STUDENTS’ ATTITUDE TOWARD MONOLINGUAL APPROACH IN ENGLISH CLASSES AT SMA LAB SALATIGA
Sonya Meilina Ekawati
Graduate, Faculty of Language and Literature Satya Wacana Christian University
Salatiga
Maria Christina Eko Setyarini Faculty of Language and Literature Satya Wacana Christian University
Salatiga
Abstract
This paper aims to investigate the students’ attitude towards Monolingual approach in English classes. In the field of ELT, monolingual has been prescribed as an official approach to be applied in English classes. However, the literature suggests that it has been a debatable approach for years. Studies on learners’ attitude toward the implementation of the approach indicated various impacts on students. This study investigates 103 Indonesian high school students’ attitude at a private high school in Salatiga where the approach is applied. The attitude is investigated by a questionnaire measuring the respondents’ learning performance, opinion, and feeling based on their experiences studying at a Monolingual class. The findings would seem to indicate that most of the students had a fairly positive attitude towards the approach. The students enjoyed studying in the Monolingual class and supported the use of English–only in their English classes.
Keywordsː monolingual approach, English classes, students’ attitude
INTRODUCTION
A monolingual approach (henceforth called MA) suggests that a target language should be the only medium of instructions. English as a medium of instructions provides more exposure to English and more chances to acquire it. Students and teacher will learn English not as a subject, but through English (Ibrahim, 2001). Thus, it is believed that the use of the first language (L1) had been largely regarded as a negative influence. The second language (L2) is also seen as an optimal medium for teaching English in the classroom.
However, some arguments oppose the use of MA in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes. Viavara (2011) argues that interacting in English inside the classroom continues to a challenge for many educators or future educators. Especially, in EFL setting
where English is being taught by the non-native English teachers, the use of MA in
classrooms will challenge the teachers to keep encouraging themselves and their learners to communicate in English in a formal setting.
Further, students’ L2 cannot co-exist with their previous languages (Canagarajah, 1999).
In spite of the fact that their mother tongue helps students in mastering L2, there are some cases where the teachers conduct the class in L1 entire time. Viavara (2011) finds that
This situation might discourage the teacher and the students to learn L2 actively as they always depended on their L1.
Despite the arguments about MA, the experience learning English using the approach in my high school and my university was positive to me. Specifically, in my high school, I had to communicate in English with my classmates and my English teacher in my class. If I spoke Indonesian or Javanese, I would get a punishment. As my teacher provided a punishment for all students who talked in Indonesian during the class, we could force ourselves to speak in English. This method somehow helped us to build our confident in using the target language.
The situation also made us aware that English needed to be used actively.
In educational contexts, students’ attitudes mostly concerned with their attitude towards schools, school subjects, teachers, other students (Ibrahim, 2001), and teaching approaches (Lee, 2012). Gardner and Lambert (1972) as cited in Abidin (2012) mentions that, the students’ ability to master a second language is not only influenced by a metal competence or a language skill but also by their attitude and perception towards the target language. It is still debatable whether the MA implementation in EFL classes might affect the students’ attitude. Therefore, this study aims to investigate students’ attitude towards MA in an EFL class and to
answer the following research questions: What are the students’ attitudes towards a
monolingual approach in English as Foreign Language (EFL) classroom?
It is hoped that findings of the study would provide insights for instructors and students in English Language Education Program of Satya Wacana Christian University (henceforth
called ED-SWCU) to understand how learners perceive and react towards the use of English
-only instruction in their classrooms. The study also possibly helps future educators to be more aware of their student’s attitude towards the approach that they have applied in teaching L2.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Monolingual Approach in EFL classrooms
The approach has long been prescribed by official policies in the field of English Language Teaching (ELT) (Kumaravadivelu, 2003; Macaro, 2001; Phillipson, 1992) as well as in other contexts (McMillan & Turnbull, 2009, as cited in McMillan & Rivers, 2011). As the focus on developing English skills moved from written aspects to spoken communicative aspects, MA is getting more attention due to the increase of the exposure of the target language (Tsukamoto, 2011). Furthermore, MA implies that languages other than the target one should be avoided in language teaching and learning process at all cost (Lee, 2012).
