Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Linguistic, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal
Volume 7 Nomor 1, Juli-Desember 2023
e-ISSN: 2597-3819
p-ISSN: 2597-9248
DOI : https://doi.org/10.31539/leea.v7i1.6603
88
COOPERATIVE LEARNING FOR IMPROVING
STUDENTS’ L2 WILLINGNESS TO WRITE IN CREATIVE
WRITING
Hilarius Raditya Priambada Purba1
Universitas Internasional Batam
Elsha Ridzky Fadila Darsono2
Universitas Internasional Batam
hilarius@uib.ac.id
Submit, 19-06-2023 Accepted, 08-11-2023 Publish, 10-11-2023
ABSTRACT
This research aims to investigate the effectiveness of cooperative learning in
improving students' L2 willingness to write in creative writing. Classroom action research
is the method that will be used to measure student learning or achievement as a result of an
intervention to assess the effectiveness of the instrument in the study; a pre-test and post-
test are commonly used instruments in classroom action research. The study's findings
revealed that the classroom action research group’s L2 willingness to write in creative
writing improved significantly after the cycle of cooperative learning instruction. The
findings support cooperative learning’s effectiveness in improving students’ L2 willingness
to write in creative writing. According to the findings, incorporating cooperative learning
into language instruction is a promising approach for improving writing skills in the L2
context.
Keywords: Classroom Action Research, Cooperative Learning, Creative Writing, L2
Willingness to Write
INTRODUCTION
Mastery of writing skills is essential not only for school children but for everyone
(Yusuf et al., 2019). A Second Language (L2) student in Indonesia should master writing
skills for written communication and academic writing purposes, such as letters, essays,
89
papers, articles, journals, and theses (Toba et al., 2019; Yusuf et al., 2019). Writing is one
of the four basic skills. According to Rosa Indah (2022), writing is commonly regarded as
the most difficult skill to master, not only because it requires mastery of many English
skills such as reading, speaking, and listening. White (1986) defines writing as the process
of expressing ideas, information, knowledge, or experience through writing and
comprehending the writing to acquire knowledge or information to share and learn.
Students may struggle with writing skills in English class due to various factors.
Dwi et al. (2019). Moses and Mohamad (2019) and Toba et al. (2019) stated that
L2 students face a variety of challenges in writing, such as a lack of vocabulary, poor
grammar, poor spelling, readiness, and exposure to books and reading materials. A lack of
writing practice, a dislike of writing, writing anxiety, negative perceptions, low motivation,
and insufficient writing time can all contribute to this. At the same time, English teachers
face the challenge of selecting suitable teaching strategies to overcome student
apprehension about writing, especially in Indonesia, where English is treated as a second
language. English teachers worldwide use various strategies to teach writing in the
classroom. Several activities have been designed to give students experience the writing
process and the separate components, such as journal writing, peer conferring,
collaboration in small groups, brainstorming, outlining, and peer revision (Galbraith &
Rijlaarsdam, 1999).
The cooperation of Cooperative Learning, or CL, is one of the strategies that are
thought to suit the teaching of writing (Altun & Sabah, 2020). According to Slavin (1980),
cooperative learning is an old educational concept that has seen a significant revival in
educational research and practice in recent years. The term refers to classroom techniques
in which students work on learning activities in small groups and are rewarded or
recognized based on the performance of their group. Johnson & Johnson (1994) also stated
cooperative learning is an effective strategy for students and positively impacts the
classroom and school climate. It has been confirmed by teachers in classrooms ranging
from preschool to graduate school. However, the significance of emphasizing cooperative
learning in the classroom extends beyond academic achievement, positive relationships,
and psychological health.
90
The concept of cooperative learning emerged from 3 decades of research in social
relationships, group dynamics, and learning (Antil et al., 1998). The structural approach to
cooperative learning is based on the development, analysis, and systematic application of
structures, which are content-free methods of organizing social interaction in the classroom
(Slavin, 1980). Meanwhile, because it is one of the teaching skills, teachers are expected to
be able to use a variety of methods effectively. A good teacher’s ability to produce
enjoyable learning, variations, and methods of teaching will be a good start for student
learning outcomes (Juita & Widiyarto, 2019).
