Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 809
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v12i4.1707
Collaborative Learning to develop English Speaking
Confidence in A2 students
Aprendizaje colaborativo para desarrollar la confianza al hablar inglés en estudiantes
de nivel A2
Oscar Renato Camacho Castillo
orcastilloc@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8915-3377
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador- Durán
Jacqueline Elizabeth López López
jelopez@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1765-8103
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador-Durán
Josué Reinaldo Bonilla Tenesaca
jrbonillat@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2345
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador-Durán
Diana Carolina Egas Herrera
dcegash@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2878-0689
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador-Durán
Artículo recibido: 18 septiembre 2025 -Aceptado para publicación: 28 octubre 2025
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
This research analyzes how collaborative learning impacts increased English speaking confidence
among tenth-grade elementary school students with an A2 level (specific level of language
proficiency within the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) who attend a
rural school in Ecuador. In this context, students face challenges such as technological limitations,
limited language practice, and traditional grammar-focused methods, which affect their
motivation and self-esteem when communicating verbally. Using a qualitative-quantitative
approach and a quasi-experimental design that included pre- and post-assessments, collaborative
strategies such as role-playing, puzzle-like activities, and peer feedback were implemented over
a four-week period. The tools employed consisted of structured observation lists and rubrics to
measure oral performance. The findings are anticipated to highlight significant improvements in
students' fluency and self-confidence, as well as the development of a replicable methodological
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 810
guide, contributing to effective and inclusive English teaching in rural areas. This study aims to
contribute to educational innovation and teacher professional development through a participatory
and transformative approach.
Keywords: collaborative learning, speaking confidence, English teaching
RESUMEN
Esta investigación analiza cómo el aprendizaje colaborativo influye en el aumento de la confianza
al hablar inglés en estudiantes de décimo grado de nivel A2 (un nivel específico de competencia
lingüística dentro del Marco Común Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas) en una escuela
rural de Ecuador. En este contexto, los estudiantes enfrentan desafíos como limitaciones
tecnológicas, práctica lingüística limitada y métodos gramaticales tradicionales, que afectan su
motivación y autoestima al comunicarse verbalmente. Mediante un enfoque cualitativo-
cuantitativo y un diseño cuasiexperimental que incluyó evaluaciones previas y posteriores, se
implementaron estrategias colaborativas como juegos de rol, actividades tipo rompecabezas y
retroalimentación entre pares durante cuatro semanas. Las herramientas empleadas consistieron
en listas de observación estructuradas y rúbricas para medir el rendimiento oral. Se prevé que los
hallazgos resalten mejoras significativas en la fluidez y la autoconfianza de los estudiantes, así
como el desarrollo de una guía metodológica replicable, contribuyendo así a una enseñanza del
inglés eficaz e inclusiva en zonas rurales. Este estudio busca contribuir a la innovación educativa
y al desarrollo profesional docente mediante un enfoque participativo y transformador.
Palabras clave: aprendizaje colaborativo, confianza al hablar, enseñanza del inglés
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
guide, contributing to effective and inclusive English teaching in rural areas. This study aims to
contribute to educational innovation and teacher professional development through a participatory
and transformative approach.
Keywords: collaborative learning, speaking confidence, English teaching
RESUMEN
Esta investigación analiza cómo el aprendizaje colaborativo influye en el aumento de la confianza
al hablar inglés en estudiantes de décimo grado de nivel A2 (un nivel específico de competencia
lingüística dentro del Marco Común Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas) en una escuela
rural de Ecuador. En este contexto, los estudiantes enfrentan desafíos como limitaciones
tecnológicas, práctica lingüística limitada y métodos gramaticales tradicionales, que afectan su
motivación y autoestima al comunicarse verbalmente. Mediante un enfoque cualitativo-
cuantitativo y un diseño cuasiexperimental que incluyó evaluaciones previas y posteriores, se
implementaron estrategias colaborativas como juegos de rol, actividades tipo rompecabezas y
retroalimentación entre pares durante cuatro semanas. Las herramientas empleadas consistieron
en listas de observación estructuradas y rúbricas para medir el rendimiento oral. Se prevé que los
hallazgos resalten mejoras significativas en la fluidez y la autoconfianza de los estudiantes, así
como el desarrollo de una guía metodológica replicable, contribuyendo así a una enseñanza del
inglés eficaz e inclusiva en zonas rurales. Este estudio busca contribuir a la innovación educativa
y al desarrollo profesional docente mediante un enfoque participativo y transformador.
Palabras clave: aprendizaje colaborativo, confianza al hablar, enseñanza del inglés
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 811
INTRODUCTION
The teaching of English in rural areas faces numerous pedagogical and social challenges
that hinder the comprehensive development of communication skills, especially oral expression,
as indicated (SAGE Advices., 2020), Communicative competence includes both grammatical
and social knowledge for appropriate language use. Tenth-grade students in Ecuador show low
levels of confidence and engagement when speaking English. This problem is largely due to the
abundance of grammar-focused instruction, limited exposure to other languages, and a lack of
collaborative environments that foster meaningful interaction. Therefore, it is essential to
implement creative techniques that promote active learning, student engagement, and emotional
security in language use.
Collaborative learning is a pedagogical approach based on constructivist theories, where
knowledge is built through social interaction and shared experiences. It promotes peer interaction,
shared goals, and mutual accountability, fostering a more dynamic and inclusive classroom
environment, as noted by (Johnson & Johnson, 2012) highlighting that cooperative structures
improve learning outcomes when students are positively interdependent and individually
responsible.Similarly (Barkley, Cross, & Major, 2005) They emphasize that collaborative
learning increases motivation and participation, especially when students participate in
meaningful tasks, agreeing with what was stated by (Slavin, 2014) argues that collaboration
improves academic performance and interpersonal skills by allowing students to explain concepts
and clarify misunderstandings together.
