An Analysis of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

Since the beginning of 1970s, pioneered by Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975), research in

TEFL has shifted its focus from the teacher to the learner (taken from Mistar, 2002).

The process of learning itself nowadays does not only find out what they learn but also

put the attention on finding out how and why learners learn (Wenden 1991:11). In other

words, the process of language learning has become part of the content of learning.

Oxford (1980:5) states that

Interest has been shifting from a limited focus on merely what students

learn or acquire –the product or outcome of language learning and

acquisition –to an expanded focus that also includes how students gain

language- the process by which learning or acquisition occurs.

Therefore, according to Chamot (2005:113), studying the learners’ language

learning strategies is considered as the best way to uncover the process of language

learning. Furthermore Ellis (1994:537-8) lists the three major classifications in the

language learning strategies (henceforth: LLS) those are “cognitive strategies” which

relate to how students think about their learning (ex: I try to find pattern in English),

“metacognitive strategies” which relate to how students manage their own learning (ex:

I plan my English course), and “social strategies” which relate to how student interact

with others through the language (ex: I practice my language with my friends). The

2

classifications are variously elaborated by some researches like Rubin (1981), O’Malley

and Chamot (1987), and Oxford (1990) which will be elaborated in Chapter 2 and 3.

As mentioned before that learning strategies have been discussed by various

scholars, a range of terms here have emerged with regard to the field. First of all,

Oxford and Crookall (1989:404) collected some terms that define learning strategies

First is “ the learning techniques (Stern, 1983) or “learning behaviors” (Weinstein and

Mayer,1986) which occurs when learners adopt some forms of language learning

actions in order to cope problems in particular areas of language learning such as

grammar. Seliger uses “tactics” which is used when learners try “to organize a learning

situation, respond to the learning environment, or cope with input and output demand”

(Seliger, 1984, cited in Ellis 1994:531). The last and most common used term for LLS

is “strategy” (Oxford, 1990:8) defined as “behaviors or actions which learners use to

make language learning more successful, self-directed, and enjoyable”. Therefore based

on the terms collected, it shows that learners attempt to deal with their learning process

such various ways in order to make the process become easier and interesting.

In addition, Lessard-Cluston (1997, cited in Dakun, 2004) summarizes some

basic characteristics in the generally accepted view language learning strategies. Firstly,

language learning strategies are consciously generated by learners; they are actions or

steps taken by language learners to facilitate learning tasks. Secondly, language learning

strategies enhance language learning and help develop the learner’s skills in listening,

speaking, reading, or writing the second language. Thirdly, the main goal of language

learning strategies is to affect the way in which the learner selects, acquires, organizes,

3

or integrates new knowledge. Fourthly, language learning may be visible behaviors,

steps, and techniques or unobservable thoughts and mental processes. Finally, the other

generally accepted features of language learning strategies include allowing learners to

become more self-directed, expanding the role of language teachers, being problem-

oriented, flexible and teachable. Oxford also adds that learning strategies help improve

learners’ proficiency and build their greater self-confidence (Oxford, 1990:9)

In Indonesia, according to Khairul (2004), research on language learning

strategies used by the Indonesian-speaking learners to learn English as a foreign

language has rarely been conducted. For example, ‘CBSA’ (Cara Belajar Siswa Aktif),

which is a method that aims to activate learners’ critical thinking and has been

developed by the Department of Education since 1990s, still does not give any

satisfactory result for Indonesian learners. Consequently, there was not enough

empirical information about language learning strategies used by Indonesian-speaking

learners in learning English as foreign language. So far in the case of Indonesian

learners of English, research in language learning strategies has been conducted in order

to answer whether Indonesian learners have employed these strategies during their

learning process (Manurung, 2005; Mistar, 2002; Weda, 2005). The aim is to introduce

the language learning strategies to various levels of learners, since there are certain

reasons why learning strategies are ignored by some learners. First reasons, cited by

Sadtono (1995, in Mistar, 2002) indicate that most Indonesian learners probably do not

use effective techniques or strategies for learning English. He notes that Indonesian

learners of English do not realize that learning a foreign language requires

4

perseverance, discipline, knowledge of techniques of assimilating new habits, self-

evaluation, a great deal of practice, and that the whole business takes a long time.

Another explanation, mentioned by Weda (2005), is that learners are not trained to

overcome their learning problems or they are too dependent on their language teachers.

In line with Weda, Manurung (2005) adds that the situation occurs because the majority

of Indonesian students have always learnt language in a context where a “guru” (an

expert) is the main focus of the teaching-learning activities. Thus, the language learning

researchers indicate that language teacher should not only teach the language but also

teach learners how to learn (Nunan, 1996; Oxford, 1990).

On the other hand, there are also some Indonesian learners who are considered

to be applying the learning strategies when they solve their learning problems, even

though they probably do not realize that their learning techniques are actually a part of

the language learning strategies. Certain groups seem to choose some strategies

different than the others, for example the college students prefer to use cognitive

strategy than the English teachers who chose metacognitive, and meanwhile they are

both considered as language learners. For the other group of learners like the office

workers, who also need to use English for their professional career, probably could use

social strategies during their learning processes. Obviously, these learners employ some

behaviors and techniques that could help them improve their potential in developing

their language ability whether they realize it or not.

Therefore, this thesis attempts to investigate the most frequent strategies

employed by three groups of learners. Those groups are divided into the college

5

students, the English teachers, and the office workers. In other words, the study reported

here tries to focus on how the learners from different background level learn a foreign

language by using their language learning strategies.

1.2 Statement of The Problem

With regards to the previous section, this study aims to examine the process of learning

English as a foreign language especially from the learners’ point of view. In order to

reach this goal, this study seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What are the most frequently used strategies employed by all the groups of

learners?

2. What is the individual language learning strategy used by each group of

learners?

1.3 Significance of The Study

This study intends to compare the language learning strategies among the learners and

hopefully the findings can help language teachers facilitate teaching and learning more

effectively by focusing not only on the teaching methods but also on at the strategies

that learners employed.

6

1.4 Objective of The Study

In order to fulfill the goal of the study, this study has two fundamental objectives:

1. It intends to investigate which group of learning strategies is believed to be used

most frequently by the learners.

2. It intends to investigate which individual LLS is used by each group of learners.

1.5 Limitation of The Study

This study offers a closer look at the problem of learning strategies for language

learners. As explained previously, many experts and researchers have identified the

learning strategies used by some language learners. The present study, however, only

adapts the LLS and its categorization as listed by Oxford (1990)

7

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES

This chapter reviews the relevant literatures of language learning strategies by

examining the background, the issues along the definition, the characteristics, and

the categories of the language learning strategies. The first part of the chapter

discusses the development of language learning strategies based on some research

conducted by several researchers. The second part provides about the definitions

and characteristics of language learning strategies and the third part describes

categories in the language learning strategies. The third part discusses about factors

that influencing the strategy choice and some method used in investigating the

LLS. For the last part, it presents surveys by previous research methodologies in

investigating the language learning strategies.

2.1. The Good Language Learner

Language learning strategies research began in the 1970s with the work of Joan

Rubin (1975), who suggested the model of “the good language learner” (henceforth

GLL) which was taken from the successful language learners and differentiated

from the less successful ones.

Furthermore, Rubin comes up with the strategies that were being employed

by the successful learners and those are:

8

1. The good language learning is a willing and accurate guesser

2. The good language learner has a strong drive to communicate or to

learn from a communication.

3. The good language learner is often not inhibited. He is willing to

appear foolish if reasonable communication results.

4. In addition to focusing on communication, the good language learner

is prepared to attend to form

5. The good language learner practices

6. The good language learner monitors his own and the speech of

others

7. The good language learner attends to meaning

(Rubin, 1975: 21-23)

However, according to Graham, Stern (1975) is the first one who contributed the

idea of “the good language learner” (cited in Graham, 1997:37). He has classified

learning strategies which he drew up based on his own experience as a learner and

teacher and the background literature on language learning. Stern argues that the

good language learner “must fit into a theory of language learning and such a theory

can be developed in five progressive stages, those are;

(1)What it means to know a knowledge: competence, (2) What it means

to know more than one language, (3) What is involved in first-language

learning (4) What is involved in second- language learning, (5) What is

the distinction between the strategies of the good and the poor language

learner.

Based on the five stages, Stern (1975, cited in Croft: 1980) further took three of

them and explains about some principles that underlie the strategies of the GLL. The

first one is “knowing a language: competence”, by competence he means that GLL

also should learn from what native speakers’ knowledge on the language and how

they intuitively use form, meaning, communication, and creativity in their language.

