Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1571
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v13i2.2286
Using Collaborative Learning to Strengthen English
Speaking Confidence in A2-Level Students
Uso del Aprendizaje Colaborativo para fortalecer la confianza oral en inglés en
estudiantes de nivel A2
Hernan Fabricio Solórzano Vidal
hfsolorzanov@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3135-9469
Universidad Bolivariana Del Ecuador
Durán - Ecuador
Jacqueline Elizabeth Lopez Lopez
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Durán – Ecuador
Josué Reinaldo Bonilla Tenesaca
jrbonillat@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2345
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Durán – Ecuador
Artículo recibido: 10 abril 2026- Aceptado para publicación:16 mayo 2026
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
This study analyzes the effectiveness of collaborative learning strategies in strengthening English
speaking confidence among A2-level tenth-grade students at Unidad Educativa “Luz de
América,” a rural public school in Ecuador. In this educational context, English instruction has
traditionally focused on grammar-based methodologies, offering limited opportunities for oral
interaction and communicative practice. As a result, students frequently demonstrate low
confidence, restricted vocabulary use, inaccurate pronunciation, and reluctance to participate in
speaking activities. To address this issue, a mixed-methods, quasi-experimental design with a
single-group pre-test and post-test was implemented over a six-week period. The pedagogical
intervention incorporated collaborative learning strategies such as role-plays, pair and group
storytelling, guided group discussions, problem-solving tasks, and peer interviews. Students’
speaking performance was assessed using CEFR-aligned rubrics evaluating vocabulary,
grammar, pronunciation, fluency, and interaction. Data were collected through oral pre- and post-
tests, perception surveys, classroom observations, and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative
results revealed clear improvement across all speaking components after the intervention.
Vocabulary range and fluency showed the most significant gains, while pronunciation and
grammatical accuracy also improved consistently. Overall, 60% of students progressed from A2
to A2+ level, and an additional 23% consolidated their A2 performance. Qualitative findings
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1572
indicated reduced speaking anxiety, increased motivation, and greater willingness to
communicate in English, particularly during peer-supported activities. The findings confirm that
collaborative learning is an effective, low-cost, and inclusive pedagogical approach for enhancing
speaking confidence and oral performance in EFL classrooms, especially in rural and under-
resourced educational settings.
Keywords: collaborative learning, speaking confidence, A2 level, EFL, rural education
RESUMEN
El presente estudio analiza la efectividad de las estrategias de aprendizaje colaborativo en el
fortalecimiento de la confianza oral en inglés de estudiantes de décimo grado con nivel A2 en la
Unidad Educativa “Luz de América”, una institución pública rural del Ecuador. En este contexto
educativo, la enseñanza del inglés ha estado tradicionalmente centrada en enfoques gramaticales,
con escasas oportunidades para la interacción oral y la práctica comunicativa, lo que ha generado
baja confianza, uso limitado del vocabulario, dificultades de pronunciación y resistencia a
participar en actividades orales. Para abordar esta problemática, se aplicó un diseño de
investigación mixto experimental con pretest y un post test a un solo grupo durante un período de
seis semanas. La intervención pedagógica incluyó estrategias de aprendizaje colaborativo como
juegos de rol, narración de historias en parejas y grupos, discusiones guiadas, tareas de resolución
de problemas y entrevistas entre pares. El desempeño oral fue evaluado mediante rúbricas
alineadas al MCER, considerando vocabulario, gramática, pronunciación, fluidez e interacción.
Los datos se recopilaron a través de pruebas orales, encuestas de percepción, observaciones de
aula y entrevistas semiestructuradas. Los resultados cuantitativos evidenciaron mejoras
significativas en todas las dimensiones de la expresión oral tras la intervención. El vocabulario y
la fluidez mostraron los mayores avances, mientras que la pronunciación y la precisión gramatical
también presentaron progresos constantes. En términos generales, el 60% de los estudiantes
alcanzó el nivel A2+, y el 23% consolidó su nivel A2. Los datos cualitativos revelaron una
disminución de la ansiedad al hablar, mayor motivación y una mayor disposición para
comunicarse en inglés, especialmente en actividades colaborativas. Se concluye que el
aprendizaje colaborativo constituye una estrategia pedagógica eficaz, accesible e inclusiva para
fortalecer la confianza oral en contextos EFL rurales y con recursos limitados.
