Template Artikel Jurnal Optimasi Sistem Industri JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5 NO. 2 (2018) Online version available in : http://arbitrer.fib.unand.ac.id JURNAL ARBITRER | 2339-1162 (Print) | 2550-1011 (Online) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.5.2.81-93.2018 Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International. Some rights reserved Article The Framework of Cooperative Problem-based Learning (Co-PBL) to Promote Verbal Creativity in EFL Writing: Is It Feasible? M. Ali Ghufron, Siti Ermawati English Education Department, IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro, East Java, Indonesia SUBMISSION TRACK A B S T R A C T Recieved: August 27, 2018 Final Revision: October 4, 2018 Available Online: October 29, 2018 One of the influential factors that could affect students’ writing skill is verbal creativity (VC). As an attempt to promote VC in EFL writing, two learning models i.e. cooperative learning and problem-based learning are incorporated and modified. This study was aimed at: (1) describing the structure of the framework of Co-PBL in order to promote VC in EFL writing; and (2) evaluating the feasibility of the framework of Co-PBL in EFL writing class. To achieve the goals of this study, a descriptive explanatory research was applied. It involves the EFL writing teachers and the first and second-grade students of English Education Department of a private university in East Java, Indonesia. The data were gathered through Focus Group Discussion (FGD), observation, semi-structured interview, and questionnaire. Incorporating cooperative learning (CL) and problem-based learning (PBL) results in the Co-PBL framework to guide the students through PBL cycles based on CL principles. The Co-PBL framework was also modified by inserting learning activities which could promote VC in EFL writing in each phase or cycle of PBL. Further, it was also confirmed that the Co-PBL framework is feasible to be implemented in EFL writing class. These findings, then, might have significant implications for EFL writing teachers and students. KEYWORD Cooperative learning, problem-based learning, Co-PBL, verbal creativity, EFL writing CORRESPONDENCE E-mail: ali.ghufron@ikippgribojonegoro.ac.id I. INTRODUCTION Education in the 21st century should pay attention to the development of human civilization, prosperity, and well-being. One of the ways that could be implemented is through the integration of creative thinking skill into teaching and learning process. Zhu et al., (2017) argue that creatvity is extremely important for human life. It is urgently needed not only for the progression of human civilization, but also for human prosperity. Runco (2004) even argued that creativity is more important due to the rapidly increasing complexity of the world around us, and it can be used as a useful and effective response to evolutionary changes. Due to the importance of creativity, some efforts had been done by many researchers in http://josi.ft.unand.ac.id/ https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.5.2.81-93.2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 82 order to stimulate students’ creativity, including verbal creativity. Verbal creativity is an ability to think creatively and to measure one’s fluency, flexibility, and originality of a verbal form, which deals with words and sentences. Moreover, verbal creativity is an ability to form and create new ideas and then combine them into something new referring to the existing information. The new ideas reflect fluency, flexibility, and originality that can be seen in divergent thought revealed verbally (Munandar, 2009). Dealing with this verbal creativity, some studies had revealed that verbal creativity plays a critical role in EFL writing skill (see Al-jarf, 2015; Izadi, Mehri; Khoshsima, 2015; Pishghadam & Mehr, 2011; Rababah, Luqman; Melhem, 2014; Rababah, Halim, Mohamed, & Jdaitawi, 2013; Rababah, Alshehab, & Melhem, 2017; Weisi & Khaksar, 2015). In order to improve students’ EFL writing skill, they must have a high level of verbal creativity. Unfortunately, not every student has high level of verbal creativity. However, verbal creativity can be trained and stimulated through several activities in learning. One of the efforts that can be implemented to promote verbal creativity in EFL learning is by integrating cooperative learning (CL) and problem-based learning (PBL). Cooperative learning is a learning model where students are working together in small groups to help each other (Roger & Johnson, 1994). Further, Roger & Johnson (1994), argue that in a cooperative learning situation, interaction among students is characterized by positive goal interdependence with individual accountability. Positive goal interdependence requires acceptance by a group that they “sink or swim together”. Meanwhile, problem-based learning (PBL) is a learning model which starts with an unstructured problem that has more than one answer. Students have to collaboratively learn together through the PBL cycle (Mohd-yusof, Helmi, Jamaludin, & Harun, 2011; Yusof; Hassan; Jamaludin; Harun, 2012). The unstructured problems are used as the starting point of learning, creating deep interests among students to learn new knowledge and integrate existing ones, and forcing them to think critically and creatively to solve the problem (Boud & Feletti, 1997; Tan, 2003; Woods, Felder, Rugarcia, & Stice, 2000; Woods, 1996). Some studies had revealed that CL and PBL indirectly could stimulate verbal creativity skill, and