Considering that collaboration between peers, group work is carried out to achieve common
goals, such as practicing the language, solving activities and improving learning through
communication and mutual support, as indicated (Gillies, 2016) Reinforces that structured group
work improves communication and critical thinking skills, especially in language learning
contexts.
The research selected 25 tenth-grade students—15 male and 10 female—using
convenience sampling and a qualitative-quantitative approach with a quasi-experimental design.
Oral rubrics and observation lists were used for four weeks that a specific sub-skill was
emphasized in the first oral participation and confidence building activities, in the second week
Pronunciation and vocabulary enrichment through storytelling and role-playing, during Week 3
Fluency development through peer interviews and thinking, pairing and sharing tasks, Finally
week 4 integration and feedback through group discussions and presentations.The rural setting
reflects technological limitations and limited family support, allowing for the implementation of
effective strategies in vulnerable environments.
Regarding ethical considerations, each participant was treated with dignity and respect.
Informed consent was obtained, confidentiality was guaranteed, and participation was completely
INTRODUCTION
The teaching of English in rural areas faces numerous pedagogical and social challenges
that hinder the comprehensive development of communication skills, especially oral expression,
as indicated (SAGE Advices., 2020), Communicative competence includes both grammatical
and social knowledge for appropriate language use. Tenth-grade students in Ecuador show low
levels of confidence and engagement when speaking English. This problem is largely due to the
abundance of grammar-focused instruction, limited exposure to other languages, and a lack of
collaborative environments that foster meaningful interaction. Therefore, it is essential to
implement creative techniques that promote active learning, student engagement, and emotional
security in language use.
Collaborative learning is a pedagogical approach based on constructivist theories, where
knowledge is built through social interaction and shared experiences. It promotes peer interaction,
shared goals, and mutual accountability, fostering a more dynamic and inclusive classroom
environment, as noted by (Johnson & Johnson, 2012) highlighting that cooperative structures
improve learning outcomes when students are positively interdependent and individually
responsible.Similarly (Barkley, Cross, & Major, 2005) They emphasize that collaborative
learning increases motivation and participation, especially when students participate in
meaningful tasks, agreeing with what was stated by (Slavin, 2014) argues that collaboration
improves academic performance and interpersonal skills by allowing students to explain concepts
and clarify misunderstandings together.
Considering that collaboration between peers, group work is carried out to achieve common
goals, such as practicing the language, solving activities and improving learning through
communication and mutual support, as indicated (Gillies, 2016) Reinforces that structured group
work improves communication and critical thinking skills, especially in language learning
contexts.
The research selected 25 tenth-grade students—15 male and 10 female—using
convenience sampling and a qualitative-quantitative approach with a quasi-experimental design.
Oral rubrics and observation lists were used for four weeks that a specific sub-skill was
emphasized in the first oral participation and confidence building activities, in the second week
Pronunciation and vocabulary enrichment through storytelling and role-playing, during Week 3
Fluency development through peer interviews and thinking, pairing and sharing tasks, Finally
week 4 integration and feedback through group discussions and presentations.The rural setting
reflects technological limitations and limited family support, allowing for the implementation of
effective strategies in vulnerable environments.
Regarding ethical considerations, each participant was treated with dignity and respect.
Informed consent was obtained, confidentiality was guaranteed, and participation was completely
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 812
voluntary, with no academic repercussions for refusal. The research is governed by the
institution's ethical standards and the general principles of ethical educational research, as
outlined in the "Research and Development Program." , as pointed out (Red Holos XXI, 2023)
Ethics in educational research involves always acting with unconditional respect for others during
all stages of the research process, applying an institutional code of ethics that guides good
practices, including the design, collection, analysis, and dissemination of findings
The purpose of the research is to analyze how collaborative learning influences the
strengthening of confidence in English speaking among tenth grade students in a rural school,
with the development of specific objectives to achieve: Identify the most effective collaborative
strategies to promote oral production in English through an observation checklist and also;
evaluate the impact of group dynamics on fluency and confidence in speaking using oral
performance rubrics, considered as the student's ability to express knowledge orally in a clear,
coherent and structured way, during presentations, responses or expositions, showing mastery of
the content according to (Jiménez, 2021), as well as communicative fluency and examine the
factors that generate disconfidence in students when speaking English through an observation
checklist.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Among the materials used for the research are recorded:
Table 1
Materials
Resources Materials/Description
Bibliographical Physical books
E-books
Magazines
Reports
Website documents
Brochures
From the office Computer
Printer
Projector
Paper
Pencils
Folders
Recorder
Microphone
Cell Phone
Internet
Humans Professor
Students
Researcher
Economical Mobilization
Telecommunications
Inputs
Food
Legal Authorities – authorization
Note: Used during the investigative process.