The second stage is by starting his language learning process which is divided into

9

(a) initial stage, where learners start to learn the new language; (b) learning process

where learners collected the new information and build the new system according to

the new language he learnt; (c) the ideal end point: native-like competence”. Here

Stern argues that” the second-language learner comes close to the native-like

competence when he has internalized, interiorized, or incorporated the rules of the

new language” (Stern 1975, cited in Croft 1980: 55-62). The third stage, he

explains about the three major problems of learning which are explained as follows:

(1) The discrepancy between first and second languages (he states that GLL

should be able to overcome the difference in the language system between L1

and L2).

(2) The code-communication dilemma (it is the problem whenever the learner

have to use the language either “formally” (focus on grammar, sound system,

etc) or “functionally” (focus on communication))

(3) The choice between rational and intuitive learning (it is mentioned that

learners have their “dilemma” when they want to use the language

“naturally/intuitively” or they should also pay attention on “the concepts” and

“systems”).

(Stern 1975, cited in Croft 1980: 55-62)

Therefore, based on the three-progressive stage mentioned, Stern concluded some

features from the GLL as their result of his observation. The following are the

features.

10

1. A personal learning style or positive learning strategies

2. An active approach to the learning task

3. A tolerant and outgoing approach to the target language and empathy with

its speakers

4. Technical know-how about how to tackle a language

5. Strategies of experimentation and planning with the object of developing

the new language into an ordered system of revising this system

progressively.

6. Constantly searching for meaning

7. Willingness to practice

8. Willingness to use the language in real communication

9. Self-monitoring and critical sensitivity to language use

10. Developing the target language more and more as a separate reference

system and learning to think in it.

(Stern, 1975 cited in Croft, 1980: 68)

Research on the good language learners continue to develop. Another

research conducted by Naiman et al (1978) also interested in comparing the less

successful students with the unsuccessful ones. The research reported by them had

three main aims. One was to identify the strategies that good learners used. Second,

they wondered whether there were any correlations between successful learning and

the variables, particularly the personality and cognitive style ones. The third was to

learn something about what teachers do in classrooms. Two case studies were

conducted from the interviews from 32 adult learners and students at grade 8, 10, 12

of French in Toronto. The result was cited in Graham (1997:39) as follows,

The interviews with the adult subjects produced several pertinent

insights into the language learning process. Most thought they had a

good memory (50%) and were interested in analyzing languages (66%);

47% thought motivation was important; 82% favoured actively

producing the language from the start of learning. Interestingly, 94%

saw learning as a largely conscious process, whereas the unsuccessful

learners felt it was something one effortlessly acquires; 78% thought it

was a help to have learned more than one language; 85% had felt some

11

discouragement, frustration, impatience or confusion during learning.

About half had left inhibited or embarrassed. Many emphasized the

importance of action in learning, seeking out speaking situations to

overcome shyness (Naiman et al., 1978:13-15)

As the result, Naiman et al. (1978, cited in Graham 1997:39) went on to classify

such observations into strategy types, which are summarized as follows:

1. An active task approach, active involvement in the learning process,

seeking out learning opportunities

2. Realization of language as a system, e.g. analyzing the L2 and making

inferences

3. Realization of language as a means of communication and interaction, e.g.

looking for situations involving communication, emphasizing fluency rather

than accuracy in the initial stages of language learning.

4. Management of affective demands, e.g. learning to laugh at oneself

5. Monitoring of L2 performance, e.g. asking native speakers for corrections

Based on some research on GLL studies, it can be seen that the results provide some

answers regarding to the question why some students fail or probably have some

serious learning problems while the others were capable to face them. By

discovering how successful language learners produce some strategy to overcome

their learning problems, it is hoped the less successful learners can also produce

some strategy to overcome their learning problems.

Furthermore the recent research on investigating language learners’

strategies has developed rapidly. Some researchers include Rubin (1981), Wenden

(1983a, 1986b), O’Malley et al (1985) and Oxford (1990) conduct the LLS research

included the relationship to its variables such as in gender, age, culture, etc. Further

discussion in the language learning strategies will be presented in the sections that

follow.

12

2.2 Terminology in Language Learning Strategies (LLS)

Based on Griffith (2004), the term ‘strategy’ has been used by many prominent

writers (such as Rubin, 1975; O’Malley et al, 1985; Oxford, 1990). She further

explains that some researchers prefer to use the terminology such as “learning

behaviours” (Wesche, 1977; Politzer and McGroarty, 1985 cited in Graham 2004),

“tactics” (Seliger, 1984 cited in Ellis 1986) and “techniques” (Stern, 1992 cited in

Ellis 1986).

The learning strategies also have been defined by several experts. For example

Oxford (1990:8) defines it as “the specific actions taken by the learner to make learning

easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable

to new situations”. In line with her, O’Malley and Chamot (1990:1) mention learning

strategies are “special ways of processing information that enhance comprehension,

learning, or retention of information”. Ellis is another author who views strategies for

learning and strategies for using, including communication strategies or “devices for

compensating for inadequate resources” (Ellis, 1986:165), as quite different

manifestations of a more general phenomenon which he calls learner strategies.

Besides the definitions, categorizing in LLS also has variously explored,

furthermore the following section will explain each characteristic and some categories

in language learning strategies.

13

2.3. Characteristics of Language Learning Strategies

Researchers such as Wenden (1987: 7-8), Lessard- Clouston (1997: cited in Internet

TESL Journal and Oxford (1990a:9) list some characteristics that define the language

learning strategies. The characteristics of language learning strategies are summarized

in the table below.

Table 2.1: Characteristics of LLS

Wenden (1987:7-8)

Lessard- Clouston

(1997: Internet TESL

Journal)

Oxford (1990a:9)

1. Contribute directly

and indirectly to

learning

2. Observable and

unobservable

3. Problem oriented

responding to the need

4. Specifications/techniq

ues

5. Deplorable and

automatized

6. Behaviour which are

amenable to change

1. Enhance language

learning and develop

competency

2. Visible or unseen

3. Involve information and

memory

4. Learner generated-

deliberate steps

1. Contribute to communicative

competence

2 Observable and unobservable

3 Are problem oriented

4 Are action based

5 Expand the role of language

teachers

6 Can be taught

7 Allow learners to become

more self-directed

8 Often used consciously

9 Involve in any aspects, not

just cognitive

10 Are influenced by a variety of

factors

11 Support learning directly

/indirectly

12 Are flexible

As can be seen in Table 2.1, Wenden (1987), Lessard-Clouston (1989) and Oxford

(1990) agree that LLS enhance learning and can be both observable which include the

actions and techniques, or unobservable which include the memory and cognitive

aspects. Furthermore it also shows that both Wenden and Oxford feel that LLS are

problem-oriented and are applied when a problem exists. Though Lessard-Clouston

14

places learners as playing a greater role (that is being learner-generated), in the other

hand Oxford places teachers as having a greater role. Nevertheless, for successful

learning to take place, it is obvious that learners need to participate actively in the

learning process, although the teachers can help to enhance their learning process.

2.4. Taxonomy of Language Learning Strategies

Some researchers identified three major strategies used by the language learners,

those which are dealing indirectly and directly to the process of learning such as

metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies and social/affective strategies

(O’ Malley et al 1983, Rubin and Wenden 1987, Ellis 1994). Based on Rubin’s

classifications, metacognitive strategies refer to “make use knowledge about

cognitive processes and constitute an attempt to regulate language learning by

means planning, monitoring, and evaluating” whereas cognitive strategies refer to

“the steps or operations used in problem solving that require direct analysis,

transformation, or synthesis learning materials” (Wenden and Rubin 1987:23).

Social strategies, on the other hand is “the ways in which learners elect to interact

with other learners or native speakers of the target language” such as cooperation

and questioning for clarification (Ellis 1994:538)

Therefore, O’Malley and Chamot (1985), Oxford (1990) and Rubin (1981)

have first categorized the strategies under direct and indirect strategies which are

further sub-categorised and samples of such taxonomies of language learning

strategies by the key figures in the field are as summarized in table 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4.

15

Table 2.2. O’Malley and Chamot’s typology of learning strategies

(1985, taken from Ellis 1994: 538)

Learning Strategy Sub-strategies

Metacognitive

Advance organizers

Directed attention

Selective attention

Self-management

Advance preparation

Self-monitoring

Delayed production

Self-evaluation

Cognitive

Repetition

Resourcing

Directed physical response

Translation

Grouping

Note-taking

Deduction

Recombination

Imagery

Auditory representation

Key word

Contextualization

Elaboration

Transfer

Inferencing

Social/ affective Cooperation

Question for clarification

Chamot and O’ Malley provide the first clear contrast between cognitive and

metacognitive strategies. Metacognitive strategies include the processes by which

learners plan, monitor (considered in a broad sense), and evaluate their learning. For

cognitive strategies, Chamot (1987, cited in Ellis, 1994: 536) argues that techniques

such as “repetition (imitating a language model, either covertly or overtly), “note-

taking” (writing down information presented orally), and “elaboration” (relating

new concepts to other information in memory) appear to be directly linked to the

16

performance of particular learning tasks. Social/affective strategies, on the other

hand, concern the ways in which learners elect to interact with other learners and

native speakers.

