opinions to the group although they had a lot to say during the group discussions. One of the main reasons, according to the discussion with them, might be their tendency to perfection as speakers of English and being shy to make errors. Others find it very easy to speak in English although they commit a lot of errors in pronunciation, grammar and even choice of right vocabularies. This shows the need for more authentic activities and real life situations that enhance the students' abilities in speaking and listening. Based on the class observations of the researcher during group activities, it was clear that some students tend to use Arabic language to convey their opinions and thoughts and switch to English in the presence of the teacher. This is quite clear in grade four and less in grade five and six. After a discussion about this point with

39

the students it became clear that more input is needed before the students become ready to start discussing a certain point or negotiating ideas in English. Question number 4 revealed to what extent the students enjoyed working cooperatively with other students. All of them either strongly agreed or agreed to this statement which shows the need of those students to have a wide variety of such activities in the classroom to avoid boredom and monotony of doing the same procedures with the same activities repeatedly. The students explained that they could learn the new concepts in an enjoyable way that they did not notice how much time they spent on some activities. Some of them wished they could have more English classes a day to have more "fun time". In question 5, about 25% of the students strongly agreed and about 64% agreed that the new strategies of cooperative learning strategies helped them to a great extent understand the given material during the implementation period. Only 10%were not able to decide whether those new strategies helped them understand the new material or not. Through the discussion with the students during the interview, most of them explained how things became easier for them to acquire with the help of their group mates. They feel that being able to discuss some issues in a group or being helped by a peer in the group has a positive impact that makes them feel more comfortable to ask and seek information. In the sixth question, more than 83% expressed their desire of having cooperative learning activities in their learning. They showed great interest in the new strategies. In the discussion during the interview, they talked about the possibility of having the same strategies in other subjects. They think they would like other subjects if they were taught in the same way. Some of them even suggested if teachers of other subjects could be told and convinced to keep the same classroom seating and use similar activities with them. Question 7 reveals that more than three quarters of the students could get along with other group members. 20% of them were not able to give clear response whether it was easy for them to get along with other group members or not. In general, the discussion with the students gave good reasons for why some of them had this feeling of uncertainty. It was clear in their responses that it was not easy for them to adapt to the new strategy in just three weeks. Some of them showed a feeling of uneasiness to be challenged and active most

40

of the time. I believe the nature of those students and their level of English plays an important role in their way of thinking. In this question 60% of the students showed great acceptance in doing their assigned tasks no matter what their roles in the group are. Achieving success for the group for them is more important than thinking of what roles they should be assigned. They showed readiness and obedience/ for the sake of the group success though some of them had the desire and competency to play leadership roles to guide the group. 10% were undecided about the stated point and they interpreted this uncertainty by their poor communication skills in English. However, those students showed enthusiasm and pleasure by the end of some activities when their groups achieved success. These feeling, I believe, can be a good motivation for them in the future to play their assigned roles and do their tasks with more help and encouragement from the side of the teacher and group members. Questions 9 and 10 gave almost the same percentages. In the ninth question about three fourths of the students strongly agreed that this experience of cooperative learning helped them gain some new useful skills. Through the discussion with them, they showed awareness of the cooperative learning structures' nature. They explained how they had to be completely cooperating, listening, helping, negotiating, tutoring, coaching, and playing assigned roles to achieve success for their groups. They learned how to take turns and respect each other's opinion. They started to develop the sense of sharing and exchanging opinions politely with minimum noise occurrence. This experience helped them develop the sense of responsibility and ownership of achievement and acknowledging each group member in that achievement. They started to learn how to comment, correct, help, ask for help, and accept criticism. In the tenth question most students strongly agreed that cooperative learning had helped them to work effectively in groups. They commented on some negative aspects of some cooperative learning structures, especially in the first two weeks; when some students were unable to abide by the rules of the activities, and others who did not take those activities seriously enough to achieve the given tasks. In the third week there was a slight improvement in those students' behaviour. In their answers to the eleventh question: "What did you like most about working in a group?" the following responses were collected:

41

working with my friends collaboratively Respecting each other in the team Sharing ideas with my team members Helping team members The variety of given answers and ideas Speaking English freely without feeling shy Acquiring new useful skills It helps weak students get involved in all activities It helps me know more about my group members and have good relations Improving my oral skills in English

with them

Some of the students' most significant responses to the last question, "Do you have any disadvantages of working in a group?" were the following: Sometimes only one or two in the team do the whole work and the others Some students speak in Arabic and do not abide by the rules some students do not take turns while working on an activity Sometimes the class becomes very noisy during team discussions Some students do not do their assigned roles talk to each other