Palabras clave: aprendizaje colaborativo, confianza oral, nivel A2, inglés como lengua
extranjera, educación rural
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
indicated reduced speaking anxiety, increased motivation, and greater willingness to
communicate in English, particularly during peer-supported activities. The findings confirm that
collaborative learning is an effective, low-cost, and inclusive pedagogical approach for enhancing
speaking confidence and oral performance in EFL classrooms, especially in rural and under-
resourced educational settings.
Keywords: collaborative learning, speaking confidence, A2 level, EFL, rural education
RESUMEN
El presente estudio analiza la efectividad de las estrategias de aprendizaje colaborativo en el
fortalecimiento de la confianza oral en inglés de estudiantes de décimo grado con nivel A2 en la
Unidad Educativa “Luz de América”, una institución pública rural del Ecuador. En este contexto
educativo, la enseñanza del inglés ha estado tradicionalmente centrada en enfoques gramaticales,
con escasas oportunidades para la interacción oral y la práctica comunicativa, lo que ha generado
baja confianza, uso limitado del vocabulario, dificultades de pronunciación y resistencia a
participar en actividades orales. Para abordar esta problemática, se aplicó un diseño de
investigación mixto experimental con pretest y un post test a un solo grupo durante un período de
seis semanas. La intervención pedagógica incluyó estrategias de aprendizaje colaborativo como
juegos de rol, narración de historias en parejas y grupos, discusiones guiadas, tareas de resolución
de problemas y entrevistas entre pares. El desempeño oral fue evaluado mediante rúbricas
alineadas al MCER, considerando vocabulario, gramática, pronunciación, fluidez e interacción.
Los datos se recopilaron a través de pruebas orales, encuestas de percepción, observaciones de
aula y entrevistas semiestructuradas. Los resultados cuantitativos evidenciaron mejoras
significativas en todas las dimensiones de la expresión oral tras la intervención. El vocabulario y
la fluidez mostraron los mayores avances, mientras que la pronunciación y la precisión gramatical
también presentaron progresos constantes. En términos generales, el 60% de los estudiantes
alcanzó el nivel A2+, y el 23% consolidó su nivel A2. Los datos cualitativos revelaron una
disminución de la ansiedad al hablar, mayor motivación y una mayor disposición para
comunicarse en inglés, especialmente en actividades colaborativas. Se concluye que el
aprendizaje colaborativo constituye una estrategia pedagógica eficaz, accesible e inclusiva para
fortalecer la confianza oral en contextos EFL rurales y con recursos limitados.
Palabras clave: aprendizaje colaborativo, confianza oral, nivel A2, inglés como lengua
extranjera, educación rural
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. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1573
INTRODUCTION
English oral communication is a key component of language proficiency, yet it remains
one of the most challenging skills to develop, particularly in rural educational contexts where
learners have limited exposure to authentic language use. In many Ecuadorian public and semi-
public schools, English instruction traditionally revolves around textbook-based grammar drills,
vocabulary lists, and translation exercises, leaving little room for meaningful interaction or
spontaneous speech. This results in low confidence, high problems, and a lack of fluency among
students, especially those at the A2 level.
In response to these issues, collaborative learning has emerged as a promising pedagogical
alternative. Rooted in Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory and constructivist principles,
collaborative learning encourages students to engage in shared tasks, negotiate meaning, and
support each other’s learning processes. According to Johnson and Johnson (2017), structured
group work promotes individual accountability, equal participation, and positive interdependence.
These principles are particularly effective in developing speaking confidence, as students feel less
isolated and more supported during oral tasks.
Research by Dana and Aminatun (2022) and Alcívar Loor et al. (2023) highlights that
collaborative learning reduces speaking problems, increases peer support, and enhances oral
fluency and pronunciation through repeated practice in a low-pressure setting. In this context,
confidence in speaking is defined as the learner’s perceived ability to communicate ideas
effectively, without fear of making mistakes, while demonstrating fluency and interactional skills.