In recent study, Ellis (2005) also asserts that the more L2 exposure that students can receive, the faster the students can learn. Macaro (2001) as cited in Qandri (2006) justifies
that teaching entirely in L2 makes the language real and develops the learners’ in-built
MA supporters have stated that translating between L1 and L2 can be dangerous as it encourages the belief that there are 1 to 1 equivalents between the languages, which is not always the case (Pracek, 2003 as cited in Miles, 2004). Hence, learning two languages should be separated. Harbord (1992) as cited in Pardede (2013) also supports the L1 and L2 separation and acknowledges that overusing of L1 makes students believe that word for word translation is a useful technique. Consequently, they will work towards transferring meaning in learning L2. It is important to differentiate the use of L1 as the medium of communication and the imitation of L1 as a learning process in EFL classrooms.
Learners’ Attitude in Language Learning
Attitude views something by involving mental positions about such things as a way of behaving, thinking, and acting toward something (Miles, 2004). Long and Russell (1999) as cited in Kurihara (2006) defines attitudes as a mean of adjusting and changing one’s social environment. Wu (2008) says that changing one’s belief and opinion about one object can change desirability towards a particular object. In other words, attitude is changeable. It is used to evaluate favorable and unfavorable feelings towards specific attitude objects, such as personal action decision, abstract concepts, and policy decision.
Wu (2008) mentions three component models: cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. First, the cognitive component refers to beliefs about an attitude object or topic, for instance, a teacher might believe that teaching English was beneficial for students using
English-only in classrooms. Second, the affective component refers to feeling or emotions
associated with an attitude object. For example, some students enjoy studying in a class where MA is applied in classes. Third, the behavioral component refers to past behaviors associated with the attitude object. In this case, a person might possess a positive attitude towards MA in EFL classes due to his/her active involvement in class activities.
Attitude is considered as an essential factor influencing language performance (Visser, 2008, as cited in Abidin, 2011). Horwitz (1999) as cited in Lee (2012) also states that those learners’ attitudes or beliefs about language learning are influential factors in the success of the target language learning. In other words, achievement the target language relies on not only an intellectual capacity but also in learners’ attitude towards language learning.
Students’ Attitudes towards Monolingual Classrooms
A study by Schweers (1999) as cited in Hoang, Jang and Yang (2010) found that 88,7% Spanish students studying English wanted their class to include L1 in their class. Lee’s study
(2012) does not explore the issue of teacher code-switching to learners’ L1, but the findings
showed that only less than 20% of the learners embraced MA wholeheartedly that the L1 cannot be completely left out in their learning process. The use of L1 is still needed by L1 learners. It is likely that MA has brought out the negative attitudes for EFL students.
On the contrary, the while low-level students often show their preference for a bilingual
approach. Hopkins (1989) and Howell (1991) as cited in Auerbach (1993) state that more advanced students may feel that the use of L1 deters their acquisition of the target language. The low students feel the use of mother tongue supports their learning English. However, the advance students feel that the use of mother tongue will impede the process of acquiring English. Another study conducted by Kalanzadeh, Hemati, Shahivand, and Bakhtiarvand,
(2013) involving the third-grade high school students in the Persian context found that the
Iranian English classes could have a demoting effect on students. The use of L1 discourages learners to develop their language ability in L2. Some Japanese students showed neutrals
views for either monolingual or bilingual approach (Dwyer & Heller-Murphy, 2001, as cited
in Miles, 2004). In fact, the students considered any approach that has been applied by their English teacher would not hinder their learning process to master the L2.
METHODOLOGY
The study employed a quantitative paradigm to gather, analyze, and interpret the data. Cohen (1980) as cited in Sukamolson, (2007, p.2) defines a quantitative research as:
a social research that employs empirical method and empirical statements. Typically, empirical statements are expressed in numerical terms. Another factor is that empirical evaluations are applied. Empirical evaluations are defined as a form that seeks to determine the degree to which a specific program or policy empirically fulfills or does not fulfill a particular standard or norm.
Context of the Study
The study was done at Laboratorium Kristen Satya Wacana Senior High School (SMA Lab). SMA Lab is a private school under the management of Satya Wacana Christian University and located in Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia. The school has applied a
monolingual approach in all English classes from grade 10th to grade 12th.
