Recontextualizing Cooperative Learning: Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Agency in Adapting a Global Pedagogical Model

Authors

  • Umar Umar Institut Agama Islam Negeri Bone, Indonesia
  • Ismail Ismail Universitas Negeri Manado, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56404/jels.v6i1.317

Keywords:

Cooperative Learning, Teacher Agency, Sociocultural Theory, Activity Theory, EFL Teaching

Abstract

Cooperative Learning (CL) is widely recognized as an effective student-centered pedagogical approach and has been extensively promoted in educational reforms worldwide. However, existing studies have predominantly focused on measuring its effectiveness, while limited attention has been given to how teachers interpret and enact CL within their specific sociocultural contexts. Addressing this gap, this study investigates how Indonesian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers conceptualize, implement, and adapt cooperative learning in their classroom practices. Employing a qualitative multiple case study design, data were collected from four secondary school English teachers through semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, and document analysis. The study was informed by Sociocultural Activity Theory and the concept of teacher agency to examine how pedagogical practices are shaped by cultural values, institutional conditions, and professional experiences. The findings reveal that cooperative learning is not implemented as a uniform instructional model but is continuously reinterpreted and recontextualized according to local classroom realities. Teachers enacted CL in diverse ways, drawing upon moral, cultural, religious, institutional, and pragmatic considerations. Furthermore, cultural norms emphasizing social harmony influenced interaction patterns, while tensions between policy expectations and classroom realities prompted teachers to adapt cooperative learning practices strategically. The study highlights teacher agency as a critical mediating factor in translating global pedagogical ideas into contextually meaningful classroom practices. These findings contribute to the literature on pedagogical recontextualization and teacher agency by demonstrating that successful implementation of cooperative learning depends not on procedural fidelity but on teachers’ capacity to adapt pedagogical principles to their sociocultural environments. The study also offers implications for educational policy and teacher professional development by emphasizing the importance of context-sensitive approaches to pedagogical reform.

References

Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. Routledge.

Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique (Rev. ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.

Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 624–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Butler, Y. G. (2011). The implementation of communicative and task-based language teaching in the Asia-Pacific region. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 36–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000122

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Crossley, M., & Watson, K. (2003). Comparative and international research in education: Globalisation, context and difference. RoutledgeFalmer.

Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit.

Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity-theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747

Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Hu, G. (2002). Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of communicative language teaching in China. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 15(2), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908310208666636

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057

Kelchtermans, G. (2017). ‘Should I stay or should I go?’: Unpacking teacher attrition/retention as an educational issue. Teachers and Teaching, 23(8), 961–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1379793

Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Kyndt, E., Raes, E., Lismont, B., Timmers, F., Cascallar, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Educational Research Review, 10, 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.

Ministry of Education and Culture. (2016). Kurikulum 2013: Pedoman implementasi. Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia. https://kurikulum.kemdikbud.go.id/

Nguyen, P. M., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A. (2006). Cooperative learning vs. Confucian heritage culture’s collectivism: Confrontation to reveal some cultural conflicts and mismatch. Asia Europe Journal, 4(3), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-005-0008-4

Pantić, N. (2015). A model for study of teacher agency for social justice. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 759–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044332

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Phillips, D., & Ochs, K. (2004). Educational policy borrowing: Historical perspectives. Symposium Books.

Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach. Bloomsbury Academic.

Schweisfurth, M. (2011). Learner-centred education in developing country contexts: From solution to problem? International Journal of Educational Development, 31(5), 425–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.03.005

Slavin, R. E. (2014). Cooperative learning and academic achievement: Why does groupwork work? Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 785–791. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.201201

UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO Publishing, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-30

How to Cite

Umar Umar, & Ismail, I. (2025). Recontextualizing Cooperative Learning: Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Agency in Adapting a Global Pedagogical Model. Journal of Education and Learning Sciences, 6(1), 324–342. https://doi.org/10.56404/jels.v6i1.317

Issue

Section

Articles