L2 writing is critical for second language learners, as it allows them to communicate
effectively in a range of contexts and to develop their overall language proficiency.
Segundo Marcos et al. (2020) and Vakilifard et al. (2020) state it is beneficial to use
cooperative learning to teach L2 writing because it promotes meaningful interactions,
knowledge sharing, and a supportive learning environment. Ultimately, these benefits can
improve students' willingness to write in L2 and assist them in their language learning
goals. According to Kaivanpanah et al. (2019), the willingness to write denotes a person's
desire or eagerness to engage in the act of writing. It is influenced by a number of factors,
including interest in the topic, motivation, confidence in one's writing abilities, and the time
and effort required to complete a written piece. L. Studies Pourfeiz (2022) stated that some
people struggle with writing or do not find it to be a particularly enjoyable activity. They
may be intimidated by the writing process, lack confidence in their abilities, or simply lack
interest in the subject at hand (Ghufron & Ermawati, 2018). These individuals’ willingness
to write may be lower, and they may require additional support or encouragement to write
(Wachholz (1996) Writing Self-Efficacy in High and Low Apprehensive Writers, n.d.).
Rafiee Abbasian-Naghneh (2020) also stated that individuals' willingness to write can have
a significant impact on their success in a variety of contexts, such as academics,
professional settings, or personal pursuits. Individuals can improve their writing skills and
increase their willingness to participate in this valuable activity by developing a positive
attitude toward writing and seeking out opportunities to practice and improve.
Cooperative learning can be an effective instructional strategy for increasing
students’ willingness to write in their second language (Abramczyk & Jurkowski, 2020).
According to the observations, students rarely practice writing in English classes because
91
they are afraid of making grammatical errors and are unable to develop ideas in creative
writing. As a result, students' unwillingness to write. The goal of this research is to see if
cooperative learning increases students’ L2 willingness to write.
However, in the current study, cooperative learning is used to determine whether
the strategy can improve students’ L2 willingness to write in high school by conducting
Classroom Action Research. Students at this level are expected to master the writing skill
as well as learn other English skills (Zaki, 2022). The objective is to test whether the
strategy can improve students’ willingness to write. As a result, this study, titled
Cooperative Learning for Improving Students' L2 WTW in Creative Writing (CAR), is
being carried out. The research question in this study is: How does a cooperative learning
strategy help students improve their L2 Willingness to Write in creative writing?
LITERATURE REVIEW
L2 Writing
Writing is a complex and dynamic process of generating, organizing, and
communicating ideas through the use of language (Flower & Hayes, 1981). According to
Flower and Hayes (1981), writing is a process that involves using language to create and
organize ideas.
The process of producing written text in a second language, typically in an academic
or professional context, is referred to as L2 writing (Tahmouresi & Papi, 2021). In recent
years, second language acquisition scholars have concentrated on a variety of aspects
related to L2 writing, such as the role of feedback and assessment and the relationship
between language proficiency and writing development (Yu et al., 2019). In L2 writing
assessment, individuals learning a second language are evaluated on their ability to write.
Golparvar & Khafi (2021), Stapleton & Leung Ka Kin (2019), and Wei et al. (2020) stated
that L2 writing assessment can take many forms, including standardized tests, teacher-made
tests, portfolios, self-assessments, peer-assessments, and analytical scoring rubric. The L2
writing assessment typically evaluates multiple writing dimensions, including content,
organization, vocabulary, grammar, mechanics, and discourse features.
Cooperative Learning Strategy
Cooperative learning has grown in popularity in recent years as pedagogical trends
around the world have changed (Ismail & Al Allaq, 2019). It involves students working in
92
groups to achieve common objectives (Silalahi & Hutauruk, 2020). Students are
responsible for their own learning as well as the learning of their peers in this approach.
Positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face interaction, and the
development of interpersonal and small-group skills are all emphasized in cooperative
learning (Abrami & Chambers, 1996).
Nevertheless, cooperative learning has several challenges that students and teachers
must overcome if they are to reap the benefits it provides. According to the study B. Studies
& Heritage (2019), cooperative learning has some challenges, including a lack of awareness
and coordination among group members. It is also confirmed that lack of cooperative
learning experience is a problem.