Research Participants
The participants were 11th-grade students in five English classrooms at SMA Lab. The
classes were XI-1 Science class, XI-2 Science class, XI-1 Social class, XI-2 Social class, and
XI- Language class. The participants have experienced studying English with the practice of
monolingual approach since their 10th grade. In total, there were 103 students. Table 1 details the information about the participants.
Table 1. Demographic Information of Participants
This study used a purposive sampling method to draw on the participants who have the following characteristics. They have been exposed to a monolingual approach in their English class, so their views on the practice of the approach based on their previous or current
Category Description n
Gender Male 43
Female 60
Age 15-16 97
17-18 6
Length period of 5-6 3
learning English 7-8 5
9-10 47
11-12 42
experience. Then, they have learned English in a formal instructional setting (rather than natural settings).
Data Collection Instrument
In this study, a Likert-scale questionnaire (adapted from Hoang, Jang, & Yang, 2010))
was used to gather the data. All statements in the questionnaire were written in Bahasa
Indonesia to ensure that all participants clearly understood meanings of the questions. More specifically, the questionnaire consists of 23 statements to investigate three components of
attitude: behavior, cognitive and affective. Statements 1-12 were related to students’ learning
performance in their class to investigate their behavior and cognitive in their English class
where the monolingual approach was applied. Statements 13-18 dealt with what the
participants believe about the use of English by teachers and students during the class or class
activities. Meanwhile, statements 19-23 concerned with students’ feeling and emotion about
studying in a monolingual class.
Data Collection Procedure
The researcher did some steps to collect the data. Initially, she approached the school principal and English teachers of SMA LAB and asked their permissions to conduct the study in the school. After obtaining the permission, she distributed 125 questionnaires to the participants. On the questionnaire, the participants were asked to respond all statements in the
questionnaire particularly 5-15 minutes before the lesson began.
Data Analysis Procedure
After the researcher had collected all the questionnaire, she numbered each
questionnaire Then, she coded, analyzed, and calculated the data using the Microsoft Excel
program. The percentage of each statement was categorized into themes that were interpreted and implicated with relevant literature. The categorization was used to determine the attitude of the participants in learning English in their monolingual classroom. Eventually, the researcher used some tables to detail her analysis.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This part presents the analysis of students’ attitude toward the monolingual practice in their classroom. Initially, the research used Table 2 to show whether the students have experienced studying English either in a natural or formal instructional setting.
Table 2. Students’ Exposure to English in a Natural or Formal Institutional Setting
Questions Yes (n) No (n) 1. Did you grow up in a family that uses English for daily 0 103 communication at home?
2. Have you ever lived in a country that English is used as 0 103 an official language?
Table 3 showed that all participants had exposed to English in a formal institutional setting.
They also had never used English actively at their home and lived in English-speaking
countries. The main source of exposure to English was through their English classes which prohibited the use of L1 during the class session.
Then, the study found three themes to answer the research question. The first theme was students’ feeling. The other themes were related to students’ opinion and students’ behavior towards the monolingual approach. The researcher discussed the themes in the subsequent sections of this study.
The Emotional Aspect of Attitude towards the Monolingual Approach
Students’ fondness toward English-only class
The data indicated that 34% students somewhat agreed that they liked to study in a class in that English was used as a language instruction. Meanwhile, 18.4% students strongly agreed that they enjoyed the English lesson at their school. Enjoying learning English with the
English-only environment would possibly develop students’ positive attitude.
Table 3. Students’ Response of Fondness towards English-Only Class
No Statements Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree 1. I like to learn English in a class 1,0 5.8 40.8 34,0 18.4 where English is used as the
language of instruction and I enjoy my English lesson at school.
2. I like if my English teacher uses 2,9 14.6 46.6 26,2 9.7 English-only to communicate
during classroom activities.
On the other hand, the data revealed that 46.6% students were neutral in responding whether they like if their teacher uses English to communicate during class activities. This finding implied that the students recognized the importance of exposure to English in learning. At the same time, the use of L1 sometimes needs to be applied in teaching L2. This result was slightly different to the finding result conducted by Nazary (2008) who reported that 72% of Parisian University students preferred to teachers who use more than one language rather than those who use one language only in the classroom. It indicated that the students seemed to prefer a teacher who uses one language only in the classroom.