Rubin’s classification on LLS divides into four types, however besides the

cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, and social, she also adds

communicative strategies between them. The communication strategies employed

by learners when they practice their language with others, it covers participating in

a conversation, getting meaning across and clarifying. Whereas social strategies

deal with opportunities to use the language that learners have.

Table 2.3 Rubin’s typology of learning strategies (in Ellis 1994:534)

Learning Strategy Sub-strategies

Cognitive Strategies

Clarification/ Verification

Guessing/ Inductive

Inferencing

Deductive Reasoning

Practice

Memorization

Monitoring

Metacognitive Strategies

Planning

Prioritising

Setting goals

Self-management

Communicative Strategies

Participating in a

conversation

Getting meaning across

Clarifying

Social Strategies

Opportunities to be exposed

to the knowledge

Opportunities to practise the

knowledge

17

The classification of language learning strategies reflects more or less the

same categorization. A comparative study O’Malley and Chamot (1990), Oxford’s

(1990), and Rubin (1981) classification systems used in the field however

concludes that Oxford’s (1990) system of language learning strategies is superior in

accounting for the variety of strategies used by language learners (Chamot, 2004).

Oxford’s (1990:17) taxonomy of language learning strategies consisting of direct

and indirect strategies are further subdivided into six categories as can be seen as

follows,

Table 2.4 Oxford’s typology of learning strategies (1990)

Learning Strategies Sub-strategies

A. Direct Strategies

Memory Strategies

Are devices used by learners to

make mental linkages to enable

new information especially

vocabulary to be retained by

learner.

Creating mental linkage

Grouping

Associating/elaborating

Placing new words into context

Applying images and sounds

Using imagery

Semantic mapping

Using keywords

Representing sounds in memory

Reviewing well

Using action

Cognivtive strategies

Are used by learners to process

language and accomplish tasks.

Practising

Repeating

Formally practicing with sounds and

writing systems

Recognizing and using formulas and

patterns

Recombining

Practising naturalistically

Receiving and sending messages

Getting the idea quickly

18

Using resources for receiving and sending

messages

Analyzing and reasoning

Reasoning deductively

Analyzing expressions

Analyzing contrastively (across languages)

Translating

Transferring

Compensation strategies

Are used by learners to make up

for their missing knowledge. They

include the use of gesture,

rephrasing, asking for help and

making guesses.

Creating structure for input and output

Taking notes

Summarizing

Highlighting

Overcoming limitations in speaking and

writing

Switching to mother tongue

Getting help

Using mime or gestures

Avoiding communication partially or

totally

Selecting the topic

Adjusting or approximating the message

Coining words

Using a circumlocution or synonym

B. Indirect Strategies

Metacognitive strategies

Are used by learners to plan,

organize, evaluate and monitor

their own language learning.

Centering your learning

Overviewing and linking with already

known material

Paying attention

Delaying attention

Delaying speech production to focus on

listening

Arranging and planning your learning

Finding out about language

Organizing

Setting goals and objectives

Identifying the purpose of a language task

Planning for a language task

Seeking practice opportunities

Evaluation your learning

Self-monitoring

Self-evaluating

19

Affective Strategies

Are used by learners to deal with

their emotions, motivations and

attitudes when learning English.

Lowering your anxiety

Using progressive relaxation/ deep

breathing/meditation

Using music

Using laughter

Encouraging yourself

Making positive statements

Taking risks wisely

Rewarding yourself

Taking your emotional temperature

Listening to your body

Using a checklist

Writing a language learning diary

Discussing your feelings with someone

else

Social Strategies

Refer to how learners use

language learnt to interact and

learn from others.

Asking questions

Asking for clarification or verification

Asking for correction

Cooperating with others

Cooperating with peers

Cooperating with proficient users of the

new language

Empathizing with others

Developing cultural understanding

Becoming aware of others’ thoughts and

feelings.

2.5. Factors influencing the choice of LLS

Discussions on individual, situational and social factors which could be the factors

that influencing learners choices will be elaborated in the following sections even

though the relationship between learner’s factors and the choice of LLS is not

going to be the main focus in the thesis. However these factors will enrich our

insights on LLS.

20

2.5.1 Learner’s belief about language learning

Wenden (1987:23) found that learners who emphasized the importance of learning

tended to use cognitive strategies that helped them to understand and remember

specific items of language, while learners who emphasized the importance of using

language employed few learning strategies, used more on communication

strategies. However, learners who stressed personal factors did not manifest any

distinctive pattern of strategy use.

2.5.2 Age and Learning Experience

In terms of age that is also related to the extent of learning experience, young

learners have been observed to employ task-specific strategies while older learners

employ generalized strategies more flexibly. Ehrman and Oxford (1989:1) reported

that “adults use more complex and sophisticated strategies”. It explains why older

learners generally learn grammar and vocabulary faster initially than younger

learners and not so in pronunciation.

2.5.3 Affective States

Investigation on the influences of the affective domain of learners dealing with

variables such as learners, attitude towards language and motivation has carried out

by Green and Oxford (1995). Studies into the area suggest that motivation seems to

be the most important of the learner variables since how learners deal with their

emotions affects the strategies they employ.

21

2.6. Previous LLS Research Methodologies

Learning strategies has been identified through various self-report procedures.

They range from listing the strategies through intuitions and making informal

observation to conducting interviews, coming up with self-exploration data and

finally designing questionnaires to collect data. The major methodologies that have

been employed previously are detailed in this section.

In general two categories have been used in the study of language learning

strategies, namely observation and self-report. For observation, researchers have

either used informal observations or scheduled observation. Self-report methods

include interviews, diary studies and questionnaires. These methods are discussed in

detail in the sections that follow.

2.6.1. Interviews

Oxford and Crookal (1989:404) listed some methods and findings on the LLS and

interviews are the first research methodology used in this field. Interviews are

conducted to find out how learners describe what they are thinking and doing in a

recently completed task. However, learners may forget details of the mental

processes or even describe what they thought are right. A more accurate method of

learning the strategies actually applied by learners is through the use of “stimulated

recall interview”. For stimulated recall interview, the learners are asked to describe

22

their thoughts as videotapes of students performing a certain task are played.

(Chamot 2005:113)

2.6.2. Diaries and Journals

Written diaries and journals have also been used to identify language learners’

strategies. In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning

experiences and the ways in which they attempted to solve language problems.

Rubin (2003:78 cited in Oxfrod and Crookal 1989:408) suggests using diaries for

instructional purposes to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their

own learning processes and strategies. The diary studies also have been primarily

used to shed light on the learners’s affective states and how these influence learning

(Brown 1985, Parkinson and Howell-Richardson 1990, cited in Oxford and Crookal

1989: 408)

2.6.3. Thinking-aloud protocols

A think-aloud protocol can be used for individual interviews in which the learner is

given a target language task and asked to describe his or her own tasks while

working on it (Chamot 2005:114). In general, think-aloud tasks may tell us more

about skill learning than language strategies. This self-report may be inaccurate if

learners do not report truthfully or cannot remember their thinking. As Grenfell and

Harris have pointed out: “It is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human

brain and find out what is going on there” (1999:54, cited in Chamot 2005:115)

23

2.6.4. Questionnaires

The most frequently used method for identifying students’ learning strategies is

through questionnaires. Most descriptive studies have relied on a questionnaire

developed by Oxford (1990:293-6), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning

(SILL). The SILL is a standardized measure with version for English as a second

language (ESL) students and students of a variety of other languages, and as such

can be used in studies to correlate strategy use with variables such as learning styles,

gender, proficiency level, culture, and task.

Oxford argues that her classification on LLS has been acknowledged to be

“more systemic in linking individual strategies, as well as strategy groups” (Oxford

1990:14) and also “the most comprehensive classification” (Ellis 1994:539)

Furthermore, Oxford’s SILL has been adopted for this research since it is also

formulated for learners who study English as their foreign language so each

question were designed understandable.

2.7. The Importance of LLS and Current Study

Early research into language learning strategies has been concerned with establishing

what good language learning strategies might be. The findings from research conducted

by Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) suggest that the successful learners have employed a

number of positive strategies. Oxford (1990a:1) stresses that language learning

strategies are important for language learning because they are “tools for active, self-

directed involvement essential for developing competence”. Graham (1997:20)

24

indicates that second and foreign language teachers can help learners understand good

LLS and should train learners to develop and use them. Lessard-Clouston (1997) poses

the question of what types of language learning strategies appear to work best with what

learners in what context. Oxford (1993:25) stresses the importance of further research in

different learning environments regarding learners’ language learning strategy use:

“investigations should be replicated so that more consistent information becomes

available within and across groups of learners”.

