Statement of intent

Names of students	Score	Mean	Difference
Difference squared
1	Abduraxmonova Shakarjon	70	61.2	8.8	77.4
2	Ishimbetov Jahongir	50	61.2	-11.2	125.4
3	Jumaniyozova Shohida	45	61.2	-16.2	262.4
4	Jumanova Mabluda	60	61.2	-1.2	1.4
5	Mahkamov Ma’ruf	55	61.2	-6.2	38.4
6	Nazarova Shahnoza	70	61.2	8.8	77.4
7	Saidmurodova Marhabo	45	61.2	-16.2	262.4
8	Saidova Dilfuza	70	61.2	8.8	77.4
9	Sayilxonova Gulmira	75	61.2	13.8	190.4
10	Soatova Aziza	50	61.2	-11.2	125.4
11	Yuldasheva Feruza	70	61.2	8.8	77.4
12	Shukurov Ulug’bek	75	61.2	13.8	190.4

SD=_{ }

C. Data collected from the subjects’ Post-test results

After a month of conducting the classes by using different the methods the researcher held post-test to compare the results and see the effectiveness of current methods. The researcher used optional asking method for gaining the post test results.

The post results were made by the researcher in accordance to the stated assessment criteria (Table 7).

Post-test writing scores

The percentages of the result show that students understood writing techniques and genres of poetry. It can be seen that there was considerable noticeable increased to 12 points and the highest score 15 points.

Table 7

№	Names of students	Score
1	Abduraxmonova Shakarjon	80
2	Ishimbetov Jahongir	60
3	Jumaniyozova Shohida	57
4	Jumanova Mabluda	75
5	Mahkamov Ma’ruf	63
6	Nazarova Shahnoza	85
7	Saidmurodova Marhabo	58
8	Saidova Dilfuza	80
9	Sayilxonova Gulmira	90
10	Soatova Aziza	64
11	Yuldasheva Feruza	80
12	Shukurov Ulug’bek	90

52

So that it became easier to compare the pre-results and post test results, the researcher first summed up the mean, the average numerical value of post-test

The formula for calculating the mean is as follows:

ΣΧ

Χ = −−−−−

Ν

In this formula, Χ is the mean, Σ X indicates add up of scores, and Ν is the number of students..

The group 315 consisted of 12 pupils and the added up score is . In that case, mean is:

The mean = 888:12= 74

The mean = 74

Group 315. Post-test frequency distribution.

Table 8

Score value	Frequency
57	1
58	1
60	1
63	1
64	1
75	1
80	3
85	1
90	2

Post-test frequency distribution allowed the investigator see how many subjects performed in the same way. The lowest score was 57, and the highest one was 90. Each one student from 7 students got 57, 58, 60, 63, 64, 75, 80 respectively and three students took 80, and two students got 90. The most frequent score is 80.

Mode = 80

As shown in the Table 7, the value at the center of the range of the set is 73.5

Median = (57+90):2=73.5

In those measurements, the investigator represented group’s behavior or performances in numbers according to the aspects of central tendency.

The researcher also focused on dispersion which shows the performances of individuals.

The range in the set is 34 (the lowest score was subtracted from the highest score and plus 1. The range = (90-57) +1= 34

The next aspect of dispersion is standard deviation (SD) which shows the average of differences of all scores from the mean (Table 9).

Table 9

№	Names of students	Score	Mean	Difference	Difference squared
1	Abduraxmonova Shakarjon	80	74	6	36
2	Ishimbetov Jahongir	60	74	-6	36
3	Jumaniyozova Shohida	57	74	-17	289
4	Jumanova Mabluda	75	74	1	1
5	Mahkamov Ma’ruf	63	74	-9	81
6	Nazarova Shahnoza	85	74	11	121
7	Saidmurodova Marhabo	58	74	-16	256
8	Saidova Dilfuza	80	74	6	36
9	Sayilxonova Gulmira	90	74	16	256
10	Soatova Aziza	64	74	-10	100
11	Yuldasheva Feruza	80	74	6	36
12	Shukurov Ulug’bek	90	74	16	256

SD=_{ }

Data comparison

The histogram placed below presents the main idea of the thesis by comparing the Group 315 students’ pre-test and post test results. It is obvious from the histogram that ability of students’ writing poem reached a plateau in comparison of their initial marks (Figure 10).