Students’ confidence and anxiety to learn the L2 in an L2 setting
Item 3 in Table 4 reported that 29,1% students somewhat agreed and 21,4% strongly
agreed that they feel excited and challenged when they are allowed to speak in English-only.
Table 4. Students’ Responses of Their Confidence and Anxiety
No Statements Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
3. I am excited and challenged when 14.6 24.3 45.6 8,7 6.8 I am allowed only to use English in
class.
4. I am not confident with my 1,0 10.7 37.9 29,1 21,4 English ability; thus, I become
passive in my English class.
5. Getting a punishment if I speak 6.8 10.7 43.7 28,2 10,7 Indonesian in class makes me
afraid to participate during a class activity.
Nevertheless, almost half of students (43,7%) selected a neutral response telling that they become passive in the classroom because they feel unconfident with their English ability. It was likely that the students were afraid of making some mistakes when they spoke English. Further, the students showed neither agree nor disagree (45,6%) that they were frightened to participate if the teacher punished the students who spoke the Indonesian language in the classroom. This finding indicated that the enforcement did not cause the students’ anxiety in participating in a class.
The Cognitive Aspects of Attitude towards the Monolingual Approach Students’ language ability while studying in a monolingual setting
Table 5. Students’ Response towards Their Language Ability
No Statements Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree 6. I understand everything 1,9 11.7 31.1 45.6 9.7 that my teacher says
in English.
7. I clearly understand
the instruction given by 1,0 8.7 35,0 43.7 11,7 my teacher in English.
8. I comprehend main points 0 8.7 34,0 43.7 13,6 of the material being taught
by my teacher in English.
being taught by my teacher in English.
Regarding students’ understanding of their teacher’s utterance in item 6 and 7, it was found that more than 50% of students showed their agreement that during the English lesson, they understood instructions that their teacher said in English. This finding suggested that the majority of students showed their positive opinion when their teacher always spoke in English during the lesson. It appeared to prove that the students’ English language ability to understand their teacher instruction and utterance has improved because they have learned to be accustomed to listening the teacher’s instruction, and explanation in English.
Also, in item 8 and 9, there were more than half of students agreed that they were able to grasp main points of the material being taught in English. In this case, those students were able to follow and comprehend all the materials. The finding revealed that the implementation of monolingual practices in an English class did not impede students’ learning process. Similar to Hoang, Jang, and Yang’s (2009) result in their previous study, there were more than 70% Vietnamese University students who were able to grasp the main points of the lesson.
The use of English-only in teaching and learning situations
Table 6. Students’ Responses Towards the Use of English-Only in Their Classroom
No Statements Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree 10. I think Indonesian should not 7.8 23.3 43.7 18.4 6.8 be used in any situations in
English classes.
11. I think English should be used to 3.9 11.7 47.6 23.3 13.6 discuss tests, quizzes, and
assignments in the class.
12. I think the teacher should teach 1,0 17.5 30.1 30.1 21,4 grammar and new vocabularies
using English-only.
13. I think a teacher should 1,9 4.9 39.8 35,0 18,4 speak English-only when giving
instruction for activities in the class.
Regarding students’ responses to the statement that the Indonesian language should not be used in any situation in an English classroom, it was found that 43,7% students were neutral. Moreover, almost a half number of students (47,6%) thought that English should be used to discuss classrooms’ tests, quizzes, and assignments during the English lesson.
strongly agreed that English should be used in giving instructions during class activities. This current result was contradictory with Burden’s (2000) as cited in Nazary (2008) research on 290 Japanese University students. His study showed that most of the students believed that L1 is essential to explain vocabulary, grammar, instructions, classroom tests, quizzes, and assignments.
The benefits of using English exclusively in an L2 setting
Obviously, based on their responses to the statement 14, 25,2% students somewhat agreed and 51,5% students strongly agreed that practicing English would accommodate them to communicate in English better.
Table 7. The Students’ Responses of Using English Exclusively in a L2 Setting
No Statements Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
14. The more English is 1,0 3.9 18.4 25.2 51,5 used in a class, the better
I learn to communicate in English.
