STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDIN JAMBI
THESIS
Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of One of Requirements to Obtain Undergraduate (SI) Degree at English Education Program
Faculty of Education and Teacher Training
HADI HUSNAINI TE.140988
ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND TEACHER TRAINING THE STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDDIN JAMBI
2018
iv
and proud. I dedicate this thesis especially to :
My Family, My beloved father “Drs. H. Muhammad Salman, M.pd.i” , My beloved mother “Aisyatul Jannah, S.Pd.i” and My beloved sister “Rafiqoh Luthfiyah” who have been caring me with love and affection, teaching, and
educating me that Islam be part of my life.
My best friends “Diah Oktriana”, “Yusnida Tanjung” , “Jamilah” and “Izzatul Ulya”who have been always giving me support. All of my classmates ENGLISH EDUCATION OF D 2014. Your support and your kindness make me strong to stand until now.
And for all I just want to say : Thank you very much.
A. Background of The Problem ... ……. 1
B. Limitation of Research ... 3
C. Formulation of Problem ... 3
D. The Significance of the Research ... 3
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A. Theoretical Framework ... 5
B. Previous Studies ... 16
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH A. Research Design ... 19
B. Research Subjects ... 19
C. Population and Sample ... 20
D. Data Collection Techniques ... 20
E. Data Analysis Techniques ... 21
F. Hypotheses ... 23
xiii
Table 3.1 Distribution of population ... 31
Table 3.2 Pearson Score Interpretation ... 34
Table 4.1 Statistical Scores of Speaking ... 36
Table 4.2 Statistical Scores of Self Efficacy ... 37
Table 4.3 Normality Testing ... 38
Table 4.4 Correlation between Self Efficacy and Speaking Performance ... 39
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Speaking Performance ... 47
Appendix 2 Self Efficacy Questioner Sheet ... 50
Appendix 3 Result of Speaking Scores and Self Efficacy ... 53
Appendix 4 Result of Speaking Performance ... 55
Appendix 5 Result of Self Efficacy ... 55
Appendix 6 Descriptive Result ... 58
Appendix 7 Correlation Result ... 59
Appendix 8 Documentation ... 60
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of The Study
Speaking is the one of skills that has to be learned by students. By speaking, students can share ideas, interact each other and communicate in English. Therefore, to enable the students to communicate in English fluently, they should acquire language components such as grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation. Speaking is also considered as one of an effective and efficient forms of communication compared with other forms of communication since it is less formal and also simple in structure. Through speaking, the students can express their ideas and thoughts. People also assume that one can communicate if he can speak in that language well.
However, it is not easy to master English speaking skill, as well as using it to communicate. Some people, especially students, find difficulties in using English when they are trying to interact with others. They still look hesitate to interact with their friends and their lecturer by using English. The same issues can also be found in English language learning at non-speaking English schools, where most learners often seem passive, and reluctant in speaking English in the classroom (Hamouda, in Mastur 2007:2).
Therefore, students tend to have different drives to speak English.
There are encouragements and barriers that make them want to express their ideas in English. Particularly in Indonesia where English is learned as a foreign language, students do not commonly communicate with English in the class. Some students may feel hesitant to speak English in front of others. On the other hand, some others have their own encouregement, so they are willing to speak English.
According to Hamouda (in Suganti, 2011:1) there are some factors that may influence students to speak English namely anxiety, lack of interest, incomprehensible input, shyness, lack of confidence, and low self belief on their speaking capability. Students’ beliefs on their capability either positively
or negatively influence their willingness to speak. It is believed that self efficacy can determine how people feel, think, and behave, as well as the choices they make in specific situation. Self efficacy can be seen as the confidence that people have in their ability to do the things that they try to do, accomplish the goal and perform task competently. So, the beliefs which students hold about their ability in speaking English can either encourage or make them doubt to speak English in front of others in the classroom.
Moreover, one of the most important factors to control students in speaking English is their belief and confidence on their capability, or the so called self-efficacy as defined by Bandura (in Mastur 2007:2) which said that self-efficacy is “the belief in one‟s capabilities to organize and execute the course of action required to manage prospective situations”. In other words, self-efficacy can be seen as the confidence that people have in their ability to do the things they try to do, accomplish the goal and perform task competently (Dornyei, in Mastur 2007:2). It is believed that self-efficacy can determine what people think, behave, as well as the choices they make in particular situation (Bandura in Mastur 2007:2). Thus, the belief that students have about their ability to speak can either encourage or make them hesitate to speak English in front of others in the classroom.
Based on pre observational research atthe fifth semester, the writer found that there are some students who have interest in English class, particularly speaking, but there are not many students who want to try to speak in English, unless being forced by the lecturer. According to the lecturer, the students‟ level of speaking skill is relatively average, but some of them seem like afraid to express their idea in using English. When the researcher asked some students on why they do not want to speak English in the classroom, most of their answers are because they feel shy, they do not have the confidence to speak, and there are even some students who said that they cannot speak even before they tried. Therefore, it isclear that the students‟
level of self-efficacy seems to give lots effect on their speaking performance.
These are the reasons why the researcher wants to examine the correlation between the students‟ self efficacy and their speaking performance.
Based on the explanation, the researcher interested to rise the study with the title“THE CORRELATION BETWEEN SELF EFFICACY AND SPEAKING PERFORMANCE OF THE FIFTH SEMESTER STUDENTS OF ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM UIN SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDDIN JAMBI.”
B. Limitation of the Problem
Avoiding of being too broad, the study was focused to observe the 5th semester of English Departement students of UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi, academic year 2018/2019. This study was focused on self efficacy and speaking performance.
C. Formulation of the Problem
Based on the problem that the writer has explained briefly in the background of the study, the writer chooses one problem to be researched and the research question can be formulated as: “Is there significant correlationof self-efficacyand andspeaking performance in the English language among the 5th semester of English Departement students of UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi, academic year 2018/2019?