This study investigates how collaborative learning strategies such as pair work, small group
discussions, storytelling, and peer feedback can enhance the oral speaking confidence of A2- level
students in the 10th grade at Unidad Educativa "Luz de América," located in a rural parish of Santo
Domingo, Ecuador. The school serves students from diverse socio-economic backgrounds, many
of whom face limited access to English resources outside the classroom.
This research investigates whether collaborative learning can improve English speaking
confidence in 10th-grade students. The study focuses on three specific objectives:
1. Assessing speaking performance through CEFR-aligned pre- and post-tests
2. Analyzing perceptions via surveys and interviews.
3. Observing classroom behavior related to participation and peer interaction.
The significance of this research lies in its contribution to inclusive and participatory
English teaching practices in under-resourced environments. By integrating collaborative learning
into the EFL classroom, educators can create more meaningful and interactive learning
experiences that build not only linguistic competence but also self-assurance and motivation
among learners.
INTRODUCTION
English oral communication is a key component of language proficiency, yet it remains
one of the most challenging skills to develop, particularly in rural educational contexts where
learners have limited exposure to authentic language use. In many Ecuadorian public and semi-
public schools, English instruction traditionally revolves around textbook-based grammar drills,
vocabulary lists, and translation exercises, leaving little room for meaningful interaction or
spontaneous speech. This results in low confidence, high problems, and a lack of fluency among
students, especially those at the A2 level.
In response to these issues, collaborative learning has emerged as a promising pedagogical
alternative. Rooted in Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory and constructivist principles,
collaborative learning encourages students to engage in shared tasks, negotiate meaning, and
support each other’s learning processes. According to Johnson and Johnson (2017), structured
group work promotes individual accountability, equal participation, and positive interdependence.
These principles are particularly effective in developing speaking confidence, as students feel less
isolated and more supported during oral tasks.
Research by Dana and Aminatun (2022) and Alcívar Loor et al. (2023) highlights that
collaborative learning reduces speaking problems, increases peer support, and enhances oral
fluency and pronunciation through repeated practice in a low-pressure setting. In this context,
confidence in speaking is defined as the learner’s perceived ability to communicate ideas
effectively, without fear of making mistakes, while demonstrating fluency and interactional skills.
This study investigates how collaborative learning strategies such as pair work, small group
discussions, storytelling, and peer feedback can enhance the oral speaking confidence of A2- level
students in the 10th grade at Unidad Educativa "Luz de América," located in a rural parish of Santo
Domingo, Ecuador. The school serves students from diverse socio-economic backgrounds, many
of whom face limited access to English resources outside the classroom.
This research investigates whether collaborative learning can improve English speaking
confidence in 10th-grade students. The study focuses on three specific objectives:
1. Assessing speaking performance through CEFR-aligned pre- and post-tests
2. Analyzing perceptions via surveys and interviews.
3. Observing classroom behavior related to participation and peer interaction.
The significance of this research lies in its contribution to inclusive and participatory
English teaching practices in under-resourced environments. By integrating collaborative learning
into the EFL classroom, educators can create more meaningful and interactive learning
experiences that build not only linguistic competence but also self-assurance and motivation
among learners.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1574
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Research Design
This study employed a mixed-methods approach within a quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-
test design in a single group. This design allowed the researcher to collect both quantitative data,
to measure improvement in speech, and qualitative data, to understand the students' experiences
and perceptions. This methodological triangulation ensured the reliability and depth of the
analysis, in line with the proposal by Fetters and Molina-Azorin (2020), who argue that combining
data types improves the interpretive quality of classroom studies.
Participants
The study involved 30 tenth-grade students (16 girls and 14 boys) from the "Luz de
América" Educational Unit, a semi-rural school located in Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas. The
total tenth-grade population is 120 students. The sample was selected using purposive sampling
based on the following criteria: the students possessed an A2 level of English proficiency,
diagnosed through placement activities; they regularly attended the English language lab and had
parental consent to participate; and the group represented mixed levels of academic achievement,
which facilitated diverse peer collaboration.