later it also affects on EFL writing skills. Some of the studies (see Atkinson, 2003; Chen, 2004; Cole, 2012; Elola & Oskoz, 2010; Mahmoud, 2014; Wong, Chin, Chen, & Gao, 2009) revealed that CL could help students develop their English language skills, including EFL writing skills. Furthermore, thare also a number of studies that support the argument which PBL has a powerful effect in EFL learning, including EFL writing (see also Dastgeer, 2015; Iswandari, 2017; Kusmawati & Purwati, 2015; Lin, 2012, 2015; Ng Chin Leong, 2009). However, there is still no study which investigated the integration of cooperative learning and problem-based learning by adding and inserting some pedagogical attempts which directly could influence the improvement of verbal creativity in EFL writing. Further, there is still no study which focused on integrating cooperative learning and problem-based learning (developing Co- PBL) for promoting verbal creativity in EFL writing. Based on the explanation above, this study was focused on the modification and integration of CL and PBL in EFL writing course. The modification and integration of the two learning models was inteded to develop new learning actvitities which could optimally stimulate verbal creativity skill, and later on, it will also affect on EFL writing skills. The novelty of this study lays not only on the integration of the principles of cooperative learning and problem-based learning, but also on the addition and insertion of pedagogical attempts (i.e. vocabulary boosting, remembering English structures, questions-answers, etc), in which those M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 83 pedagogical attempts could directly promote verbal creativity in EFL writing. II. METHODS Research Design To achieve the goals of this study, a descriptive explanatory research was applied. Descriptive explanatory research is appropriate to provide a picture of an event, condition or situation, or to answer the question of how and why. By making use of this design, the researcher was basically challenged to explain the framework of the modification and the integration of CL and PBL (hereafter: Co-PBL) in a more accurate way and about how feasible the framewok of the new model to be implemented in EFL writing course to stimulate students’verbal creativity. Participants of the Study This study involved the EFL writing teachers and the first and second-grade students of English Education Department of IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro (Institute of Teacher Training and Education of PGRI Bojonegoro) in East Java, Indonesia at the even semester in the academic year of 2017/2018. The participants in this study were chosen by using two types of purposive sampling technique i.e. criterion and intensity sampling. Criterion sampling was used to choose the participant from teachers. According to Patton (2002), criterion sampling involves the cases that meet some predetermined criterion of importance. The pre-determined criteria in selecting paticipant from teachers are that he/she must have experience in conducting CL and PBL tutorial in EFL writing class; and he/she is still in progress of teaching EFL writing. From these criteria, there were only 2 teachers who were selected in this study. Besides, there were 120 students who took EFL writing course from the first and second grade. In selecting the participant from students, the researchers used intensity purposive sampling which involves selecting cases that are information- rich manifesting the phenomena of interest intensely but not extremely (Patton, 2002). At last, 20 students from the first and second- grade students were selected. From the 20 students, it was selected 10 students representing each grade level of high, low, and medium cumulative grade points to participate in this study. Data Collection Technique Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Focus Group Discussion (FGD) was condected between selected teachers and students. This FGD was done after the implementation of the framework in EFL writing class (after tryout 2). It was intended to evaluate the feasibility of the framework of Co-PBL to be implemented in EFL writing class. Observation The observation process was done simultaneously with the implementation process. The field-notes was made whether the practice had followed the rules stated in the lesson plan or not. Theefore, in this phase, some related documents such as syllabus and lesson plan are needed. Besides, it was also used to note some improvisation done during the implementation process in which it will be used as a reference in second FGD. Semi-structured Interview Semi-structured interview was also conducted with the teachers and some students who were chosen purposively. Data from the interviews were recorded and collected. The responses from interview sessions were transcribed in Ms Word for analysis by using the coding processes. Coding process was used as it is more practical for the researcher to classify the data into specific categories and terms, related to the study. Questionnaire At the end of learning, the students were also given a questionnaire in order to evaluate the implementation of Co-PBL. The questionnaire uses the Likert scale for scoring. The students should mark the numbers between 1 to 5 (1 = very poor, 5 = excellent). The results of the questionnaire were, then, compared with the results of M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 84 qualitative data. According to Patton (2002), methods of triangulation often