D. Research Objectives and Significance a. Research Objectives
This study was conducted in order to know the significant relationship in self-efficacy and speaking performance in the English language among the 5th semester of English Departement students of UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi, academic year 2018/2019.
b. Significance Research a) Theoritical Benefits
By conducting this research, the researcher hopes that her research will give valid information about the correlation between self-efficacy, and performance in the English language among the 5th semester of English Departement students of UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi, academic year 2018/2019,. The researcher also hopes that the result of this study will become input to English teachers and also English learners for their teaching and learning.
b. Practical Benefits
a) The results of this study are expected to provide benefits for the campus, especially UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi in the self efficacy, speaking anxiety and speaking performance.
b) For the next researcher can be used as a reference in order to further improve the quality of learning English, especially in the self efficacy and speaking performance.
c) For students can be motivated to continue to excel in achieving maximum learning results, particularly in terms of learning English speaking performance.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW RELATED STUDIES A. Definition of Speaking
Speaking is one of two productive skills in language teaching and learning. It is defined as a two way processes between speaker and listener (or listeners) and involves the productive skill of speaking and receptive skill of understanding (Byrne, 1986, p.8, in Mazouzi, 2013, p.6).
Meanwhile, Nunan (2003, p.48) defined that speaking consists of producing systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning. Moreover, Bygate (1987, p.1, in Mazouzi, 2013, p.5) argued: “Speaking skill is the ability in using oral language to explore ideas, intentions, thoughts and feelings to other people as a way to make the message clearly delivered and well understood by the hearer. Thus, speaking skill can be described as the ability to communicate orally to other people with the aim is to express their idea and feeling. It involves producing, receiving, and processing information.
Speaking ability is an important aspect in learning a certain language, as Theodore Huebner (in Mauludiyah, 2014:9) stated, “language is essentially speech, and speech is basically communication by sounds”.
Hughes stated that “Speaking is not a discrete skill.” (Hughes, 2002 : 6). It cannotstand alone because some complex activities or sub-skills such asvocabulary mastery, grammar competence, comprehension, inputs oflanguage, phonology, and pronunciation are included. People speak usingwords in which the words have meaning that the speakers have to chooseand use them appropriately and of course this activity needs a skill inchoosing and using the proper ones. Not only does the word order thatpeople should notice, but the knowledge of how to pronounce words isalso should be noticed in speaking. The reason of why pronunciationshould be noticed because in speaking in foreign and second
language thewritten form and the pronunciation are far different. Those sub-skills aremerely needed for successful of communication activities.
Speaking, according to Bygate in Nunan “Speaking is typicallyreciprocal: interlocutors are normally all able to contribute simultaneouslyto the discourse, and to respond immediately to the each other‟scontributions.” (Nunan, 2000 : 7).
In language learning, speaking may essential for learners.
Horwitzstated that “speaking is the hallmark of second language learning.Although some learners may have personal goals for language learningthat do not include speaking, most educators accept speaking as anessential goal of language learning and teaching.” (Horwitz, 2008 : 91).
Speaking becomesessential because it is the skill which people can see directly that thelearners of a language are succeed. People may judge that the successful oflanguage learning is when the learners can produce the language they arelearning. Like what stated by McDough and Shaw “In many contexts,speaking is a skill upon which person is judged „at face value.‟ (Shaw, : 6).
In otherwords, people may sometimes make judgment about language competencefrom speaking skill rather than any other skill. Moreover, Farrel, statedthat “One of the main sources of evidence of language competency is theability to speak the language you are learning.” (Farrel, : 8).Therefore, speaking canbe a direct judgment for language learners, because speaking performancecan define the knowledge of the speakers in using the language.
Woods stated that “Speaking effectively depends very much on thespeakers‟ ability to interact with an interlocutor.” (Woods, 2005 : 41).
Another statement isstated by Linder that the “Communicative competence is measuredaccording to the degree of fluency with the spoken language, but it alsoincludes comprehension of that language in real-life situation.” (Lander, 1977 : 5).Referringto the statements of Woods and
Lander, it can be concluded that the abilityof speaking is the ability to speak and interact with the interlocutor withfluently and comprehensibly.
In classroom, speaking activities may happen to practicecommunicative competence. Ur stated some characteristics of a successfulspeaking activity such as bellow: (Penny, 1996 : 120).
a.) Learners talk a lot:As much as possible of the period of timeallotted to the activity is in fact occupied by learner talk. This mayseems obvious, but often most time is taken up with teacher talk orpauses.
b.) Participation is even:Classroom discussion is not dominated by amonitory of talkative participants: all get chance to speak, andcontributions are fairly evenly distributed.
c.) Motivation is high:Learners are eager to speak: because they areinterested in the topic and have something new to say about it, orbecause they want to contribute to achieving a task objective.
d.) Language is of an acceptable level:Learners express themselves inutterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other, andof an acceptable level of language accuracy.
Speech, like written language, needs to be processed. People speakwhat they have in their mind. There are some phases in speaking processes:
a.) Conceptualization
Conceptualization is a phase of forming ideas (what is going to bespoken) or principles in the mind.”22 During this phase the intention isconceived. This phase is also known by the lexical level. In lexicallevel is the stage of brain conveys meaning of a word. For the exampleis when someone figures out “Goat”, there will be an activation of thelexical module carrying all the features of goat.
b.) Words Level
The words level is the level of carrying the meaning ofwords (Gleason, 1998 : 337) The meanings of the words are carried out based
on thesyntactic frame. It is the process of the mind to arrange meaning fromthe smallest unit of the words into sentences.
c.) Articulation
This phase is the phase of turning the idea or concept into a spoken word (Gleason, 1998 : 337). This phase of oral production requires matching the syntacticalelements from the words level to the sound that make up the language.
Speaking in target language needs skills since speakers need to know the vocabularies and to know how to use the language, so the interlocutors could understand the speakers. Some learners may be reluctant to speak.
Nation found some possibilities that make some learners have no willingness to speak: (Nation, 1995 : 8).
a.) Inadequate Vocabulary
Vocabulary is needed since it is the thing that the speakers are going to produce. It also that learning foreign language involves learningthousands of words. The lack of vocabulary may cause learners choose tomake no sounds in speaking class. To be functional, students need arelatively small fund of words that they know well and can useproductively in speaking. The teachers‟ role is facilitating students tostudy and to provide them vocabularies to study.
b.) Inadequate Control of Grammar
Some learners who are not good in grammar may be reluctant to speak. However, it is not absolutely that students with good grammarknowledge are good is speaking. At least, students with good grammarknowledge are more encouraged than who do not.
