EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT DISCOURAGE STUDENTS
TO PRACTICE SPEAKING IN ENGLISH
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Ardiyarso Kurniawan 112009018
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT DISCOURAGE STUDENTS
TO PRACTICE SPEAKING IN ENGLISH
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Ardiyarso Kurniawan 112009018
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT DISCOURAGE STUDENTS
TO PRACTICE SPEAKING IN ENGLISH
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Ardiyarso Kurniawan 112009018
Approved by:
Christian Rudianto, S.Pd., M.AppLing. Rindang W., M. Hum.
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any other person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2013. Ardiyarso Kurniawan and Christian Rudianto, S.Pd., M.AppLing.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya Wacana University, Salatiga.
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION Kind of Work : Undergraduate Thesis
In developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free right for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
External Factors that Discouraged Students to Practice Speaking In English
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce, print, publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or database, transmit, broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part without my express written permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge. Made in : Salatiga Date : 19 June, 2013
Verified by signee,
Ardiyarso Kurniawan Approved by:
Christian Rudianto, S.Pd., M.AppLing. Rindang W., M.Hum.
EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT DISCOURAGE STUDENTS
TO PRACTICE SPEAKING IN ENGLISH
Ardiyarso Kurniawan
English Department of Satya Wacana Christian University
ABSTRACT
In language learning, giving chances to practice the target language is needed. Practicing for a period of time can lead the students to acquire higher achievement and knowledge. However, there are internal and external factors affecting the language learning and eagerness of practicing using the language. In my study context, the students do not have any problem with internal factors, but they were discouraged to practice speaking in English caused by external factors. Realizing that it is necessary to find out the problem faced by the students, this study aims to find out external factors that discourage the students to practice speaking in English. This study uses Qualitative method because this study describes how external factors can discourage students to practice speaking in English. The subjects of this study are 7 SMP Laboratorium students who were joining English Zone club. In this study, stimulated-recall interview was used to collect the data which were gathered on 6th – 19th February 2013. The questions were adapted from Brianne (2006) who conducted a research on internal and external factors in language learning. The results of the interview were analyzed using transcribing parts of a lesson and got the participants to comment on what was happening at the time the activity under study took place (Nunan, 1989) and categorizing data that provides a means to classify the data (Lieblech, Tuval-Mashich and Zilber, 1998). It is indicated that the participants had problems on three external factors in language learning: relationship between teacher- students and students-students, Learning Environment and Learning styles. Also, some recommendations were proposed to increase the students’ performances.
Keywords: Language learning, external factors
INTRODUCTION
personal practice, and study habits. External factors refer to the institutional contexts in which language learning takes place. Brianne (2006) states that external factors (include learning environment, length of exposure, and learning style) happen to the learner, not because of the learner.