55

In accordance to these above illustrated marks the mean, mode, frequent score, median, the range and SD also have climbed significantly which shows the research’s success. Besides, the methods which researcher used while conducting the lessons proved its effectiveness and importance (Figure 11).

D.Answers to the research questions

The researcher set up the following question before beginning the entire survey:

• 
  What is the syllabus for teaching poems in academic groups particularly third course students?
  
• 
  How students are learning writing poems?
  

56

• 
  What methods are suggested in teaching collaborative writing poems to academic course learners?
  
• 
  Which of them are considered more efficient and essential?
  

The first objective of the research was to determine the syllabus for teaching vocabulary in academic groups particularly third course students?

While investigating, the researcher picked up all necessary information about young learners poetry syllabus by analyzing the different books and sources. Besides that the observation and experiments attained the researcher find the answer the question. In general the young learners teaching poetry is based on the theory “from easy to difficult”.

The next question was “How pupils are learning writing poems?” In order to find the answer, the researcher made a observations and hold questionnaire from the teachers in the first English faculty and analyzed different books.

What methods are suggested in teaching vocabulary to young learners?

The investigator found out that the methods have priceless place in teaching writing poems to young learners. They motivate learners; make the lesson interesting and fun; increased the assimilation of taught materials.

In general while teaching writing poems to young learners the following methods are used:

1. 
   Using brainstorming
   
2. 
   Using vocabulary checking tasks
   
3. 
   Using singing
   
4. 
   Miming and Total Physical Response
   
5. 
   Role play
   
6. 
   Project based learning
   

The last question was ” How do you think the role of motivation in teaching process?”

57

For answering to this question the researcher made observations and distributed questionnaire to the passive subjects and analyzed the responds. According to gathered data they thoughts the role of motivation in teaching process is very sugnificant in all stages.

Discussion:

So, the results prove that the debate-based teaching method was completely beneficial for students on the way of improving critical thinking and writing skills. On this way, debate-based materials, problematic questions for discussion, different debatable situations and cases, and authentic materials played a considerable role to confirm the hypothesis of implementing collaborative writing poems into classroom use can improve students` creative and critical thinking capacities. As mentioned above, the debate-based teaching was conducted with Group 315 and the difference between the means of the Pre and Post-Tests of this group is 12.1. This means students of the group 315 experienced rapid rise from the beginning to the end of the experiment. 12.1 is completely enough climb.

However, it should be taken into account that the practice lasted for a short period of time, so it can be concluded that the survey was successfully implemented. As a way of conclusion, it can be advocated that the research found appropriate answers to the qualification paper questions. The benefit of implementing debates in teaching was rated well by the students, and the students in the experiment got great satisfaction from their performance after the investigation. Further, they noticed positive alteration in the way they think critically and write poems collaborative. The students were provided with the necessary guidelines, data and environment by the researcher.

3.2 FINAL REFLECTION

Before starting the experiment, as a student-teacher I had some obstacles to begin. My supervisor Sultonova Nigora regularly supported me to believe my strength, and provided me with sufficient ideas and techniques whilst the practice period. As we, with my supervisor, decided to undertake the experiment in the third academic course, group 315 in the first English faculty. I chose this group there to conduct the practice. I firmly believe that this experiment has provided me with a basic foundation of experience for my upcoming career in English language teaching, especially when I will deal with teaching through poems to improve students’ writing poems collaborative and critical thinking skills. The study encouraged me to explore recently developed and creative activities and methods which may engage the learners to carry out assignments on improving all four skills with the help of poems.

We spent a month to hold the investigation. During this period we came across some challenging and intriguing situation, besides, we had learnt some important skills and points which are very crucial to make the class more effective.

The most challenging task was to teach the third course students in EFL classes due to that fact that it was the first time of the researcher’s experience with young learners. Although we observed the classes during several lessons and acquainted with the subjects beforehand, to manage the classes were very difficult. The students were active and at the same time they had certain sorts of behavior. In order to cope with the problem we decided to praise the self-disciplined students and gave the special motivation like praised in front of their peers, called their parents and praise them by telling their parents about their work. That approach attained the researcher not only to teach the lass, but also we would be able to motivate the learners.

In spite of the difficulties, we learnt many things and we got the most effective

experience during the practicum. The first point which I should mention that in

order to have an effective class and encouraged learners, the teacher should know

59

their learners’ peculiarities; we should have enough knowledge, well-organized tasks and exercises and also materials should be attention-catcher.