Zaman (2020) stated that the goal of implementing a cooperative learning strategy
is to achieve three important goals. The first goal of cooperative learning is to increase
student activity on important academic tasks (academic achievement). The second goal is
to increase tolerance and acceptance of people with different abilities. The third goal is to
teach collaboration skills and collaboration with students (social skills development). In a
word, cooperative learning methods assist students in becoming real language users both
inside and outside of the English classroom. While being guided by the teacher, students
can learn to cooperate with others and express their own opinions, ideas, and feelings.
L2 WTW (Willingness to Write)
L2 WTW describes an L2 learner's willingness, motivation, and confidence to
engage in target language writing tasks (Tahmouresi & Papi, 2021). Motivation is one of
the most important factors influencing L2 learners’ success and performance in the
language learning process (Meşe & Sevilen, 2021). Various factors influence this construct,
including the learner’s prior writing experiences, self-efficacy beliefs, attitudes toward
writing, and the task and context in which the writing occurs (Puspita & Iriani, 2022).
The quality of L2 willingness to write refers to a language learner's positive
characteristics and attitude toward engaging in writing activities in their second language.
It reflects their eagerness and motivation to participate in written communication in the
target language. Students who demonstrate a high level of L2 willingness to write exhibit
enthusiasm, active engagement, perseverance, and an intrinsic drive to express themselves
effectively in writing (Jang & Lee, 2019). This characteristic demonstrates their dedication
93
to overcoming language barriers and developing proficiency in written communication in
a second language. Aside from the quality of L2's willingness to write, there are some
indicators to consider. Indicators of L2 willingness to write are observable cues or
behaviors that indicate a student's motivation and readiness to engage in second-language
writing activities. It denotes the student's active participation, perseverance, intrinsic
motivation, and independent participation in writing tasks. These indicators reflect the
student's positive attitude and enthusiasm for writing in their second language, as well as
their commitment to improving their writing skills in the face of challenges or setbacks.
Students who exhibit these indicators show a willingness to overcome language barriers
and actively develop their proficiency in writing in a second language.
Edmund (1958) stated that prior writing experiences refer to the learner’s previous
writing experiences in their L2. These experiences, whether positive or negative, can shape
a learner’s attitudes and beliefs about writing in their second language. The learner’s
perception of their own ability to write in the L2 is referred to as self-efficacy beliefs. If a
learner has high self-efficacy beliefs, they are more likely to be willing to write in the L2
and participate in writing tasks because they believe they have the necessary skills and
abilities (Qiu & Lee, 2020). According to Bachman (1987) and Musgrove (1998), the
learner's general feelings about writing in the L2 are referred to as how they feel toward
writing. Positive attitudes toward writing can improve willingness to write, whereas
negative attitudes can decrease willingness to write. The task and context in which the
writing takes place also have an impact on the learner’s willingness to write. The
complexity and relevance of the writing task, for example, can influence the learner’s
motivation and willingness to engage in the task (Kreeft Peyton et al., 1990). The context
of a writing task, such as its purpose and intended audience, can also influence the learner's
motivation and willingness to write (Al-Ahdal & Alqasham, 2020).
L2 willingness to write refers to individuals learning a second language's
willingness to engage in the act of writing in that language (Yu et al., 2020). Developing a
willingness to write in a second language is an important aspect of second language
acquisition because it can help people improve their language skills and communicate more
effectively (Yu et al., 2019). Lee & Yuan (2021) stated that journaling, writing exercises,
collaborative writing tasks, and writing assignments that relate to the individual's personal
94
interests or experiences are examples of activities that promote the willingness to write in
a second language.
Several studies have been conducted to investigate L2 WTW and its impact on L2
writing performance. As an example, Rafiee Abbasian-Naghneh (2020) discovered that
there were positive correlations between teacher/peer feedback, autonomy, L2 motivation,
L2 learners’ attitude, and L2WTW. However, no significant relationship was found
between genre knowledge and L2 writers’ self-confidence and L2WTW in this study. In
conclusion, L2 WTW is able to understand and encourage L2 learners' willingness and
motivation to write in the target language, which can result in improved writing proficiency
as well as increased engagement and satisfaction with the writing process.