This study is taken from my real experience while teaching English in a Junior High School club activity called English zone. This activity is made for students who are interested in learning English. All materials are delivered in English, that includes explanation and instruction in teaching-learning process. The students could understand the material and instruction given. For example, when I asked them to write a simple story about their last holiday, then they made an outline of their story. Not only that, they use the appropriate tenses (past tense). The examples above show that they have a good basic English. They could differenciate when they should use past and present tense, and also understand the instruction given. However, when they have to present their works, they feel so shy. They prefer to point out other students to do it. Although the students have a good basic English (grammar, tenses, etc.), they faced a problem in English speaking practice. The students are discouraged to practice speaking in English. What becomes the problem is the external factor outside of the influence of the learner. In this paper, I will focus on external factors that discouraged students to practice speak in English. Thus, I assume that there are external factors which discouraged students to practice speak in English. This study focuses on the contribution of finding out external factors that happen during teaching-learning
LITERATURE REVIEW
Many people are successful in learning a foreign language because they are hardworking and willing to learn. Students have to be able to acquire not only theory,
but practically also. Hussin, Maarof, and D’Cruz (2001) mention that what occurs in
the language classrooms must be extended beyond the walls of the classroom so that a link is created between what is learned in the classrooms with what occurs outside of the classrooms. Languages cannot be learned merely in classrooms. Learning a language requires communication in real life situations. Thus, students need to acquire communication skills that they can use with various kinds of people. It is essential that they learn not only how to communicate in the target language but also the background, history, and culture that defines it. Practicing speaks in English during the teaching and learning time is important because it is a chance to practice English skills, in this case speaking, in the class. Nevertheless, there are factors that can't always be controlled. Brianne (2006) divides factors affecting language learning into two: internal and external factors. These divisions are not based on whether the features are specific to an individual or to a variety of learners, but rather on what level of control the learner has on each one. He stated that internal factors include those which are determined by the individual learner such as motivation, attitude, personal and study habits. According to this theory, each of these (internal factors) is
an individual component of the students’ ability to learn a foreign language. For
Brianne (2006) states that learning environment is the place or space where learning occurs, which contains Classroom size, size of the group, tools and devices provided. According to Wilson (1995), students who are given generous access to information resources-- books, print and video materials, etc.--and tools--word-processing programs, e-mail, search tools, etc.--are likely to learn.
The next external factor is length of exposure. It refers to the amount of time they have been studying with the language. Length of exposure to a language may also be an aspect in language learning, especially in learner’s achievement (Brianne,
p.37). Not only that, he adds : “it was the long and sustained exposure and opportunity
to use the language which gave younger group an advantage over the older ones, not
simply their being at a young age.” (p.40)
Another important external factor is about Learning styles, educational conditions under which a student is most likely to learn (Stewart & Fellicetti, 1992). Thus, learning styles are not really concerned what learners learn, but rather how they prefer to learn.
Despite the English club students have good basic English, the students are discouraged to practice speaking in English. He/she just points out the others to answer or present their work to the class. I often witness and experience it in English club. Discouragement cannot happen by itself. It is influenced by many factors (internal and external) around it.
There are some theories about factors that discouraged the students to practice
This study wants to find out external factors that discouraged students to practice speak in English.
Ellis (1985) uses the categories of “personal” (motivation, self-esteem, attitudes, study habits, learning environment, and language aptitude) and “general” (age, aptitude, cognitive style) factors. He claims that personal factors are highly
idiosyncratic features of each individual’s approach to learn a language (100) and general one are variables that affect all learners (100). Each component affects every learner in language learning, although perhaps in different ways. In my opinion it
doesn’t benefit this study to categorize them into personal and general way. Based on
Brianne theory about internal and external factors, the researcher has decided that age, motivation, self- esteem, attitudes, study habits, cognitive style and aptitude as internal factors and learning environment as external factors. From these two theories (Brianne and Ellis), learning environment is categorized as one of the external factors.
Hussin, Maarof, and D’Cruz (2001) support that the relevance of conductive
environment that could contribute to the success of language learning.
could affect students’ willingness. In my opinion, classroom atmosphere while teaching learning process could affect the students’ willingness to learn. If they feel
comfortable with the atmosphere that the teacher just create, they will have good willing to learn, especially practicing speak in English.
From those theories and examples given above, it can be seen kinds of external factors that discouraged students to practice speak English in classroom. Therefore, by using Brianne (2006) and Hussin, Maarof and D’Cruz theory, it is interesting to look for a research of the external factors as the additional references for the development of EFL education.
THE STUDY
Context of the Study
I had been a teaching-practicum student in a private school in Salatiga. During the time, I had taught students and found that they have good Basic English. At the same time, evidence was emerging that students were discouraged to practice speak in English. For these reason I chose to investigate external factor that discouraged students to practice speak in English.
already had some knowledge of the school. This would provide relative access and observation process.