Understanding grammarcan be a way for learners to produce language.
c.) Lack of Fluency
Fluency is a skill aspect of language. It is a skill in which the speaker of a language speaks easily. Guillot defined fluency as
“fluidity”,the absence of hesitation. (Guillot, 1999 : 11).
d.) Shyness
Some students may be shy to speak or unconfident to do it.
This may occur because of fear and negative experience. Students fear to takerisks for making any mistakes and errors in speaking. Moreover, what makes some students being anxiety is bad experience they have.
e.) Lack of Encouragement
It takes some courageous to start speaking in another language.Some learners may be reluctant to speak because they feel discourage tospeak in front of whole class. Another, they may feel inconvenient tospeak because they feel that they do not have any chances to speak. Theteachers should see and be aware of this. This may make the students to bepassive in classroom activities. The solution of this is the teacher shouldmake groups or pairs, so they are motivated to speak.
B. The Importance of Speaking
Speaking ability is an important aspect in learning a certain language, as Theodore Huebner (1960, p.4 in Mauludiyah, 2014, p.9) stated,
“language is essentially speech, and speech is basically communication by sounds. Penny Ur (1996) argued that of the four skills (reading, writing, speaking, and listening), speaking skill seems to be the most important one since foreign language learners are most of all interested in becoming actual speakers of the language. She also stated that people who know a language are often referred to as „speakers‟ of that language (p.120).
C. The Nature of Speaking
Tarigan (1990, p.3-4 in Mauludiyah, 2014, p.14) defined that speaking is a language skill that is developed in child life, which is produced by listening skill, and at that period speaking skill is learned. Speaking is a productive skill. It could not be separated from listening. When we speak we produce the text that will be heard by other people and it should be
meaningful. In the nature of communication, we can find the speaker, the listener, the message and the feedback.
The nature of speaking has been discussed by many researchers. Byrne (1986, p.8) states that: “Oral communication is two-way process between speaker and listener (or listeners) and involves the productive skill of speaking and the receptive skill of understanding (or o listening with understanding).
For him, speaker and listener participate in oral communication process, and they use a productive skill which is speaking and receptive skill which is listening, because speaking is an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving and processing information.
Speaking is also a multi-sensory activity because it involves paralinguistic features such as eye-contact, facial expressions, body language, tempo, pauses, voice quality changes, and pitch variation (Thornbury, 2005, p.9) which affect conversational flow. It seems that culture is a very essential part in how speaking is constructed which has implications for how English speaking is taught and learned.
D. The Aspects of Speaking
Harris (1969, p.81 in Lestari, Nababan & Erni, 2013, p.3) stated that speaking ability has four components which are generally recognized in analyzing speaking. They are as follows:
a.) Pronunciation
includes the segmental features of vowels, consonants, stress, and intonation patterns. The speaker is required to pronounce English word correctly. (Harris, 1969 in Khalidah, Gultom & Harini, 2013, p.2).
b.) Grammar
Warriner in Noni (2002, p.15 in Lestari et al., 1993, p.3) said that communication in speaking will run smoothly if grammar is used in speaking. So grammar or structure is a very important aspect in speaking ability.
c.) Fluency
Hornby (1974, p.330) defines fluency as the quality of being able to speak smoothly and easily. It means that someone can speak without any hesitation. Someone can speak fluently even though he makes errors in pronunciation and grammar.
d.) Vocabulary
Vocabulary is range of words known or used by a person in trade, profession, etc. (Hornby, 1974, p.979) If students have many vocabularies, it will be easier for them to express their idea.
E. The Functions of Speaking
A few language experts have attempted to categorize the functions of speaking in human communication. According to Brown and Yule, as quoted by Richards (2008, p.21). The functions of speaking are classified into three; they are talk as interaction, talk as transaction, and talk as performance. Each of these speech activities is quite distinct in term of form and function and requires different teaching approaches. Below are the explanations of the speaking functions:
a.) Talk as Interaction
In interactional discourse, language is mainly used to communicate in our daily life. It is an interactive act of verbal expression which is done spontaneously by two or more person.
This is about how people try to convey their message to others.
According to Yule, (1989, in El Fattah, 2006, p.37-38) this type of communication plays an important social role in oiling the wheels of social intercourse. So, the primary intention in this function is social relationship. According to Richards, (p.3) some of the skills involved in using talk as interaction are:
(1) Opening and closing conversations (2) Making small-talk
(3) Recounting personal incidents and experiences
(4) Turn-taking (5) Interrupting (6) Reacting to others b.) Talk as Transaction
In transactional discourse, speaking is more focus on delivering the message and making sure that the others understand what we want to deliver, clearly and accurately. Language serving this purpose is 'message' oriented rather than 'listener' oriented (Nunan, 1989, p.27). In this kind of spoken language, students and teachers usually focus on meaning and talking in the way of their understanding. For example, classroom group discussions, teachers‟ classroom instructions, and problem solving activities.
Richard (p.4) also mentioned some of the skills involved in using talk as transactions, they are:
(1) Explaining a need or intention (2) Describing something (3) Asking questions (4) Confirming information (5) Justifying an opinion (6) Making suggestions (7) Clarifying understanding (8) Making comparisons
c.) Talk as Performance
In this case, speaking activities are more focus on monolog rather than dialog. Speaking as performance can be seen at speeches, public talks, retelling stories, and so on. Examples of talk as performance are making a presentation, performing class debate, and giving a lecture.
In conclusion, there are three functions of speaking that are categorized by the expert that include talk as interaction, talk as transaction, and talk as performance. Those are kinds of talks we usually use in daily speaking with its different functions.Testing speaking skill seems to be challenging because the oral poduction test has a high subjectivity. (Heaton, 2000 : 12). It tends to be subjective becauseit tested orally and assessing spoken language is so difficult because in thistest we have to discriminate whether or not the speakers have the ability tospeak the target language. For this reason, in testing speaking, to be wise isa must to make the test valid and reliable. Moreover, the evaluation ofspeaking needs some guidance or scales of to what extend people have theability to speak in foreign language. It needs guidance to let the testershave a standard that have to be required by the test takers.
According to Harris, there are some components that are scored inspeaking test. The components that have to be scored are pronunciation,grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. (Harris, 2009 : 84). Then, the criteria ofspeaking assessment are adapted from Harris‟s speaking rubrics. Thecomponents of the score are illustrated such as bellow.