RESEARCH METHOD
Research Design
Pre-tests and post-tests are commonly used instruments in Classroom Action
Research to measure student learning or achievement as a result of an intervention. A two-
section test will be used to conduct this research: pre-test and post-test. The pre-test assesses
students' current writing situation as well as their willingness to write before the writing
strategy is implemented. This includes evaluating their current writing abilities, strengths
and weaknesses, and willingness to write. As for the post-test, it evaluates students' writing
skills after implementing the writing strategy. This can include evaluating their ability to
use the strategy, as well as their writing fluency, accuracy, and organization, among other
aspects.
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the writing strategy, the researchers may
compare the results of the pre-test and post-test. If the post-test results show a significant
improvement in students’ writing skills when compared to the pre-test results, the writing
strategy was successful.
Data Collection
The Classroom Action Research method was used by the researchers in this study.
According to Wulandari et al. (2019), a type of research methodology used by educators to
improve their teaching practices and student outcomes is classroom action research. A
cyclical process of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting on classroom practices and
their effects on student learning is involved. The researcher instructed students to do
creative writing individually during the first cycle; at this point, the researcher had not
95
implemented the cooperative learning strategy. In order to determine students' abilities, the
researcher observes and reflects on the results of the student's work. The findings revealed
that students' willingness to write was extremely low. The researcher then redesigned the
plan of action, observed, and reflected in the second cycle. The researcher introduced the
cooperative learning strategy to students during the second cycle. Students were asked to
work in groups to do creative writing. The researchers divided each student into eight
groups of five or six people. The students were divided into groups based on their ability,
with one or two students excelling in English in each group. The results of this second cycle
demonstrated great success, with an increase in students’ willingness to write.
Data Analysis Procedures
Data analysis in a classroom action research context can be approached in the
following ways:
1. From the fourth week of January until the second week of February, researchers
conducted class observation. It is critical to conduct class observation in order to
collect the necessary data. The data will be processed by conducting classroom
action research.
2. This process involves four steps: planning, action, observation, and reflection
(Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988).
3. The mean score was calculated by taking the average scores of the pre-test and post-
test results.
4. Students’ writing is assessed based on the scoring rubric’s criteria, which include
content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics. Following that, the
results are objectively and comparatively analyzed by comparing test scores over
cycles.
A pre-test will be administered to determine students' willingness to write to implement
the strategy into action; once the results are obtained, the researchers will implement the
strategy into action. The students will then be given a post-test to determine whether the
strategy is effective in improving their willingness to write. A scoring rubric will be used
to evaluate the results of their writing.
96
Table 1. The scoring rubric of writing adapted from (PGRI Tulungagung, 2019)
Components of
writing
Poor
1
Fair
2
Good
3
Excellent
4
Content (C)
Present no clear
information
Present the
information with
some details
Present the
information with
details in parts of
the paragraph
Present the
information with
well-chosen
details across the
paragraph
Vocabulary (V)
There are
numerous lexical
errors that
interfere with
comprehension
Vocabulary errors
can occasionally
make
comprehending
more difficult
Error in
vocabulary choice
are few and do not
interfere with
understanding
Good in
vocabulary choice
Grammar (G)
Many errors in
grammar choice
interfere with
understanding
Error in grammar
choice, and
sometimes
interfere with
understanding
Error in grammar
choice are few and
do not interfere
with
understanding
Good in grammar
Mechanics (M)
Error in spelling,
punctuation, and
capitalization
severely interfere
with
understanding.
Errors in spelling,
punctuation, and
capitalization
sometimes
interfere with
understanding.
Error in spelling,
punctuation, and
capitalization are a
few
Good in spelling,
punctuation, and
capitalization
FINDING
The post-test score results showed that students performed better than the pre-test
score results in creative writing. Tables 1 and 2 compare the main scores in the four writing
components of content, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics in the pre-test (Table 1) and
post-test (Table 2).