Participants
The participants were SMP Lab students who join English club. In this club activity includes 7 students from different grades only because from two English Zone classes, one class was closed by the SMP Lab teacher consideration. Most of them are 7th graders, but only one who is 8th graders. They were being interviewed related to the topic. The research was conducted in Semester I/2012-2013. The data were gathered from 29th January – 11th February 2013.
The table below is the information about the participants.
No. Participant initial Sex Class
1. DA Female 7A
2. JE Female 7B
3. GE Female 7C
4. JN Male 7B
5. OG Female 7B
6. SA Female 7B
Method and Methodology
The research question of this study is “What are the external factors that discouraged English Club Students in SMP Laboratorium to practice speaking in
English?” It was done by using Qualitative Research. Based on Maxwell (2005) it is included in Qualitative research because the question is about the influence on particular events and activities.
Interview method was chosen for this research since this study wanted to find out the external factors that discouraged English Zone students in SMP Laboratorium to practice speaking in English. According to Johnson (1985), oral interview has been used by second language acquisition researcher seeking data on stages and processes on acquisition. A stimulate-recalled interview was applied in this study. The
interviews’ findings were transcribed and categorized based on the literature review. Based on the responses to these interviews, one can draw conclusion on the external factors that discouraged SMP Lab students to practice speaking in English.
Data Instrument
A stimulate-recalled interview was applied in this study to collect the data
from the participants in order get access into students’ cognitive domains. There were 6 questions, 1 question was about the background in joining English Club, 4 questions were about external factors which were adapted from Brianne (2006), Hussin, Maarof,
process in English Zone class. The questions given were structured to find out the external factors.
All the participants were interviewed one by one in order to get more understanding of their opinions and responses. The individual interview was recorded using a mobile phone. Each participant took about 10 minutes to answer all the questions. All of the conversations were in Indonesian in order to get more comfortable atmosphere and ease the participants in giving their answers.
Data Analysis
After the all data were successfully collected, then I made the transcription. Elliot (2005) believes that the transcribing process is better understood as a compromise. Using clean transcription would be better, because I only focus on the content of the interview. Next, I read the data several times to get what the data says exactly and also highlight important lines related to external factors mentioned by the interviewee. Then the data findings were mentioned and explained. I had to decide on categories that emerged from the data. Lieblech, Tuval-Mashich and Zilber (1998) describes category as perspective that provides a means to classify the data. After all the findings had been put and mentioned, I linked the theoretical framework with all the research findings.
Procedure
interviewee, I did piloting the interview question, included record and transcribe parts of a lesson which aim at samples chosen. After piloting had finished, I started doing interview. Before the interview began, I explained the purpose of the interview to the interviewees and answer any questions they had. In the interview section, a more deep elaboration toward the research question about external factors that discouraged them to practice speaking in English. I also showed parts of recording and then asked the participants to comment on what was happening at that time. After the data were collected, the recorded conversations were transcribed for each participant. Then, the information in the transcripts was categorized based on the question. It consists of 6 main parts: 1) reason for joining English Zone, 2) length of exposure in learning English, 3) relationship between teacher-students or students-students, 4) learning environment: group size, classroom environment; classroom size, time, and facilities, 5) learning styles, and 6) related to the video taken.
DISCUSSION
Length of Exposure
According to Brianne (2006), the question about length of exposure referred to the amount of time they have been studying with the language. Length of exposure to a language may also be an aspect in language learning, especially in learner’s achievement (p.37). He adds that: “it was the long and sustained exposure and opportunity to use the language which gave younger group an advantage over the
older ones, not simply their being at a young age.” (p.40)
The interviews with the participants specify that the majority of participants began studying English in Kindergarten. They have studied English for 7 years in average. Brianne claimed that the amount of time they have been studying English affects their levels of proficiency. All the participants have a good Basic English. When asked about the score in English subject DA said “Lumayan...80-90 (not too bad… about 80-90)”. When she recalls what score she got in the test, she mentioned
that she always gets good scores for English Subject. This response was not only stated by DA, but also the other participants.