15. I think to master English, I have 0 2.9 38.8 27.2 31,1 I have to English exclusively
in my class.
Meanwhile, in statement 15, 58,3% of students thought that English should be used exclusively in the class to help them master the language. This possibly proved that forcing
the students to learn with the English-only was found to be advantageous.
Students’ Behavioral Aspects of Attitude towards the Monolingual Approach Students’ participation and interaction in a monolingual class
Item 16 indicated 47,6% neutral responses that the students asked their teacher if they needed help to comprehend materials in English. According to Vanichakorn’s (2009) observation result in a monolingual class, there were just a few times when the students raised their hands and asked questions to the teacher directly. It was assumed that those monolingual students were not comfortable enough to ask their teacher using English when they did not comprehend some materials. Table 8 details the findings.
Table 8. Students’ Responses of Participation and Interaction in a Monolingual Class
No Statement Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
16. If I don’t understand the material 1.0 15.5 47.6 24.3 11,7 being taught in my class,
17. If I don’t understand the material 1,0 1.9 30.1 42,7 24,3 being taught in class, I prefer to ask
my other classmates.
18.I can interrupt and ask my teacher 3,9 7.8 46.6 29.1 12,6 to repeat the explanation in English.
19.I communicate with my teacher and 1,9 10,7 48,5 29,1 9,7 my other classmates in English
during the class.
20 I communicate with my other 0 4.9 31.1 35,0 29,1 classmates in Indonesian if my
teacher cannot hear us.
21. I will answer the questions in 1,0 1.9 29.1 44,7 23,3 English when my teacher point at me.
22. I discuss with my other group 1,0 10.7 52.4 28.2 7.8 member by using English
23. I can express my opinion 1,9 11.7 47.6 28,2 10,7 in English in the class.
.
On the contrary, in item 17, 42.7% of students somewhat agreed and 24,3 % of students strongly agreed that they chose their other classmates to be asked about comprehension problems (item 17). More than half numbers of students looked for help from their classmates instead of asking their teacher to help them. As the majority of the students preferred their other classmates to help them, this finding seemed to verify the claim of Vanichakorn (2009)
that the students from the English-only classes relied a great deal on the so-called good
students who helped facilitate the teacher’s English only instructions.
The neutral response (46,6%) was also found in item 18. It was likely that when the students interacted with their teacher, most of them showed neutral responses. A similar response was also found in item 19 showing 48,5% neutral responses.
In item 20, the students had more positive responses. 35% of the students somewhat agreed and 29,1% of them strongly agreed on the statement in the item. This was a surprising result because a half number of students would switch to Indonesian when the teacher could not hear them. Hoang, Jang, and Yang’s study (2009) found that only 19% Vietnamese University students who switched into the Vietnamese language when the teacher could not hear them.
assignments or tasks with their group mates in English. Concerning with students’ participation and interaction in a monolingual class, the data showed 47.6% neutral responses that the students were capable of expressing their opinions in English.
Since these 11th
-grade students have been studying in a monolingual class for more than
a year, they possibly have adapted with the classroom setting where English is the only language option for teaching and learning. The students believed that maximizing English use in the class would help them to practice English. Besides, they viewed that high exposure to English would speed their language competence to master English.
The study highlighted some cases for which English appeared to be useful in the L2 setting. The students thought that grammar functions, vocabulary, and classroom instructions should be explained in English. Besides, the students appeared to consider using the mixture of English and Indonesian in an English classroom. In that case, they wished their teacher to allow them sometimes to speak the Indonesian language. Nearly half of the students did not put much effort to express their opinion or to ask their teacher to repeat questions in English. Instead, the students agreed that they answered questions in English when their teacher asked them.
Concerning the students’ performance in the class, the students limited their participation and interaction with the teacher in English. In fact, they acted differently when the teacher was near them and when the teacher was not. They showed high neutral responses in communicating with their teacher and other classmates in English. However, the findings showed an agreement that they switched to talk in Indonesian language with their classmates when their teacher could not hear them. Then, during a group discussion, the majority of students mixed English and Indonesian language to discuss the tasks or assignments with their fellow group members.
