Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная
лингвистика
и
лингводидактика
–
Foreign
Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/foreign-linguistics
The main processes of learning the English language with
group work
Farangizkhon ABDUVALIYEVA
Fergana State University
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received March 2024
Received in revised form
10 April 2024
Accepted 25 April 2024
Available online
25 July 2024
Group work appears to be one of the most effective methods
of adapting to changes in the language curriculum, offering
several benefits for both teachers and students. However,
educators face challenges in assessing this process, especially
when it occurs outside the classroom. This study examines
language teachers
’
views on group projects in Mexican colleges.
The complexity of the assessment process and the methods used
by teachers are examined. The study, using a qualitative
approach and semi-structured interviews, involved seven
teachers from undergraduate English language teaching
programs from different public institutions in Mexico. The results
show that teachers lack consistency in their assessments of
group work. Many of them prefer to evaluate students
individually due to the presence of “free riders” in groups. In
addition, there are no standardized criteria for assessing results.
2181-3663
/©
2024 in Science LLC.
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3701-vol2-iss3-pp37-42
This is an open-access article under the Attribution 4.0 International
(CC BY 4.0) license (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru
Keywords:
classroom,
group work,
team,
workloads,
work ethics,
real-world work.
Guruh ishlarida ingliz tilini
o‘
rganishning asosiy
jarayonlari
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
sinf,
guruh ishi,
jamoa,
ish yuki,
mehnat axloqi,
haqiqiy ish.
Guruhlar bilan ishlash til
o‘
quv dasturidagi
o‘
zgarishlarga
moslashishning eng samarali usullaridan biri b
o‘
lib,
o‘
qituvchi va
talabalar uchun bir qator imtiyozlarni taqdim etadi. Biroq,
o‘
qituvchilar ushbu jarayonni baholashda qiyinchiliklarga duch
kelishadi, ayniqsa u sinfdan tashqarida sodir b
o‘
lganda. Ushbu
tadqiqot til
o‘
qituvchilarining Meksika kollejlaridagi guruh
loyihalariga qarashlarini
o‘
rganadi. Baholash jarayonining
murakkabligi va
o‘
qituvchilar tomonidan q
o‘
llaniladigan usullar
1
Student, Fergana State University. E-mail: Baxtiyorovafarangiz9@gmail.com
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–
2
№
3 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
38
tekshiriladi. Sifatli yondashuv va yarim tizimli intervyulardan
foydalangan holda
o‘
tkazilgan tadqiqotda Meksikadagi turli
davlat muassasalaridan ingliz tilini
o‘
qitish b
o‘
yicha bakalavriat
dasturlari b
o‘
yicha yetti nafar
o‘
qituvchi ishtirok etdi. Natijalar
shuni k
o‘
rsatadiki,
o‘
qituvchilar guruh ishini baholashda izchillik
y
o‘
q. Ularning k
o‘pchiligi guruhlarda “erkin chavandozlar”
mavjudligi sababli talabalarni individual ravishda baholashni
afzal k
o‘
rishadi. Bundan tashqari, natijalarni baholash uchun
standartlashtirilgan mezonlar mavjud emas.
Основные процессы изучения английского языка при
групповой работе
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
класс,
групповая работа,
команда,
рабочая нагрузка,
трудовая этика,
реальная работа.
Групповая работа представляется одним из наиболее
эффективных методов адаптации к изменениям в языковой
программе, предлагая ряд преимуществ как для учителей,
так и для учащихся. Однако преподаватели сталкиваются с
трудностями при оценке этого процесса, особенно когда он
происходит вне классной комнаты. Данное исследование
анализирует взгляды преподавателей языков на групповые
проекты в мексиканских колледжах. Рассматривается
сложность процесса оценки и методы, применяемые
учителями. В исследовании, проведенном с использованием
качественного
подхода
и
полуструктурированных
интервью, участвовали семь преподавателей программ
бакалавриата по преподаванию английского языка из
различных государственных учебных заведений Мексики.
Результаты показывают, что у преподавателей отсутствует
единообразие в оценках результатов групповой работы.
Многие из них предпочитают оценивать студентов
индивидуально из
-
за наличия в группах «безбилетников».
Кроме того, отсутствуют стандартизированные критерии
для оценки результатов.