voluntary, with no academic repercussions for refusal. The research is governed by the
institution's ethical standards and the general principles of ethical educational research, as
outlined in the "Research and Development Program." , as pointed out (Red Holos XXI, 2023)
Ethics in educational research involves always acting with unconditional respect for others during
all stages of the research process, applying an institutional code of ethics that guides good
practices, including the design, collection, analysis, and dissemination of findings
The purpose of the research is to analyze how collaborative learning influences the
strengthening of confidence in English speaking among tenth grade students in a rural school,
with the development of specific objectives to achieve: Identify the most effective collaborative
strategies to promote oral production in English through an observation checklist and also;
evaluate the impact of group dynamics on fluency and confidence in speaking using oral
performance rubrics, considered as the student's ability to express knowledge orally in a clear,
coherent and structured way, during presentations, responses or expositions, showing mastery of
the content according to (Jiménez, 2021), as well as communicative fluency and examine the
factors that generate disconfidence in students when speaking English through an observation
checklist.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Among the materials used for the research are recorded:
Table 1
Materials
Resources Materials/Description
Bibliographical Physical books
E-books
Magazines
Reports
Website documents
Brochures
From the office Computer
Printer
Projector
Paper
Pencils
Folders
Recorder
Microphone
Cell Phone
Internet
Humans Professor
Students
Researcher
Economical Mobilization
Telecommunications
Inputs
Food
Legal Authorities – authorization
Note: Used during the investigative process.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 813
Research Paradigm
The study was descriptive and the method was quasi-experimental. From a descriptive
perspective, it sought to identify and define characteristics and elements of a phenomenon through
carefully observed data (Bonilla, 2020), The objective was to document the implementation of
collaborative learning strategies— role plays, jigsaw reading and listening, think–pair–share, peer
interviews, debates and dialogues, group storytelling, and peer feedback sessions —in a rural
English as a foreign language (EFL) In experimental terms, the objective was to evaluate how
these strategies impact students' oral confidence and fluency in English. The research focuses
specifically on students at level A2 according to the CEFR, the basic user who can understand
frequently used sentences and expressions related to areas of immediate relevance, stated by
(Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), 2025) addressing aspects
such as sentence-level fluency, pronunciation, and willingness to engage in oral activities. The
goal is not to assess long-term language acquisition, but rather the immediate changes in
confidence and fluency that result from collaborative interaction.
Research Approach
A qualitative-quantitative approach was adopted to measure the effect of collaborative
learning on oral confidence. This method allows the researcher to compare students' performance
before and after the intervention, as well as to determine measurable improvements. Quantitative
data were collected using structured instruments that ensure objectivity and consistency.
Statistical analysis, including measures of central tendency and comparison of means, was used
to support the finding that collaborative methods positively contribute to students' oral preparation
and performance.
Sampling Technique
This research employed a non-probability convenience sampling method, which selects
participants based on their easy access and proximity to the researcher (Ochoa, 2015), due to
practical limitations of access and availability. The sample included 25 students (10 females and
15 males) from the tenth grade of Basic Education at the Educational Unit under study, aged
between 14 and 15. These students had been previously identified as having an A2 level of English
proficiency, based on their classroom performance and teacher evaluations, aligned with the
CEFR descriptors. While convenience sampling limits generalizability, it provides a focused view
of a specific rural educational context. Informed consent was obtained from the students and their
guardians, thus ensuring compliance with research ethical standards.Instrumentos
Two main instruments were designed and validated to collect data relevant to the research
objectives. All instruments were reviewed by English as a foreign language experts to ensure
clarity, relevance, and age-appropriateness.
Research Paradigm
The study was descriptive and the method was quasi-experimental. From a descriptive
perspective, it sought to identify and define characteristics and elements of a phenomenon through
carefully observed data (Bonilla, 2020), The objective was to document the implementation of
collaborative learning strategies— role plays, jigsaw reading and listening, think–pair–share, peer
interviews, debates and dialogues, group storytelling, and peer feedback sessions —in a rural
English as a foreign language (EFL) In experimental terms, the objective was to evaluate how
these strategies impact students' oral confidence and fluency in English. The research focuses
specifically on students at level A2 according to the CEFR, the basic user who can understand
frequently used sentences and expressions related to areas of immediate relevance, stated by
(Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), 2025) addressing aspects
such as sentence-level fluency, pronunciation, and willingness to engage in oral activities. The
goal is not to assess long-term language acquisition, but rather the immediate changes in
confidence and fluency that result from collaborative interaction.
Research Approach
A qualitative-quantitative approach was adopted to measure the effect of collaborative
learning on oral confidence. This method allows the researcher to compare students' performance
before and after the intervention, as well as to determine measurable improvements. Quantitative
data were collected using structured instruments that ensure objectivity and consistency.
Statistical analysis, including measures of central tendency and comparison of means, was used
to support the finding that collaborative methods positively contribute to students' oral preparation
and performance.
Sampling Technique
This research employed a non-probability convenience sampling method, which selects
participants based on their easy access and proximity to the researcher (Ochoa, 2015), due to
practical limitations of access and availability. The sample included 25 students (10 females and
15 males) from the tenth grade of Basic Education at the Educational Unit under study, aged
between 14 and 15. These students had been previously identified as having an A2 level of English
proficiency, based on their classroom performance and teacher evaluations, aligned with the
CEFR descriptors. While convenience sampling limits generalizability, it provides a focused view
of a specific rural educational context. Informed consent was obtained from the students and their
guardians, thus ensuring compliance with research ethical standards.Instrumentos
Two main instruments were designed and validated to collect data relevant to the research
objectives. All instruments were reviewed by English as a foreign language experts to ensure
clarity, relevance, and age-appropriateness.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 814
Observation checklist for collaborative oral tasks
This checklist, considered as the instrument that relates actions on specific tasks,
organized in a systematic way to assess the presence or absence of these and ensure their
fulfillment during the learning process (Sierra & Sosa, 2020), It includes 12 items, grouped into
two categories: (a) observable student behaviors during collaborative activities (e.g.,
participation, turn-taking, use of English) and (b) indicators of oral confidence (e.g., eye contact,
reduced hesitation, willingness to speak). This list was used during class sessions to document
real-time interactions. Expert suggestions were incorporated to refine the indicators and better
align them with the characteristics of A2-level students. The final version is available in Appendix
A.