As the foremost goal of the researcher was to assist learners to improve their critical thinking abilities by arranging writing poems collaborative in the class, various types of poetry genres topics, problematic questions and different debate-based materials were analyzed and applied in the process. The results completely turned out to be positive since the participants obtained efficiency on improving writing and speaking after they had applied to use those poetry-based materials while they were performing the effective competitive poems. This is clearly confirmed by the results obtained from the analysis of data gathered from the main survey questionnaire that was taken from the teachers who observed collaborative works and questionnaires from the students. Furthermore, it was much obvious from the difference between the results of pre-test and post-test taken from the students. So, the ultimate aim of this study is to show whether it is possible to develop students’ collaborative working through implementing classroom role plays. During the study some research tools were applied, and among them, questionnaire and pre, post-tests greatly assisted me to collect the data.

Through this experiment, I concluded that collaborative working-based teaching methods should be applied in language classroom in order to improve writing poems through their critical thinking capacities. Notably, teaching students with the help of writing poems requires far more attention as well as effort, especially while dealing with university students. I firmly believe that those results gathered from the study will be beneficial for my future teaching experience as I am planning to teach adults. By the research, I figured out that collaborative

working-based teaching approaches should be placed in into the language learning classroom. Moreover, more and more new writing teaching methods should be created in order to motivate learners to improve writing poem collaborative skills.
60

III. List of used literatures

1. 
   Reference list
   

1. I. A. Karimov. “Yuksak ma’naviyat-yengilmas kuch” –Toshkent. Ma’naviyat,2008.

2.”Ta’lim to’g’risidagi qonun”. Kadrlar tayyorlash milliy dasturi. Toshkent, 1997.

3. A. Karimov. “Yuksak ma’naviyat-yengilmas kuch” –Toshkent. Ma’naviyat,2008.

4. Jacob, E., Rottenberg L., Patrick S. &Wheeler E. (1996). Cooperative Learning: Context and Opportunities for Acquiring Academic English. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 253-280.

5. William Littlewood. Aspects of Language teaching. oxford: oxford university Press.

6 Millis, B. J. What are cooperative and collaborative learning? 2007,

7. AndrewJ Teach English: A training course for teachers. Cambridge University Press, 1988. 345 p

8. Pardee, R.L PrinciplesandPracticeinsecondlanguageacquisitionLogman,1993

9.Reeve. The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching Oxford, O.U.P.

10.Farkas Creating authentic materials and activities for the adult literacy classroom: A handbook for practitioners. NCSALL teaching and training materials. Boston, MA: NCSALL at World Education. (1991)

11. Ritchie and Rigano. Collaborative Learning (Second ed.). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

12. According to Lowry et al.,. Writing as Collaboration. College English, 51(8), 855-867.

61

13. Ede, L., and Andrea A. Lunsford. (Mar. 2001). Collaboration and Concepts of Authorship. PMLA, 116(2), 354-369.

14. Celce-Murcia, M. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Los Angeles: Heinle&Heinle. 1991.

15. Povey. Writing and Community Action: A Service-Learning Rhetoric with Readings. New York: Longman.

16.Dr. Janette Hughes. Project administration techniques for successful classroom collaborative writing.1998
17. Kristina Robertson^. Poetry: A powerful medium for literacy and technology development (What Works? Research into Practice Research Monograph #7). Retrieved April 23, 2009

62

2. 
   Bibliography
   

1. 
   Alpha, J. Utilizing poetry as an ESL teaching tool and resource. Retrieved April 22, 2009
   
2. 
   Alderson, J.C. & Urquhart, A.H. (1984) Reading in a Foreign Language London, Longman
   
3. 
   Breen, M.P. Authenticity in the language classroom Applied Linguistics 6/1 pp60-70\(1985)
   
4. 
   Breen,J., and D.Candlin. The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics,1,2,pp.89–112.1980.
   
5. 
   Brumfit, C.J. & Johnson, K. Carrell, P.L., Devine, J. & Eskey, D.E. (Editors) (1988) Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading Cambridge, C.U.P. (1979)
   
6. 
   Celce-Murcia, M. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Los Angeles: Heinle&Heinle. 1991.
   
7. 
   Collins English Dictionary for Advanced learners, third edition, 2001
   
8. 
   Deans, T. Writing and Community Action: A Service-Learning Rhetoric with Readings. New York: Longman. (2003). 
   
9. 
   Ede, L., and Andrea A. Lunsford. (Mar. 2001). Collaboration and Concepts of Authorship. PMLA, 116(2), 354-369.
   
10. 
    F. Gaughan & P. H. Khost (Eds.), Collaboration(,) Literature(,) and Composition (pp. 127-145). Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press, Inc.
    