From the responses given by the participants, it can be generalized that all of the participants have a good basic of English for Junior High School level. However, the participants still want to develop their English proficiency. In conclusion, the length of exposure to English has given them good basic of English to perform in English Zone.
Good relationship between teacher- students and students-students
In this section, how the relationship between teacher and students and between students and peers is discussed. The answers given are analyzed and classified according the participants’ opinion.
Students – Students Relationship
Hussin, Maarof, and D’Cruz (2001) said that relationships between learners
are important. In classroom in which mutual respect is lacking, differing values can lead to conflicts between student and peer. From here, the conflict between 7th and 8th graders affected their relationship.
Most of the participants (7th graders) said that they prefer the class with the same grade only. Like what OG said “Aku lebih suka yang sendiri, maksudnya kelas 1 sendiri kelas 2 sendiri (I prefer to the class that consists of 7th graders only)”. Firstly, it was mentioned that they, 7th graders, don’t know 8th graders well. The excerpt from the interview with JE was taken: “..Rasanya agak aneh. Soalnya biasanya kita ngomong, bergaul sama kelas 7... (I feel a kind of strange that just because we (7th
graders) interact and communicate with 7th graders only.)”Secondly, OG stated that each grade has different materials. Perhaps, the 8th graders already know and understand the material earlier.
Conflicts in classroom may affect students’ performance. There was a participant who stated her experience and how the relationship affected her
“Biasanya kalau aku salah, diejek terus. Padahal aku
salahnya Cuma sedikit aja. Yang lain salahnya banyak tapi
gak diejek. itu sih seandainya kalau yang dateng kelas 7 aja,
aku berani. Tapi karena yang dateng juga ada kelas 8,
kadang gak meduliin lagi adik kelasnya (If I make a mistake
usually my friends make a fun of me even on a small
mistake. Sometimes, the others just make their mistakes, but
no one make a fun of them. If the members were 7 graders
only, perhaps I would do it. In fact, the members are 7 & 8
graders and sometimes they don‟t care about their younger
brother.)”
Uniquely, at first GE said that she just felt comfortable already with their friends. Later, when she was asked related to the video taken, she said in the following interview, “Apalagi disitu kan juga ada kakak kelas! Ya Suasananya tetep aja beda kalau ada kakak kelas, takut diketawain kalau salah (Not only that, 8th
grader is there! Ya…The atmosphere may little bit different, I‟m afraid if they make a
fun of me.)“
The contradictory performance from what they stated about the presence of the older grader happened not only to 7th grader. NI, 8th grade student, also stated the same idea.
”Sebenernya di suruh maju, tapi takut salah nanti
diketawain jadi ada perasaan takut gitu. takut diketawain
sama yang ikut ex skul. …murid-muridnya yang suka
forward, but I was afraid if the members, to be specific the
students, laugh at me when I make a mistake.) “
In this section, the participants (7th & 8th graders) were blaming each other.
This result may seem contradictory with Hussin, Maarof, and D’Cruz (2001), who states that mutual respect is needed in the classroom. What just happened in the class is that mutual respect is lacking and leads to conflicts between student and peer. As a conclusion, the relationship affected their performance, especially practicing speak in English.
Teacher-students relationship
According to Kabilan (2000) another important point in good relationship is that teacher-students relationship. He states that teachers should develop a mutual relationship with their learners. In order to develop a mutual relationship with their learners, teachers need to understand students who are from different backgrounds, have different interests, future goals, aims for English learning, and most importantly, different personalities. Once they understand them better, teachers are able to apply specific teaching and communicating strategies tailored to each student, thereby creating a trusting relationship between a teacher and student. Once a relationship develops, the classroom will become comfortable and enjoyable enough for students to learn positively from the teacher without any hesitation.
“Boseni… Gak seru! Gak murah senyum (Boring… It
wasn‟t challenging! They are unfriendly.)”