Oral performance rubric for pretest and posttest
(Guzhñay, 2021) The rubric specifies clear criteria such as pronunciation, fluency,
coherence, and discourse structure. It describes different levels of achievement for each criterion,
allowing for an objective assessment of the student's oral expression. It evaluates students' oral
skills before and after implementing collaborative strategies. It is based on five assessment
criteria: fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary use, interaction, and coherence. Each criterion is
scored on a scale of 1 to 4, with a maximum total score of 20. The rubric was aligned with the
CEFR A2 speaking descriptors and reviewed for developmental appropriateness. It allowed for a
standardized comparison of oral performance over time. The rubric is presented in Appendix B.
Expert Validation Forms
To ensure the content validity of the instruments, two validation forms were created: one
for the independent variable (collaborative learning strategies) and another for the dependent
variable (speaking confidence). Language education experts rated each item as "Valid," "Valid
with revision," or "Invalid" and provided suggestions for improvement. Their input contributed
to refining both the checklist and the rubric. These forms are available in Appendices C .
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data collected before and after the collaborative learning intervention revealed significant
improvements in students' English oral performance and self-confidence. The analysis was based
on scores from the oral performance rubric and the structured observation checklist administered
to 25 EB students in Year 10.
They showed a greater inclination to participate spontaneously and used English more
frequently during group activities. Eye contact, variation in tone, and a more natural
conversational rhythm were noticeably observed. Comparing the pre- and post-observation
checklists, it was evident that 72% of students were reluctant to speak voluntarily before the
intervention; after the fourth week, this figure adjusted to 14%, with 86% actively engaging in
speaking tasks.
Observation checklist for collaborative oral tasks
This checklist, considered as the instrument that relates actions on specific tasks,
organized in a systematic way to assess the presence or absence of these and ensure their
fulfillment during the learning process (Sierra & Sosa, 2020), It includes 12 items, grouped into
two categories: (a) observable student behaviors during collaborative activities (e.g.,
participation, turn-taking, use of English) and (b) indicators of oral confidence (e.g., eye contact,
reduced hesitation, willingness to speak). This list was used during class sessions to document
real-time interactions. Expert suggestions were incorporated to refine the indicators and better
align them with the characteristics of A2-level students. The final version is available in Appendix
A.
Oral performance rubric for pretest and posttest
(Guzhñay, 2021) The rubric specifies clear criteria such as pronunciation, fluency,
coherence, and discourse structure. It describes different levels of achievement for each criterion,
allowing for an objective assessment of the student's oral expression. It evaluates students' oral
skills before and after implementing collaborative strategies. It is based on five assessment
criteria: fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary use, interaction, and coherence. Each criterion is
scored on a scale of 1 to 4, with a maximum total score of 20. The rubric was aligned with the
CEFR A2 speaking descriptors and reviewed for developmental appropriateness. It allowed for a
standardized comparison of oral performance over time. The rubric is presented in Appendix B.
Expert Validation Forms
To ensure the content validity of the instruments, two validation forms were created: one
for the independent variable (collaborative learning strategies) and another for the dependent
variable (speaking confidence). Language education experts rated each item as "Valid," "Valid
with revision," or "Invalid" and provided suggestions for improvement. Their input contributed
to refining both the checklist and the rubric. These forms are available in Appendices C .
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data collected before and after the collaborative learning intervention revealed significant
improvements in students' English oral performance and self-confidence. The analysis was based
on scores from the oral performance rubric and the structured observation checklist administered
to 25 EB students in Year 10.
They showed a greater inclination to participate spontaneously and used English more
frequently during group activities. Eye contact, variation in tone, and a more natural
conversational rhythm were noticeably observed. Comparing the pre- and post-observation
checklists, it was evident that 72% of students were reluctant to speak voluntarily before the
intervention; after the fourth week, this figure adjusted to 14%, with 86% actively engaging in
speaking tasks.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 815
Qualitative data collected from teacher observations and student feedback supported that
the implementation of role-playing and activities such as thinking, pairing, and sharing helped
students overcome their fear of making mistakes. Puzzle tasks encouraged collaboration, as
students required assistance from their peers to achieve language objectives. Peer feedback
sessions promoted metacognitive reflection, allowing students to detect pronunciation errors and
correct themselves on the spot.
Evidence indicates that the combination of organized collaboration, positive feedback,
and consistent practice significantly improves speaking confidence and communication skills.
They coincide with those of (Johnson & Johnson, 2012) who emphasize that positive
interdependence and group responsibility foster both academic performance and affective
development.
Table 2
Comparison of pre- and post-test scores
Criteria Pretest Mean Posttest Mean Improvement (%)
Vocabulary Usage 2.1 3.3 57%
Sentence Fluency 1.8 3.1 72%
Pronunciation 2.0 3.2 60%
Interaction and Participation 1.9 3.5 84%
Speaking Confidence (Observed) 2.0 3.6 80%
Note: Applied to the group of students.
As shown in Table 1, students showed notable improvements across all criteria. The
greatest increases were observed in interaction, participation, and speaking confidence,
suggesting that collaborative strategies significantly improved students' willingness to speak, as
expressed by (Heredia, Ochoa, Veloz, & Villegas, 2024) In their research, they considered that
by promoting positive interaction among students, collaborative learning contributes to creating
a more favorable school climate and preventing bullying and violence. This highlights the need
for further research on the effective implementation of collaborative learning in different school
contexts and with diverse groups of students. Likewise, the importance of developing more
specific evaluation instruments to measure the effects of collaborative learning on school
coexistence was identified, as appreciated (Guillen, 2024) Positive interdependence in
cooperative learning has a positive influence on school coexistence. It is important to foster and
promote this interdependence among students to improve their coexistence and create a mutually
supportive environment in the classroom.