Instruments
1. Pre- and post-intervention oral tests: Designed according to the CEFR A2 level oral
expression descriptors, these tests required students to describe personal experiences,
express opinions, and participate in brief role-playing activities. A rubric was used to assess
five dimensions: fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, and interaction.
2. Observation checklist: This tool focused on peer interaction, engagement, and participation
in tasks. Teachers recorded real-time observations related to turn-taking, English use during
activities, peer feedback and encouragement, and nonverbal indicators like enthusiasm.
3. Semi-structured interview guide: Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
adapted to collaborative classroom contexts, the interviews explored students' attitudes
toward collaborative activities, the perceived usefulness of peer interaction for improving
speaking skills, and suggestions for future improvements.
Procedure
The research was conducted over six consecutive weeks and included the following phases:
Diagnostic phase: An oral placement task and an initial survey were administered to
establish a baseline of oral performance and students' initial perceptions.
Intervention phase: A series of collaborative learning activities were implemented,
including role-playing simulations of situations such as shopping, giving advice, and school life;
paired storytelling using images; group problem-solving tasks, such as planning an event; and
peer interviews with presentations of results.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Research Design
This study employed a mixed-methods approach within a quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-
test design in a single group. This design allowed the researcher to collect both quantitative data,
to measure improvement in speech, and qualitative data, to understand the students' experiences
and perceptions. This methodological triangulation ensured the reliability and depth of the
analysis, in line with the proposal by Fetters and Molina-Azorin (2020), who argue that combining
data types improves the interpretive quality of classroom studies.
Participants
The study involved 30 tenth-grade students (16 girls and 14 boys) from the "Luz de
América" Educational Unit, a semi-rural school located in Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas. The
total tenth-grade population is 120 students. The sample was selected using purposive sampling
based on the following criteria: the students possessed an A2 level of English proficiency,
diagnosed through placement activities; they regularly attended the English language lab and had
parental consent to participate; and the group represented mixed levels of academic achievement,
which facilitated diverse peer collaboration.
Instruments
1. Pre- and post-intervention oral tests: Designed according to the CEFR A2 level oral
expression descriptors, these tests required students to describe personal experiences,
express opinions, and participate in brief role-playing activities. A rubric was used to assess
five dimensions: fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, and interaction.
2. Observation checklist: This tool focused on peer interaction, engagement, and participation
in tasks. Teachers recorded real-time observations related to turn-taking, English use during
activities, peer feedback and encouragement, and nonverbal indicators like enthusiasm.
3. Semi-structured interview guide: Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
adapted to collaborative classroom contexts, the interviews explored students' attitudes
toward collaborative activities, the perceived usefulness of peer interaction for improving
speaking skills, and suggestions for future improvements.
Procedure
The research was conducted over six consecutive weeks and included the following phases:
Diagnostic phase: An oral placement task and an initial survey were administered to
establish a baseline of oral performance and students' initial perceptions.
Intervention phase: A series of collaborative learning activities were implemented,
including role-playing simulations of situations such as shopping, giving advice, and school life;
paired storytelling using images; group problem-solving tasks, such as planning an event; and
peer interviews with presentations of results.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1575
Evaluation phase: A post-intervention oral test and a final survey were administered.
Additionally, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subgroup of students to explore
their perceptions in greater depth.
Data Analysis
Quantitative data, derived from pre- and post-intervention test scores and survey responses,
were analyzed using descriptive statistics to identify patterns of improvement. Qualitative data,
obtained from interviews and observations, were thematically coded and organized into emergent
categories such as motivation, peer support, and active participation. This process allowed for
triangulation of the findings and a comprehensive understanding of the impact of collaborative
strategies.
Ethical Considerations
This study followed all applicable ethical guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from
both the students and their parents or guardians. Anonymity was preserved through coding of
responses. Students were informed that they could withdraw voluntarily at any time without
academic consequences. The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the relevant school
authorities.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The implementation of collaborative activities over six weeks generated observable
and measurable gains in students' oral performance.