These results show the lack of mutual relationship between teachers and students (Kabilan, 2000). According to the participants, as mentioned earlier, the teachers
couldn’t understand their students well. The excerpt below was quoted from the
interview with NI which supports SA statement.
“Cemberut-cemberut gak jelas.. Ya tadi pas aku masuk,
kelihatannya gimana gitu…(She showed unfriendly face..
When I was entering the classroom.. looked unfriendly..)”
In conclusion, the teacher couldn’t develop mutual relationship with their students. It becomes a problem because the classroom is uncomfortable and not enjoyable for the students. In addition Kabilan (2000) stated that teachers are required to teach all the students the importance of having respect for one another in a classroom so that each of the students can actively participate in lesson.
Learning Environment
Brianne (2006) stated that learning environment is the place or space where learning occurs, which contains Classroom size, size of the group, tools and devices provided. All these environments are discussed in the followings.
Group size:
with exceptional needs, the class should be smaller. Classroom size doesn’t refer to the physical size of the classroom. Rather, it refers to the number of the students in the classroom. According to Resnick and Zurowsky (2003), students in this optimal classroom condition experience continuing pressure to participate in learning activities and become better, more involved students. Attention to learning goes up and disruptive and off task behavior goes down.
When the participants were being asked about the group size in English Zone, they answered differently. Most of the students said that the group size is still small. They expected to have more students in this class. They argue that more students mean more chance for them to share their knowledge with others. As said by NI in the following interview:
“Belum sih… Iya, jadinya biar untuk nambah-nambah
temen, biar saling sharing pengalaman dan belajar bahasa
Inggris gitu (It is important in order to get more friends
and also share our experiences in learning English.)”
OG adds that inviting more students from the same grade is better. As OG states:
“Hmm.. kalau menurutku terlalu sedikit deh. Perlu
ditambah lagi. tapi lebih mending sama kelas 7nya (Hmm,
I think it is too small. We need to invite more students. But I
The two statements above indicate that the group size of English Zone is small, 7 students. Referring to NEA about ideal group size and influence of group size and pressure by Resnick and Zurowsky (2003), there is no problem with the group size because the number of students doesn’t exceed the optimal group size limit. Every individual has some limitations in his or her thinking, skill and ability. Size of the group affects how individuals interact with each other as well as the overall performance. What becomes the problem is the group size doesn’t reach the group size limit. The participants want to invite other students, who are the same graders. This statement is related with relationship between students and peers which discussed previously. As mentioned earlier, the participants want to invite the other students in order to share their experiences in learning English. Browder (2005) says that learning requires active participation. One of the elements in active participation is interacting with peers. The link between class participation and peers is further supported by recent research conducted by Fantuzzo, Sekino, and Cohen (2004). They found that students who participated in more interactive peer are more likely to participate in classroom activities without prompting from the teacher. Consistent with previous findings, result indicates that students also displayed higher academic skills. Furthermore, higher levels of classroom participation, as well as higher levels of interactive peers, have been linked to higher levels of their performance, to be specific practicing English.
Classroom environment:
properly organized to support the type of schedule and activities a teacher has planned, it can impede the functioning of the day as well as limit what and how students learn. Hale (2002) found that students in classrooms with large windows, natural lighting, and well-designed skylights performed 19 to 26% better than their peers in classrooms without these features. Not only that, Hunter (2006) found that the environmental conditions in schools, which included the inoperative heating system, inadequate ventilation, and poor lighting, affected the health and learning as well as the morale of students and the staff. English Zone is conducted in two preferable rooms, PSB or Multimedia room. It depends of the availability of the room schedule on that day.
Regarding the classroom environment, most of the students prefer PSB than multimedia room which is cleaner. GE says:
“Kalau menurutku antar PSB sama Multimedia lebih enak
PSB Lebih bersih (In my opinion, I prefer PSB rather than
Multimedia room. PSB is cleaner.)”