Table 2. 1 Speaking Rubrics Indicators
No Criteria Scale Description
1 Pronounciation 5 Has little foreign pronounciation 4 Clear enough to be understood
3 The pronounciation leads to misunderstanding
2 Very hard to understand. Must frequently be asked to repeat
1 Unclear ronounciation
2 Grammar 5 Makes only little error on grammar and word order
4 Occasionally makes errors and
unclear meaning
3 Makes frequent errors of grammar and word order
2 Grammar and word-order errors make comprehension difficult
1 Makes some errors in grammar which leads to unclear meaning
3 Vocabulary 5 Use of vocabulary and idioms like native speakers
4 Sometimes uses inappropriate terms
3 Frequently uses wrong words / Inadequate vocabulary
2 Misuse of words and very limited vocabulary
1 Vocabulary limitations so extreme and imossible to make conversation 4 Fluency 5 No hesitation in speaking like the
native speakers
4 Speed of speech seems to be slighty affected by language problems
3 Speed and fluency are rather strongly affected by language problems
2 Usually hesitant: often forced into silence
1 Speech is so halting (stop moving) and impossible to make conversation 5 Comprehension 5 Appears to understand everything
without difficulty
4 Understand nearly everything at normal speed, although occasional reetition may be necessary
3 Understanding with slower than normal speed with repetition
2 Has great difficulty following what is said and needs frequent repetition 1 Can not be said to understand even
simple conversational English (Harris, 2000 : 123)
F. Types of Classroom Speaking Performance
Brown (2001, p. 271) described that there are six types of speaking, they are:
1. Imitative
Teacher asks students to drill word in which the students simply repeat a phrase or structure (e.g., "Excuse me." or "Can you help me?") for clarity and accuracy. (Brown, p. 271).
2. Intensive
This is the students‟ speaking performance with the aim to practice some phonological and grammatical aspects of language. It usually places students doing the task in pairs (group work), for example, reading aloud that includes reading paragraph, reading dialogue with partner in turn, reading information from chart, etc. (Brown, 2004, p.141).
3. Responsive
assessment tasks include interaction and test comprehension but at the somewhat limited level of very short conversations, standard greetings and small talk, simple requests and comments, and the like.
The stimulus is almost always a spoken prompt (in order to preserve
authenticity), with perhaps only one or two follow up questions or retorts. (Brown, 2001, p. 273).
4. Transactional (dialogue)
It carried out for the purpose of conveying or exchanging specific information. It is an extended form of responsive language. Such conversation could readily be part of group work activity as well, such as information-gathering interviews, role plays, or debates. (Brown, 2001, p.273; Brown, 2004, p.172).
5. Interpersonal (dialogue)
It is carried out more for the purpose of maintaining social relationships than for the transmission of facts and information. The forms of interpersonal speaking performance are interview, role play, discussions, conversations and games. (Brown, 2001, p. 274).
6. Extensive (monologue)
Teacher gives students extended monologues in the form of oral reports, summaries, storytelling and short speeches (Brown, 2004, p.142).
Based on the theory above, it can be concluded that there are some points that should be considered in assessing speaking. The students need to know at least the pronunciation, vocabularies, and language functions that they are going to use. When the students have been ready and prepared for the activity, they can use the language appropriately.
G. The Goals of Speaking
As stated by (Azizfar etal, 2014) mastering of oral aspects of language implies that students understand what others say and try to express what they want in a language class. Speaking skill is essential for each person who wants to learn second or foreign languages. Feelings of tension and apprehension are usually existed among second or foreign language learners. Different learners use different strategies when they
speak a foreign language. Such feelings in the learners may hold them back from the ultimate goal. Some speak in public with no tenses, but some wait for a time to gain necessary knowledge, and some never speak a foreign language (Azizfar et al., 2014).
Language competence is equal to language use and language acquisition is both affected by and affects the conditions of its use (Goodwin, 1995). Language learning researchers have been trying to assess learners‟ language proficiency by studying their ability to use the language for social interactions in real world contexts. Thus, the learners purpose for studying language is to get the ability to use the language in a communicative way not only to get grammatical competence (Cekaite, 2007; Hall, 1995; Hellermann, 2006; Kanagy, 1999; Kramsch, 1986;
Markee, 2000; Young, 1999, 2000, 2002; Young & Miller, 2004). To be able to speak a language requires not only the ability to process information and language but also the knowledge of language items (Harmer, 2001).
H. Self-efficacy
The concept of self-efficacy firstly is theory of Social Cognitive byBandura. Bandura published his seminar work “Selfefficacy: Toward a unifying Theory of Behavioral Change” on 1977. He wrote that self- efficacy proved to be an accurate predictor of performance in the en-active mode of treatment although subjects engaged in no overt behavior (1977:211).Bandura further proposed that a person‟s attitude, abilities, and cognitive skills comprise what is known as the selfesteem, too(Tilfarlioglu
& Cinkara, 2009). Then a large number of studies in education have been done to observe its implication particularly in second/foreign language learning where affective factors may influence its process and the performance.
Bandura defines self-efficacy as “the belief in one‟s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations,” or stated another way, self-efficacy refers to individual‟s belief in his or her ability to succeed in a particular situation(Bandura, 1995, p.2 in Jennifer Dodds, 2011, p.19).
Moreover, self-efficacy is the belief that people have in own abilities, specifically ability to meet the challenges ahead and complete a task successfully (Akhtar, 2008). General self-efficacy refers to overall belief in ability to succeed, but there are many more specific forms of self- efficacy as well (e.g., academic, parenting, sports).
Then, self efficacy is the belief in one‟s own ability to successfully accomplish something. It is a theory by itself, as well as being a construct of social cognitive theory. Self-Efficacy tells us that people generally was only attempt things fail (Bandura, 1994: 15).
According to Bandura (1994: 44-45) there are several indicators of self-efficacy; they are: Confident to complete a specific task, Confident to motivate own self to take the necessary steps in completing the task, The individual are able to increase motivation in own self to choose and do an action which is needed to finish the task.
