穨Review. Pdf

CHAPTER FOUR 
 RESULTS AND FINDINGS 
This study attempts to examine the outcome of using cooperative learning in 
EFL teaching in a junior high school context with regard to: (1) the effects of 
cooperative learning on the improvement of the EFL learners’ language learning in 
terms of communicative competence and the school monthly achievement tests, (2) 
the effects of cooperative learning on the EFL learners’ motivation toward learning 
English as a foreign language, and (3) the effects of cooperative learning on the 
high/low achievers in a heterogeneous class. 
Due to the abundant results yielded in this study, the findings were presented 
according to the sequence of the research questions stated above. 
4.1 Effects of Cooperative Learning and Language Learning 
In this section, the results of the four aspects of oral communicative competence 
(the linguistic, discourse, strategic, and the non-verbal features) as well as the three 
monthly achievement tests were presented to examine the effects of cooperative 
learning on the EFL learners’ language learning. 
Before investigating the results on the scores of the oral task, the inter-reliability 
was achieved through the Pearson Correlation Coefficient. Since there were eight 
raters, the total score that each student received from each rater were computed for the 
inter-rater reliability. The inter-rater reliability among the eight independent raters 
was calculated through the Pearson Correlation Coefficient. The results of the 
coefficient between each pair of the raters were illustrated in Table 4.1. 

---

86
Table 4.1 Pearson Correlation Coefficient of Inter-rater Reliability 
R 
R1 
R2 
R3 
R4 
R5 
R6 
R7 
R8 
R1 
1.000 
R2 
.818 
1.000 
R3 
.905 
.881 
1.000 
R4 
.881 
.821 
.866 
1.000 
R5 
.931 
.791 
.848 
.894 
1.000 
R6 
.892 
.845 
.917 
.935 
.886 
1.000 
R7 
.910 
.838 
.867 
.828 
.895 
.838 
1.000 
R8 
.868 
.711 
.796 
.890 
.879 
.832 
.862 
1.000 
As shown in Table 4.1, the reliability was between .711 and .935. 
4.1.1 Linguistic Competence 
For the measurement of the students’ linguistic competence, two oral tasks were 
performed by the students, one as the pre-test, and the other as the post-test. The 
result of the pre-test of the oral task indicated that the two classes obtained similar 
scores on the pre-test. The mean score of the control group was 70.40 and 68.73 in 
the experimental group, as shown in Table 4.2. There was no statistical significance 
(p=. 43) found between the pre-test scores in both groups, as indicated in Table 4.2.