Chapter III
Research Methodology
This chapter begins with the discussion concerning the research method, next it is followed by the choice of the research method, the research site and the participants. Furthermore, it presents the techniques of collecting the data as well as the validity of the data. The chapter will finally end with the elaboration of the technique of the data analysis.
3.1 Research Method
This study was descriptive with an ex-post facto design and it was qualitative in nature since this study was conducted inductively by collecting the data from the field and analysis which focused on language learning strategies in developing speaking skill which were employed by high achiever, middle achiever, and low achiever students; next, this study focused on the reasons why they employed those strategies.
researcher in this case had no direct control over these variables and could only try to determine their incidence on an observed consequence.
Based on the characteristics stated above, it can be concluded that the language learning strategies are one of the factors that have been possessed by the language learners before they learn a language, so the application of the design fitted the purpose of this study.
3.2 Research Site
This study was conducted at one of the universities in Bandung. The researcher chose this university as the setting of the study on at least three reasons. First, this university was conducting the three-month English for Job Seekers program for its students. The aim of conducting this program was, among others, to enable the participants to be ready for the interview sessions on their future job interviews. Second, it was easy to get the access and communicate with the students as well as with the other lecturers working in that university. Third, it is one of the well-known universities in Bandung.
3.3 Research Participants
The categorization of the students’ achiever levels was based on the students’ average speaking scores. The average scores were taken from their mid-term test and final test scores. Students who got 5 (excellent) - 6 (outstanding) points were categorized as high achiever students, 3 (good) - 4 (very good) points were categorized as middle achiever students, and 1 (below average) – 2 (average) points were categorized as low achiever students.
The aim of the students’ categorization was to know the various language learning strategies employed by these students in mastering speaking skill. The study involved the 8th semester students due to some reasons. First, they have studied English at least for two semesters in the university. Second, they were taking the three-month English for Job Seekers program. Third, they are going to finish their study at the university and are going to search for jobs as soon as they finish their study.
In selecting the participants, this study made use purposeful sampling to gain the important information from the participants (Alwasilah, 2002: 146). The selection of the participants related to the participants’ categorization. The categorization of these participants will be presented in the discussion below.
3.4 The Participants’ Categorization Procedure
Furthermore, to make the scoring more reliable, American FSI interview procedure requires recordings of the interview session.
The American FSI scoring system was employed in this study. The reason for using FSI scoring system was because it contains written descriptions of speaking proficiency levels. Hughes (1996: 110) states that scoring will be valid and reliable only if: (1) it is clearly recognizable, (2) the appropriate descriptions of criteria levels are written, and (3) there is more than one scorer for each performance.
For the purpose of this study, the American FSI speaking proficiency descriptions were modified and it was utilized during the mid-term test as well as the final test scoring stages. The researcher was assisted both in the mid-term test and final test scoring stages by the other English language lecturer from the university where this study was conducted. Both the researcher and the other English language lecturer made use of the American FSI speaking proficiency descriptions as the basis to score the students’ speaking ability. Moreover, the students’ interview sessions in the mid-term test and final test stages were recorded. The speaking proficiency descriptions used in this study can be seen in appendix (1).
3.5 Data Collection
3.5.1 Questionnaires
A questionnaire is not simply a list of questions or forms to be filled out. Oppenheim (1982:2) believes that questionnaire is a scientific instrument of measurement and it is used for collecting particular kinds of data.
As stated in Chapter I, the purposes of this study were to investigate the strategies employed by high achiever, middle achiever, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills, as well as to reveal the reasons why they employed those strategies.
The above questions would be answered by the items in the questionnaire. The questionnaire used was modified from Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) Version 7.0 developed by Oxford (1990) especially for speakers of other languages learning English. The questionnaire covers six strategies, namely: memory, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive, affective, and social strategies.
The Questions’ Numbers and Strategies from the Questionnaire
No Questions Number The Questions were Used to Investigate
1 1 to 9 Memory Strategies
2 10 to 20 Cognitive Strategies
3 21 to 25 Compensation Strategies
4 26 to 33 Meta-cognitive Strategies
5 34 to 39 Affective Strategies
6 40 to 45 Social Strategies
Table 8 The Questions’ Numbers and Strategies from the Questionnaire
Key to Understand the Average of Language Learning Strategies
High
Always or almost always used 4.5 to 5.0
Table 9 Key to Understand the Average of Language Learning Strategies
to know their readability, their validity and reliability since they were originally written in English and were translated into Bahasa Indonesia for the purpose of the study; so that the respondents would not find any difficulties in answering the items existed in the questionnaires.
From the tried out, some inputs had been encountered; and based on that, some items were revised and needed to be explained more at its administration in order that there would not be any misunderstanding of what the items exactly meant.
Before working on the questionnaires, the respondents were given some explanation orally on how to answer the items and some words that might not be understood such as the phrases flashcard, rhymes. The respondents were also given chances to notice any other words that might hindrance them in understanding the items and they were asked to deliver the questions.
3.5.2 Interview
To validate the data from the questionnaire, this study utilized interviews. According to Creswell (2008: 226), by interviewing, the researcher will get useful information that cannot be directly observed from the questionnaire. Interview permits participant to describe in detail some personal information and it has better control over the type of information ‘filtered’ through the views of the interviewer. Fraenkel and Wallen (2007: 10) claim that interview is an important way for researcher to check the accuracy.
as low achiever students. Instances of the interview questions can be seen on appendix (4).
3.6 Data Analysis
The data from questionnaire were analyzed using Likkert scale from 1 to 5. Using this scale, the students were asked to answer the items on the questionnaire based on five possible options namely: always, frequently/usually, sometimes, rarely and never. Each answer has its own score starting form 5 point to 1 point.
Five point means that the participant always used the strategy, 4 point means that the participant usually/frequently used the strategy, 3 point means that the participant sometimes used the strategy, two means that the participant rarely used the strategy, while one means that the participant never used the strategy mentioned on the questionnaire. The scale of questionnaire items taken from Oxford (1990: 294) is presented as follows:
Frequency Scale point
Always 5
Usually/Frequently 4
Sometimes 3
Rarely 2
Never 1
Table 10 The Scale of Questionnaire Items
through narrative, interpretation of meaning and ad hoc method for generating meaning. The analysis was based on the research questions mentioned earlier: (1) the learning strategies which were employed by high achievers, middle achievers, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills, as well as (2) the reasons why they employed those strategies.
3.7 Conclusion
