
This study investigated whether collaboration among learners could facilitate the less proficient students’ learning or not. The data were obtained by interview and observation. The first interview was conducted to obtain the data from the teacher, and another data interview came from the less proficient student after the observation sessions. Both interview and observation results were analyzed qualitatively in terms of four collaborative elements by Kagan (1994, as cited in Lin, 2015), which were positive interdependence, individual accountability, equal participation and simultaneous interaction. In this study, the result of the teacher interview was related with the real situation during the group work observation. The findings of this study showed that collaborative learning among learners could facilitate the less proficient student’ learning, because it was coupled with the proper teacher’s strategy in conducting the group discussion. The teacher’s strategy was useful to manage a meaningful group discussion and decide the proper expert of each group. Besides, the high proficient student’s role, as the leader of the group, to promote the less proficient student to get involved in the discussion was significant. Finally, this study concluded that the four collaborative learning elements were mostly done by the students in the group work, and it completely helped the less proficient student’ learning.
Tidak diijinkan karya tersebut diunggah ke dalam aplikasi Repositori Perpustakaan Universitas
proficiency differences, peer interaction, Collaborative learning
proficiency differences, peer interaction, Collaborative learning
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