involves comparing and integrating data collected through some kind of qualitative methods with data collected through some kind of quantitative methods. Therefore, in order to test the consistency of the data obtained qualitatively from observations and interviews, some questionnaires were selected according to their relevance to the research questions (see Creswell & Miller, 2000; Creswell, 2012). Data Analysis The process of qualitative data analysis was inductive and simultaneously conducted with the process of collecting data in the form of reflection through various techniques of reflection. Every collected data was interacted or compared with other units of data to cross- check or develop the validity as well as to categorize the data in accordance with the formulated problems. The analysis process was conducted by applying a modified model which is originally developed by Dey (1993) in which the data analysis is a circular process including the activities of describing, classifying, and connecting. The model was modified by adding one more step, it is evaluating. The reason is without evaluating step, it is impossible for the researcher to be able to make the final decision for the data gathered. Besides, descriptive statistics were also used to analyze quantitative data gained from the questionnaires. III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION The structure of the framework of Co-PBL to promote verbal creativity in EFL writing The arrangement of the framework of Co- PBL in this study was modified and integrated based on the basic principles of CL and PBL. The basic basic principles of cooperatie learning are positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to-face interaction, interpersonal skills, and group function assessment (Yusof et al., 2012). Meanwhile, the basic principles of PBL are divided into 3 phases, i.e. phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 (Yusof et al., 2012). In phase 1, there are 2 principles, i.e. introducing the problem (topics and scope of writing) and identifying and analyzing the topics (through discussion or research). In phase 2, there is only 1 principle, it is synthesizing and applying related information with the topics in essay writing. Then, in phase 3, there are 2 principles, i.e. Presenting and reflecting the essay writing (Evaluation & Assessment) and closure (giving feedback and scoring). For more detail, see the following figure of PBL framework. Fig 1: The Original Framework of PBL M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 85 From the framework shown in Figure 1, the model evolves to the framework shown in Figure 2 to emphasize the importance of ensuring cooperative work among students in the small groups and the whole class. Besides, it was also modified by adding some activities that specifically can stimulate students’ verbal creativity in EFL writing. Those activities were pedagogical attempts that were introduced by Avila (2015). Those learning steps are remembering English grammar and structure, creating a fictional story, promoting creative writing, boosting vocabulary through screenwriting, sharing a speech, circle of life, drawing and speaking, asking and answering questions, and asking the students to create their own activities. Referring to Figure 2, there are 3 phases in the Co-PBL cycle for EFL writing class. Phase 1 consists of introduction, identification and analysis. Phase 2 is the application and solution. Phase 3 is evaluation, assessment, and feedback. This modification to the Co-PBL framework shown in Figure 2 is necessary to ensure the learning activities and assessment tasks throughout the Co-PBL cycle is aligned and support all the learning outcomes. Fig 2: The Framework of Co-PBL with VC in EFL Writing The learning activities throughout the Co- PBL cycle are aligned to ensure fulfilment of the basic principles of cooperative learning, as illustrated in Table 1, because ensuring cooperation and functional teams for students to learn together is crucial. M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 86 Table 1: Teaching and learning activities and assessment tasks aligned to promote VC and CL principles in Co-PBL CL Principles Positive Interdependence Individual Accountability Face-to-face Interaction Interpersonal Skills Group Function Assessment Phase 1: Introduction, Identification, & Analysis Introduction of topic and scope of writing to students (by teacher) Explain the topic and the scope of writing Individual identification of topic and analysis Preparing to discuss the topic with team Understanding the topic and take notes In-class interaction with teacher (Q&A about the topic given) Team discussion by comparing and contrasting the results of topic identification and analysis Assigning learning task to each team member; sharing a speech; vocabulary boosting by each team member; comparing and contrasting the topic identification and analysis Starting discussion based on individual answer; sharing a speech based on individual perspective; providing the results of topic identification and analysis In-class discussion; assigning roles for each team member; comparing and contrasting the topic identification and analysis Reach consensus of topic identification and analysis within a given time Overall observation on each team member participation Overall class discussion about topic identification and analysis (guided by the teacher) Each team provides the results of topic identification and analysis Some students may be randomly called individually; remembering