Researchers conducted a pre-test on students before implementing the cooperative
learning strategy. They were asked to write a personal letter apologizing, asking for help,
expressing feelings, and discussing their activities. The writing pre-test was given to 43
students. The pre-test average is 11.20, which is considered average. The pre-test score is
shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The average pre-test score of the students
Aspects
Pre-test
Category
Content
3.53
Good
Vocabulary
2.46
Fair
Grammar
1.51
Poor
Mechanics
2.83
Fair
Average
11.20
Average
97
Although the pre-test results indicated that students' writing ability and willingness
to write were average, the goal of this study was to determine how students' writing ability
and willingness to write could be improved through the Cooperative Learning (CL)
Strategy. Furthermore, a post-test session was held, and the cooperative learning strategy
was used in this post-test session. The researchers divided each student into eight groups,
each of which had five or six members. The researchers divided the students into groups
based on their ability so that each group had one or two who excelled in English. The results
of the post-test were compared to the results of the pre-test in Table 2.
Table 2. The average pre-test and post-test scores of students
Aspects
Pre-test
Post-test
Improvement
Content
3.53
4.00
0.47
Vocabulary
2.46
3.39
0.93
Grammar
1.51
3.51
2.00
Mechanics
2.83
3.51
0.68
Average
11.20
14.41
0.09
Good
The table shows that the Cooperative Learning (CL) strategy can help students
improve their writing skills. The student's average score on the pre-test was 11.20,
indicating an average level of writing ability. Students' scores increased by 0.09 to 14.41
after the implementation of CL. As shown in the table, the students' scores increased,
indicating that CL is a very effective approach to teaching writing and improving students'
willingness to write. The content aspect increased by 0.47, from 3.53 to 4.00, followed by
the vocabulary aspect, which increased by 0.93 from 2.46 to 3.39, grammar by 2.00, from
1.51 to 3.51, and mechanics by 0.68, from 2.83 to 3.51. Although the increase obtained by
students is statistically significant, it is sufficient to demonstrate that CL can increase
students' willingness to write. In line with this, students gave positive responses during the
learning process; almost all students were cooperative with the tasks assigned to them, and
they were enthusiastic about completing them. The cooperative learning strategy improved
students' willingness to write in addition to improving their grades.
Following the implementation of the cooperative learning strategy, the researcher
also interviewed several students, asking if they felt their willingness to write had increased.
Did the students’ self-confidence improve? Students felt that they became more
enthusiastic about writing because the strategy allowed them to exchange ideas with their
98
friends, making students more understanding of each other’s perspectives in order to find
the best answer. After implementing the cooperative learning strategy, students can develop
and improve their writing confidence, which is beneficial for improving writing skills in
English as a second language.
DISCUSSION
This study examines how a cooperative learning strategy helps students improve
their willingness to write in creative writing. The researchers used the Classroom Action
research (CAR) method to find the answer. It has been shown in this study that cooperative
learning strategies can increase engagement and writing skills among students.
Pre-tests and post-tests were carried out in this research. Cooperative Learning
strategies were not used in the pre-test. The pre-test assesses students' current writing
situation as well as their willingness to write before the writing strategy is implemented.
This includes evaluating their current writing abilities, strengths, weaknesses, and
willingness to write. The cooperative learning strategy was implemented four weeks after
the pre-test in the post-test. The students' writing test scores were 14.41, which improved
by 0.09 from the pre-test result. The class had also become more fun, interactive, and full
of discussion. This is possible because cooperative learning strategies can help students
reduce anxiety while also developing motivation and interest (Language et al., 2021). This
is also supported by Abrami and Chambers (1996). Cooperative learning emphasizes
positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face interaction, and the
development of interpersonal and small-group skills.
The study found that the Cooperative Learning strategy is an effective learning
method to improve students' willingness to write in creative writing. The students were
highly motivated to complete the post-test task with their classmates; employing this
strategy may improve their willingness to write. That is supported by Qiu & Lee (2020),
students believe they have the necessary skills and abilities, and learners who have high
self-efficacy beliefs are more likely to be willing to write in an L2 and participate in writing
tasks. When compared to the pre-test and post-test, students' writing content appeared to
have increased by 0.47. In addition, it appears that their vocabulary improved by 0.93,
though this was statistically significant. Students frequently made mistakes in word choice
99
and word form. Students' work demonstrated relevance to the assigned topic, provided
detailed information, and matched the text's social purposes.