Self efficacy concerns primarily cognitive judgments of one‟s own capabilities based on mastery criteria (Bang & Clark, 2001), whereas self concept emerges as a more complex construct incorporating both cognitive and affective responses toward the self. Academic self concept and self efficacy are first compared from the following three conceptual perspectives: construct composition, nature of comparison, and generality and structure. Construct composition is that a person‟s perceptions of her/himself are formed through his/her experience with his/her environment. Self concept may be described as organized, multifaceted, hierarchical, stable, developmental, evaluative and differentiable. The cognitive facet of self concept consists of awareness, understandings of the self and its attributes. Shavelson (1976) believes that the individual not
only develops a description of her/himself in a particular situation but that s/he also forms evaluations of her/himself in these situations. The affective facet of self concept incorporates one‟s feelings of self worth. Self efficacy deals with cognitively perceived capability of the self. Whether or not one has the capability to carry out a course of the action that leads to the successful accomplishment of goals is the focus of efficacy.
It is also a confident that we are able to try hard, persistent and diligent. The existence of a hardly effort from the individual to finish the task that is dicided by using all of thing. Confident that we survive to face obstacles and difficulties The individual are able to hold out in getting difficulty and obstacle which is emerged and be able to get up from the failure. Confident that we are able to do the task which has general range or specific.The individual are sure that in doing the task, they can finish even that it is general or specific.
Self-efficacy consists of two words; self and efficacy. Self is the identity of a person while efficacy is defined as the power to produce an effect (Zulkosky, 2009 in Nurjannah, 2015, p.7). He also mentioned that the synonym of efficacy includes effectiveness, efficaciousness, and productiveness. Basically, Bandura (1997) defined self-efficacy as the people‟s beliefs in their capabilities to produce desired effects by their own actions. He also defined that self-efficacy as a person's confidence in its capacity to organize and implement actions to achieve the goals set, and try to assess the level and strength in all activities and contexts. He further explained that self-efficacy is “what people think, believe and feel affects how they behave” (1986, p.5 in Dodds, 2011, p.19). Maddux (2000) mentioned that self-efficacy is the belief that says “I can perform the behavior that produces the outcome” (p.4). Self-efficacy beliefs lead to a person's ability to organize and implement a series of actions to achieve specified outcomes(Bandura, 1997 in Nurjannah, 2015, p.7)
Baron & Byrne (2000) suggested that self-efficacy is an individual‟s judgment of his or her own ability or competence to perform a task,
achieve a goal and produce something. Besides that, Feist & Feist (2002) also stated that self-efficacy is the belief of individuals that they have the ability to hold control over their own work in a particular situation(In Astrid, 2009, p.1)
Based on the explanations above, it can be concluded that self-efficacy is an individual‟s belief and confidence in his or her own capabilities to perform or complete tasks and difficulties they face in order to overcome obstacles and achieve the expected goals. It is not expected to measure one's actual capabilities but, rather, the confidence that an individual holds in regards to particular abilities in spite of the fact that, as we will find in the following sections, self-efficacy beliefs can directly influence individual's efforts and activities and therefore, serve as an excellent predictor of one's future performance and ability (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 1997, in Dodds, p.19)
Self efficacy is commonly defined as the belief in one's capabilities to achieve a goal or an outcome. Students with a strong sense of efficacy are more likely to challenge themselves with difficult tasks and be intrinsically motivated.
These students will put forth a high degree of effort in order to meet their commitments, and attribute failure to things which are in their control, rather than blaming external factors. Self-efficacious students also recover quickly from
setbacks, and ultimately are likely to achieve their personal goals. Students with low self-efficacy, on the other hand, believe they cannot be successful and thus are less likely to make a concerted, extended effort and may consider challenging tasks as threats that are to be avoided. Thus, students with poor self-efficacy have low aspirations which may result in disappointing academic performances becoming part of a self-fulfilling feedback cycle.
Self-efficacy refers to perceived capabilities for learning or performing behaviors at designated levels. Self-efficacy can influence choice of activities, effort, persistence, and achievement. People acquire information about their self- efficacy for a given activity from their actual performances, vicarious experiences, forms of persuasion, and physiological symptoms. In educational settings, students have goals and varying levels of self-efficacy for learning. As they engage in a task they acquire skills and evaluate their learning progress.
Perceptions of progress sustain self-efficacy and motivation and promote learning.
Students' self-efficacy is influenced by such contextual variables as goals, social models, rewards, social comparisons, and forms of feedback. Self-efficacy has been shown to predict student motivation and achievement across a variety of content areas. Teachers' self-efficacy affects classroom planning, instruction, and student interactions. Future research should address assessment issues, longitudinal changes in self-efficacy, and the role of self-efficacy during self- regulation. (Schunc,2001)
In general, self-efficacy can be divided into two categories; high self- efficacy and low self-efficacy. In performing a particular task, people with high self-efficacy tend to be more involved in the situation, while those who have low self-efficacy prefer to avoid and stay away from the task.
Individuals who have high self-efficacy tend to be more motivated to do a particular task, even a difficult one. They do not view the task as a threat they should avoid. They are not afraid to fail in performing the task. Instead, they increase their efforts to prevent a failure that might occur. Those who fail in their work, they usually regain their self-efficacy as quickly after experiencing failures (Bandura, 1997, in Astrid, 2009, p.30-31).
On the contrary, people who have low self-efficacy will try to avoid difficult tasks. Such individuals have low commitment in achieving the goals they set. When they faced difficult tasks, they are busy thinking about the shortcomings they have, the distractions they face, and all the results that can be detrimental to them. They do not increase their efforts and give up very easily.
They are too slow in correcting their own mistake and regaining their self-efficacy when facing a failure(Bandura, 1997, in Astrid, p.31).
According to Bandura (1997 in Nurjannah, p.9), there are four big factors that influence someone‟s self-efficacy.
a) Mastery Experiences
Individuals develop the beliefs of their capability through the results from their previous performances which may be interpreted in either direction. The students who are successful of their tasks in the past will be more confident in doing their activity in the future. On the contrary, negative interpretation about previous tasks can undermine their personal efficacy. Mastery experiences, thus, serve as an excellent predictor of someone‟s future success (Chen, 2007, p.21).
b) Vicarious Experiences
Individual‟s self-efficacy can also be influenced by vicarious experiences provided by social models or friends whom they assume having the similarity of competence and intelligence (BandurainChen, p.21). Seeing people comparable to them capable of performing the same tasks will make them think that they, too, have the ability to finish the tasks. Information gained from comparing with their friends thus gives reference to individuals‟ own capabilities. Therefore, peer modeling is another big factor that affects students‟ personal efficacy.
c) Social Persuasion
People also develop efficacy beliefs through social persuasion or verbal judgment from others about their capabilities in doing something.
