Chapter I
Introduction
1.1 Background
English is an International language that is used worldwide. The current status of English as an international or global language is underpinned by its wide use in a range of fields such as education, politics, diplomacy, international trade and industry, commerce, science and technology, the media, information technology, popular culture, and communication (Crystal, 2003a: , Huda, 2000: 68, Jenkins, 2003). In educational field, English is used as a medium of instruction in some schools and universities in some parts of the world, with subjects such as management, information, technology and the humanities.
The above factors, and the large number of speakers who use English worldwide, can be considered to be valid reasons for English language special status in Indonesia. In line with this, observers on the use of English in Indonesia (among others Dardjowidjojo, 2003: 32, Huda, 2000: 65-66, Renandya, 2000: 116, Simatupang, 1999: 64) have seen it as potentially serving a number of important purposes, for instance as a means of international communication in practically all fields of works.
University graduates are then expected to master English, especially to become fluent in English speaking skill as, among others, a means of international communication. The importance of being fluent in speaking English is relevant to Nunan’s study (2000: 39) which revealed that mastering the art of speaking is the single most important aspect of learning a second and a foreign language, and success is measured in terms of the ability to carry out a conversation in the language.
Unfortunately in many areas in Indonesia, based on the information from the Educational Board (as cited in Kompas, 2009), the university students’ ability in English especially speaking skill is still considered to be low. Many EFL students find it difficult to develop their speaking ability (Petersen, 2010). Even so, there are a few students who seem to find it easy to develop their speaking skill. Their ability in developing speaking skill is probably the result of employing appropriate language learning strategies. The employment of language learning strategies seems necessary for the language learners because speaking the new language often causes the greatest anxiety among other language skills (Oxford, 1996: 164).
Bialystock, 1978: 42). Furthermore, Rubin (1975 as cited in O’Malley and Chamot, 1993: 3) and Oxford (1990: 16) mention that there are direct strategies (such as memory strategies) and indirect strategies (such as social strategies) that affect language learning to develop their English skills (the discussion about these strategies will be elaborated in Chapter II of this study).
However research concerning language learning strategies to develop speaking skill still receives a little attention in Indonesian EFL context. Therefore, this study aims to investigate language learning strategies to develop speaking skill used by university students; the students are categorized as high, middle, and low achievers. The study will also focus on figuring out the reasons why they employed those strategies. The focus on these topics is considered important to reveal the relationship between language learning strategies and English proficiency.
1.2 Research Questions
In line with the focus of the study, this study attempts to address the following research questions:
(1) What learning strategies are employed by high achiever, middle achiever, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills?
1.3 The Purpose of the Study
The purposes of this study are:
(1) To investigate the language learning strategies employed by high achievers, middle achievers, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills.
(2) To reveal the reasons why they employed those strategies.
1.4 The Clarification of Terms
In this study, there are several terms that needed to be clearly defined in order to avoid misunderstanding and ambiguity. The definitions of the terms in this study are as follows:
(a) Language learning strategies are specific actions or techniques that learners use to assist their progress in developing second or foreign language skills (Oxford, 1990). (b) Speaking strategy is the tools for active, self directed involvement needed for
developing L2 communicative ability (O’Malley and Chamot, 1990).
(c) The speaking strategies in this research are not automatically attached to every high achiever, middle achiever, and low achiever student in mastering speaking skills in general but the strategies that were being used by these students by the time they were at their levels when this study was being conducted.
students were those who got their speaking mid-term and final-term tests scores 3 (good) – 4 (very good), and low achiever students were those who got their speaking mid-term and final-term tests scores 1 (below average) – 2 (average).
1.5 The Scope of the Study
This study was conducted to investigate language learning strategies employed by high, middle, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skill as well as the reasons why they employed those strategies.
A number of researchers (Rubin, 1975; Oxford, 1990; O’Malley and Chamot, 1990; Silberstein, 1994; Mikulecky and Jeffries, 1996; Grabe and Stoller, 2002; Nunan, 2003) have put forward some language learning strategies. However, this study focuses on language learning strategies developed by Oxford (1990) since it includes everything that second/foreign language learners need to be intelligent learners (Wu, 2008). Meanwhile, the elaboration of Oxford’s and others researchers’ learning strategies will be elaborated in Chapter II of this study.
learning, evaluating learning); (2) affective strategies (lowering anxiety, encouraging oneself, and taking emotional temperature); and (3) social strategies (asking questions, cooperating with others, and empathizing with others).
1.6 The Significance of the Study
With regard to the significance of the study, this research has the potential to give implication to the theory, educational practice, and professional practice.
Theoretically, this study is expected to enrich the literature on language learning strategies to develop speaking skill which still receives a little attention in Indonesian EFL context.
Based on the fact that many EFL students find it difficult to develop their speaking ability (Petersen, 2010), practically this study would provide these students with the information related to appropriate language learning strategies in developing speaking skill. By using the information provided in this study, it is hoped that the students will gain their self direction. Relevant to this, some researchers (among others Oxford, 1990: 10; O’Malley and Chamot, 1990: 182) believe that self directed students would gradually gain confidence, involvement, and proficiency in speaking ability.