Qualitative data collected from teacher observations and student feedback supported that
the implementation of role-playing and activities such as thinking, pairing, and sharing helped
students overcome their fear of making mistakes. Puzzle tasks encouraged collaboration, as
students required assistance from their peers to achieve language objectives. Peer feedback
sessions promoted metacognitive reflection, allowing students to detect pronunciation errors and
correct themselves on the spot.
Evidence indicates that the combination of organized collaboration, positive feedback,
and consistent practice significantly improves speaking confidence and communication skills.
They coincide with those of (Johnson & Johnson, 2012) who emphasize that positive
interdependence and group responsibility foster both academic performance and affective
development.
Table 2
Comparison of pre- and post-test scores
Criteria Pretest Mean Posttest Mean Improvement (%)
Vocabulary Usage 2.1 3.3 57%
Sentence Fluency 1.8 3.1 72%
Pronunciation 2.0 3.2 60%
Interaction and Participation 1.9 3.5 84%
Speaking Confidence (Observed) 2.0 3.6 80%
Note: Applied to the group of students.
As shown in Table 1, students showed notable improvements across all criteria. The
greatest increases were observed in interaction, participation, and speaking confidence,
suggesting that collaborative strategies significantly improved students' willingness to speak, as
expressed by (Heredia, Ochoa, Veloz, & Villegas, 2024) In their research, they considered that
by promoting positive interaction among students, collaborative learning contributes to creating
a more favorable school climate and preventing bullying and violence. This highlights the need
for further research on the effective implementation of collaborative learning in different school
contexts and with diverse groups of students. Likewise, the importance of developing more
specific evaluation instruments to measure the effects of collaborative learning on school
coexistence was identified, as appreciated (Guillen, 2024) Positive interdependence in
cooperative learning has a positive influence on school coexistence. It is important to foster and
promote this interdependence among students to improve their coexistence and create a mutually
supportive environment in the classroom.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 816
Tabla 3
Check List
Observed Indicator Yes No Sometimes Comments
Actively participates in group
activities
22 1 2 Most participate “frequently” or
“occasionally,” although a significant
group rarely participates.
Shows willingness and
motivation when working in a
group
20 1 4 80% feel more motivated when working
in a group.
Interacts positively with
classmates
22 2 1 22 report receiving frequent support; 3
rarely or never.
Expresses themselves orally
during collaborative activities
2 3 20 23 feel insecure or neutral; only 8 feel
confident speaking.
Shows greater comfort speaking
in a group than individually
5 2 18 40% sometimes; 26% no; only 26% yes.
Shows understanding of content
when working in a group
19 5 1 78% agree or strongly agree.
Reduces anxiety or shyness
when participating in group
talks
4 23 1 24 express embarrassment; only 6
students feel confident speaking.
Participates enthusiastically in
activities like role-plays or
debates
6 18 1 Only 6 mention enthusiasm or enjoyment
for role-plays and debates.
Not: Applied to students.
Indicator: Actively Participates in Group Activities
Data obtained from the observation checklist also indicate a positive change in behavior.
During the first week, 72% of students were hesitant to speak voluntarily. By the fourth week,
that percentage decreased to 16%, with 84% spontaneously participating in speaking activities,
especially during role-plays and peer interviews.
Qualitative Insights from Observations
Students responded more positively when tasks were interactive and involved role-playing
or peer feedback. Those who initially avoided participating gradually became involved when the
group dynamics allowed them to feel supported and not judged.
These behavioral changes confirm the influence of social learning environments on
affective variables. According to (Zoltán, 2010), Students are more willing to communicate when
Tabla 3
Check List
Observed Indicator Yes No Sometimes Comments
Actively participates in group
activities
22 1 2 Most participate “frequently” or
“occasionally,” although a significant
group rarely participates.
Shows willingness and
motivation when working in a
group
20 1 4 80% feel more motivated when working
in a group.
Interacts positively with
classmates
22 2 1 22 report receiving frequent support; 3
rarely or never.
Expresses themselves orally
during collaborative activities
2 3 20 23 feel insecure or neutral; only 8 feel
confident speaking.
Shows greater comfort speaking
in a group than individually
5 2 18 40% sometimes; 26% no; only 26% yes.
Shows understanding of content
when working in a group
19 5 1 78% agree or strongly agree.
Reduces anxiety or shyness
when participating in group
talks
4 23 1 24 express embarrassment; only 6
students feel confident speaking.
Participates enthusiastically in
activities like role-plays or
debates
6 18 1 Only 6 mention enthusiasm or enjoyment
for role-plays and debates.
Not: Applied to students.
Indicator: Actively Participates in Group Activities
Data obtained from the observation checklist also indicate a positive change in behavior.
During the first week, 72% of students were hesitant to speak voluntarily. By the fourth week,
that percentage decreased to 16%, with 84% spontaneously participating in speaking activities,
especially during role-plays and peer interviews.
Qualitative Insights from Observations
Students responded more positively when tasks were interactive and involved role-playing
or peer feedback. Those who initially avoided participating gradually became involved when the
group dynamics allowed them to feel supported and not judged.
These behavioral changes confirm the influence of social learning environments on
affective variables. According to (Zoltán, 2010), Students are more willing to communicate when
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 817
they feel part of a supportive peer group. This was especially evident in collaborative techniques
such as jigsaw puzzles and think-match-share, which encouraged students to negotiate meaning
and take active roles in speaking.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this study demonstrate that collaborative learning has a significant
positive impact on developing English speaking confidence among A2 level students. Through
structured peer interaction and group activities, students improved not only their speaking
performance in terms of vocabulary, pronunciation, and fluency, but also their willingness to
speak and participate in class.