Based on the findings and recommendations made by the various researchers,

the current study thus seeks to find the language learning strategies employed by

Indonesian learners according to their context. It is hoped that the findings will provide

insights for teachers and researchers in similar and almost similar context to reflect and

improve on their teachings as well as help their learners learn more effectively.

2.8. Research into Language Learning Strategies

Furthermore, some Indonesian research has conducted LLS research among

Indonesian learners’. The research studies attempt to reveal what the strategies

employed by the learners relating to their language proficiency test. Other research

discussed factors influencing learners in choosing their strategies. The following is

the review from the previous research.

25

2.8.1 Studies of the effects of strategy instruction

Some researchers like Weda (2005) and Manurung (2005) conduct the research in order

to find out the strategies employed by the learners. As the result, learners’ proficiency

level showed increasing as they applied the strategies. The following the studies on the

strategy instruction.

2.8.1.1. Weda (2005)

The study is designed to identify the range and types of learning strategies used by

students learning English and to give information about the use of particular language

learning strategies which can explain the success in language learning. Weda research

also provides information about the students’ assessment towards teachers’ performance

in the classrooms, and suggests a model of training learner or learning how to learn

based on the findings.

The research method was quasi-experimental and was carried out in the

population of 85 students from two classes which focused on social science. Two main

instruments were being used, they are (1) the self-administered questionnaire (a 40-item

Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and the seven strategies employed by

good language learners (GLL) (2) proficiency test which covers English Structure,

Vocabulary and reading comprehension.

For the first group (IPS 1), the pre-test result showed that Metacognitive and

Social strategies were the highly usage and after the treatment the strategies highly used

were Metacognitive and Memory strategies respectively. Furthermore, for the GLL

26

strategies was Attend to form and Attend to meaning strategies, while in post-

questionnaire, it was found that the high usage of GLL strategies was Monitor speech

and Attend to Meaning strategies. The second group (IPS 2), it was found that Attend to

Meaning strategies was the highest usage, and the highest use of LLSs in post-

questionnaire was also Attend to Meaning strategies. From this description, it can be

seen that the students who used Attend to Meaning and Monitor Speech strategies have

score improvement in post test.

2.8.1.2. Manurung (2005)

The research discusses the effect of language learning strategy instruction on the

improvement of the four language skills at tertiary education level. It focuses on two

main points, of which the first is related to the effect of instruction in the use of

language learning strategies prior to undertaking autonomous language learning as self-

access center on the improvement of the four language skills, and the second relates to

the language learning strategies used in the self-access center where autonomous

language learning takes place. The subjects of the study were 126 first year non-

language department students registered for General English, a compulsory course at

the Language Training Centre (LTC) at a university in Indonesia. The subjects were

divided into two groups, 63 students as the experimental group and other 63 as the

control group. The experimental group was given instruction in the use of effective

language learning strategies before they use the self-access centre, while the control

group was assigned only to do self-access language learning. The result of the language

27

learning strategy instruction in the present study indicates that students in the

experimental group benefited from the language learning strategy instruction.

Furthermore, this study shows that the students in the experimental group improved

more in their EFL performance than their counterparts in the control group

2.8.2 Studies investigating factors affecting strategy choice

Use of appropriate learning strategies enable students to take responsibility for their

own learning furthermore, it is said that better language learners generally use strategies

appropriate to their own stage of learning, personality, age, purpose for learning the

language and type of language (Bialystok, 1981) as taken from Oxfrod and Nyikos

(1989). These factors are important because learners need to keep on learning even

when they are no longer in a formal classroom. The following are some research that

has been conducted in order to find out the relation between the language learning

strategies employed by the students with their culture backgrounds.

2.8.2.1. Lengkanawati (1999)

The study reported about the learner variable in relation to the language learning

strategy use. Language learning strategy choices used by the EFL students in Indonesia

and Indonesian as a foreign language in Australia related to the possible influences of

the learner’s cultural background were investigated. The data were collected through

observation, self-report survey using modified Strategy Inventory for Language

Learning (SILL) and interviews. This research reveals some evidence of the differences

28

in the degree of strategies used by both groups. The use of memory , metacognitive, and

affective strategies by EFL students in Indonesia is more frequent than the use of those

by IFL students in Australia. On the other hand, the use of cognitive, compensation, and

social strategies is higher in Australia than in Indonesia. Furthermore, the study

attempted to analyze the differences among the students’ point of view of their cultural

background. Furthermore, the statistical result showed that among the six categories of

language learning strategies, five strategies are proven to have significant differences in

the intensity of using memory, cognitive, compensation, affective, and social strategies

between EFL learners and IFL learners. There is no significant difference in the use of

metacognitive strategies by EFL and IFL learners. The influence of the students’

cultural background on the use of these strategies is very obvious. Very few of the

respondents involved in this research dared to put forward questions to the teachers. The

other influence is the low-used strategy in cooperating with peers or with proficient user

of the target language. This is probably because Indonesian students are very shy to

reveal that they do not know something.

2.8.2.2. Sugeng (1997)

Five research questions are asked concerning the profiles of students' learning strategies

in terms of general categories

and subordinate categories. Three hypotheses are

proposed concerning the influences of Language, Gender, and Grade on students'

learning strategies. Observation was conducted by trained student observers

using a

29

modified guide (Oxford, 1990) involving a total of 240 elementary school students.

Percentages were used as the statistics for the descriptive analyses. For hypothesis

testing a three-by-four

multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used.

MANOVA is methods to cover cases where there is more than one (correlated)

dependent variable and where the dependent variables cannot simply be combined.

Further the research followed by three-way analyses of variance (ANOVA), which is a

stasticial analysis based more than two variables, for the four strategy categories.

Correlation was calculated for the four strategy categories and non- parametric ANOVA

was conducted for the metacognitive category. Use of the students' learning strategy is

as follows: cognitive (63.31 %), affective (23.79%), social (9.05%), and

meta-cognitive

(3.85%). A significant main effect is found for Grade (p = 0.0001), and Language (p =

0.0126). A significant interaction is found for Grade and Language (p = 0.0001). For

metacognitive a significant interaction is found between Grade and Gender (p =

0.0012). A significant main effect of Grade was found for cognitive (p = 0.0009) and

for affective (p = 0.01).

30

CHAPTER III

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter is divided into two major sections. The first section describes and explains

some underlying theories in the language learning strategies. It discusses some features

in the language learning, which will be explained in details based on Oxford’s (1990)

language learning strategies classifications. The second section is concerned with the

research methodology and the data analysis.

3.1 Direct and Indirect Strategies

Oxford studied the learning strategies and classified them. She refers to it as

“Oxford’s Strategy Classification System” (Ehrman and Oxford, 1990). For the use

of the strategies when one is learning the target language, Oxford divided it into two

general classifications, namely direct strategies and indirect strategies.

3.1.1 Direct Strategies

Oxford states that direct strategies are the strategies that “require mental processing”

of the language even though the processing is differentiated according to its purpose

(1990:37). She illustrates direct strategies as “the performer in a state play” which

when learners express their specific actions with the language. Direct strategies

31

categorized into memory strategies, cognitive strategies, compensation strategies

therefore the following are the explanation of each category.

3.1.1.1 Memory strategies

First of all, Thompson (1987, cited in Wenden 1987) describes some techniques in

memory strategies. She calls the memory strategies as “mnemonic” which means

“aiding memory” (Higbee, 1979 cited in Thompson 1987) or is often also referred to

as ‘memory tricks’. There are several ways the mnemonics can be adapted by the

learners. She puts her ideas as follows:

1. By using linguistic mnemonics the learners try to remember every new word

by linking them to the other words. There are two ways in relating the new

words. The first is called the peg method which uses the unrelated item and

then links them with a set of memorize “pegs or hooks” like: red with bed,

green with clean, blue with glue, etc. The second one is called the keyword

method which by rhyming the new word with the learners’ L1, for example

in Indonesian, the word sound of house is almost similar to haus.

2. By using spatial mnemonics, the learners can apply it in three ways. First,

the loci method is sometimes used by the learners to memorize speeches

(Yates, 1966 in Thompson 1987) when they imagine the word and then put

each word into each room therefore whenever the person visits “the rooms”,

the location selected will help him/her to remember those words. Second,

the spatial grouping which the learner put the new words by drawing in a

32

pattern of triangle or circle. The last one is called the finger method, in

which the learner associates the item to be learned with a finger (first

item=left pinky, second item=left ring finger, etc)” (1987:45).