In general, although the participants of the study are young learners, they showed quite good understanding of the work they have been doing during the implementation of the program. They could trace the weaknesses and strengths of the program which made the researcher take their notes into consideration. The researcher made some modifications during the implementation phase based on some students' feedback, whether these remarks were given orally or on feedback form. Many of them were fully engaged in the new strategies and showed sense of responsibility towards the program as a whole. IV.3: Conclusion

42

The results of this study add to the literature on using KCS in EFL educational settings in the Arab world. They proved the potential of KCS in enhancing peer relationships, improving communication skills, and helping build a more motivating and encouraging classroom environment for English learning. The findings also reveal a number of remarks that should be taken into consideration in similar studies in the future. First, it is recommended that such a study be prolonged for a longer time, one semester or even two semesters, to give the participants enough time to use KCS more skillfully and become more proficient and experienced. The accumulated experience in using KCS during a semester or an entire year might yield more accurate results. Due to time limitations of this program, the students had to join their groups immediately after the pre-test and they did not have enough time to know each other well. Second, teaching the KCS and needed social skills before the implementation of the program can be more practical and beneficial for the participants. The researcher gave just a brief idea about the rules and procedures of the activities which sometimes caused misunderstanding and chaos at the beginning of some activities. The researcher recommends that the teacher who would apply such activities of cooperative learning to spend quite enough time on demonstrating these activities along with posters or signs around the classroom or on the desks explaining the rules of the activities and the required group behaviors. Third, a larger number of participants, with both genders, could lead to more precise results and divulge more advantages and disadvantages of using KCS. Fourth, more research is needed to determine which of the many KCS are the most motivating, encouraging and beneficial for upper primary learners. Fifth, the impact of using KCS on classroom environment was observed but so limited due to the nature of the young learners of the study whose behavior is still under control and could be handled or treated by some efforts, so further research is needed to investigate its impact on older learners of English in schools of boys, girls and coeducation.

43

Further research is also needed to study the prerequisites which make KCS more effective. It is also beneficial to investigate the effects of other methods of cooperative learning on the EFL students' oral skills, motivation and achievement. Lastly, applying KCS in other school subjects could yield better results as the students and teachers will work towards their goals in all subjects using the same strategies.

References
Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Burton, D and Bartlett, S (2004) Practitioner Research for Teachers. London: PCP. Celce-Murica, M. 2001. Teaching English as a second or Foreign Language. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Cohen, E.G., Lotan, L. & Catanzarite, L. (1990). Treating status problems in the cooperative classroom. In S. Sharan, (Ed.). Cooperative learning: theory and research. pp. 203-230. Wesport: Praeger. Diaz-Rico, L., & Weed, K. (Eds.). (2002). The Crosscultural, Language, And Academic Development Handbook A complete K-12 Reference Guide (2 nd ed.). Boston : Pearson Education Group, Inc. Eggen, P., Jacobsen, D., Kauchak, D. (2006) Methods for Teaching: Promoting Student Learning in K-12 Classrooms. Prentice Hall: New Jersey. Fischer, J. (1996). Open to ideas: Developing a framework for your research. In G. Burnaford, J. Fischer & D. Hobson (Eds.), Teachers doing research: Practical possibilities (pp. 33-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Good, T.; Slavings, R.; Harel, K.; & Emerson, H. (1987) Student passivity: a study of question asking in K-12 classroom, Sociology of Education, 60, 181-199. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M.B., Cope, J. A. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-32. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Creative controversy: Intellectual challenge in the classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

44

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Cooperation in the Classroom (6th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: cooperation in the college classroom. Edina: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T.; Smith, K. A. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom, (2nd ed.); Interaction Book: Edina, MN. 1998. Johnson , D.W. & Johnson, T. (1999). Making Cooperative Learning Work. Theory into Practice, 38(2), 67. Johnson, D. W. & Johnson R. T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1991). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic. Third Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1986). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D., Johnson, R.& Holubec, E. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. Retrieved July, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.clcrc.com/pages/cl-methods.html Kagan, S. and Kagan, M. (1998). Multiple intelligences: Thecomplete MI book. San Cemente, CA: Kagan. Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative Learning. San Clemente, CA: Resources for Teachers, Inc. Kagan, S. (1995). We can talkCooperative learning in the elementary ESL classroom. Washington, DC (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 382035). Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (Eds.) (1988). The Action Research Planner. Melbourne: Deakin University. Kessler, C. (Ed.). (1992). Cooperative language learning: A teachers resource book. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. Kharma, N. & A. Hajjaj (1989) Errors in English among Arabic speakers: analysis and remedy. Harlow: Longman. .Lewin,K. (1948) Resolving Social Conflicts. New York, Harper