In addressing the research objectives, this study confirms that collaborative strategies
promote an enabling environment where students feel more confident and motivated to use the
target language. These results are particularly relevant in rural contexts, where educational
resources are limited and traditional methods often fail to foster communicative competence.
The data validate the hypothesis that collaborative learning is an effective approach for
improving speaking confidence, making it a valuable pedagogical strategy for EFL teachers
working in similar socio-educational settings.
they feel part of a supportive peer group. This was especially evident in collaborative techniques
such as jigsaw puzzles and think-match-share, which encouraged students to negotiate meaning
and take active roles in speaking.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this study demonstrate that collaborative learning has a significant
positive impact on developing English speaking confidence among A2 level students. Through
structured peer interaction and group activities, students improved not only their speaking
performance in terms of vocabulary, pronunciation, and fluency, but also their willingness to
speak and participate in class.
In addressing the research objectives, this study confirms that collaborative strategies
promote an enabling environment where students feel more confident and motivated to use the
target language. These results are particularly relevant in rural contexts, where educational
resources are limited and traditional methods often fail to foster communicative competence.
The data validate the hypothesis that collaborative learning is an effective approach for
improving speaking confidence, making it a valuable pedagogical strategy for EFL teachers
working in similar socio-educational settings.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 818
REFERENCES
Barkley, E., Cross, P., & Major, C. (2005). Collaborative Learning Techniques. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Bonilla, E. (2020). Metodología de la investigacion. Mexico: Continental S.A.
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). (30 de 08 de 2025).
www.coe.int. Obtenido de https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-
reference-languages/level-descriptions
Gillies, R. (3 de Marzo de 2016). ro.ecu.edu.au. Obtenido de
https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2902&context=ajte
Guillen, W. (2024). Aprendizaje cooperativo para fortalecer la convivencia escolar en. Lima:
UCV. Obtenido de
https://repositorio.ucv.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/20.500.12692/155442/Guillen_AV-
SD.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Guzhñay, K. (2021). Las rúbricas de evaluación formativa para los aprendizajes de lengua y
literatura. Machala: UTMACH.
Heredia, G., Ochoa, F., Veloz, A., & Villegas, L. (23 de Agosto de 2024).
revistasocialfronteriza.com. Obtenido de
https://www.revistasocialfronteriza.com/ojs/index.php/rev/article/view/391#:~:text=Al%2
0promover%20la%20interacci%C3%B3n%20positiva,a%20toda%20la%20comunidad%
20escolar
Jiménez, A. (2021). Lenguaje oral y rendimiento escolar en educación infantil. Madrid: UNIR.
Obtenido de https://reunir.unir.net/handle/123456789/11577?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (24 de Octubre de 2012). www.scirp.org. Obtenido de
https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=589667
Ochoa, C. (29 de Mayo de 2015). www.netquest.com. Obtenido de
https://www.netquest.com/blog/muestreo-por-conveniencia?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Red Holos XXI. (1 de Febrero de 2023). redholosxxi.com. Obtenido de
https://redholosxxi.com/reflexiones-eticas-en-el-proceso-de-investigacion-
educativa/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
SAGE Advices. (5 de Noviembre de 2020). hmedia.wizards.com. Obtenido de
https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Sierra, R., & Sosa, K. (14 de Julio de 2020). cuaed.unam.mx. Obtenido de
https://cuaed.unam.mx/publicaciones/libro-evaluacion/pdf/Capitulo-14-LISTA-DE-
COTEJO.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Slavin, R. (3 de Diciembre de 2014). www.redalyc.org. Obtenido de
https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/167/16731690002.pdf
REFERENCES
Barkley, E., Cross, P., & Major, C. (2005). Collaborative Learning Techniques. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Bonilla, E. (2020). Metodología de la investigacion. Mexico: Continental S.A.
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). (30 de 08 de 2025).
www.coe.int. Obtenido de https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-
reference-languages/level-descriptions
Gillies, R. (3 de Marzo de 2016). ro.ecu.edu.au. Obtenido de
https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2902&context=ajte
Guillen, W. (2024). Aprendizaje cooperativo para fortalecer la convivencia escolar en. Lima:
UCV. Obtenido de
https://repositorio.ucv.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/20.500.12692/155442/Guillen_AV-
SD.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Guzhñay, K. (2021). Las rúbricas de evaluación formativa para los aprendizajes de lengua y
literatura. Machala: UTMACH.
Heredia, G., Ochoa, F., Veloz, A., & Villegas, L. (23 de Agosto de 2024).
revistasocialfronteriza.com. Obtenido de
https://www.revistasocialfronteriza.com/ojs/index.php/rev/article/view/391#:~:text=Al%2
0promover%20la%20interacci%C3%B3n%20positiva,a%20toda%20la%20comunidad%
20escolar
Jiménez, A. (2021). Lenguaje oral y rendimiento escolar en educación infantil. Madrid: UNIR.