Not only that, another participant says that PSB has a good ventilation circulation which makes comfortable. As DA says from the following interview:
“Multimednya terlalu pengap. PSB Lebih nyaman, dan
kelihatannya ruangannya lebih baru (The multimedia
room is just really stuffy. PSB is more comfortable and
This result shows that cleanliness and inadequate ventilation are the problem when the English Zone is conducted in Multimedia room. It is in line with Hunter (2006) who says that the environmental conditions will affect the health and learning as well as the morale of students and the staff. As schools have been successful in eradicating asbestos, arsenic in drinking water and lead in paint, mold and its effect on indoor air quality have established a new challenge in maintaining a comfortable environment in which students can learn (Colgan, 2003). Studies have shown that schools with indoor air quality problems experience a higher rate of health problems with students (Guarneiri, 2003). It then stands to reason that sick children will not be as likely to succeed academically. Therefore Gertel, McCarty, and Schoff (2004) state that it was important for school to provide an appropriate environment for learning. In summary, all students should be provided an opportunity to learn in a quality environment conducive to maximizing both the teaching learning process and their performance in classroom.
Classroom size:
size (either PSB or Multimedia) is large enough. In the following interview NI says: “sama saja. Ya kalau yang ikut cuma sedikit ya luas (Both are the same. The
members are only a few so the rooms are big.)”. The members of English Zone are 7 students only. Actually, the classroom size of PSB could accommodate 25 students and multimedia could accommodate 15 students. Relating to Tanner (2000) about the density, the contrast between the students’ number and the classroom size could be seen here. Both, of PSB and Multimedia room have less density. Like what OG says,
“karena personil English Zone itu terlalu sedikit, jadi ruangnya sangat luas.(Only a few number of English Zone members, so the room looks very big)”.
In line with Tanner (2006), the participants have ample space in the classroom to interact with the others. In conclusion, they do not have any problem with the physical size of the classroom.
Time:
English Zone is one of the club activities in SMP Lab. This club activity starts right after teaching-learning process in the school finished, around 14.00. However, the participants give interesting answers; mostly they have no problem with the time. GE said “Ya, gak masalah aja (Ya.. no problem.)”, related with the time. Another participant, JN, also supported that”Oh, sebelum English Zone, waktu istirahat kedua kan sudah makan, jadi sudah isi energy. Pulangnya sore pun juga gak masalah,
karena pelajarannya menyenangkan. (Oh, I have my lunch at the 2nd time break
before English Zone so I‟m already fully charged of energy. It‟s okay for going home
late in the evening because English Zone is fun)”.
Therefore, expecting students to engage in learning time after their primary activity in school, at a time of day when alertness is lower, both because of the time of day and the fatigue caused by the primary activity. Refer back to alertness by Kramer (2000), English Zone starts at 2 p.m., which means in between the highest alertness. Interestingly, the participants already prepared for the time condition of this club activity. It makes them ready for the English Zone. In other words, the participants faced no problem with the learning time of English Zone.
Facilities:
The data shows that most of the students are satisfied and comfortable enough with the facilities provided by the school. As DA says in the following interview:
“Ya fasilitasnya sih udah lumayan. Udah ada ACnya.
Sejauh ini baik-baik saja (I think the facilities are pretty
good. AC is already installed in the room. So far so good.)”
Another participant, JN, also supports DA statement. He says that he the facilities are good, and could enjoy it. “Bagus, dan bisa menikmati. (Good and I could enjoy it)”.