3. By using visual methods, here the learners can use pictures that represent the

new word or visualize the new word or a content of a passage.

4. By using the physical response, the learners pretend to act out a sentence or

words that they have just learnt. For example “pretend that you are writing a

book”, which is easier to remember than “I am writing a book”.

5. By verbal elaboration methods, the learner can apply it in three ways. The

first one is by grouping a certain words according to their classes such as

animals, colors, vegetables, and so forth. The second one is by using the

word chain, that is by associating each word according to what comes first

and then relating it to the next word. Thompson (1987:46) gives examples

like to remember “car”, “house”, “flower”, and so forth, one forms an image

a car in front of a house, a house surrounded by flowers, etc. The third

method, called the narrative chain, is just the same as the word chain. Here

the association is done by putting the new words into a story that might help

learners to remember easier.

Some techniques on the memory strategies that are listed by Thompson (1987) were

also adopted by Oxford, which fall into four sets: creating mental linkages, applying

images and sounds, reviewing well, employing action. Furthermore, Oxford

(1990:40-43) abbreviates these strategies as CARE, as illustrated by her statement

33

“Take CARE of your memory and your memory will take CARE of you”. “Creating

mental linkages” strategies form the corner stone for the rest of the memory

strategies by classifying or reclassifying language material into meaningful units, by

associating/elaborating, and by placing new words into a context. “Applying images

and sounds” strategies include: using imagery (the visual imagery is used either in

the mind or in actual drawing), using keywords (remembering a new word by using

auditory and visual links), semantic mapping (relating words, pictures, and means of

lines or arrows) and representing sounds in memory (remembering new language

according to its sound). “Reviewing well” strategy is done by reviewing carefully

spaced intervals, which is also called spiraling. “Employing action” includes two

ways, namely by using physical response or sensation and by using mechanical

techniques.

Based on the classification given, it seems that making mental pictures,

linking words from one to another, and exposing an action are the memory

strategies learner use mostly.

3.1.1.2 Cognitive Strategies,

These strategies are typically found to be the most popular strategies with the

language learners (Adler and Vogler, 1986, taken from Oxford, 1990:43).

Cognitive strategies are defined by Rubin (1987) as “the steps, or operations used

in problem solving that require direct analysis, transformation or synthesis of

learning materials”. There are four types of cognitive strategies, namely

34

“practicing, receiving and sending messages, analyzing and reasoning, and creating

structure for input and output”. Oxford creates the acronym PRAC, as illustrated in

her statement “Cognitive strategies are PRACtical for language learning.

“Practicing” is the most important type of cognitive strategies. It includes

repeating, formally practicing with sounds and writing systems, recognizing and

using formulas and patterns (being aware of and/or using routing formulas),

recombining (combining known elements in new ways to produce a longer

sequence), and practicing naturalistically (as in participating in a conversation,

reading a book or article, listening to a lecture, or writing a letter in the new

language). “Receiving and sending messages” can be used by learners to extracting

the new ideas by using a variety of resources for understanding or producing

meaning. “Analyzing and reasoning” are concerned with logical analysis and

reasoning as applied to various target language skills. The strategies contain

deductive reasoning deductively (by applying the general rules to the new target

language situations); analyzing expressions (using the meanings of various parts to

understand the meaning of whole expression); translating; transferring (applying

knowledge of words, concepts, or structures from one language to another).

“Creating structure for input and output” combines three ways to create structure,

namely taking notes, summarizing, and highlighting.

3.1.1.3 Compensation Strategies

35

These are some strategies that help learners when comprehending and producing the

new language. There are two types of compensation strategies included; “guessing

intelligently in listening and reading”, and “overcoming limitations in speaking and

writing”. The acronym created by Oxford (1990:47-50) for this category is GO as

illustrated by her statement, “language learners can GO far with compensation

strategies”. The strategy is considered very useful when the learners try to make

educated guesses rather than become panic and tend to use whatever words they can

find. In “guessing strategies”, there are two strategies that can be used, namely using

linguistic clues (language-based clues) and using other clues (non language-based

clues). The second strategy, “overcoming limitations”, as applied in speaking and

writing, such as switching to the mother tongue, getting help, using mime and gesture,

avoiding communication partially or totally, selecting the topic, adjusting or

approximating the message, coining words, and using a circumlocution or synonym.

3.1.2 Indirect strategies

For the indirect strategies, Oxford mentions it as “The Director, … is an internal

guide and support the Performer” (1990:15). Furthermore she argues that the learner

attempts to take self-control of his/her learning process while the teacher seems put

a less focus in this part. The classifications under this strategy are metacognitive

strategies, affective strategies, and social strategies.

3.1.2.1 Metacognitive strategies

36

These are the strategies that go beyond the cognitive and the way learners manage their

own learning process. Wenden (1982 cited in Wenden 1987:25) listed several planning

that learners use, those are when learners “choose” what and how they want to learn the

language and then they “prioritize “ which part of the language they prefer to learn first

and finally they could set up their own learning “goals”. Metacognitive strategies

therefore facilitates learners to make a self-control to their own learning process, if they

feel that what they have planned consider as not successful they could re-organized

according to what fit them best.

Furthermore, Oxford categorizes the metacognitve strategies as “centering your

learning, arranging and planning your learning, and evaluating your learning” (Oxford

1990:138-40). The acronym is created as CAPE, that is, metacognitive strategies make

language learners more CAPE-able. “Centering your learning” helps learners to keep

focusing on certain language tasks, activities, skills, or materials. These strategies

include activities such as overviewing and linking with already known material; paying

attention to specific aspects of the language or to situational details; and delaying

speech production to focus on listening. “Arranging and planning your learning”

include strategies used in finding out about language learning; organizing; setting goals

and objectives; identifying the purpose of language task; planning for a language task;

seeking practice opportunities. “Evaluating your learning”, by applying self-monitoring

such as identifying errors in understanding or producing is used the new language or by

self-evaluating by checking one’ progress in a certain month or week.

3.1.2.2 Affective strategies

37

These strategies refer to the learners’ emotions, attitudes, motivations, and values

towards their learning process, as illustrated in the following statement “good language

learners are often those who know how to control their emotions and attitude about

learning” (Savignon: 1983, taken from Oxford :1990:141), since the unstable emotions

and motivations would influence the learners’ effort during the learning process. There

are three ways used by learners to maintain their affective personality, namely

“lowering your anxiety, encouraging yourself, taking your emotional temperature”

(Oxford 1990:143-4). “Lowering your anxiety” can be applied by using progressive

relaxation, deep breathing, or meditation; by listening to music, or also by using

laughter when watching or reading fun stuffs. “Encouraging yourself” includes

activities like making positive statements, taking risks wisely, and rewarding yourself.

“Taking your emotional temperature” consists of activities like listening to one’s body;

using a checklist to discover feelings, attitudes, and motivations concerning language

learning in general; writing a language learning diary, and discussing your feeling with

someone else.

3.1.2.3 Social strategies.

Learning a new language requires a learner to be able to communicate in the new

language in a community. The strategies help learners when engaging in a

conversation. The strategies include activities such as “asking questions, cooperating

with others, and empathizing with others”(Oxford 1990:146-7). “Asking questions”

consists of activities like asking for clarification by paraphrasing, slow down, or give

38

example; and also asking for correction when the learner makes a mistake.

“Cooperating with others” can be done with peers or with proficient users of the new

language. “Empathizing with others” is applied by developing cultural understanding

and also by becoming aware of other’s thoughts and feelings

3.2 Research Methodology

This section describes the research framework, setting and respondents and the research

instruments and procedure. Both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods

and a number of descriptive as well as statistical analyses to seek answers to the

following research questions; (1) what is the most frequently used strategies that are

employed by all the groups of learners? And (2) what is the individual language

learning strategy used by each group of learners?

3.2.2 Setting and Respondents

This research attempts to investigate the LLS used by English language learners who

have been using the English language in their daily activities. The sampling includes

sixty respondents that are divided into three different groups, namely 20 college students,

20 English teachers, and 20 office workers.

The twenty college students were first semester students majoring in English

language. Their experiences in language learning were quite varied; most of them have

taken English course outside their formal institution while other respondents have learnt

it through the formal institution only. The twenty English language teachers have taught

39

English for more than five years. They teach English from kindergarten up to college

students. The third group, twenty office workers who were taken from different

professions such as; doctors, tour consultants, tax consultants, executive secretaries,

accountings, technician, and bank officers. These office workers showed more varied

experiences in their language learning process especially when dealing with their

professions. In addition to their formal education, some of the respondents indicate that

they studied in the English course before.