Furthermore, when facing difficulties in comprehending a learning material, only a few students who were willing to interact with their teacher and to ask about their difficulties. Meanwhile, most of the students seemed to seek help from other classmates. Apparently, this particular finding is not in harmony with the previous statement about students’ opinion regarding comprehension of the material. Eventually, the findings would seem to indicate that the monolingual approach could prevent the majority of students to involve fully in their classroom activities.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study is to explore the high school students’ attitude towards the monolingual approach in English classes. Overall, the students show positive attitude towards the Monolingual approach. They perceived the implementation of the Monolingual Approach well. They also showed a pleasant feeling studying in their monolingual class, as they were aware of the importance of L2 use in the L2 learning. However, it was essential to note that the approach did not facilitate the students’ learning performance effectively in class. The majority of students showed neutral responses regarding how they acted and dealt with their learning difficulties. The approach limited them from having full participation in their class and interaction with their teacher.
their communication skill frequently. It is also important to keep encouraging the students to be more enthusiastic about participating in their class and in interacting with their teacher and other classmates using English.
The findings of this study have several limitations. The attitudinal questionnaire could only provide the general statements of students’ behavior, belief, and feeling towards the monolingual approach without asking detail reasons what caused them to think and feel the way they did. Further, the students’ English proficiency has not been yet measured. Thus, the findings have relied on the students’ past or current experiences studying in the monolingual approach class. To find deeper insights of the students’ thought and feeling, future researchers
need to do class observations and semi-structure interviews as a part of data collection
instruments. It can help future researchers to select students who get a low and high score to be interviewed as the attitude towards the monolingual approach possessed by both types of students may come out differently.
REFERENCES
Abidin, D. J. (2012). EFL students' attitudes toward learning languageː The case of Libyan
Secondary School Students. Asian Social Science, 8(2), 119-134. Retrieved March 5,
2013, from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ass/article/view/14617
Al-jadidi, H., & Sanguinetti, J. (2010). Characteristic Pedagogical Style of Bilingual and
Monolingual English Teachers. International Journal Arts and Science , 3(16), 131
-147. Retrieved October 15, 2013 from http://www.openaccesslibrary.org/images/
BGS269_Husna_Al-jadidi.pdf
Al-Nofaie, H. (2010). Attitudes of Teachers and Students towards Using Arabic in EFL
Classrooms in Saudi Public Schools - A Case Study. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on
Youth and Language), 4(1), pp. 64-95.Retrieved November 8, 2013 from
http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_4_1/al-nofaie.pdf
Auerbach, E. (1993).Re-examining English Only in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly,
27(1), 9-32. Retrieved January 23, 2013 from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files /rcd/BE019020/Reexamining_English_Only.pdf.
Burden, P. (2000).The use of the students’ mother tongue in monolingual English
“Conversation” classes at Japanese universities. The Language Teacher, 24(6), 5-11
Retrieved July 14, 2013 from http://jaltpublications.org/old_tlt/ articles/2000/06/burden
Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press, Retrieved February 16, 2013 from http://eku.comu.edu.tr/ eku/index.php/eku/article/download/124/pdf_55.
Ellis, R. (2005).Principles of Instructed language learning. Asian EFL Journal, 7(3).Retrieved
March 5,2013 from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/sept_05_re.pdf
Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition; Second Edition. Oxford:
Kalanzadeh,GA, Hemati, F., Shahivand, Z., & Bakhtiarvand, M.(2013). The Use of EFL
Students' L1 In English Class. The International Journal of Language Learning and
Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW) ,2, p.30-39. Retrieved March 7, 2013 from http://www.academia.edu/2480620/THE_USE_OF_EFL_STUDENTSL1
_IN_ENGLISH_CLASSES
Hoang, N. T., Jang, S. H., & Yang, Y. (2010). English-Only Classrooms: Ideology versus
Reality. International Education Research Conference, pp 1-11. Melbourneː
Australian Association for Research in Education. Retrieved January 23, 2013, from http://www.aare.edu.au/10pap/1755HoangJangYang.pdf
Ibrahim, J. (2001). The Implementation of EMI (English Medium of Instruction) inIndonesian University:Its Opportunities its Threats,its Problem and its Possible solution. 49th International TEFLIN Conference in Bali, 3, pp. 121-137. Surabaya: Petra Christian University. Retrieved February 23, 2013 from http://puslit.petra.ac.id/ journals/letters/
Kurihara, N. (2006). Classroom Anxiety: How Does Student Attitude Change in English Oral
communication class in a Japanese senior high school?. Accents Asia Organization,
1(1).Retrieved March 15, 2013, fromhttpː//www.accentsasia.org/1-1/kurihara.pdf
Lee, J. H. (2012). Reassessment of English-only approach in EFL context in view of young
learners’ attitudes, language proficiency, and vocabulary knowledge. Multilingual
Education a SpringerOpen Journal, 2(5).Retrieved February 12, 2013, from
multilingual-education.: http://www.multilingual-education.com/content/2/1/5
McMillan, B. A., & Rivers, D. J. (2011). The Practice of policyːTeacher attitude toward
"English Only". Elseivier:System, 39(2), 251-263. Retrieved February 15, 2013, from
http://www.mville.edu/images/stories/Graduate_Academics_Education/ChangingSubur bs/ELLStrategiesAndResourse/Teacher_attitudes_in_classrooms.pdf.