Social persuasion, may offer additional ways of increasing someone‟s belief that they can succeed. Bandura (1997, in Chen, p.21) said that
although social persuasion itself alone may not create huge increases in efficacy perception, “it is easier to sustain a sense of efficacy, especially when struggling with difficulties, if significant others express faith in one‟s capabilities than if they convey doubts” (p.101).
d) Physiological and Emotional States
Physiological and emotional states influence self-efficacy in any opportunities as well. For example when we learn to associate poor performance or perceived failure and success with pleasant feeling states, positive or negative mood, and other factors like fatigue, anxiety, etc (Maddux, 2000 in Nurjannah, p.10).
According Bandura (Ghufron and Rinaswita, 2010: 80), self-efficacy on every individuals will differ from one individual to another based on three dimensions. Here are the three dimensions.
a) Dimension level (magnitude / level)
This dimension relates to the degree of difficulty with the problemencountered by an individual. In this case whether the individual is capablesolve the problem or not. If the individual is faced withtasks
arranged according to a certain degree of difficulty, then self- efficacyindividuals may be confined to easy, medium, or taskseven covering the most difficult tasks, according to the limits of abilitywhich is recommended to meet the demands of the required behavior oneach level.
This dimension affects the behavioral electionwill be tried or avoided. If an individual feels able to perform a given task then he will try to solve it so vice versa.
b) Dimensions of strength (strength)
This dimension relates to the degree of strength or weakness of belief or individual expectations of his or her abilities. The belief that less of his ability will have an easy impact shaken by unsupportive experiences.
Instead, high confidence encourages individuals to survive in their efforts.
Although it may be found less supportive experience. This dimension usually related directly to the level dimension, that is, the higher the level the difficulty of the task, the weaker the perceived confidence to solve it.
c) Dimensions of Generalization (generality)
This dimension relates to the area of individual belief behavior will be its ability to achieve a success. Individuals can feel confident or unsure of his or her ability. Is it limited to a certain activities and situations or on a series of activities and situations vary.
In this study, self-efficacy is seen as one's self-belief of his ability to perform the necessary actions to solve a problem that involves thinking ability critically. Measurements of self-efficacy in this study focused on three dimension that is magnitude / level dimension, dimension strength, and dimension of generality which is then downgraded to indicator-indicator.
According to Bandura (1994), Perceived self-efficacy is defined as people's ideas about their strengths to produce selected levels of working. Self-efficacy beliefs decide on the way people experience, believe, encourage themselves and perform. Such beliefs create these effects through four main stages. They are cognitive, motivational,
emotional and selection stages. A well-built sense of efficacy increases human achievement and personal success in many ways. People who strongly believe in their competence view difficult tasks as challenges and they are not afraid of performing them. They set themselves special objectives and are committed to them. They make hard efforts in the face of breakdown. They rapidly get well their feeling of efficacy after break downs. They believe that failure is because of inadequate effort or poor knowledge which is achievable. Such an effective idea causes personal success, decreases anxiety and reduces depression. According to Pajares (2000), beliefs that students create, generate and keep are very important factors in their achievement or breakdown in school. So it is concluded that why students succeed or not succeed largely depends or students self efficacy belief.
a.) Gender Differences
The connection between gender and self-efficacy has been concentrated in studies. In general, researchers state that boys and men are likely to be more positive than girls and women in educational fields which are linked to mathematics, science, and technology (Meece, 1991; Pajares & Miller, 1994;
Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich, 1996), regardless of the truth that success differences in these fields are largely reducing (Eisenberg, Martin & Fabes, 1996).
Boys and girls also are likely to agree to a contrary position while reacting to self-efficacy tools. Researchers have examined that boys are likely to be more self admiring in their reactions but girls are more humble (Wigfield et al., 1996). Some researchers have illustrated that gender differences in group, individuality, and educational variables may really be a role of gender adoption rather than of gender (Eisenberg et al., 1996; Hackett, 1985; Harter, Waters, & Whitesell, 1997; Matsui, 1994). According to Eccles's (1987), cultural beliefs like students' gender role beliefs to some extent cause differences in lessons and occupation choice and in self-belief ideas and perceived significance of responsibilities and behaviors.
b.) Self Efficacy and its Dimension
According to Zimmerman (2000) and Bandura (1997) considered people motivation mainly in name of outcome expectations before he developed self- efficacy as a main factor in social cognitive theory. Through the therapy of phobic humans, he found individual differences in their perceived potential to use mastery modeling methods outside the remedial situation in spite of the fact that all individuals were able to communicate effectively with the aim of their fear without unpleasant results at the end of the treatment. However, they established a strong outcome hope that right methods would keep them safe from unpleasant results. Bandura called this individual distinction self- efficacy. Even if self-efficacy and outcome expectations were equally assumed to influence motivation, he considered a greater role for self- efficacy because the types of outcomes people anticipate depend largely on their judgments of how well they will be able to perform in given situations.
According to Zimmerman (2000), Self-efficacy determines focus on performance competence instead of individual traits. Subjects evaluate their abilities to accomplish certain task requirements, rather than who they are individually or what ideas they have about themselves most of the time. Self- efficacy values are multidimensional in type and they are different according to the function.
c.) Sources of Self Efficacy
According to Bandura (1994), the most efficient way of generating a powerful sense of efficacy is through accomplishment of experiences in an excellent way. Successes establish a strong belief in one's personal efficacy.
Failures weaken it, especially when failures happen before a feeling of efficacy is strongly formed. The second way of getting self-beliefs of efficacy is through the indirect practices offered by social models. When they see people similar to themselves succeed by making effort, they believe that they also have too much to do similar activities to succeed. By the same token, observing others' fail despite high effort lowers observers' judgments of their own efficacy and undermines their efforts. The impact of modeling on
perceived self efficacy is strongly influenced by perceived similarity to the models.
Moreover, social assurance is a third way that causes people to believe that they have what they need to be successful. People who are encouraged orally that they have the qualities which are necessary for controlling given activities, are highly possible to make greater effort and maintain it than if they feel apprehensive about their personal imperfection when problems occur. The fourth way of reforming self-beliefs of efficacy is to decrease people's stress and help them adjust their negative emotional tendency.