English grammar and structure; Question and answer In-class discussion; remembering English grammar and structure; Question and answer Proper etiquette in discussion, Q&A to reach overall consensus Overall observation on participation of all students Phase 2: Application & Solution Team synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing Taking notes of the summary of concepts understood and questions on hazy points to help learning in team; making an outline; findings important points for thesis statement; peer reviewing the first draft Individually prepare peer learning/teaching notes for team; submit individual peer learning notes; arranging an outline; writing the thesis statement in a complete sentence; writing the first draft; revising the first draft Learning in team; explaining concepts to understand and asking on hazy points; overall class discussion led by designated team Reach consensus of topic identification and analysis within a given time Overall observation on each team member participation Individual synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing Writing an outline, writing the first draft, revising the first draft Individually writing an outline, writing the first draft, and revising the first draft In-class and out-of class session In-class and out- of class session Progress checking Phase 3: Evaluation, Assessment, & Feedback Presenting & reflecting the essay writing (Assessment & Evaluation) Comparing and contrasting the final draft Individual feedback from team member on writing performances Presenting the final feedback and discussion led by designated team Sincere comments and feedbacks to improve writing performances Peer rating and feedback on writing performances Closure (Giving feedback and scoring) Giving feedback and comments on writing performances Revising the final draft based on comments and feedbacks In-class closure Motivation on team working & conflict management In-class session on improvement to be made M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 87 The feasibility of the framework of Co-PBL in EFL writing class To analyze and evaluate the feasibility of the Co-PBL framework in EFL writing class, the implementation to the first and second grade students who took EFL writing course in English Education Department of IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro (Institute of Teacher Training and Education) at the even semester in the academic year of 2017/2018 was studied. In this part, the implementation of the tryout is described. Trying out was done by implementing the model of Co-PBL in EFL writing class. The tryout was conducted to get the feasibility of the product. The result of the tryout was the data about the feasibility of model framework of Co-PBL. There were four techniques in collecting data, i.e. observation, FGD, semi-structured interview, and questionnaire. The data of teaching learning process was collected by using passive participant technique. During the implementation, the researcher simultaneously observed the classroom activities. The teaching-learning process was observed and analysed to be evaluated. A FGD with the teachers and students was conducted to reflect the implementation of the tryout. This discussion was aimed at evaluating the implementation of the model framework of Co-PBL in the class. The tryout implementation for this model framework of Co-PBL was done for a month (four weeks and four meetings). Each tryout was completed in two meetings. A FGD was done at the end of the second tryout. However, after each tryout the students were given questionnaire and inerviewed to reveal their feedback towards the tryout implementation. Tryout 1 The tryout 1 was done on April 4, 2018. It was Wednesday. The teacher firstly explained the topic that was going to be discussed. It was about argumentative essay. The teacher raised a problem about the controversial issue dealing with the governement policy of taking the results of national examination as the major consideration of students’ passing grade. Then, the students in team and indvidually identify and analyse the topic. After that, the teacher led the overall class discussion. The activities were continued to the team synthesis and application of what the students gained from individual, team, and in- class discussion about the topic into essay writing. Since the time was over, the teacher closed the meeting at that day. In the second meeting of the tryout 1, the teacher continued the learning activities. The students were asked to apply the results of their team discussion, synthesis, and application of topic into individual writing. They started writing from the first (rough) draft until the final draft. When the students had met their final draft, they submitted it to the teacher. After all papers were submitted, the teacher took several papers randomly. The selected ones must be presented by the writer in front of the class. Then, the other students read the paper carefully to find some improper words and/or phrases, incorrect grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The mistakes were corrected together. The last acivity was the teacher assessed and evaluated the papers one by one. However, since this activity needs much time, this was done outside the class by the teacher. The results of teacher’s feedbacks and evaluation towards the papers were distributed in another meeting. During the implementation of tryout 1, the researcher took notes and observed the class. The following is the results of the