The quantitative results, presented in Table 1, reveal that of the 30 participants, 18 students
(60%) improved their level from A2 to A2+, demonstrating significant progress in the dimensions
assessed by the CEFR rubric. Seven students (23%) progressed from an initial A1-A2 level to a
consolidated A2 level, while five students (17%) showed no significant changes in their oral
performance.
Table 1
Distribution of post-intervention results (n=30)
Category Number of students (n) Percentage (%) Confidence interval (95%)
A2+ 18 60 42–76
A2 7 23 11–42
No change 5 17 6–35
Note: Confidence intervals were calculated using the Wilson method for binomial proportions. These quantitative
findings were complemented and enriched by qualitative data.
Surveys administered before and after the intervention indicated a substantial increase in
Evaluation phase: A post-intervention oral test and a final survey were administered.
Additionally, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subgroup of students to explore
their perceptions in greater depth.
Data Analysis
Quantitative data, derived from pre- and post-intervention test scores and survey responses,
were analyzed using descriptive statistics to identify patterns of improvement. Qualitative data,
obtained from interviews and observations, were thematically coded and organized into emergent
categories such as motivation, peer support, and active participation. This process allowed for
triangulation of the findings and a comprehensive understanding of the impact of collaborative
strategies.
Ethical Considerations
This study followed all applicable ethical guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from
both the students and their parents or guardians. Anonymity was preserved through coding of
responses. Students were informed that they could withdraw voluntarily at any time without
academic consequences. The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the relevant school
authorities.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The implementation of collaborative activities over six weeks generated observable
and measurable gains in students' oral performance.
The quantitative results, presented in Table 1, reveal that of the 30 participants, 18 students
(60%) improved their level from A2 to A2+, demonstrating significant progress in the dimensions
assessed by the CEFR rubric. Seven students (23%) progressed from an initial A1-A2 level to a
consolidated A2 level, while five students (17%) showed no significant changes in their oral
performance.
Table 1
Distribution of post-intervention results (n=30)
Category Number of students (n) Percentage (%) Confidence interval (95%)
A2+ 18 60 42–76
A2 7 23 11–42
No change 5 17 6–35
Note: Confidence intervals were calculated using the Wilson method for binomial proportions. These quantitative
findings were complemented and enriched by qualitative data.
Surveys administered before and after the intervention indicated a substantial increase in
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1576
perceived oral confidence and motivation to participate in speaking activities. Students reported
feeling more comfortable expressing themselves in English, attributing this improvement to the
supportive environment created by collaborative work. Classroom observations documented
improvements in spontaneous interaction, turn-taking, and students' ability to provide
constructive feedback to their peers.
Semi-structured interviews revealed that students particularly valued dynamic and
cooperative activities over traditional teacher-centered instruction. Participants expressed that
collaborative tasks, such as role-playing and storytelling, provided them with authentic and
meaningful contexts for practicing speaking English. Several students mentioned that their nerves
of making mistakes decreased considerably when working in small groups, as they perceived a
less consideration and more supportive environment.
These results confirm the findings reported by Slavin (1996) and Gillies (2016) on the
academic and affective benefits of cooperative learning in language classrooms. They also align
with recent research highlighting the role of collaborative learning in reducing language problems
and strengthening communicative readiness in English as a foreign language contexts.
The figures below visually illustrate the distribution of the results and the methodological
procedure implemented:
Figura 1
Distribución de resultados post-intervención (n=30)
The figure presents the percentage distribution of the levels achieved by the students after
the intervention. It shows that 60% reached A2+, 23% remained at A2, and 17% showed no
change, suggesting an overall positive impact of the collaborative activities on improving oral
performance.
perceived oral confidence and motivation to participate in speaking activities. Students reported
feeling more comfortable expressing themselves in English, attributing this improvement to the
supportive environment created by collaborative work. Classroom observations documented
improvements in spontaneous interaction, turn-taking, and students' ability to provide
constructive feedback to their peers.