However, there are some students who have different opinion about the facilities provided. As GE says,
“Multimedia itu LCD belum terlalu canggih, masih pakai papan putih itu pak. Terus meja-mejanya juga belum
lengkap. Belum pas sama murid-muridnya gitu pak. Terus
kalau di PSB, LCDnya udah canggih, udah bisa langsung
nyala, kursi-kursinya juga udah lengkap gitu. Fasilitas di
PSB udah canggih-canggih. LCD di PSB langsung nyala,
tapi kalau di multimedia masih agak kurang, masih harus
masang-masang dulu. Jadi masih makan waktu gitu. (In
multimedia room, the LCD is not sophisticated enough; it
uses white board as the screen. We need to install and
prepare the LCD first before we use it from the
administration office. The tables provided are not equal
In the other hand, facilities in PSB are sophisticated. LCD
already installed in the room, tables and chairs are
completely enough for the student.)”
There are two rooms that used for English Zone, PSB and Multimedia room. Both of them have the same facilities. But, based on their opinion, those two classes are different quality of facilities.
In conclusion, what may become the problem in here is the quality of the facilities provided. Hale (2002) points out that Effective facilities management contributed to the success of every student in every school. In here, it is not about the buildings themselves, but what the school need these building for, the knowledge creation and transfer or learning. Perkins (1996) draws the analogy of childhood intimacy with local neighborhoods to learning environments. Growing up in neighborhood, children "knew their way around"-- where to find things, who to ask, what to expect, where to go. He suggests that students come to "know their way around" more than just neighborhoods. Provide good facilities in order to supports to "learn their way around." When the teacher asks the students to perform practice
English about certain topics, how the students could practice or perform if they don’t know their way around. They don’t know where to find about the topic, what to expect and so on.
Learning styles
In this section, most of the students are bored with the learning style in this class, watching video related to the theory in the material given in that day, like what JE said in the following interview.
“Ada yang mboseni, Nonton video tentang teori (There are
some boring activities, like watching the video about
theory.)”
Another support was given by DA.
“Harusnya kan bisa juga disamain sama pelajarannya
sama pelajaran di kelas… ya kliatannya gak nyambung
gitu… kurang asik gitu (I think, the material given should
be related with the material given in the classroom… It
seems contrast… Unchallenging enough.)”
In here, the material given and the topic of the video are not appropriate with
their proficiency level. So, they couldn’t understand the material, and as a result, they felt bored with it.
Different opinion came from NI. She said that the material is good enough, but the problem is from the teacher itself. To be specific, the way the teachers deliver the material or instruction. Felder (1996) argues in similar direction that a learning
style is useful if balancing instruction meets the students’ needs of essentially all
students in a class.
favorable learning for all students and potentially improve their performance in learning English. In line with Lynn (2011), who stated that if the instructor can make simple modifications in teaching approaches based on learning styles of the students in the classroom, or offer alternative resources related to the course material, he or she may be able to provide an environment that enhances the learning capabilities of their students.
CONCLUSION
This study examines external factors that discouraged SMP Lab students to practice speaking in English. The data analyzed indicates that considering from the length of exposure, the seven participants have a good basic of English for Junior High School level. Moreover, the participants still want to develop their English proficiency. The length of exposure to English has given them good basic of English to perform in English Zone.
However, the relationship between teacher- students and students-students are not mutual. The participants are blaming each other. Mutual respect is lacking and leads to conflicts between student and peers in English Zone. Moreover, Conflicts in
classroom affect students’ performance, especially when the teacher asks them to practice speak in English. Not only, when the participants are interviewed related to teacher-students relationship, but the majority of the participants say that the teachers
is uncomfortable and not enjoyable for the students which lead the students for not being actively participated in the classroom.
The last external factor, learning style, indicates two problems in English Zone. First, the participants think that the material and the topic of the video are not appropriate with their proficiency level. So, they cannot understand the material, and as a result, they felt bored with it. Second, the way the teachers deliver the material or instruction is not appealing for students. The teacher should recognize the students as being different. Determination of student learning styles could offer insight to the teacher to help facilitate a more favorable learning for all students and potentially improve their performance in learning English.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This thesis would not have been finished without the support of many people. I would like to praise Jesus Christ who has given me the life and always gives me blessings. I wish to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Bapak Christian Rudianto, who were abundantly helpful and patient in guiding me to finish this thesis in a limited time. Deepest gratitude also goes to Ibu Rindang W., as my thesis examiner. Without her knowledge and assistance this study would not have been completed. I would like to thank to students of English Department who were willing to share their thought, experiences and knowledge for this thesis. I also wish to express my love and gratitude to my beloved parents who always supported me. Special thanks also go to my special one, Christiani Dewi, who always helps me in
REFERENCES
Abramson, P. (1991). Making the Grade. Architectural Review. 29 (4) 91-93.