45

McIvor, G. (1995) Practitioner Research in Probation in McGuire, J. (ed) What Works? .Reducing Offending. New York: Wiley .McLeod, J. (1999) Practitioner Research in Counselling London: Sage Publications McGroarty, M. (1989). The benefits of cooperative learning arrangements in second language instruction. NABE Journal, 13(2), 127143. McGroarty, M. (1993). Cooperative learning and second language acquisition. In D. D. Holt (Ed.), Cooperative learning (pp. 1946). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics & ERIC clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. McNiff, J., Lomax, P. and Whitehead, J., 1996. You and your action research project. London: Routledge Falmer. Miller, N. & Harrington, H.J. (1990). A situational identity perspective on cultural diversity and teamwork in the classroom. In S. Sharan, (Ed.). Cooperative learning: theory and research. Pp. 39-76. Wesport: Praeger. Mustafa, Ghasoub, S. H. (2002) English Language teaching and learning at government schools in the United Arab Emirates. University of Exeter: Unpublished doctoral thesis. Nakagawa, J. 2003. Spencer Kagan's Cooperative Learning Structures. 2nd Peace as a Global Language Conference Proceedings & Supplement, Sep. 27-28 2003, Tokyo. Japan Ochi , A. & Sugie, S. 2001. Dowa kyouiku to Bazu Gakushuu. [Dowa education and buzz learning]. Tokyo: Youkansha Olsen, R. E. W.-B., & Kagan, S. (1992). About cooperative learning. In C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teachers resourcebook (pp. 130). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
OSullivan, Andrew (2002) Reading and Arab College Students - Issues in the United Arab Emirates Higher Colleges of Technology. Retrieved from: www.readingmatrix.com/conference/pp/proceedings/sullivan.pdf (accessed May 2010) Rababah, Ghaleb (2003) Communication problems facing Arab learners of English: A personal perspective In TEFL Web Journal: Vol 2 No 1; 15-30

Rogers, C. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80s. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company. Rust, F., & Clark, C. (2007). How to do action research in your classroom. Lessons from the Teachers Network Leadership Institute. New York: Teachers Network. And in PDF from www.teachersnetwork.org Schmuck, R. A. & Schmuck, P. A. (1997). Group Processes in the Classroom (7th Ed.) Madison, WI: Times Mirror Company. S. G. McCafferty, G. M. Jacobs, & A. C. DaSilva Iddings (Eds.), Cooperative learning and second language teaching (pp. 18-29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006.

46

Shaaban, K. & Ghaith, G. (2005). The theoretical relevance and efficacy of using cooperative learning in the ESL/EFL classroom. TESOL Reporter, 38 (2), 14-28. Shaw, I. (2005). Practitioner research: Evidence or critique? British Journal of Social .Work, 35, 1231-1248 Slavin, R.E. (1987). Developmental and motivational perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, 58, 1161-1167. Slavin, R.E. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48, 71-82.

Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Slavin, R. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary educational psychology, 21, 43-69. Slavin, R. & Cooper, R. (1999). Improving intergroup relations: lessons learned from cooperative learning programs. Journal of Social Issues. (Winter). Retreived from the World Wide Web at: www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0341/4_55/62521561/p8/article.jhtml? term= on 13 Jan 2004. [EXPIRED LINK] Van Wyk MM 2007. The use of cooperative learning in Economics in the Further Education and Training phase of the Free State province. Ph.D Thesis (Unpublished), Bloemfontein, University of the Free State. Wigzell, R., & Al-Ansari, S. (1993). The pedagogical needs of low achievers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 49(2), 302-315. Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (2006). Instructional leadership: A research-based guide to learning in schools (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Longman. Young, D. J. (1999). Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere. Boston: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Zeichner, K. M., & Noffke, S. E. (2001). Practitioner research. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 404-442). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.

47

Social Skills Development

Social Skills Observation Sheet Social Skills

1 2 Appendix3A 4 5

Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5

___________________Observation Date

:Instructions
Stand by each group for one minute. Do not interact with group members. Record .each use of each skill with a mark
Spencer Kagan: Cooperative Learning Publisher: Resources for Teachers, Inc. 1(800)Wee Co-op

48

Appendix B Appendix B
Pre test
A) Match the notices to the correct signs. 1. You should not swim here. 2. You must not drive fast here. 3. You can play football here after lessons. 4. It is cheaper to buy things today than tomorrow. 5. You can drive here next week.

49

B) Choose the best word for each space.

Question 6 7 8 9 10

Answer Letter

50

C) Complete the five conversations.

