Perspectives on collaborative learning: a case study of teachers and students of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) within an Algerian higher education institution

This interpretivist case study examines the perceptions of teachers and students towards collaborative learning for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in higher education in Algeria.

Learning English in higher education in Algeria is frequently carried out through individualistic and competitive or collaborative ways. Although EFL students workcollaboratively on some tasks, there is evidence that there may be some lack of clarity regarding the characteristics and use of some elements of collaborative learning in relation to EFL teaching, learning and assessment. This study focuses on collaborative learning for EFL students in English language classrooms in higher education. It was found that collaborative learning can be effective in achieving the development of language skills for students, however; it was also found that collaborative learning can mean the developmentof the social network, communication and critical thinking skills. This contested and unclear meaning of collaborative learning in English language education leads to question whether collaborative learning means a process (where the interaction of students is important) or a product (where the language should be learned). This study endeavours to explore (1) the meaning of collaborative learning for EFL higher education teachers and students; (2) the evaluation and assessment system for such collaborative learning; and (3) the contextual factors that affect collaborative learning for EFL students. Therefore, the originality of this study lies in exploring and seeking to understand the aim of collaborative learning in EFL teaching and its interaction with assessment processes used.

The qualitative interpretive methodology was employed to gain an in-depth understanding of how teachers and students experienced and perceived collaborative learning. The perceptions of three categories of people (teachers, head of the department and students) were investigated through semi-structured interviews, therefore; nine Algerian EFL teachers
and eight EFL undergraduate students were selected. Five participant teachers from the above sample also agreed to be observed in the classroom. Moreover, two official Algerian
ministry documents were consulted for documentary evidence in addition to the written field notes.

The findings reveal the complexity of the use of collaborative learning as a pedagogical approach. In particular, the participants seemed to focus more on the product, that is; on language related-outcomes because the students are assessed on their individual learning of the language though they work in groups. This major finding contradicts the interaction patterns of social interdependence theory: individual accountability, positive interdependence and promotive interaction (skills). These interaction patterns indicate that collaborative learning is about the process where the interaction skills are vital. The findingsalso indicate that collaborative learning is affected by the teacher’s pedagogy and the policy of higher education. The implications of this study can be thought provoking to higher education EFL teachers through raising an awareness of their actual thinking and practices regarding collaborative learning. The focus on the interaction of collaborative learning and assessment practices raises questions about the equal importance of both the process and the product of collaborative learning in EFL and the systematic assessment of collaborative learning practices. It could also provide information for Algerian policy makers in any future reinterpretation or redesign of assessment practices. All in all, this study can be used as a reference to enrich the knowledge and practices concerning students’ collaborative learning specifically and to contribute to the development of pedagogy in higher education in general.