Semi-structured interviews revealed that students particularly valued dynamic and
cooperative activities over traditional teacher-centered instruction. Participants expressed that
collaborative tasks, such as role-playing and storytelling, provided them with authentic and
meaningful contexts for practicing speaking English. Several students mentioned that their nerves
of making mistakes decreased considerably when working in small groups, as they perceived a
less consideration and more supportive environment.
These results confirm the findings reported by Slavin (1996) and Gillies (2016) on the
academic and affective benefits of cooperative learning in language classrooms. They also align
with recent research highlighting the role of collaborative learning in reducing language problems
and strengthening communicative readiness in English as a foreign language contexts.
The figures below visually illustrate the distribution of the results and the methodological
procedure implemented:
Figura 1
Distribución de resultados post-intervención (n=30)
The figure presents the percentage distribution of the levels achieved by the students after
the intervention. It shows that 60% reached A2+, 23% remained at A2, and 17% showed no
change, suggesting an overall positive impact of the collaborative activities on improving oral
performance.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1577
The conceptual model summarizes the proposed pedagogical mechanism: collaborative
learning activities (role-plays, storytelling, and discussions) promote positive interdependence
and individual accountability, which reduces problems and strengthens peer support. As a result,
the willingness to speak and repeated practice increase, key elements for building oral confidence.
Figura 2
Diagrama conceptual: aprendizaje colaborativo y confianza oral
The bar chart shows the number of students per level at the end of the intervention: 18
students at A2+, 7 at A2, and 5 with no change. This distribution supports the main finding: the
majority improved their oral performance.
Figura 3
Conteos por categoría (n=30)
Figura 4
Distribución porcentual (barra 100%)
Figure 4 represents the percentage distribution in a stacked bar chart (100%), showing A2+
The conceptual model summarizes the proposed pedagogical mechanism: collaborative
learning activities (role-plays, storytelling, and discussions) promote positive interdependence
and individual accountability, which reduces problems and strengthens peer support. As a result,
the willingness to speak and repeated practice increase, key elements for building oral confidence.
Figura 2
Diagrama conceptual: aprendizaje colaborativo y confianza oral
The bar chart shows the number of students per level at the end of the intervention: 18
students at A2+, 7 at A2, and 5 with no change. This distribution supports the main finding: the
majority improved their oral performance.
Figura 3
Conteos por categoría (n=30)
Figura 4
Distribución porcentual (barra 100%)
Figure 4 represents the percentage distribution in a stacked bar chart (100%), showing A2+
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1578
60%, A2 23%, and no change 17%. This chart allows for a quick reading of the proportion of
students in each category.
Figura 5
Línea de tiempo del procedimiento (6 semanas)
The timeline summarizes the study procedure: initial diagnosis (pre-test + survey),
development of weekly collaborative activities (role-plays, storytelling, discussions, problem-
solving), and final evaluation (post-test + survey + interview). This strengthens the
methodological clarity of the article.
Figura 6
Instrumentos de recolección de datos (enfoque mixto)
The scheme summarizes the instruments of the mixed approach: pre/post oral tests aligned
to the CCER A2 with a five-dimensional rubric, pre/post surveys on confidence and motivation,
observation checklist and semi-structured interviews.
Limitations and Future Directions
Despite the encouraging results, this study has some limitations that should be considered
when interpreting the findings. First, the quasi-experimental, single-group (pre-test/post-test)
design without a control group limits the ability to attribute the improvements solely to the
collaborative intervention, as other contextual factors could have played a role. It is recommended
that the study be replicated with a control group to strengthen the internal validity of the results.
Second, the six-week intervention period, while sufficient to observe initial changes, may
not be adequate to assess the long-term stability of the improvements in oral confidence. Future
research should extend the study duration and conduct follow-up studies to determine whether
the observed benefits are sustained over time.
60%, A2 23%, and no change 17%. This chart allows for a quick reading of the proportion of
students in each category.
Figura 5
Línea de tiempo del procedimiento (6 semanas)
The timeline summarizes the study procedure: initial diagnosis (pre-test + survey),
development of weekly collaborative activities (role-plays, storytelling, discussions, problem-
solving), and final evaluation (post-test + survey + interview). This strengthens the
methodological clarity of the article.