Obtenido de https://reunir.unir.net/handle/123456789/11577?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (24 de Octubre de 2012). www.scirp.org. Obtenido de
https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=589667
Ochoa, C. (29 de Mayo de 2015). www.netquest.com. Obtenido de
https://www.netquest.com/blog/muestreo-por-conveniencia?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Red Holos XXI. (1 de Febrero de 2023). redholosxxi.com. Obtenido de
https://redholosxxi.com/reflexiones-eticas-en-el-proceso-de-investigacion-
educativa/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
SAGE Advices. (5 de Noviembre de 2020). hmedia.wizards.com. Obtenido de
https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Sierra, R., & Sosa, K. (14 de Julio de 2020). cuaed.unam.mx. Obtenido de
https://cuaed.unam.mx/publicaciones/libro-evaluacion/pdf/Capitulo-14-LISTA-DE-
COTEJO.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Slavin, R. (3 de Diciembre de 2014). www.redalyc.org. Obtenido de
https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/167/16731690002.pdf
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 819
Zoltán, D. (Enero de 2010). ve.scielo.org. Obtenido de
https://ve.scielo.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0798-97092010000100007
Zoltán, D. (Enero de 2010). ve.scielo.org. Obtenido de
https://ve.scielo.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0798-97092010000100007
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 820
ANNEXES
Appendix A – Pre-Study Survey (Collaborative Learning & Speaking Confidence)
Instructions: Choose the option that best represents your opinion or experience.
1. Have you participated in group or pair-based English learning activities before?
( ) Yes ( ) No
2. How often do you practice speaking English in group settings?
( ) Daily ( ) Weekly ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never
3. Do you feel more confident speaking English when working in groups or pairs?
( ) Strongly Agree ( ) Agree ( ) Neutral ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly Disagree
4. Do collaborative activities help reduce your anxiety when speaking English?
( ) Strongly Agree ( ) Agree ( ) Neutral ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly Disagree
5. How confident do you feel speaking English in front of classmates?
( ) Very Confident ( ) Confident ( ) Neutral ( ) A little Confident ( ) Not
Confident
6. Do you prefer working alone or with others when practicing speaking?
( ) Alone ( ) With others
7. In speaking tasks, how often do your classmates help you feel more secure?
( ) Always ( ) Often ( ) Sometimes ( ) Rarely ( ) Never
ANNEXES
Appendix A – Pre-Study Survey (Collaborative Learning & Speaking Confidence)
Instructions: Choose the option that best represents your opinion or experience.
1. Have you participated in group or pair-based English learning activities before?
( ) Yes ( ) No
2. How often do you practice speaking English in group settings?
( ) Daily ( ) Weekly ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never
3. Do you feel more confident speaking English when working in groups or pairs?
( ) Strongly Agree ( ) Agree ( ) Neutral ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly Disagree
4. Do collaborative activities help reduce your anxiety when speaking English?
( ) Strongly Agree ( ) Agree ( ) Neutral ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly Disagree
5. How confident do you feel speaking English in front of classmates?
( ) Very Confident ( ) Confident ( ) Neutral ( ) A little Confident ( ) Not
Confident
6. Do you prefer working alone or with others when practicing speaking?
( ) Alone ( ) With others
7. In speaking tasks, how often do your classmates help you feel more secure?
( ) Always ( ) Often ( ) Sometimes ( ) Rarely ( ) Never
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 821
Appendix B Rubric: Speaking Confidence in Collaborative Activities (A2 Level)
Criteria 4 – Excellent 3 – Good 2 – Fair 1 – Needs
Improvement
Willingness to
Speak
Always
volunteers to
speak without
hesitation
Often volunteers to
speak with minor
hesitation
Speaks only when
asked or
encouraged
Rarely speaks;
avoids
participation
Participation in
Group Tasks
Actively
contributes in
group
discussions and
tasks
Participates in most
group interactions
Participates
occasionally
Seldom
participates in
group work
Eye Contact &
Body Language
Maintains eye
contact and uses
confident body
language
Generally
maintains eye
contact, slight
nervousness
Limited eye
contact and
hesitant gestures
Avoids eye contact
and shows
discomfort
Response
Fluency
Speaks fluently
with little to no
pauses
Speaks with few
pauses or self-
corrections
Hesitates
frequently but can
complete
sentences
Frequent long
pauses; struggles
to complete ideas
Peer
Interaction
Encourages and
supports peers
confidently
Communicates well
with peers, some
hesitation
Minimal
interaction; needs
prompting
Rarely interacts or
avoids speaking
with peers
Self-Perceived
Confidence
(Survey)
Reports feeling
very confident
when speaking
Reports feeling
mostly confident
Reports some
confidence, but
with noticeable
anxiety
Reports low or no
confidence
Appendix B Rubric: Speaking Confidence in Collaborative Activities (A2 Level)
Criteria 4 – Excellent 3 – Good 2 – Fair 1 – Needs
Improvement
Willingness to
Speak
Always
volunteers to
speak without
hesitation
Often volunteers to
speak with minor
hesitation
Speaks only when
asked or
encouraged
Rarely speaks;
avoids
participation
Participation in
Group Tasks
Actively
contributes in
group
discussions and
tasks
Participates in most
group interactions
Participates
occasionally
Seldom
participates in
group work
Eye Contact &
Body Language
Maintains eye
contact and uses
confident body
language
Generally
maintains eye
contact, slight
nervousness
Limited eye
contact and
hesitant gestures
Avoids eye contact
and shows
discomfort
Response
Fluency
Speaks fluently
with little to no
pauses
Speaks with few
pauses or self-
corrections
Hesitates
frequently but can
complete
sentences
Frequent long
pauses; struggles
to complete ideas
Peer
Interaction
Encourages and
supports peers
confidently
Communicates well
with peers, some
hesitation
Minimal
interaction; needs
prompting
Rarely interacts or
avoids speaking
with peers
Self-Perceived
Confidence
(Survey)
Reports feeling
very confident
when speaking
Reports feeling
mostly confident
Reports some
confidence, but
with noticeable
anxiety
Reports low or no
confidence
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 822
APPENDIX C: POST-STUDY SURVEY
Instructions: Please answer honestly about your experience during the collaborative learning
activities. Your responses will help improve future English-speaking programs. All answers will
remain anonymous and confidential.