3.2.3 Research Instruments

The research adapts Oxford’s (1990) SILL which is considered to be more

comprehensive in accounting for strategies used by learners. The adapted Oxford’s

(1990) SILL was divided into six sections, A to F, based on Oxford’s (1990)

categorization of strategies as mentioned and explained earlier (see page 18). Each item

from the questionnaire were adopted precisely in this thesis, since the questions were

designed for foreign language learners on the other hand it uses simple words and easy

to understand by the respondents. Furthermore, strategy description was based on the

five-point Likert-scale, namely; 1 = never or almost never true of me, 2 = usually not

true of me, 3 = sometimes true of me, 4 = usually true of me and 5 = always or almost

always true of me. Table 3.2 shows the categorization of items in the questionnaire.

Items under each category in SILL questionnaire,

A. Memory strategies (9 items); 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9

B. Cognitive strategies (14 items);10, 11, 12,13,14,15,16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23

C. Compensation strategies (6 items); 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29

40

D. Metacognitive strategies (9 items); 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38

E. Affective strategies (6 items); 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44

F. Social strategies (6 items); 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, and 50

The main procedure used in collecting quantitative data was done by distributing

questionnaire. To enrich the quantitative data, qualitative data were collected through

guided interview questionnaires.

3.2.4 Data Analysis

After the data were collected, they were coded and analyzed. Both descriptive and

inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The descriptive data used include the

means and standard deviations. Based on the classification in this study, LLS are

analyzed in terms of its frequency of use based on Oxford’s classification of the SILL

average analysis (Oxford, 1989, cited in 1990) as follows:

Classification Frequency of use Average score

High Always or almost always true of me

Usually used

4.5 to 5.0

3.5 to 4.4

Medium Sometimes used

Generally not used

2.5 to 3.4

1.5 to 2.4

Low Never or almost never used 1.0 to 1.4

Based on the categorization above, the data reported in this study work are analyzed

statistically by using SPSS.

CHAPTER IV

41

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents and analyzes the data obtained from using the Oxford’s SILL

questionnaires. The first section of this chapter will mainly describe the data of the

respondents and their backgrounds. The data include the age, gender, and education.

The second section of this chapter will present analyses on the correlation between

some variables in language learning strategies and their accounts for answering the

research questions mentioned earlier in Chapter 1.

4.1 Data

a. The age of respondents

The data indicate that more than 60% of the student respondents are between the age 18

– 22 years old, around 70% of the teachers and workers respondents are between 24 –

35 years old. The minimum age is 18 and the maximum age is 60 years old. Based on

table 4.1 it could be seen that most student respondents are of young learners while

teachers and workers respondents are of adult learners.

Table 4.1 Age

42

Age student teacher Worker

Count % Count % Count %

18 13 65.0%

19 4 20.0%

20 1 5.0%

21 1 5.0%

22 1 5.0%

24 1 5.0% 6 30.0%

25 1 5.0%

26 2 10.0%

27 2 10.0% 2 10.0%

28 2 10.0% 2 10.0%

29 3 15.0% 1 5.0%

30 1 5.0% 2 10.0%

31 1 5.0%

32 2 10.0% 1 5.0%

34 1 5.0% 1 5.0%

35 2 10.0% 1 5.0%

37 1 5.0%

38 1 5.0%

39 1 5.0%

55 1 5.0%

58 1 5.0%

60 1 5.0%

Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

b. English learning experiences

The respondents gave a variety of responses based on their English learning experience.

The English learning experiences ‘table (figure 4.1) below indicates that the

respondents' experience in learning English is more than ten years in average. Most of

them stated that their first encounter with the language started when they were in junior

high schools. Some of them were introduced to English when they were at elementary

schools. Table 4.2 indicates that the respondents' English learning experience ranges

from 3 to 35 years.

43

3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 17 18 20 25 35

education

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Coun

t

Table 4.2 English learning experiences

Years

student teacher worker

Count % Count % Count %

3 1 5.0%

5 2 10.0% 1 5.0%

6 1 5.0% 1 5.0%

7 2 10.0% 6 30.0%

8 9 45.0% 1 5.0% 3 15.0%

9 2 10.0% 2 10.0% 4 20.0%

10 4 20.0% 2 10.0%

11 1 5.0%

12 3 15.0% 1 5.0%

13 1 5.0% 2 10.0%

15 1 5.0% 3 15.0%

17 1 5.0%

18 1 5.0% 1 5.0%

20 1 5.0%

25 2 10.0%

35 1 5.0%

Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

Figure 4.1

4.2. The overall result of Language Learning Strategies

44

The overall mean language learning strategies score of 3.45 indicates that all learners

are moderate users of language learning strategies. However there is a difference

between the group of students and the groups of teachers and workers. The students are

moderate users (3.29), whereas the teachers and workers are considered as high users of

language learning strategies, the mean results are 3.54 and 3.51. For the overall result of

the strategies used by respondents is shown in table 4.3 Results of the strategies used

Table 4.3: The overall result of the strategies used

The strategies Mean S.D. Rank

Memory strategies 3.13 0.63 5

Cognitive Language Learning Strategies 3.55 0.59 2

Compensation Language Learning Strategies 3.42 0.62 4

Metacognitive Language Learning Strategies 3.71 0.71 1

Affective Language Learning Strategies 3.12 0.73 6

Social Language Learning Strategies 3.48 0.81 3

It can be seen that the memory and affective language learning strategies are the least

frequently used by the respondents. It demonstrates that most learners hardly learn a

language by memorizing it. As a result, the highest score occurs in metacognitive

strategies and the second highest score occurs in the compensation language learning

strategies.

Next at the table 4.4 (Results of the individual strategies used) listed the highest score of

the individual-strategies employed by the learners:

45

Table 4.4: Results of the individual strategies used

Individual Strategies Mean S.D %

“I pay attention when someone is speaking

English”(MET32)

4.38 0.73 88%

“If I do not understand something in English, I ask the

other person to slow down or say it again” (SOC 45)

4.35 0.84 86%

“I try to find out how to be a better learner of English

(MET33)

4.16 0.95 76%

“I notice my English mistakes and use that information

to me do better” (MET 31)

4.11 0.80 80%

“if I can’t think of an English word, I use a word or

phrase that means the same thing” (COMP 29)

4.03 0.90 80%

“I encourage myself to speak English even when I am

afraid of making a mistake” (AFF 40)

3.98 0.91 68%

“I think about my progress in learning English”

(MET38)

3.93 0.95 71%

The result shows that there are three individual strategies chosen under the

metacognitive strategies, namely one individual strategies chosen under the social

strategies, one individual strategies chosen under the compensation strategies, and one

individual strategies chosen under the affective strategies. Therefore, no memory

strategies are chosen as the highest strategy.

As explained earlier, the metacognitive strategies turn out to be the most

frequently used strategies used by the English learners, that is almost 88% respondents

choose MET32 paying attention when someone is speaking English as their most-

frequently used strategies.

46

4.2.1. Overall LLS used by EFL Learners

For the overall LLS used by EFL learners, the result will be analyzed based on Oxford’s

LLS classifications (1990). The results of the most and least frequently strategies used

by all groups of learners are listed in the table 4.5 up to table 4.10 in the following

sections.

4.2.1.1. Memory LLS used by EFL Learners

Oxford (1990:41) further explains that the strategies can be classified into “simple or

complex, mundane or strange”. Here, learners associate the new language into things

that they have already known in order to remember the new information easily. This

strategy is part of semantic mapping which means “connecting the key concept placed

in the center and linked it with the relative words or concepts”.

Table 4.5: Results of the memory strategies

4.2.1.2. Cognitive LLS used by EFL Learners

The most-frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D Rank

MEM1 I think of relationships between what I already

know and new things I learn in English

1 5 3.65 1.03 1

The least-frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D. Rank

MEM5

I use rhymes to remember new English

words

1 5 2.70 1.013 1

47

As we could see from the tables below, learners most favorite cognitive learning

strategies are watching English language TV shows or going to movies spoken in

English’ (COG15). Learners who apply cognitive strategies actually try to practice

naturalistically. Rubin further explains that “Language learners often feel besieged by

‘whirling words’ from radio and TV programs, films, lectures, stories, articles, and

conversations’ (1975:45). The other strategies such as in practicing and practicing

naturalistically are mostly employed by the learners (COG12, COG11). While the

second frequently chosen category is in COG17, where the learners try to create

structure for input and output that could help them comprehends and produces the new

language. For the least frequently used strategies is to start conversation in English

(3.33).

Table 4.6: Results of the cognitive strategies

The most frequently used strategies

Min Max Mean S.D. Rank

COG11

I try to talk like native English speakers

1 5 3.62 1.059 5

COG12

I practice the sounds of English

1 5 3.62 1.027 4

COG15

I watch English language TV shows spoken in

English or go to movies spoken in English.