observation in tryout 1. M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 88 Table 2: Observation Checklist and Field-notes of Tryout 1 No. Learning Activities Yes Partially No 1 Introducing the topic and scope of writing √ 2 The students individually identify and analyze the topic √ 3 Team discussion by comparing and contrasting the results of topic identification and analysis √ 4 Overall class discussion about topic identification and analysis (guided by the teacher) √ 5 Team synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing √ 6 Individual synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing √ 7 Presenting & reflecting the essay writing (Assessment & Evaluation) √ 8 Closure (Giving feedback and scoring) √ 9 Activities to promote VC: Vocabulary boosting, Questions and Answers, Remembering English Grammar & Structure, Creating a Fictional Story, Promoting creative writing, Sharing a speech, etc. √ Notes: 1. The learning outcomes are suitable with syllabus 2. The teaching and learning activities were in line (suitable) with lesson plan 3. Team working analysis need to be improved 4. Group function assessment was not optimally implemented 5. Closure (giving feedback and scoring) was not completely done in-class activity due to the lack of the time Tryout 2 The tryout 2 was started on April 18, 2018. The problem raised was about the government policy that university should implement blended learning for all subjects in teaching and learning process. The activities were mostly the same as the explanation in tryout 1. However, the tryout 2 were more well- prepared. After the tryout 1 had finished, the teacher and the researcher took a reflection on the process of tryout 1. Based on the reflection, it was found some parts that need to be improved in tryout 2. The parts that need to be improved were the team working analysis, group function assessment, and activities that could promote students’ verbal creativity. After the tryout 2 had finished, selected participants were interviewed regarding their opinion about the feasibility of the Co-PBL model. Most of them expressed their exicitement during the implementation of the framework of Co-PBL. Besides, they also admitted that the learning was challenging, motivating, a bit frustrating in certain part, for example when they had to individually synthesize apply the information about the topic in essay writing. However, for overall, they responded positively to the new framework of Co-PBL. The following is the transcript of the interview: Question: What is your opinion about the teaching and learning process using the framework of Co-PBL which you’ve already done? Is it applicable in EFL writing class? Student 1: Ummm... in my opinion, it was very challenging. We were challenged to work both in group and individual. For me myself, working in a group is a difficult thing to do. Frankly speaking, I am an introvert student. But, through this kind of activities, I realized that working in a group is very important. The hardest thing for me is when we had to write what we had discussed into essay writing individually. But, so far, I can enjoy the learning activities. It is applicable in EFL writing class. Student 2: Ya, I think, it really motivates me. I was M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 89 motivated to learn English writing. I also really enjoyed the activites such as remembering English grammar, vocabulary boosting, and so on. It makes me remember the English structures and also memorize a lot of vocabularies. However, the thing that makes me a bit frustrating is writing the essay individually... (Chuckled...) Student 3: Of course, it is applicable and feasible. To me, it was challenging and motivating. We were given an unstructured problem, in this case is a controversial issue or topic, than we had to look for the solution by giving our arguments and we had to persuade other people in order to have the same opinion with us. Then, working in a group is really nice and joyful. The data gained from the interview above, was also triangulated with the results of questionnaire distribution. The following is the results of questionnaires distribution after the implementation of tryout 2. Table 3: The Results of Questionnaire Distribution Excellent Good Average Poor Very Poor No. Learning Activities 5 4 3 2 1 1 Introducing the topic and scope of writing 75,0% 20,8% 4,2% 2 The students individually identify and analyze the topic 95,8% 4,0% 3 Team discussion by comparing and contrasting the results of topic identification and analysis 62,5% 37,5% 4 Overall class discussion about topic identification and analysis (guided by the teacher) 81,7% 18,3% 5 Team synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing 65,0% 18,3% 16,7% 6 Individual synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing 73,3% 23,3% 3,3% 7 Presenting & reflecting the essay writing (Assessment & Evaluation) 94,2% 5,8% 8 Closure (Giving feedback and scoring) 74,2% 25,8% 9 Activities to promote VC: Vocabulary boosting, Questions and Answers, Remembering English Grammar & Structure, Creating a Fictional Story, Promoting creative writing, Sharing a speech, etc. 46,7% 28,3% 25,0% M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 90 Table 4: Observation Checklist and Field-notes of Tryout 3 No. Learning Activities Yes Partially No 1 Introducing the topic and scope of writing √ 2 The students individually identify and analyze the topic √ 3 Team discussion by comparing and contrasting the results of topic identification and analysis √ 4 