11. 
    Halliwell, Susan: Teaching English in the Primary Classrooms. U
    
12. 
    Harmer, J.. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman. 1991
    
13. 
    Hyman, D., & Lazaroff, BWith A Little Help From Our Friends: Collaboration and Student Knowledge-Making in the Composition Classroom. (2007).
    
14. 
    Hymes, D. H. 1981. On communicative competence. In The communicative approachtolanguageteaching. C. J. Brumfit and K. Johnson. Oxford: Oxford University Press 63
    
15. 
    Jacob, E., Rottenberg L., Patrick S. &Wheeler E. Cooperative Learning: Context and Opportunities for Acquiring Academic English. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 253-280. (1996).
    
16. 
    Guariento, W. & Morley, J. (2001) Text and Task Authenticity in the EFL Classroom in ELT Journal 55(4), pp 347-353
    
17. 
    Kryder, L. G. Project administration techniques for successful classroom collaborative writing.(1991).
    
18. 
    McCarthy, Carol. Poetry in translation. Lesson Plan published by the Academy of American Poets.
    
19. 
    Mead, D. G. Celebrating Dissensus in Collaboration: A Professional Writing Perspective. Paper presented at the 45th Conference on College Composition and Communication in Nashville, TN. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED375427).(1994).
    
20. 
    Millis, B. J. (2007, May 22). What are cooperative and collaborative learning? Retrieved November 3, 2007,
    
21. 
    Price, M., & Warner, A. B. What You See Is(Not) What You Get: Collaborative Composing in Visual Space. Across the Disciplines   Retrieved Nov. 1, 2007,
    
22. 
    Speck, B. W., Johnson, T. R., Dice, C. P., & Heaton, L. B. Collaborative Writing: An Annotated Bibliography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. (1999). 
    
23. 
    Spooner, M. & Yancey, K. (1998). A single good mind: Collaboration, cooperation, and the writing self. College Composition and Communication, 49(1), 45-62.
    
24. 
    UR, Penny. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and theory.UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 375 s. ISBN-0521-44994-4.
    
25. 
    WRIGHT, Tony. Roles of Teachers & Learners.UK: Oxford University Press, 1996. 160 s.
    

64

Internet links

http://benjaminzephaniah.com/ Information about the poet Benjamin Zephaniah. I haven’t yet managed to work him into a lesson, but I think there’s lots of potential to use his work in the classroom. Great for teenagers..

https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/en/stories-poems - The British Council’s Learn English website has a huge archive of poems. You’ll find any topic under the sun.

http://www.poemhunter.com/ This is a great site to help you find poems. It’s especially useful if you can only remember a few lines.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/english_literature/poetryrelationships/ - BBC bitesize website has some great resources for older teen.
 

Appendix

Appendix 1. Questionnaire.

1. 
   How do you think the role of motivation in teaching process?
   
2. 
   Which techniques should be implemented to motivate students?
   
3. 
   What skill do you prefer to teach and why?
   
4. 
   How do you try to develop your students English learning skills?
   

5. Do you want students to work collaborative in your lesson?

6. Are you in favor of using poems in students’ language learning

7. How can we see the effectiveness of students’ writing poems collaborative in EFL classes

8. Do you prefer authentic materials in ou class or adopted one?

9 . How do you organise your lessons as teacher –centered or student-centered way?

Appendix 2. Checklist for evaluation of the writing poem pre-test.

	Criteria	Description	Points
	5 points for each correct answer	5- All the tasks are completed correctly provided	5

That test provided by the researcher, test 1 among group 315 students at university. It takes approximately 30- minutes for each test. Students have some challenges with writing poems and some students can not work collaborative while writing poems was played first. Teachers try to solve these problems and they teach them writing poems techniques.

Appendix 3. Observation lists and notes.

Teacher :_______________________ Observer :_________________________

Date : __________ Time:_______ Number of sudents_________ Level_______

Aims:____________________________________________________________

Stages/ Timing	Procedures/ Activities	Alternatives/ Questions/ Comments

Appendix 4. Assessment criteria for the post-test.

Name:____________________________________________

Group:___________________________________________

Total score:____________________________________/100p

	Criteria	Description	Points
	5 points for each correct answer	5- All the tasks are completed correctly provided	5