BEST (Building Educational Success Together).2005. BEST overview and policy agenda. Retrieved 07/03.05 from http://21csf.org/csf-home/Documents/BEST/BEST_Policy.pdf
Brianne, J. J. (2006).Foreign Language Learning: An Exploratory Study on The External and Internal Influences Affecting Success. Baylor University. May 2006.
Browder, M. Dianne. (2005). Aligning IFP to Academic Standards. Verona, WI: Attainment Company.
Colgan, C. (2003). Is the mold the new asbestos? American School Board Journal, 190(6), 26-29.
Council of Chief State School Officers. Students Continually Learning: A report Presentations, Student Voices and State Actions. Washington, D.C. Author, April 2001. 113 pages. ED 455008.
Elliott, J. (2005). Using narrative in social research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: Sage.
Ellis, Rod. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford UP. 1985.
Felder, R. M. (1996). Matters of Styles. ASEE Prism, 6(4), 18-23.
Gertel, S., McCarty, P., & Schoff, L. (2004). High performance schools equals high performing students. Educational Facility Planner, 39, 20-24.
Guarneiri, M.A (2003). Indoor air quality in schools: Clean air is good business. School Business Affairs, 69(6), 26-30.
Hunter, M. A. (2006) Public school facilities: Providing environments that sustain learning. Teachers College Columbia University. New York; NY: National Access Network.
Hussin, S., Maarof, N., & D’Cruz, J. (2001). Sustaining an interest in learning English
and increasing the motivation to learn English: an enrichment program. The
Kramer, A.F., Hahn, S., Irwin, D. E., & Theeuwes, J. (2000). Age differences in the control of looking behavior. Do you know where your eyes have been? Psychological Science, 11, 210-217.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., &Zilbert, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
McKay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
National Education Association. (2003) Class Size: Priorities for Changing NCLB: A federal class size reduction program is an NEA priority in rewriting NCLB.
Retrieved from
http://nea.org/home/13120/htm
Nunan, D. (1989). Understanding language classroom. London: Prentice Hall.
Romero, M. (2010). Self-regulated Learning in Technology Enhanced Learning Environments: Problems and Promises. Group awareness in time-on-task regulation in CSCL. Universitat de Barcelona. October 2010
Savage, T. V. (1999). Teaching self-control through management and discipline. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Stewart, K. L., & Felicetti, L. A. (1992). Learning styles of marketing majors. Educational Research Quarterly, 15(2), 15-23.
Tanner, C. K. (2006). Educational Facilities Planning: Leadership, Architecture, and Management. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn and Bacon.
APPENDIX Questions for Interview
1. Sejak kapan Anda belajar bahasa Inggris?
2. Apa alasan Anda ikut english zone?
3. Apa yang Anda rasakan ketika belajar di English Zone ini?
a. Tentang teman sekelas?
b. Tentang guru pengajarnya?
4. Menurut Anda, bagaimana keadaan di kelas English Zone ini?
a. Tentang suasana kelasnya?
b. Tentang jumlah siswa?
c. Tentang fasilitas yang ada di dalam ruang kelas?
d. Tentang waktu berlangsungnya English Zone?
e. Tentang ukuran ruang kelas?
5. Menurut Anda, bagaimana materi yang sejauh ini diberikan?
6. Terkait dengan video yang diputarkan tadi, bisa diceritakan apa yang Anda alami