1 5 3.90 .986 1

COG17

I write notes, messages, letters, or reports in

English

1 5 3.72 1.136 2

COG18

I first skim an English passage (read over the

passage quickly) then go back and read

carefully

1 5 3.57 .927 6

COG20 2 5 3.55 .946 7

48

4.2.1.3. Compensation LLS used by EFL Learners

In order to compensate for the meaning of new words, here learners use guessing

strategies which are sometimes called inferencing. Therefore, when they apply this

strategy, learners try to overcome their limitations in speaking or in writing. The other

strategies which are most frequently used include guessing the unfamiliar words (3.85),

guessing what the other person will say in English (3.45), and by using gestures (3.78).

The least frequently used strategy in this part is ‘by making up new words’ and reading

English without looking up every new word.

Table 4.7: Results of the compensation strategies

I try to find patterns in English

COG21

I find the meaning of an English word by

dividing it into parts that I understand

1 5 3.50 1.066 8

COG22

I try not to translate word-for-word

1 5 3.65 1.132 3

The least-frequently used strategy Min Max Mean S.D Rank

COG14

I start conversation in English

1 5 3.33 1.115 2

COG23

I make summaries of information that I

hear or read in English

1 5 3.32 1.214 1



49

4.2.1.4. Metacognitive LLS used by EFL Learners

For metacognitive strategies, learners choose paying attention when someone is

speaking English’ (4.38). By applying this strategy, learners basically try to centering

their learning. Furthermore as the second and third strategy, learners choose noticing

their English mistakes and using it to become better (4.12) and thinking about one’s

progress in learning English (3.93). The highest score also shows that learners applying

the strategy in arranging and planning one’s learning, in this category they chose ‘to

find as many ways as he/she can use the English’ (3.67) and ‘ to look for opportunities

COMP24

To understand unfamiliar English words,

I make guesses

1 5 3.85 1.087 2

COMP25

When I can't think of a word during a

conversation in English, I use gestures

1 5 3.78 1.043 3

COMP28

I try to guess what the other person will

say next in English

1 5 3.45 .999 4

COMP29

If I can't think of an English word, I use a

word or phrase that means the same thing

1 5 4.03 .901 1

The least frequently used strategies


COMP26

I make up new words if I do not know

the right ones in English

1 5 3.22 1.195 1

COMP27

I read English without looking up every

new word

1 5 3.28 1.195 2

50

to read as much as possible’ (3.60). In the least strategies used, they choose organizing

one’s schedule (3.05), seeking practice opportunities (3.17), setting goals and

objectives (3.37)

Table 4.8: Results of the metacognitive strategies



MET30

I try to find as many ways as I can to

use my English

1 5 3.67 1.020 4

MET31

I notice my English mistakes and use

that information to me do better

2 5 4.12 .804 2

MET32

I pay attention when someone is

speaking English

2 5 4.38 .739 1

MET36

I look for opportunities to read as

much as possible in English

1 5 3.60 1.077 5

MET38

I think about my progress in learning

English

2 5 3.93 .954 3

The least frequently used strategies


MET34

I plan my schedule so I will have enough

time to study English

1 5 3.05 1.241 1

MET35 1 5 3.17 1.251 3

51

4.2.1.5. Affective LLS used by EFL Learners

Even though affective strategies are one of the least frequently used strategies, however

there is one affective strategy which is considered highly being used by all learners and

that is ‘encouraging oneself to speak English even when he/she is afraid of making a

mistake (3.98). This self-encouragement includes saying supportive things, prodding

oneself to take risks wisely, and providing rewards (Oxford 1990:143). For the least

strategy used in this category is ‘to write down one’s feelings in a language learning

diary’ (2.43)

Table 4.9: Results of the affective strategies

I look for people I can talk to in English

MET37

I have a clear goal for improving my

English skills

1 5 3.37 .920 2



AFF39

I try to relax whenever I feel afraid of

using English

1 5 3.58 1.013 2

AFF40

I encourage myself to speak English

even when I am afraid of making a

mistake

2 5 3.98 .911 1

AFF41

I give myself a reward or treat when I

do well in English

1 5 2.93 1.300 4

AFF42

I notice if I am tense or nervous when I

1 5 3.12 1.195 3

52

4.2.1.6. Social LLS used by EFL Learners

For the social strategies, learners prefer asking for clarification or verification from the

opponents every time they do not understand of what have been said previously, while

the second highest score is in cooperating with peers. Oxford explains that this strategy

can involve a regular learning partner or a temporary pair or small group. Further she

adds that this strategy involves “controlling impulses toward competitiveness and

rivalry”. (Oxford 1990:147)

Table 4.10: Results of the social strategies

am studying or using English

AFF43

I write down my feelings in a language

learning diary

1 5 2.43 1.345 6

AFF44

I talk to someone else about how u feel

when I am learning English

1 5 2.68 1.214 5

The most frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D. Rank

SOC45

If I do not understand something in

English, I ask the other person to slow

2 5 4.35 .840 1

53

4.2.2. Individual LLS used by each group of learners

Based on the strategies chosen, there are 50 items of individual strategies under the six

language learning strategies. Those are 9 individual strategies under the memory strategies,

13 individual strategies under the cognitive strategies, 6 individual strategies under the

compensation strategies, 8 individual strategies under the metacognitive strategies, 6

individual strategies under the affective strategies, and 6 individual strategies under the

social strategies.

Before we go further, the table 4.11 shows the result of overall language

strategies divided by each group of respondents. There are 60 respondents which were

divided into three groups; those are 20 college student, 20 English teachers, and 20 office

workers.

down or say it again

SOC47

I practice English with other students

1 5 3.68 1.066 2

The least frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D. Rank

SOC46

I ask English speakers to correct me when I

talk

1 5 3.35 1.338 3

SOC48

I ask for help from English speakers

1 5 3.10 1.272 2

SOC49

I ask questions in English

1 5 3.42 1.030 4

SOC50

I try to learn about the culture of English

speakers

1 5 2.98 1.214 1

54

Table 4.11: Average SILL results by each group of learners

Learner groups College Students English Teachers Office Workers

Strategies used Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev

Memory 3.08 0.55 3.21 0.50 3.10 0.36

Cognitive 3.30 0.26 3.68 0.26 3.67 0.50

Compensation 3.52 0.28 3.75 0.28 3.00 0.47

Metacognitve 3.47 0.46 3.85 0.46 3.82 0.58

Affective 3.12 0.67 3.07 0.67 3.16 0.61

Social 3.24 0.49 3.62 0.49 3.57 0.58

Figure 4.2.Results of each group learners’ LLS

The result above shows all the three groups who used metacognitive as their highest

strategies in the language learning. However, the teachers’ result shows the highest

mean score (3.85), while the workers’ mean score is 3.82 and the college students’

55

mean score is 3.47. For the least-used strategies, the results vary. The memory strategies

are used least frequently by the college students (3.08) and by the office workers (3.10),

whereas affective strategies are used least frequently by the teacher respondents. Results

of the individual strategies will be explained in the following sections.

4.2.2.1. The result of memory strategies used by each group of learners

The result indicates that memory strategies were used least frequently among the other

categories of strategies. Data on the use of individual strategies shows that all individual

strategies, which were grouped into memory strategies, had mean scores in the range of

2.5 to 3.2. The low use of memory strategies could be considered as a surprising result

because this finding was contradictory with Indonesian learning habits. Indonesian

students usually study the facts by learning and remembering however this learning

style highly requires memory and cognitive strategies. As a result, the findings of the

present study provide additional empirical information that supports a tendency that

Indonesian students are not in favor with their traditional learning style (learn and

remember) anymore.

Furthermore, the results show that there are two strategies selected under this

strategy, i.e., those that are dealing with creating mental linkages by associating and

classifying new words into context. However, the strategy in using flash cards and

rhymes is least used. The reason is becaused that both of these techniques are still rarely

used in the schools or institutions where they learn English. The table 4.12 shows the

differences of LLS choice among the groups.

