Group Work Vs Pair Work: A Comparison of Critical Thinking Skills

Abstract

Cultivating critical thinking and problem-solving abilities is crucial in higher education, particularly as language learning evolves from a focus on grammatical accuracy to communicative competence. Collaborative learning, which is fundamentally grounded in Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, faces persistent challenges such as imbalanced participation and the presence of dominant personalities, both of which continue to shape the dynamics within the classroom environment. Current research supports the pedagogical advantages of collaborative work; however, there is a lack of understanding of how these interactions specifically impact critical thinking in naturalistic settings. This study sought to investigate the relationship between critical thinking skills and interaction types by comparing perceptions of pair work and group work. A quantitative survey was administered using an instrument divided into four main sections: demographic profile, perceived critical thinking/problem-solving skills, and perceptions of pair and group work interaction. The participants comprised 199 students from a Malaysian public university. The findings reveal a significant positive relationship between both interaction types and the development of critical thinking, although the level of engagement varied across academic clusters. The implications of this study suggest that educators should strategically balance pair and group work to reduce learner anxiety and ensure equitable participation, thereby enhancing cognitive development.