INTRODUCTION
The way that language is taught and learned at Mexican universities has changed
over the past several decades due to a variety of factors. First, communicative techniques
replaced old repetitious individualistic methods in language courses around the
beginning of the 1990s. Subsequently, the advent of social constructivist educational
techniques highlighted the value of group learning building above the individual
cognitive way of information acquisition. Furthermore, national education policymakers
recommended that the college curriculum incorporate competencies and foster the
development of lifelong learning abilities, emphasizing the significance of developing
collaborative work skills in undergraduate students. It is not surprising that language
teachers would use group work both inside and outside of the classroom given these
developments since this approach would enhance their professional activity and assist
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–
2
№
3 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
39
students in developing the social, communicative, and collaborative skills necessary for
an effective career. It is believed that group activities in the classroom provide its
participants a number of benefits, including the chance to engage in real participation
and interaction with others. Collaborating with others is a skill that group members can
acquire as they work together to accomplish the set goals, have open discussions, freely
express their opinions, develop their communication skills, sharpen their listening skills,
and resolve potential conflicts (Johnson and Johnson, 2013). People build their identities,
reflect on their particular experiences and worldviews, communicate their concerns and
ideals, and realize their role within the community via working with others. According to
some researchers, effective group work benefits both teachers and students because it
gives both a greater sense of engagement and participation in the tasks that are
impossible to achieve in a traditional classroom setting where the teacher-student
relationship is one-sided and constrained. Wallace (1998), for instance, claims that group
work improves information by integrating members
’
talents and perspectives, cuts down
on time spent on engaging activities, and keeps students engaged if they stay focused on
their objectives. In an investigation into the benefits of group work, Rezaei (2018) polled
professors and students. She discovered that students could learn collaboratively,
support peer instruction and scaffolding, develop teamwork, communication, social, and
leadership skills, use a variety of perspectives in their work, cultivate a sense of
community and responsibility, expand their creativity and imagination, complete
complex projects, encourage exploratory thinking, enhance critical thinking and self-
confidence, practice self-directed learning, and lessen peer competition and teacher
workload. Although group work seems to have many benefits, some authors have begun
to doubt its efficacy due to study reports indicating that students view group work as a
time waster, an additional burden, and a challenge to assess in terms of the caliber of the
knowledge gained (Ha, Jeroen, Theo, 2018). Wallace (1998) notes that potential obstacles
to collaboration could include student differences, varying opinions on particular
subjects, erratic student schedules when assignments are due outside of class, challenges
establishing team working hours, and occasionally arising conflicts when defining
students
’
various roles within the team
’
s responsibilities. Rezaei (2018) also discovered
that teachers discover certain negative aspects that arise from group work activities,
such as unequal workloads, students not feeling adequately acquainted with the group,
personality differences, interpersonal conflicts, jealousy, resistance, and resentment
attitudes, conflicts involving finding time outside of class, busy students unable to
participate, differences in work ethics, commitment levels, and motivations, poor
communication, students not liking or enjoying it, time wasters and distractions,
variations in the knowledge and experience levels of learners, unfair grading, technical
issues, and requiring more class time than anticipated for student presentations.
Students should work in groups despite the aforementioned disadvantages since it can
enhance the way they think and feel. In addition to differences and disputes, learning can
occasionally entail encountering irritation and uncertainty. For this reason, group
activities can be viewed as a chance for students to develop their ability to control,
manage, resolve, and negotiate all of life
’
s challenges. Undoubtedly, the acquired
knowledge is a feature that will persist in subsequent encounters.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–
2
№
3 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
40
THE MAIN FINDINGS AND RESULTS
Group work is recognized by Cohen and Lotan (2014) as an excellent method that
significantly advances academic literacy, conceptual understanding, and problem-solving.
Furthermore, some benefits over alternative methods include the chance to obtain
expertise in collaborative work (Orr, 2010), an enhancement over solitary learning, or
simply the culmination of students
’
contributions (Lillo, 2013). Cohen & Lotan (2014)
claim that group work also aids in the development of the abilities required to meet
intellectual, social, and academic objectives. According to Britton, Simper, Leger, and
Stephenson (2017), one of the most important aspects of this century
’
s workforce is the
ability to apply knowledge and skills from the classroom to real-world work settings.
Group work, defined as when more than two students “work together in the classroom to
achieve a common task or learning objective”,
is advantageous for students (Ruiz-
Esparza, Medrano, Zepeda: 2016). Nevertheless, this method has been used to solve
difficulties outside of the classroom as well. Studying groups in the classroom has
garnered a lot of attention since teachers can better monitor, engage, and value each
student
’
s contribution because they have control over the group. The ideal situation for
students is to be placed
“
in a group small enough so that everyone can participate in an
assigned
learning
task
”,
according
to
Cohen
&
Lotan
(2104:
1).
To promote independence and organizational abilities, they further stipulate that this
activity must be done without any
“
direct or immediate supervision from the teacher
”.
In this way, instructors should support learning experiences both inside and outside of
the classroom by assigning relevant projects or assignments for group work (Lillo, 2013).