Students' grammar was also affected by the pre-test, which resulted in an
improvement of 2.00 in their grammar score when compared to the pre-test score. Students
made several mistakes in tense, word order, articles, pronouns, and prepositions, and the
meaning of the sentence was rarely obscured. Cooperative learning helps students improve
their language use skills during the post-test (Mohammad & Mohammad, 2018). Students
understood how to make the sentence effective, but there are still a few tense, article, and
pronoun errors in their writing, but it has improved. According to Huisman et al. (2018),
reviewing classmates' work improved students' grammar and spelling. Low scores may
result from cooperative learning focusing on meaning-making rather than grammar and
spelling.
Prior to the implementation of the cooperative learning strategy, students made
numerous errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing. Nonetheless, as
a result of the strategy, students improved in terms of mechanics, as evidenced by fewer
errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing than previously. As a
result, students were able to improve on errors made during the pre-test session. The
findings are in line with Yusuf et al. (2019) the students significantly improved their writing
efficiency by using components, mechanics, grammar, vocabulary, and organization.
Moreover, there was a significant difference between the pre-test mean score of
11.20 and the post-test mean score of 14.41, which was increased by 0.09. The process of
working together on assignments helps students improve their writing and polish their
techniques. In line with a study by Dendup and Onthanee (2020), a cooperative learning
strategy can assist a group of students in utilizing the potential strengths of all group
members to achieve their goals.
CONCLUSION
This study investigated whether the strategy was effective in improving their
willingness to write in creative writing. A pre-test and post-test were carried out to assess
the strategy's effectiveness. This study found that the Cooperative Learning Strategy was
effective in improving students' willingness to write, with students' post-test scores
improving in every aspect of the rubric. This is evidenced by the significant advancement
100
score in the pre-test and post-test. The result in the pre-test is 11.20; the cooperative
learning strategy was not used in this pre-test. As a result, researchers used a cooperative
learning strategy on the post-test, and the total average reached 14.41; because a
cooperative learning strategy has been implemented, this may increase.
The researchers suggest teachers use cooperative learning strategies to make
learning more enjoyable and purposeful because employing this strategy can boost students'
confidence in interacting and socializing. Furthermore, the researchers recommend that the
other researchers conduct additional research on cooperative learning strategies with a
variety of topics and fun objectives.
REFERENCES
Abramczyk, A., & Jurkowski, S. (2020). Cooperative learning as an evidence-based
teaching strategy: what teachers know, believe, and how they use it. Journal of
Education for Teaching, 46(3), 296–308.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1733402
Abrami, P. C., & Chambers, B. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement:
Comments on slavin. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 70–79.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0005
Altun, M., & Sabah, R. (2020). The effect of cooperative learning strategies in the
enhancement of EFL learners’ speaking skills. Asian EFL Journal, 27(2), 144–171.
Antil, L. R., Jenkins, J. R., Wayne, S. K., & Vadasy, P. F. (1998). Cooperative learning:
Prevalence, conceptualizations, and the relation between research and practice.
American Educational Research Journal, 35(3), 419–454.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312035003419
Bachman, L. D. C. L. F. (1987). From the SAGE Social Science Collections. All Rights.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 9(2), 20–33.
Dendup, T., & Onthanee, A. (2020). Effectiveness of cooperative learning on English
communicative ability of 4th-grade students in Bhutan. International Journal of
Instruction, 13(1), 255–266. https://doi.org/10.29333/IJI.2020.13117A
Dwi, A., Politeknik, J., & Curup, R. (2019). Students’ Writing Ability on English
Descriptive Text at Grade VIII in SMPN 33 Padang. Academic Journal of English
Language and Education, 3(1).