Last, the way people interpret their mental and physical responses is very important. People with high feeling of efficacy view their situation of emotional excitement as a stimulating mean of performance, but people with a low sense of efficacy see their excitement as an obstruction.
d.) Achievements Goals of Self- Efficacy
According to (Meece et al., 1988), there are two kinds of different goals, mastery and performance goals. According to (He, 2004), learners with mastery goals are concerned with acquiring efficiency and growing their abilities. However, for performance oriented learners the aim of learning is to indicate their abilities to others and they try to get an approval from their teachers or parents. Also, academic self-efficacy works such as a major aspect that adjusts learners to prefer dissimilar aims. So, self-efficacy appears to be an originator of achievement goal implementations (Elliot & Church, 1997).
As He (2004) refers, learners with a great self-belief in their talent to complete a learning task and forming their major aim of their learning to develop self-value tend to implement a mastery aim. Learners with low confidence in their academic ability tend to select an avoidance goal. This means that when a task is impossible to be carried out, learners prefer to move away from their learning in order to stay away from being considered as unintelligent and unqualified by others. In contrast, when learners with high academic self-efficacy meet a difficult task try hard to succeed because they
tend to prove their special ability over other people. Through effectively performances they keep their able-beliefs.
e.) Self Efficacy Theoretical Framework
Self-efficacy theory derived from social-cognitive learning theory, introduced by Bandura (1997).The foundation of social cognitive theory is an observation of human activity or sense of agency in which people are actively occupied in their own progress and can create things by their effort and movements. It is pointed out individuals possess self-beliefs that make it possible for them to assess a special control over their ideas, emotions, and performances that what people believe, consider, and experience influence the way they act (Bandura, 1986).
According to Bandura (1986), Among all the beliefs that influence individual performance, and at the heart of social cognitive theory, are self- efficacy beliefs, which are people's findings of their powers to sort out and accomplish what is needed to get selected kinds of actions.
Moreover, according to Norman and Conner (1995), in this theory individual behaviors are determined according to situation-consequence, performance-consequence and noticed self-efficacy.
Also, situation-consequence anticipations include ideas about which outcomes people will face without intervening their performance.
Performance-consequence is the idea that for a special action will or will not be a special consequence. Self-efficacy anticipation is a thought whether a special is controlled by individuals. A persons thought whether he or she able to accomplish a special learning task would determine self- efficacy anticipation. Context consequence anticipation are considered to control individual performances through their effects on performance-consequence anticipations. Action or performance-consequence anticipations influence performance through their result on aims and self-efficacy anticipations.
Association of situation-consequence anticipation with performance- consequence anticipation would form special goals and plans to carry out a
special task. Actions will be successful through decreasing a known venture conducts plans to do such actions.
Self-efficacy anticipations have an explicit effect on actions and an implicit result on goals and plans. A person succeed is influence by relations one‟s performances, individual features and contextual circumstances.
Learners get knowledge to assess their self-efficacy from their real behaviors, their practices, the influences they get from others, and their mental and emotional feedback. Self-efficacy ideas affect task preference, attempt, patience, purposefulness, flexibility and accomplishment (Bandura, 1997;
Schunk, 1995).
f.) Speaking Self- Efficacy
According to Assakereh and Deghannejat (2015) there is positive relations between speaking skills achievement and satisfaction with speaking classes and speaking skills self efficacy beliefs. Speaking self-efficacy belief is a stronger predicator of Iranian EFL students speaking skills achievement (p.353).
As Asakereh and Dehghannejad (2015) argued, learners with higher speaking skills self-efficacy tend to perform better in speaking skills.
Moreover, the extent of effort, insistence and flexibility are organized on the basis of self-efficacy beliefs. And self efficacy-beliefs can changes an individual thinking prototypes and mental feedbacks. Learners with high self- efficacy tend to be more confident and are more positive to accomplish speaking activities with special complexity levels. Those with a high self efficacy belief tend to do complex assignments, whereas those with low self- efficacy may consider tasks more difficult than they actually are. This kind of belief may cause a feeling of anxiety and hopelessness (Pajares, 1996).
Also, there are a lot of studies that examined relationship between EFL learners self- efficacy and their language skills proficiency. Some studies (Kargar & Zamanian, 2014; Naseri & Zaferanieh, 2012; Shang, 2011) discovered a positive relationship between self- efficacy beliefs and reading comprehension skills success.
According to Liu (2013), a lot of studies suggested that the use of strategies is largely associated to self-efficacy ideas. Magogwe and Oliver (2007) illustrated that there was a considerable relationship between the learners strategy used and their self efficacy feelings Wang and Li (2010) argued that readers with advanced levels of self-efficacy applied more reading strategies than readers who had little self-efficacy. Liu (2013) found that whereas many investigations have been carried out on self efficacy in association with writing, reading and listening skills, investigation on self efficacy of speaking capability in foreign language learning has been ignored.
Moreover, he also examined the result of a site “English Bar” on college students speaking self- efficacy. He argued that students who often speak English at the Bar tend to have a high level of self-efficacy in comparison to their classmates who hardly ever met the “Bar”. Liu considered some positive aspects of the Bar.
First, students were allowed to choose either their co-workers or subjects to decrease their stress. Second, students without an appropriate level of proficiency in speaking skills were motivated by the overseas instructors and their co-workers. Third students self-efficacy was developed as they monitored similar others who were proficient speakers. At the end, students try harder as they found out that they were making development to talk about themselves in English. According to Asakereh and Dehghannezhad (2015), few studies have investigated the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and speaking proficiency. In addition, Saeidi and Ebrahimi Farshchi (2012) found out, communication strategies help the learners become more positive about their capabilities to handle circumstances which are fearful to them because of their language imperfections. Teachers are able to guide the students to promote an idea that they have enough ability to become successful in their speaking objectives regardless of their language weakness through teaching communication strategies. Teaching communicative strategies in content-based courses is an innovative idea to get the student
familiar with the strategies that help them overcome their language deficiencies (p.231).