Overall class discussion about topic identification and analysis (guided by the teacher) √ 5 Team synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing √ 6 Individual synthesis & application to the information related to the topic in essay writing √ 7 Presenting & reflecting the essay writing (Assessment & Evaluation) √ 8 Closure (Giving feedback and scoring) √ 9 Activities to promote VC: Vocabulary boosting, Questions and Answers, Remembering English Grammar & Structure, Creating a Fictional Story, Promoting creative writing, Sharing a speech, etc. √ Notes: 1. The learning outcomes are suitable with syllabus 2. The teaching and learning activities were in line (suitable) with lesson plan 3. Team working analysis worked good 4. Group function assessment was well-implemented 5. Closure (giving feedback and scoring) was not completely done in-class activity due to the lack of the time To gain more comprehensive results of evaluating the feasibility of the implementation of Co-PBL Framework in EFL writing class, a FGD was also implemented after tryout 2 had finished. From the FGD, it was concluded that the framework of Co-PBL is feasible. It can be implemented in EFL writing class to promote students’ verbal creativity. the verbal creativity can be stimulated through some activities that are integrated into Co-PBL framework, such as: remembering English grammar and structure, promoting creative writing, boosting vocabulary through screenwriting, sharing a speech, and asking & answering questions. These findings is supported by Avila (2015), who argued that by implementing some pedagogical attempts, such as remembering English grammar and structure, creating a fictional story, promoting creative writing, boosting vocabulary through screenwriting, sharing a speech, circle of life, drawing and speaking, asking and answering questions, and asking the students to create their own activities, the verbal creativity can be stimulated well. This study might have significant implication especially for EFL writing teachers and students. For EFL writing teachers, this study can be used as a reference in developing or modifying certain teaching technique which could improve students’ verbal creativity since it plays a pivotal role in students’ mastery of EFL writing. The teachers may also use this modification of Co-PBL in their teaching and learning process of EFL writing course. For the students, they could be more aware of their verbal creativity skills which affect their EFL writing skills. IV. CONCLUSION To sum up, it is concluded that integrating cooperative learning (CL) and problem-based learning (PBL) resulted in the Co-PBL framework to guide the students through PBL cycles based on CL principles. The Co-PBL framework was also modified by inserting learning activities or pedagogical attempts which could promote VC in EFL writing in M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 91 each phase or cycle of PBL. Further, it was also confirmed that the Co-PBL framework is feasible to be implemented in EFL writing class. The strong emphasis on cooperative learning in Co-PBL drives students to learn together with their teammates, as well as the whole class. This is a very influential activity since through teamwork, the students will not only try to solve the problem, but also stimulate their verbal creativity. It is also suggested to EFL teachers to implement this framework of Co-PBL to stimulate their students’ verbal creativity. Having a high verbal creativity will affect students’ EFL writing skill (Rababah & Melhem, 2014; Rababah et al., 2013; Rababah et al., 2017). However, this study might be merely suitable for those are learning in higher education context. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research is partly funded by Indonesian Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education on Penelitian Dosen Pemula (PDP) research scheme of the year 2018 with the contract number: 078/LPPM-IKIP-PGRI/0.4/2018. REFERENCES Al-jarf, R. Discourse and creativity issues in EFL creative writing on Facebook. International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSSS.2015010103, 2015. Atkinson, D. L2 writing in the post-process era: Introduction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 2003, 3–15. Avila, H. A. Creativity in the English class: Activities to promote EFL learning. HOW, 22(2), 2015, 91–103. Boud, D., & Feletti, G. Changing poblem based learning, in The Challenge of Problem-based Learning. London, UK: Boud and Feletti Eds, 1997. Chen, M. L. A study of the effects of cooperative learning strategies on student achievement in English as a Foreign Language in a Taiwan college. New York: ProQuest Information and Learning Company, 2004. Cole, K. S. Promoting cooperative learning in an expository writing course. Journal of International Education Research -Second Quarter, 8(2), 2012, 113–124. Creswell, J. W. Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc, 2012. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. M. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 2000, 124–130. Dastgeer, D. M. Improving English writing skill: A case of problem based learning. American Journal of Educational Research , 3(10), 2015, 1315–1319. Dey, I. Qualitative data analysis: A user-friendly guide for social scientists (Routledge). London. Retrieved from http://www.classmatandread.net/class/785wk3/Qualitative_data_analysis.pdf Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 2010, 51–71. Iswandari, D. C. Effect of environmental problem-based learning on the Indonesian EFL students’ environment - related Vocabulary Mastery and Writing Ability. Theory and M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 92 Practice in Language Studies, 7(8), 2017, 608–616. Izadi, Mehri; Khoshsima, H. Creativity in writing : A study of EFL learners' locus of control creativity in writing : A Study of EFL Learners ’ Locus of Control. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 4(2), 2015, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.2p.81 Kusmawati, D. P., & Purwati, O. The implementation of problem based learning in teaching writing descriptive text to the eighth graders. Retain, 3(2), 2015, 1–7. Lin, L. F. The application of the problem-based learning approach to a second language learning context. In Proceedings of edmedia: world conference on educational media and technology, 2012, 2465–2470. Lin, L. F. The impact of problem based learning on chinese-speaking elementary school student’s english vocabulary learning and use. System, 55, 2015, 30–42. Mahmoud, M. M. A. The effectiveness of using the cooperative language learning approach to enhance EFL writing skills among Saudi university students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(3), 2014, 616–625. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.5.3.616-625 Mohd-yusof, K., Helmi, S. A., Jamaludin, M. Z., & Harun, N. F. Cooperative problem-based learning (CPBL): A practical pbl model for a typical course. In International Conference EDUCON2011, 2011, 12–20. Munandar, U. Pengembangan kreatifitas anak berbakat (3rd Ed.). Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, 2009. Ng Chin Leong, P. The power of problem-based learning (PBL) in the EFL classroom. Polyglossia, 16(2), 2009, 41–48. Patton, M. Q. Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002. Pishghadam, R., & Mehr, F. J. Learner creativity and performance in written narrative tasks. World Journal of Education, 1(2), 2011, 115–125. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v1n2p115 Rababah, L. M., Alshehab, M. H., & Melhem, N. Z. B. Exploring the factors that hinder Jordanian students in developing creativity in EFL writing. In International Conference on Studies in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (SAHSS-2017), 2017, 7–11, https://doi.org/10.17758/EIRAI.F0117427 Rababah, L. M., Halim, A., Mohamed, B., & Jdaitawi, M. T. The level of creativity in English writing among Jordanian Secondary School students. Arts and Design Studies, 10, 2013, 25–30. Rababah, L., & Melhem, N. B. Investigation into strategies of creativity in EFL writing in Jordan. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(23), 2014, 195–206. Roger, T., & Johnson, D. W. An overview of cooperative learning. In Creativity and Collaborative Learning, 1994, 1–21. Runco, M. A. Creativity. Annu Rev Psychol, 55, 2004, 657–687. Tan, O. S. Problem-based learning innovation: Using problems to power learning in the 21st Century. Singapore: Thomson Learning, 2003. Weisi, H., & Khaksar, Z. The effect of hemispheric dominance on Iranian EFL learner’s creativity in writing. International Journal of English and Education, 4(2), 2015, 383– 397. M. ALI GHUFRON / JURNAL ARBITRER - VOL. 5. NO. 2 (2018) 93 Wong, L.-H., Chin, C.-K., Chen, W., & Gao, P. An Innovative collaborative writing approach to improve Chinese as L2 pupils' linguistic skills. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer-supported Collaborative Learning, 2009, 651–661, Rhodes Island, Greece. Woods, D. R. Problem-based learning: Helping your students gain most from PBL (3rd Ed.). Ontario: D. R. Woods Publishing, 1996. Woods, D. R., Felder, R. M., Rugarcia, A., & Stice, J. M. The Future of engineering education: III. Developing critical skills. Chemical Engineering Education, 34(2), 2000, 108–117. Yusof, K. M., Hassan, S. A. H. S., Jamaludin, M. Z., & Harun, N. F. Cooperative problem- based learning (CPBL): Framework for integrating cooperative learning and problem- based learning. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 56, 2012, 223–232, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.649 Zhu, W., Chen, Q., Xia, L., Beaty, R. E., Yang, W., Tian, F., … Qiu, J. Common and distinct brain networks underlying verbal and visual creativity. Human Brain Mapping, 30, 2017, 2094–2111. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23507 BIOGRAPHY M. Ali Ghufron is an English lecturer in English Education Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts Education, Institute of Teacher Training & Education (IKIP) of PGRI Bojonegoro, East Java, Indonesia. He received his Undergraduate Degree from the same department at the same University, his Master Degree was from Sebelas Maret University, and his Doctoral Degree was from Semarang State University, Indonesia. He has experience in teaching English in some schools, English courses, and universities. His research interests include EFL teaching methodology, ELT materials development, EFL pre-service and/or in-service teacher’s professional development, and ICT in EFL classroom. Any queries, please contact him at: ali.ghufron@ikippgribojonegoro.ac.id Siti Ermawati is a lecturer in English Education Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts Education, IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro. She got her undergraduate degree from Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Maulana Malik Ibrahim, Malang. Then, she continued pursuing her Master degree in Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Sunan Kalijaga, Yogyakarta.