Edmund, N. R. (1958). A study of the relationship between prior experiences and the
quality of creative writing done by seventh-grade pupils. Journal of Educational
Research, 51(7), 481–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1958.10882493
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College
Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365. https://doi.org/10.2307/356600
Galbraith, D., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1999). Effective strategies for the teaching and learning
of writing. Learning and Instruction, 9(2), 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-
4752(98)00039-5
Ghufron, M. A., & Ermawati, S. (2018). The strengths and weaknesses of cooperative
learning and problem-based learning in EFL writing class: Teachers and students’
101
perspectives. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 657–672.
https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11441a
Golparvar, S. E., & Khafi, A. (2021). The role of L2 writing self-efficacy in integrated
writing strategy use and performance. Assessing Writing, 47(November 2020),
100504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100504
Huisman, B., Saab, N., Broek, P. Van Den, Driel, J. Van, & Group, F. (2018). Assessment
& Evaluation in Higher Education The impact of formative peer feedback on higher
education students ' academic writing : a Meta-Analysis. Assessment & Evaluation
in Higher Education, 0(0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1545896
Ismail, S. A. A., & Al Allaq, K. (2019). The Nature of Cooperative Learning and
Differentiated Instruction Practices in English Classes. SAGE Open, 9(2).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019856450
Jang, Y., & Lee, J. (2019). The effects of ideal and ought-to L2 selves on Korean EFL
learners’ writing strategy use and writing quality. In Reading and Writing (Vol. 32,
Issue 5, pp. 1129–1148). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9903-0
Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1994). An overview of cooperative learning. Creativity
and Collaborative Learning: pp. 31–44.
Juita, H. R., & Widiyarto, S. (2019). The Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning Methods:
A case study of writing learning at Junior High School. 257(Icollite 2018), 266–
268. https://doi.org/10.2991/icollite-18.2019.58
Kaivanpanah, S., Ghonsooly, B., & Beynabaj, N. S. (2019). Willingness to Write in EFL
Contexts. Applied Research on English Language, 8(3), 339–364.
https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2019.114160.1387
Kreeft Peyton, J., Staton, J., Richardson, G., & Wolfram, W. (1990). The Influence of
Writing Task on ESL Students’ Written Production. Research in the Teaching of
English, 24(2), 142–171.
Language, E., Sultan, U. P., & Malim, T. (2021). ASIAN PENDIDIKAN A Review of
Cooperative Learning in EFL Classroom. 1, 1–9.
Lee, I., & Yuan, R. (Eric). (2021). Understanding L2 writing teacher expertise. Journal of
Second Language Writing, 52(July), 100755.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100755
Meşe, E., & Sevilen, Ç. (2021). Factors influencing EFL students’ motivation in online
learning: A qualitative case study. Journal of Educational Technology & Online
Learning, 4(1), 11–22.
Mohammad, D. H., & Mohammad, F. (2018). EFL Learners’ Attitudes towards
Cooperative Learning in the Writing Skill. International Journal of Language &
Linguistics, 5(4), 92–98. https://doi.org/10.30845/ijll.v5n4p11
Mohammed Hassan Al-Ahdal, A. A., & Alqasham, F. H. (2020). Efl Writing Tasks and the
Application of the Concept of Situatedness: Evaluating the Theoretical and
Practical Aspects of the Saudi Efl Context. TESOL International Journal, 15(4), 1–
11.
Moses, R. N., & Mohamad, M. (2019). Challenges Faced by Students and Teachers on
Writing Skills in ESL Contexts: A Literature Review. Creative Education, 10(13),
3385–3391. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1013260
Musgrove, L. E. (1998). Attitudes Toward Writing. Jaepl, 4(Winter), 1–9.
PGRI Tulungagung, S. (2019). USING DICTOGLOSS TECHNIQUE TO IMPROVE
STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL 1) Moh. Choirul Huda 2) Piping Rahadianto.
102
English Community Journal, 3(1), 307–316.