1. General Information
Age: ________
Gender: ( ) Male ( ) Female ( ) Other ( ) Prefer not to say
Current CEFR English Level (Self-assessment):
( ) Pre-A1 ( ) A1 ( ) A2 ( ) B1 or higher
Previous experience with group or collaborative English learning:
( ) None ( ) Basic ( ) Moderate ( ) Extensive
2. Learning Experience
2.1 Clarity of Group Activities
How clear were the objectives and instructions during group speaking activities?
( ) Very clear ( ) Clear ( ) Neutral ( ) Slightly unclear ( ) Not clear at all
2.2 Usefulness of Peer Collaboration
How helpful was working with classmates to improve your speaking?
( ) Extremely helpful ( ) Helpful ( ) Neutral ( ) Slightly unhelpful ( ) Not helpful at all
2.3 Group Dynamics
Did you feel supported by your peers when participating in speaking tasks?
( ) Always ( ) Often ( ) Sometimes ( ) Rarely ( ) Never
2.4 Session Structure
Were the session durations appropriate?
( ) Too short ( ) Just right ( ) Too long
3. Speaking Confidence
3.1 Perceived Improvement in Speaking Confidence
After the collaborative sessions, how would you rate your improvement in speaking confidence?
( ) Significant improvement ( ) Moderate improvement ( ) Slight improvement ( ) No
improvement
3.2 Comfort Speaking in Groups
Do you feel more comfortable speaking English in group activities now?
( ) Strongly agree ( ) Agree ( ) Neutral ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly disagree
4. Motivation and Challenges
4.1 Main Motivation
[ ] Improving communication
APPENDIX C: POST-STUDY SURVEY
Instructions: Please answer honestly about your experience during the collaborative learning
activities. Your responses will help improve future English-speaking programs. All answers will
remain anonymous and confidential.
1. General Information
Age: ________
Gender: ( ) Male ( ) Female ( ) Other ( ) Prefer not to say
Current CEFR English Level (Self-assessment):
( ) Pre-A1 ( ) A1 ( ) A2 ( ) B1 or higher
Previous experience with group or collaborative English learning:
( ) None ( ) Basic ( ) Moderate ( ) Extensive
2. Learning Experience
2.1 Clarity of Group Activities
How clear were the objectives and instructions during group speaking activities?
( ) Very clear ( ) Clear ( ) Neutral ( ) Slightly unclear ( ) Not clear at all
2.2 Usefulness of Peer Collaboration
How helpful was working with classmates to improve your speaking?
( ) Extremely helpful ( ) Helpful ( ) Neutral ( ) Slightly unhelpful ( ) Not helpful at all
2.3 Group Dynamics
Did you feel supported by your peers when participating in speaking tasks?
( ) Always ( ) Often ( ) Sometimes ( ) Rarely ( ) Never
2.4 Session Structure
Were the session durations appropriate?
( ) Too short ( ) Just right ( ) Too long
3. Speaking Confidence
3.1 Perceived Improvement in Speaking Confidence
After the collaborative sessions, how would you rate your improvement in speaking confidence?
( ) Significant improvement ( ) Moderate improvement ( ) Slight improvement ( ) No
improvement
3.2 Comfort Speaking in Groups
Do you feel more comfortable speaking English in group activities now?
( ) Strongly agree ( ) Agree ( ) Neutral ( ) Disagree ( ) Strongly disagree
4. Motivation and Challenges
4.1 Main Motivation
[ ] Improving communication
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 823
[ ] Classroom participation
[ ] Teacher support
[ ] Peer interaction
4.2 Challenges Encountered
[ ] Fear of making mistakes
[ ] Difficulty expressing ideas
[ ] Group coordination
[ ] Lack of vocabulary
5. Final Feedback
5.1 Would you recommend collaborative speaking activities to other learners?
( ) Yes ( ) No
5.2 Overall, how satisfied are you with the experience?
( ) Very satisfied ( ) Satisfied ( ) Neutral ( ) Unsatisfied ( ) Very unsatisfied
6. Speaking Confidence & Real-Life Application
6.1 Perceived Improvement
Rate your improvement in the following areas after participating in collaborative speaking
tasks:
Skill No
Improvement
Slight
Improvement
Moderate
Improvement
Significant
Improvement
Pronunciation
Accuracy ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
Fluency (Speech
Flow) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
Vocabulary
Usage ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
Speaking
Confidence ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
6.2 Real-Life Application
Do you feel more confident using English in real-life situations ?
( ) Yes, significantly ( ) Yes, moderately ( ) Neutral ( ) No, not yet
[ ] Classroom participation
[ ] Teacher support
[ ] Peer interaction
4.2 Challenges Encountered
[ ] Fear of making mistakes
[ ] Difficulty expressing ideas
[ ] Group coordination
[ ] Lack of vocabulary
5. Final Feedback
5.1 Would you recommend collaborative speaking activities to other learners?
( ) Yes ( ) No
5.2 Overall, how satisfied are you with the experience?
( ) Very satisfied ( ) Satisfied ( ) Neutral ( ) Unsatisfied ( ) Very unsatisfied
6. Speaking Confidence & Real-Life Application
6.1 Perceived Improvement
Rate your improvement in the following areas after participating in collaborative speaking
tasks:
Skill No
Improvement
Slight
Improvement
Moderate
Improvement
Significant
Improvement
Pronunciation
Accuracy ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
Fluency (Speech
Flow) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
Vocabulary
Usage ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
Speaking
Confidence ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
6.2 Real-Life Application
Do you feel more confident using English in real-life situations ?
( ) Yes, significantly ( ) Yes, moderately ( ) Neutral ( ) No, not yet