51

D) Read the text about a sailing trip.Answer sentences 16-20 Right (A) or Wrong (B): Are the Question Letter 11 12 13 14 15

16- Before their trip, Jonathan and Claire Spencer spent a lot of time working. A Right B Wrong 17- The Spencers were soon ready to travel round the world. A Right B Wrong 18- Jonathan learnt to do the job of a mechanic. A Right B Wrong 19- The trip took longer than twelve months. A Right B Wrong 20- There was a lot for children to do on the boat. A Right B Wrong 21- For Jonathan and Claire, the best part of the trip was being with her family. A Right B Wrong

52

Question 16 17 18 19 20 21

Answer Letter

E) Read the article about penguins, and then choose the best word A, B, or C for each space on the next page.

53

Question 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Answer Letter

54

Writing F) Write a short paragraph about one of these two topics 1. Your school; teachers, subjects, friends, activities etc. 2. Your family, activities, chores, tripsetc.
__________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________

55

__________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________

Pre Test Listening & Speaking Questions

1. Hello 2. How are you? 3. Can you speak English? 4. Do you understand me? 5. What's your name? 6. What's your job? 7. How old are you? 8. When is your birthday? 9. What's the date today? 10. Have you got any brothers and sisters? 11. Which country do you come from? 12. What's your favourite colour? 13. What's your phone number? 14. What do you like to do in your free time? 15. What would you be when you grow up? 16. Which living person do you admire? 17. Tell me about your family. 18. Tell me about your country. 19. Tell me about your school. 20. What do you think you'll be doing in 5 years time?

56

Body .1 Language Pre test Post test

Movements seemed fluid and helped the audience .visualize 4

Made movements or gestures that enhanced .articulation 3

Very little movement or descriptive .gestures 2

No movement or descriptive .gestures Total 1

Appendix C
Holds attention of entire audience with the use of direct eye .contact 4

Eye .2 Contact

Oral Test Rubric Consistent use Displayed of direct eye minimal eye contact with contact with .audience .audience
3 2

No eye contact with .audience Total 1

Pre test Post test Student displays relaxed, selfconfident nature about self, with no .mistakes 4 Makes minor mistakes, but quickly recovers from them; displays little or no .tension 3 Tension and nervousness is obvious; has trouble recovering .from mistakes 1

Poise .3

Displays mild tension; has trouble recovering .from mistakes 2

Total

Pre test Post test Use of fluid speech and inflection maintains the interest of the .audience 4 Pre test Post test Satisfactory use of inflection, but does not consistently use fluid .speech 3

Voice .4

Displays some level of inflection throughout .delivery 2

Consistently uses a monotone .voice Total 1

57

58

Appendix D
Lesson Plan
GRADE: 6 Week 2 Date: 24/9/2010 TEACHER: Samer Ali

Narratives
Talking and Listening Communicate in * simple formal and informal situations expressing ideas and opinions clearly ,Use pace, intonation volume, pausing and .articulation when speaking Reading Use strategies to read and respond to arrangeof simple texts for information and enjoyment making connections between the text and their .own experience Infer or guess meaning in a text usinglanguage cues To identify how sentences or paragraphs are organized to present information Writing Plan, draft and edit when writing imaginative and factual texts that relate to .their own experiences and interests Write clearly for different familiar purposes and audiences using appropriate .language use knowledge of familiar letter patterns, spelling rules and common words when .attempting to spell unknown words use common punctuation including full stops, capital letters, questions marks and .commas handwrite with consistent size .and spacing

Indicators

Content

Change the language in oral texts to suit a different purpose, context or audience

Resources Beginning

Cobsdown Cat Case Building Spelling Skills book 4 Selected Reading Passages Grammar Review :During this portion of the lesson, students will

59

Play inside/Outside Circles to revise the story elements and events of the first chapter. Teacher divides the class into two equal groups, get them stand up in two circles, one inside the other, and provides strips of paper to one of the groups getting them ask and answer the stated questions and correct or help. After 3 minutes the two groups .swap roles Round Table: Ss are seated in groups of fours, roles are assigned, every student takes a minute to give a detail or .event about the same chapter. Reporter present the group work .Ss. Are given 5 minutes to read the first 5 pages of the second chapter. 1 minute for discussion Ss play Numbered Heads Together. Every group member is given a number from 1 to 4. T. poses a question and gets the groups pull in to answer it. T. chooses a number randomly getting students with the same numbers to stand .up and answer Ss work individually to do a worksheet about the first half of chapter 2 (True/False). Pairs compare and correct Ongoing teacher observes, guides, praises, provides feedback

Middle

End Assessment Evaluation

60

Appendix E
Group Evaluation: A. Circle the appropriate # 1. We all contributed 1 2 3 4 5 not well ------------------------------------------------- very well 2. We used quiet voices 1 2 never seldom 3. We stayed on task 1 2 never seldom 3 fairly often 3 fairly often 4 often 4 often 5 always 5 always

B. Something we could do better next time: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________