Milles, R. (2004). Evaluating the use of L1 in the English Language Classroom (Master
Thesis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham), pp. 1-38. Retrieved January 26,
2013 from http://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/resources/essays/Milesdiss.pdf
Mouhanna, M. (2009). Re-Examining the Role of L1 in the EFL Classroom. UGRU Journal, 8,
1-19. Retrieved March 14, 2013 from http://www.ugr.uaeu.ac.ae/ acads/ugrujournal/
docs/REL1.pdf.
Nazary, M. (2008). The Role of L1 in L2 Acquisitionː Attitudes of Iranian University
Students. Novitas Royal Research on Youth and Language, 2(2), 138-152.
Retrieved December 4, 2013 from http://www.novitasroyal.org/nazary.pdf.
Pardede, P. (2013). Evaluation of Use of MT in EFL Classes of Secondary Schools in
Jadetabek: Students and Teachers’ Perception (Research Proposal, Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Jakarta). Retrieved Juni 15, 2013, from Scribd Website:
www.scribd.com/ ;137890893/Proposal-Evaluation-MT-in-EFL-Class
from https://dspace.aus.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11073/28/Final_thesis___ June_11.pdf?sequence=1
Rahman, S. (2005). Orientations and Motivation in English Language Learningː a Study of
Bangladeshi Students at Undergraduate Level. Asian EFL Journal, 7(1), 1-25.
Retrieved February 28, 2013 from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/March_05_sr.pdf.
Sadeharju, T. (2012). Language Choice in EFL Teaching: Student teachers’ perceptions.
Department of Languages English, Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. Retrieved
October 22, 2013 from https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/bitstream/handle/
123456789/40678/URN%3ANBN%3Afi%3Ajyu-201301111029.pdf?sequence=1.
Sukamolson Suphat, P. (2007). Fundamentals of quantitative research. Language Institute
Chulalongkorn University. Bangkok: CULI, .55-75. Retrieved November 13, 2013 from
http://www.culi.chula.ac.th/e-journal/bod/suphat%20sukamolson.pdf.
Tsukamoto, M. (2011). Students' perception of teachers' language use in EFL classroom. Osaka Jogakuin University Research Journal, 8, 143-154. Retrieved, March 27, 2013
from http://ir-lib.wilmina.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10775/2438/1/d2011_08.pdf.
Vanichakorn, N. (2009, September). Re-Examine The Use Of The Student's First Language
In The English As A Foreign Language Classrooms: A Cross-Case Analysis From
Undergraduate Engineering Students In Bangkok, Thailand. Journal of College
Teaching & Learning, 5(6),1-16. Retrieved October 12, 2013 from http://journals.cluteonline.com/index.php/TLC/article/viewFile/1137/1121.
Viavara, J. J. (2011, April). How Do EFL students Teachers Face the challenge of using L2 in
Public School?. Profile Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 13(1), 55-74.
Retrieved January 22, 2013 from http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?pid=S1657
-07902011000100004&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en
Wu, Y. (2008). Classifying attitudes by topic aspect for English and Chinese Document
Collections (Dissertation, University of Maryland, Maryland), pp. 42-45. Retrieved
March 31, 2013 from http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/8150/1/umi-umd
