The oral proficiency test was given to both the experimental and control group which served as the pre-test and post-test. The pre-test was administered before the researcher handled the two classes for twelve weeks. Statistical treatment was used such as t-test of dependent sample to determine whether there was a significant difference on the oral proficiency of the students before and after the implementation of the experiment. On the other hand, the t-test of independent sample was utilized to determine the significant difference between two groups. The gained mean score was not dramatic because the length of time carried during the intervention was not sufficient. More over the researcher found out that the fourth quarter period was not appropriate time to extract data because there are distractions when classes are about to end. That is, students’ focus on the lesson is affected. Another reason is that students’ apprehension on communication is still observed in every small group of students. The t-test of dependent samples revealed that there is a significant difference between the pre-test and post-test both the experimental and control group on the oral proficiency of the students. Naturally, it is expected to have an increase from pre-test to post-test because the researcher employed an intervention. This means that cooperative learning had an influence/impact on the oral proficiency of the students but this influence is quite minimal. On the other hand, the t-test of independent sample revealed that there is no significant difference between the experimental and control group which means that cooperative learning has no impact on the oral proficiency of the students. This interpretation is more valid because the purpose of this study is to investigate if there is a significant difference between the experimental group and control group.
ISSN 2244-6338 (Online)
ISSN 1908 9147 (Print)
Philippine E-Journals