Table 2.2. Self Efficacy Rubrics Indicators
No Criteria Description
1 Magnitude Being optimistic in doing lessons and tasks Interested in lessons and tasks
Learn according to a set schedule On time in collecting the task Never failed in doing task
2 Strength Commitment in completing tasks that are given Persistence in completing tasks
Have a positive purpose in doing things Thinking positive in doing the tasks
Believing in solving problem
3 Generality Make life experience a path to success Likes to find new situations
Responding to different situations with good and positive thinking
Trying to solve the problem Judging other positively
The rubric above is used to reduce the subjectivity of the test. In case, tojudge the skill that the students have is not easy to do because judgments aresometimes subjective. For the example is discriminating the skill of grammar;once it can be judged good, but the criteria of “good” itself is an opinion or a pointof view. Therefore, to assess the performance of speaking will be better if theassessor is two or more assessors.
I. Review Related Studies
Many studies have been carried out on this concept of self efficacy in the academic settings. The first research of Mastur (2007) with the titleThe Relationship between Students‟ Self-Efficacy and Their Speaking Abilityof MTsS Al-Manar students. In this regard, this study aims to find out whether there is a relationship between self-efficacy and speaking achievement in English language courses of the eight grade students of MTsS Al-Manar. The participants of this study were 32 students from eight grade class in academic year 2015-2016. Within a correlational research model, self-efficacy questionnaire (SEQ) was applied to the participants. The collectedquantitative data were analyzed by Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 20.0 program. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient were used to analyze the data.The finding of this research showed that the result of r calculation for students‟
self-efficacy and their speaking performance score is .536. Based on the table of interpretation of r value, the result of r calculated (.536) is between 0.400 and 0.600. This value shows that there is a positive correlation between the two variables. From the significance (2 tailed), the writer get the score .002. It means Sig<0.05 so the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected. The result explained that there is significant relationship between self-efficacy and speaking ability of the eight grade students of MTsS Al- Manar.
The second study isfrom Restimai Suganti. R (2011) with the title the correlation between self efficacy and speaking skill of the ninth grade students at Junior High School 10 Padang. This study aims to see whether or not there is a positive correlation between self-efficacy andstudent speaking skills. The population of this study was the 9th grade students of SMP Negeri 10 Padang in the school year2014/2015. The total students of all are 275 students. In determining the sample, researchers useSlovin's formula by selecting 73 students as trial students and 73 students as research students. In this research sample is class IX with a total of 73 students. In collecting data, researchersusing a questionnaire to see students' self-efficacy and speaking tests to measure speaking skillsstudent. In analyzing data, researchers used Product Moment correlation. After analyzing the data,researchers found the value of r-count was 0.40 with a significant level of 0.05. The result of r-table is 0.23with a significant level of 0.05). This means that r-count is higher than r-table (0.40> 0.23), then the hypothesisin this study accepted. Based on this study it can be concluded that self-efficacy affects student speaking skills.
Students who have high self-efficacy also have speaking skillshigh. Thus, it is expected that teachers can support students to be able to improve their self-efficacy.
The third research is from Ni Putu Yanti Cahya Sari (2012) with the title The Correlation Between Students Self –Efficacy and their Performance in Speaking Skill. This study is generally attempted to find the correlation between students‟ self-efficacy and their performance in speaking skill at the second grade of SMPN 18 Mataram in academic year 2017/2018 .The method of the research applied is correlation research (explanatory design). The population of this research consist of three clasess of SMPN 18 Mataram which number 59 population and the sample of the study is 52 students. The sample technique used in this research is simple random sampling technique by using slovin formula. Based on the result of the study, there was correlation between self-efficacy and their performance in speaking skill in which r-test (0,80) > r-table (0,268), its means the value of r-test was higher than r-table. From the research data it was found out that there was significant correlation between students‟ self- efficacy and their performance in speaking skill. This was proved by the t- test score (7,957) was higher than t-table (1,675) the degree of freedom (df) was used 50. It can be concluded that self-efficacy and their performance in speaking skill has significant correlation at the second grade students of SMPN 18 Mataram. Finally, the researcher suggests that should be more creative to make students self-efficacy increased in using media or strategy that students do not feel bored in the class.
The fourth is study of Sundari with the title The effect of speaking self efficacy and gender in speaking activitie. The present study tries to find out the effect of speaking self-efficacy and gender in speaking activities particularly in English as second/foreign language situation, using questionnaire from Bandura‟s Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales.
The Samples of this study were 23 male and 27 female college-students from speaking classes. ANOVA and T-test helped by SPSS 15.0 for windows were employed to investigate speaking self-efficacy, gender and speaking activities. The result showed that the level of speaking self- efficacy both male and female students is moderate. They can moderately
perform speaking activities but they think them quite though and difficult.
Besides, Sig. for gender scores lower than .05 (.013 < .05), gender gave significant effect towards speaking activities. Yet, not only speaking self- efficacy partially (Sig .162 > .05) but also its simultaneous interaction with gender (Sig .0677 > .05) did not affect significantly towards speaking activities.
The similarity of the last research to the present is in the focus of research or variable, they are self efficacy and speaking. The different between those researchs is in the subject. The last research took the students of junior high school, while this research will take the university students as the subject.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH
A. Place and Time of The Research
The research of this study will be conducted at the fifth semester students of English Education Program of Islamic University SulthanThahaSaifuddin Jambi which is located at Jl. Jambi Ma Bulian KM. 16 Simpang Sungai Duren Kab. Ma.Jambi.
B. Research Design
The studyconducted through quantitative method and the design correlational study. This study tends to be a study of correlation becauseinvestigates the correlation between two variables. As stated by Sangadji thatcorrelational research is a type of research with certain characteristic of theproblems of the relationship or correlation at least two variables (Sangadji, 2010 : 71). Variable isthe object of the research or what is being noticed in a research (Arikunto, 1996 : 99).
In statistical science, the correlation between two variables is known as bivariate correlation, while the correlation between more than twovariables is known as multivariate correlation. Since the correlation studysearches for whether or not there is a correlation between two variables ormore, the correlation between two variables can be a positive correlation andnegative correlation (Sudijono, 2006 : 167).A study has a positive correlation when two variables(or more) move in tandem. It means if the X variable decreases, the Yvariable also decreases and vice versa. However, a study has a negativecorrelation when one variable decreases, while the others increase and viceversa.
The researcher would like to find the relationship between independent and dependent variable namely investigating the correlation between students’
self efficacy and their speaking performance. The researcher wants to know whether the two variables are related or whether one can predict another.