Figura 6
Instrumentos de recolección de datos (enfoque mixto)
The scheme summarizes the instruments of the mixed approach: pre/post oral tests aligned
to the CCER A2 with a five-dimensional rubric, pre/post surveys on confidence and motivation,
observation checklist and semi-structured interviews.
Limitations and Future Directions
Despite the encouraging results, this study has some limitations that should be considered
when interpreting the findings. First, the quasi-experimental, single-group (pre-test/post-test)
design without a control group limits the ability to attribute the improvements solely to the
collaborative intervention, as other contextual factors could have played a role. It is recommended
that the study be replicated with a control group to strengthen the internal validity of the results.
Second, the six-week intervention period, while sufficient to observe initial changes, may
not be adequate to assess the long-term stability of the improvements in oral confidence. Future
research should extend the study duration and conduct follow-up studies to determine whether
the observed benefits are sustained over time.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1579
Finally, the generalizability of these findings is limited to the specific rural context
described. It is suggested that the research be replicated in other educational settings, such as
urban and semi-urban contexts, as well as with students at different CEFR levels, to assess the
transferability of collaborative strategies across diverse English language teaching contexts.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study demonstrate that collaborative learning strategies significantly
improved students' confidence and participation in oral English activities. The supportive peer
environment fostered a sense of security, engagement, and motivation that facilitated the
development of communicative skills. Collaborative activities, such as role-playing, group
storytelling, and team problem-solving, provided authentic contexts for students to use English
meaningfully. Participants not only increased their confidence in speaking but also demonstrated
greater fluency, vocabulary, and willingness to communicate in English.
In rural educational settings with limited technological and linguistic resources,
collaborative learning emerges as an effective, low-cost, and inclusive pedagogical strategy for
improving oral skills. These findings align with global research advocating for active learning,
peer interaction, and student-centered practices in teaching English as a foreign language.
Educators are encouraged to systematically integrate collaborative activities into their
lesson plans, structuring clear roles and providing rubric-guided feedback to maximize the
benefits of this methodology. Furthermore, educational institutions should consider teacher
training in collaborative learning strategies as a priority to strengthen the quality of English
language teaching in rural contexts.
Finally, the generalizability of these findings is limited to the specific rural context
described. It is suggested that the research be replicated in other educational settings, such as
urban and semi-urban contexts, as well as with students at different CEFR levels, to assess the
transferability of collaborative strategies across diverse English language teaching contexts.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study demonstrate that collaborative learning strategies significantly
improved students' confidence and participation in oral English activities. The supportive peer
environment fostered a sense of security, engagement, and motivation that facilitated the
development of communicative skills. Collaborative activities, such as role-playing, group
storytelling, and team problem-solving, provided authentic contexts for students to use English
meaningfully. Participants not only increased their confidence in speaking but also demonstrated
greater fluency, vocabulary, and willingness to communicate in English.
In rural educational settings with limited technological and linguistic resources,
collaborative learning emerges as an effective, low-cost, and inclusive pedagogical strategy for
improving oral skills. These findings align with global research advocating for active learning,
peer interaction, and student-centered practices in teaching English as a foreign language.
Educators are encouraged to systematically integrate collaborative activities into their
lesson plans, structuring clear roles and providing rubric-guided feedback to maximize the
benefits of this methodology. Furthermore, educational institutions should consider teacher
training in collaborative learning strategies as a priority to strengthen the quality of English
language teaching in rural contexts.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1580
REFERENCES
Alcívar Loor, K. V., et al. (2023). Cooperative, collaborative learning enhances students' ability
to improve their oral communication. Revista Científica Multidisciplinaria, 8(6), 1939–
1952.
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A
handbook for college faculty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Brown, H. D. (2015). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (4th
ed.). Pearson Education.
Burns, A. (2019). Action research in English language teaching: Contributions and recent
developments.
Language Teaching, 52(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000323
Chou, M. H. (2018). Speaking problems and strategy use for learning English as a foreign
language in full and partial immersion contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 52(3), 611–633.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.455
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.