1.7 Conclusion
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
Chapter V
Conclusions and Suggestions
5.1 Conclusions
This study investigates the language learning strategies employed by high, middle, and low achiever students in developing their speaking skills, as well as their reasons for employing certain language learning strategies. From the results and discussions in the previous chapters, several conclusions can be drawn.
First, regarding the language learning strategies employed by high, middle, and low achiever students in developing their speaking skills, the study figured out that all of the participants were active users of similar language learning strategies with high and low achiever students tended to employ meta-cognitive strategies the most for improving their speaking skill (as reported on Chart 1 (p. 71), and Chart 3 (p. 75)), while the middle achiever students tended to employ affective strategies the most to improve their speaking skill (as seen on Chart 2 (p. 73)).
As stated earlier, all of the participants had shown their full involvement in language learning since they were active users of language learning strategies. Based on this, all of the participants could be categorized as good language learners. This is consistent with Ghani (2003), who mentions that good language learners show full involvement in language learning.
theory, this study revealed interesting findings in which high achiever students were using the widest variety of language learning strategies (as seen from the overall average use of LLS presented on Chart 1 (p.71), Chart 2 (p.73), and Chart 3 (p.75)). This might be one of the explanations why the high achiever students’ English speaking skills were better than those of the middle and low achiever students.
Despite the fact that the high achiever students gained more successfully in developing their speaking skill compared to the middle and the lower achiever students, all of the participants had demonstrated their efforts to be able to speak fluently by, among others, employing several strategies such as memory, social, compensation, as well as cognitive strategies. The employment of these strategies were in line with Harmer’s (2002: 269-271) theory concerning success in speaking fluently. Success in speaking fluently depends, among others, on the rapid processing skills. These skills contain language processing, interacting with others, as well as on the spot information processing (Harmer, 2002). All of the participants’ efforts on language processing were seen from their employment of memory strategies; furthermore, their efforts on interacting with others were determined by their employment of social strategies; while, their efforts toward on the spot information processing can be seen from their employment of cognitive and compensation strategies.
employed them to gain confidence when they were speaking in English. About the reason for using compensation strategies, all of the students stated that they employed these strategies to keep the conversation going. Concerning the use of meta-cognitive strategies, all of the students pointed out that they employed these strategies, among others, to avoid producing the same errors. Regarding the employment of affective strategies, the students put forward that they utilized them, among others, to gain self-confidence and to avoid losing their concentrations. Finally, concerning the use of social strategies, the low achievers employed these strategies in order to answer their curiosity on how native speakers interacted, and pronounced the words. The middle achievers, on the other hand, used these strategies to increase their fluency in speaking English. And the high achievers employed these strategies in order to converse properly with their English native speaker friends.
From the reasons that were pointed out by these students, it can be indicated that they employed certain language learning strategies consciously to assist their progress in developing English language skills, particularly speaking skill.
As suggested by some researchers, among others Oxford (1996) and Wenden (1990), the conscious use of language learning strategies makes good language learners. It means that all of the participants in this study could be categorized as good language learners.
1997), that language learners who are capable of using a wide variety of language learning strategies appropriately can improve their language skills in a better way.
5.2 Limitations
There are some limitations of the study; the first one is to do with the number of participants which were only six students participating. It would be much better if the research involved more participants to produce a higher reliability of the study. Even so, the findings concerning the relationship between the language learning strategies used and the students’ English speaking skill achievements in this study were consistent with the findings of previous studies, such as those of Fadderholdt (cited in Hismanoglu, 1997), which revealed that language learners who were capable of using a wide variety of language learning strategies appropriately can improve their language skills in a better way. This led the researcher to feel secure that even though the number of participants was just a few but the data obtained were reliable.
of the interviews in which the transcription of some interviews was sent back to the students to be checked and made clear if necessary.
The third limitation is in relation to the time and space limit. Even though the researcher was aware of some factors influencing the choice of LLS, such as motivation, gender, cultural background, attitude and beliefs, type of tasks, age and L2 stage, learning style, as well as tolerance and ambiguity (Oxford, 1990: 9), but this study has not got a chance to discuss those factors yet.
5.3 Suggestions
Based on the findings from the study, which may not be generalized to other settings, it is suggested that the language learning strategies be gradually but intensively introduced and implemented in developing English skills, particularly speaking skill. Training on the use of appropriate LLS is suggested to be put forward in English classes/courses.
The above statement could mean that the learners need to learn how to learn, and teachers need to learn how to facilitate the process. Although learning is part of human condition, conscious skill in self-directed learning and in strategy use must be sharpened through training. The learners cannot be spoon-fed if they desire and expect to reach an acceptable level of communicative competence.
do the note taking when they read or listen to some announcements/messages. By using the appropriate note taking, their integrated English skill would be developed.