Puspita, L. D., & Iriani, R. D. D. S. (2022). The Relationship Between Writing Motivation
and Writing Self Efficacy in Students Who Become Writers. Psikologia : Jurnal
Psikologi, 7, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.21070/psikologia.v7i0.1690
Qiu, X., & Lee, M. K. (2020). Regulated learning and self-efficacy beliefs in peer
collaborative writing: An exploratory study of L2 learners’ written products, task
discussions, and self-reports. System, 93, 102312.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102312
Rafiee, M., & Abbasian-Naghneh, S. (2020). Willingness to Write (WTW): Development
of a model in EFL writing classrooms. Cogent Education, 7(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1847710
Rosa Indah, C. H. (2022). The Analysis of Generic Structure of Descriptive Text Used By
Students of Elementary School 1 Penambangan Probolinggo. Journey: Journal of
English Language and Pedagogy, 5(1), 18–23.
https://doi.org/10.33503/journey.v5i1.1790
Segundo Marcos, R. I., López Ferández, V., Daza González, M. T., & Phillips-Silver, J.
(2020). Promoting children’s creative thinking through reading and writing in a
cooperative learning classroom. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36(January),
100663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100663
Silalahi, T. F., & Hutauruk, A. F. (2020). The Application of Cooperative Learning Model
during Online Learning in the Pandemic Period. Budapest International Research
and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal): Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(3), 1683–
1691. https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v3i3.1100
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative Learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–
342. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050002315
Stapleton, P., & Leung Ka Kin, B. (2019). Assessing the accuracy and teachers’
impressions of Google Translate: A study of primary L2 writers in Hong Kong.
English for Specific Purposes, 56, 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.07.001
Studies, B., & Heritage, C. (2019). Cooperative Learning: Practices, Challenges and Its
Implication for Quality Education in Undergraduate Regular Program of Wollo
University. Journal of Education and Practice, 51–67.
https://doi.org/10.7176/jep/10-31-06
Studies, L., & Pourfeiz, J. (2022). EURASIAN JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING
AND LINGUISTIC STUDIES Willingness to write and writing performance of EFL
students : Pursuit of relevance. 1(1).
Tahmouresi, S., & Papi, M. (2021). Future selves, enjoyment and anxiety as predictors of
L2 writing achievement. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53(July), 100837.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100837
Toba, R., Noor, W. N., & Sanu, L. O. (2019). The Current Issues of Indonesian EFL
Students’ Writing Skills: Ability, Problem, and Reason in Writing Comparison and
Contrast Essay. Dinamika Ilmu, 57–73. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v19i1.1506
Vakilifard, A., Bahramlou, K., & Mousavian, M. (2020). The effect of cooperative learning
approach and semantic mapping strategy on the acquisition of L2 Persian
vocabulary. Cogent Education, 7(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1762287
Wachholz (1996) Writing Self-efficacy in high and low apprehensive writers. (n.d.).
Wei, X., Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, W. (2020). Associations of L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer
103
with L2 writers’ perception of L2 writing difficulty and L2 writing proficiency.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes, p. 47.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100907
White, J. (1986). The writing on the wall: Beginning or end of a girl’s career? Women’s
Studies International Forum, 9(5–6), pp. 561–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-
5395(86)90049-X
Wulandari, D., Shandy Narmaditya, B., Hadi Utomo, S., & Hilmi Prayi, P. (2019).
Teachers’ Perception on Classroom Action Research. KnE Social Sciences, 3(11),
313. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i11.4015
Yu, S., Jiang, L., & Zhou, N. (2020). The impact of L2 writing instructional approaches on
student writing motivation and engagement. Language Teaching Research, 19.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820957024
Yu, S., Zhou, N., Zheng, Y., Zhang, L., Cao, H., & Li, X. (2019). Evaluating student
motivation and engagement in the Chinese EFL writing context. Studies in
Educational Evaluation, 62(19), 129–141.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.06.002
Yusuf, Q., Jusoh, Z., & Yusuf, Y. Q. (2019). Cooperative learning strategies to enhance
writing skills among second language learners. International Journal of Instruction,
12(1), 1399–1412. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12189a
Zaki, L. B. (2022). the Use of Dictogloss To Improve Students’ Writing in Muhammadiyah
Plus Secondary School Batam. Jurnal JOEPALLT (Journal of English Pedagogy,
Linguistics, Literature, and Teaching), 10(2), 129–143.
https://doi.org/10.35194/jj.v10i2.2606
Zaman, B. (2020). Implementation of Cooperative Learning Strategies in Islamic Religious
Education. IJECA International Journal of Education & Curriculum Application,
3(2), 91–97.