Dana, I., & Aminatun, D. (2022). Investigating the causes of speaking problem among EFL adult
learners. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 13(4), 40–52.
Dörnyei, Z., & Murphey, T. (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom. Cambridge
University Press. Ellis, R. (2017). Task-based language teaching: Concepts, classroom
practice, and lesson planning. Oxford University Press.
Fetters, M. D., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2020). Fundamentals of mixed methods research. SAGE
Publications.
Ghaith, G. (2018). Teacher perceptions of the impact of cooperative learning on English as a
foreign language writing. Language Teaching Research, 22(5), 582–602.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816684363
Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal
of Teacher Education, 41(3), 39–54.
Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The
Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132.
Jacobs, G. M., & McCafferty, S. G. (2017). The role of collaborative learning in second language
education. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0500
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2017). Cooperative learning. University of Minnesota Press.
Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan cooperative learning. Kagan Publishing.
REFERENCES
Alcívar Loor, K. V., et al. (2023). Cooperative, collaborative learning enhances students' ability
to improve their oral communication. Revista Científica Multidisciplinaria, 8(6), 1939–
1952.
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A
handbook for college faculty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Brown, H. D. (2015). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (4th
ed.). Pearson Education.
Burns, A. (2019). Action research in English language teaching: Contributions and recent
developments.
Language Teaching, 52(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000323
Chou, M. H. (2018). Speaking problems and strategy use for learning English as a foreign
language in full and partial immersion contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 52(3), 611–633.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.455
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.
Dana, I., & Aminatun, D. (2022). Investigating the causes of speaking problem among EFL adult
learners. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 13(4), 40–52.
Dörnyei, Z., & Murphey, T. (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom. Cambridge
University Press. Ellis, R. (2017). Task-based language teaching: Concepts, classroom
practice, and lesson planning. Oxford University Press.
Fetters, M. D., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2020). Fundamentals of mixed methods research. SAGE
Publications.
Ghaith, G. (2018). Teacher perceptions of the impact of cooperative learning on English as a
foreign language writing. Language Teaching Research, 22(5), 582–602.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816684363
Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal
of Teacher Education, 41(3), 39–54.
Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The
Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132.
Jacobs, G. M., & McCafferty, S. G. (2017). The role of collaborative learning in second language
education. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0500
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2017). Cooperative learning. University of Minnesota Press.
Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan cooperative learning. Kagan Publishing.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1581
Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2009). Reticence in oral English language classrooms: A case study in
China. TESOL Quarterly, 43(1), 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-
7249.2009.tb00295.x
Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley
Blackwell.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gregersen, T. (2012). Emotions that facilitate language learning: The
positive-broadening power of the imagination. Studies in Second Language Learning and
Teaching, 2(2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2012.2.2.4
Richards, J. C. (2017). Curriculum development in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.
Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2009). Reticence in oral English language classrooms: A case study in
China. TESOL Quarterly, 43(1), 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-
7249.2009.tb00295.x
Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley
Blackwell.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gregersen, T. (2012). Emotions that facilitate language learning: The
positive-broadening power of the imagination. Studies in Second Language Learning and
Teaching, 2(2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2012.2.2.4
Richards, J. C. (2017). Curriculum development in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1582
ANNEXES
Instruments Content Validation Dossier Throough Experts’ Judgement Cover Letter
Certificate of Instrument Validations (Dependent and Independent Variables)
ANNEXES
Instruments Content Validation Dossier Throough Experts’ Judgement Cover Letter
Certificate of Instrument Validations (Dependent and Independent Variables)
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1583
Appendix A: Pre-study Survey
Appendix A: Pre-study Survey
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1584
Appendix B: IELTS-Inspired Speaking Rubric
Appendix C: Post-Study Survey
Appendix B: IELTS-Inspired Speaking Rubric
Appendix C: Post-Study Survey
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1585
Appendix D: Research Methodology
Appendix D: Data Collection and Analysis
Appendix D: Research Methodology
Appendix D: Data Collection and Analysis
Vol. 13/ Núm. 2 2026 pág. 1586
Appendix D: Results Analysis
Appendix D: Results Analysis