Teachers must provide their students the freedom to take charge of their dynamics and
adjust to new roles and responsibilities for them to investigate the dynamics that exist
outside of the classroom through group work. Davies (2009) suggests, for instance, that
for group work to be successful, the instructor must take several steps, including
organizing and directing groups, controlling motivation (by offering rewards and
consequences), fostering interdependence, and clarifying expectations. Consequently, the
teacher should play an active role in encouraging students to think and reflect,
communicating with them, responding to their inquiries, emphasizing the achievement of
group objectives and knowledge acquisition, and serving as a mediator and facilitator
when necessary (Lillo, 2013). But when educators attempt to do all of this outside of the
classroom, things get more complicated. Conversely, many drawbacks make teachers
hesitant to assess the efficacy of group work as a strategy. For example, there may be
discrepancies between students
’
performance and expectations, leading to challenging
problems. The primary cause of this disparity is unforeseen student collaborative
practices (Lillo, 2013). It is challenging to define precise standards for what and how
work should be completed by the group and individually, and it is also laborious to
maintain a record of this job
’
s completion. According to Britton, Simper, Leger, and
Stephenson (2017), this makes scoring and assessment difficult and raises the possibility
that students would see it as unfair. Rezaei (2018) issued a survey to 177 university
students, asking them about their impressions of group work. According to the findings
of the group work assessment, the majority of students feel that it is more equitable for
them to be included in their evaluation. Additionally, they thought that group projects
would yield greater results if there were two grades awarded: one for each member
’
s
contribution to the group and another for the finished work. Lastly, the study revealed
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–
2
№
3 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
41
that over 70% of students thought the final course mark shouldn
’
t be primarily
determined by the grade assigned for group projects (Rezaei, 2018). Fairness is therefore
crucial when employing group work as a teaching and evaluation tool. According to Orr
(2010), the aforementioned discrepancy between what students accomplish and what
teachers ask and anticipate is caused by unclear expectations from teachers, who value
quality above quantity when it comes to their
student’s
performance. Additionally,
students
anticipate
quantification
rather
than
qualitative
comments.
As a result, rather of emphasizing the process and their performance, the students
’
expectations for their scores are directly related to the final product and their particular
contributions to it. It is necessary to clarify that there are two definitions of assessment
while discussing the issue. Evaluation often refers to a student
’
s performance on an exam
or test, as many Mexican professors do by the academic framework that is the foundation
of Mexican institutions. An alternative notion is assessment, denoting the qualitatively
measured procedure that centers on the advancement of the pupils instead of the
outcome. Although the terms assessment and evaluation will not be used interchangeably
in this paper, we will always refer to assessment in its most emphatic sense. Nine guiding
questions were developed by the researchers to be used in a semi-structured oral
interview. The purpose of the questions was to get some information on the methods the
language instructors were using for group work outside of the classroom and the
methods by which they were assessing these methods. Interviews can be categorized
based on their level of formality, with the majority falling on a continuum from
unstructured to semi-structured to structured, according to Nunan (1992: 149).
In a formal interview, topics and concerns rather than questions dictate how it goes.
The interview questions focused on the types of assignments, tasks, and projects that the
teachers gave the students; the skills they thought the assignments would help students
develop; the methods they used to oversee and record group work outside of the
classroom; the tools and standards they thought to be evaluated; whether they assessed
each student individually or noted the group
’
s overall performance; the main problems
they encountered and how they thought they could resolve them; and what they thought
were the main benefits of group work (see Appendix A). Activities assigned by teachers
are typically done in groups. Nevertheless, they don
’
t spend enough time equipping
pupils with the abilities required to work cooperatively with others. Three key elements
that educators say should be assessed in these assignments are the caliber of the results,
the capacity for lifelong learning, and the ability to think critically and collaboratively.
Their replies show that people frequently struggle with knowing how to assess these
components. They employ guided observations and rubrics, but their understanding of
what a rubric is unclear. They downplay its significance to a list of guidelines or qualities
to assess, failing to see it as a possible resource for optimizing group projects. The
primary source of dissatisfaction for teachers about group work dynamics stems from
the free riding effect among students. However, in the end, they have stated that
individual evaluations are preferable than group evaluations. Some teachers
’
evaluation
methods are inconsistent, as are the activities
’
goals or the abilities they hope their pupils
will acquire. While not every student will advance at the same rate, teachers must work
hard to assess and evaluate the value of group work and keep in mind that children may
get advantages from working with their classmates. Their life experience will continue to
provide gains.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–
2
№
3 (2024) / ISSN 2181-3701
42
CONCLUSION
It has been shown that group work improves learning results and increases
student active involvement. In small groups, there has also been evidence of the
development of highly desired transferable skills including oral communication and
problem-solving abilities. Working with others is the only way to develop the capacity to
carefully and critically listen to others
’
views and expand on their work (Race). Group
work in the language classroom gives every student more chances to utilize the target
language (Long & Porter,). Notwithstanding the benefits and advantages,
misunderstandings about what group work comprises and the belief that everyone will
automatically collaborate in groups without any issues or misunderstandings can lead to
several unfavorable consequences.
REFERENCES:
1. Rea-Dickins, P.; K. Germaine (2001). Innovation in English Language Teaching.
Routledge: London and New York in association with Macquarie University and the Open
University.
2. Rezaei, A. (2018). E
ff
ective Groupwork Strategies: Faculty and Students
’
Perspectives. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(5), 1-10.
3.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Ferdous, T.; A. Karim (2019).
4. Working in Groups outside the Classroom: A
ff
ective Challenges and Probable
Solutions. International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 341-358.