56

Table 4.12: Results of memory strategies used among the group learners

College

Students

English

Teachers

Office

Workers

Category Memory Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

MEM1 Think of relationships

between what I already

know and new things I learn

in English

3.8 0.74 4.05 0.75 3.05 1.27

MEM2 Make use the new words in

order to remember

2.9 0.84 3.6 0.81 3.1 1.14

MEM3 Connect the sound of a new

English by making a mental

picture

3.5 0.91 3.2 1.04 3.7 1.25

MEM4 Making a mental picture of

the word

3.6 1.17 3.6

0.96

3.1 1.13

MEM5 Use rhymes to remember

new English words

2.7 0.85 2.6

1.14 2.6

1.02

MEM6 Use flashcards to remember

new English words

2 1.07 2.6 1.05 2.6 1.03

MEM7 Act out new English words 2.6 0.83 3.1 1.03 3.1 1.05

MEM8 Review English often 3 0.88 3.4 1.39 3.4 1.03

MEM9 Remembering the location

on the page, on the board, or

on the street sign everytime

they find the new words or

phrase

3.3 1.00 2.7 1.11 3.2 1.39

57

Figure 4.3 Overall results of memory strategies

More than 65% of college student and 85% of English teachers use the category in

associating and elaborating (MEM1) as their most frequently used strategies. On the

other hand, for the office workers, 50% of them choose the other strategy, i.e., by using

images in order to remember the new words. Table 4.13- 4.15 show the difference in

the way the memory strategies are used.

Table 4.13 Most frequently memory strategies used by the college students

58

Answers MEM1 % MEM3 % MEM4 %

1 1 5 %

2 2 10 %

3 7 35 % 8 40 % 7 35 %

4 9 45 % 10 50 % 7 35 %

5 4 20 % 1 5 % 4 20 %

Table 4.14 Most frequently memory strategies used by the English Teachers

Answers MEM1 % MEM2 % MEM4 %

1 1 5 %

2 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 %

3 2 10 % 8 40 % 7 35 %

4 12 60 % 8 40 % 7 35 %

5 5 25 % 3 15 % 4 20 %

Table 4.15 Most frequently memory strategies used by the office workers

Answers MEM3 %

1 1 5 %

2 1 5 %

3 5 25 %

4 9 45 %

5 4 20 %

Total 20 100 %

4.2.2.2. The result of cognitive strategies used by each group of learners

59

The result indicates that cognitive strategies were medium to most frequently used. Data

on the use of individual strategies show that all individual strategies, which were

grouped into cognitive strategies, had mean scores in the range of 3.3 to 3.9. Cognitive

learning language strategies were least used by the college students (3.3), whereas

English teachers and office workers were reported as the medium-users of the strategy

(3.6).

Figure 4.4. Overall results of cognitive strategies

Table 4.16: Results of cognitive strategies used among the group learners

60

College

Students

English

Teachers

Office Workers

Category Cognitive Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD COG10 Say or write new words

several times

3.2 0.73 3.3

1.13

3.8 1.13

COG11 talk like native English

speakers

3.5 0.78 3.9 1.11 3.4 1.10

COG12 Practice the sounds of English 3.3 0.89 3.6 0.83 3.8 1.20

COG13 Use the English words in

different ways

3.1 1.14 3.8 1 3.5 1.05

COG14 Start conversations in English 3.1 0.93 3.5 1.04 3.4 1.27

COG15 watch TV shows spoken in

English or go to movies

spoken in English

3.5 1.12 4.3 0.73 4.05 0.99

COG16 Read for pleasure in English 3.5 1.07 3.8 0.95 3.50 1.19

COG17 Write notes, messages, letters,

or reports in English

3.2 1.27 3.9 0.88 4.05 0.88

COG18 skim an English passage first

then go back and read

carefully

3.5 0.77 3.6

1.03 3.6 0.88

COG19 Look for words in L1 that are

similar to new words in

English

3.7 1.04 3.3

0.97 3.3 1.18

COG20 Try to find patterns in English 3.3 0,88 3.6 0.88 3.8 1.05

COG21 Finding the meaning by

dividing the new words into

parts

3.6 0.88 2.4 1.05 3.4 1.12

COG22 Finding the meaning by

dividing the new words into

parts

3 1.15 3.9 0.85 4.05 1.06

COG23 Make summaries of

information in English

2.8 1.04 3.5 1.05 3.6 1.31

The result in table 4.17 shows that the college students are moderate users of

cognitive strategies. We can see that only 50%-60% of the college students apply this

61

strategy like in practicing naturalistically (COG11, COG15, and COG16). It also shows

that the college students use analyzing and reasoning such as in COG21

Table 4.17 Most frequently cognitive strategies used by the college students

On the other hand, the English teachers’ result (Table 4.18) use almost all the strategies

in the cognitive categories. Here, more than 60 % of English teachers practice their

language naturalistically such as in COG 11, COG 15, COG 17, COG 16, COG 13,

COG 14. Some of these strategies are related to their speaking ability. Like in COG15,

Answers COG11 % COG15 % COG16 %

1 1 5.0% 1 5.0%

2 1 5.0% 1 5.0% 2 10.0%

3 8 40.0% 9 45.0% 6 30.0%

4 10 50.0% 4 20.0% 8 40.0%

5 1 5.0% 5 25.0% 3 15.0%

Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

COG18 % COG19 % COG21 %

1 5.0% 2 10.0% 2 10.0%

10 50.0% 8 40.0% 8 40.0%

7 35.0% 4 20.0% 6 30.0%

2 10.0% 6 30.0% 4 20.0%

20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

62

almost 90% of them “watch TV shows or movies spoken in English”, 70% of them

chose COG12 practice the sound of English, 70% of them use COG11 try to talk like

native speakers, and 60% use COG14 start conversations in English. Besides

practicing, the English teachers also use analyzing and reasoning strategies such as in

COG20 try to find pattern in English and COG21 find the meaning of an English word

by dividing it into parts. The following is the percentage of the most frequently used

cognitive strategies by the English teachers.

Table 4.18 Most frequently cognitive strategies used by the English teachers

Answers COG17 % COG18 % COG20 % COG21 % COG22 % COG23 %

1 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 %

2 1 5 % 3 15 % 1 5 % 1 5 % 3 15 %

3 8 40 % 6 30 % 4 20 % 9 45 % 5 25 % 4 20 %

4 5 25 % 9 45 % 11 55 % 6 30 % 9 45 % 7 35 %

5 7 35 % 3 15 % 2 10 % 3 15 % 5 25 % 5 25 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

Similar to the English teachers’ result, the office workers in table 4.19 also try to

practice their language naturalistically, such as in COG11 (50%), COG 17 (70%). For

Answers COG11 % COG12 % COG13 % COG14 % COG15 % COG16 %

1 1 5 % 1 5 %

2 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 % 5 25 % 1 5 % 1 5 %

3 4 20 % 6 30 % 7 35 % 4 20 % 2 10 % 8 40 %

4 7 35 % 8 40 % 6 30 % 7 35 % 8 40 % 6 30 %

5 7 35 % 4 20 % 6 30 % 4 20 % 9 45 % 5 25 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

63

75% of the office workers use analyzing and reasoning for cognitive strategies, like in

COG20 and COG22. The result also shows that around 60% of them choose strategies

for creating structure for input and output, like in COG 18, COG21, COG23.

Table 4.19 Most frequently cognitive strategies used by the office workers

Answers COG10 % COG11 % COG12 % COG13 %

1 1 5 % 1 5 %

2 5 25 % 4 20 % 3 15 %

3 8 40 % 4 20 % 2 10 % 9 45 %

4 3 15 % 5 25 % 7 35 % 3 15 %

5 8 40 % 5 25 % 7 35 % 5 25 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

COG15 % COG17 % COG16 % COG18 %

1 2 10 % 1 5 %

2 1 5 % 2 10 % 1 5 % 1 5 %

3 6 30 % 4 20 % 7 35 % 7 35 %

4 7 35 % 5 25 % 2 10 % 7 35 %

5 6 30 % 9 45 % 8 40 % 4 20 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

COG20 % COG21 % COG22 % COG23 %

1 2 10 % 1 5 % 2 10 %

2 2 10 % 2 10 % 1 5 % 3 15 %

3 6 30 % 6 30 % 3 15 % 3 15 %

4 6 30 % 5 25 % 6 30 % 7 35 %

5 6 30 % 5 25 % 9 45 % 5 25 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

64

4.2.2.3. The result of compensation strategies used by each group of learners

Compensation strategies were used by the learners as a moderate frequently used

strategies with the mean score of 3.42. The data shows that among the three groups,

English teachers are categorized as moderate to most frequent users of the strategy. The

result shows that the English teachers use the strategy mostly in COMP24 “make

guesses” (4.1). The same result is also shown by the college students groups, i.e.,

besides guessing most of them choose using gestures. Oxford (1990) mentions that

guessing strategies are used whenever they are listening or reading whereas making

gestures is used whenever they are speaking. Both could help students when they face

difficulties in expressing their language performance. However, based on the mean

score of 3.0, the office workers seem reluctant in applying these strategies.

Table 4.20: Results of compensation strategies used among the group learners

College

Students

English

Teachers

Office

Workers

Category Compensation

Strategies

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

COMP24 make guesses

3.4 1.15 3.7 0.96 4.15 1.13

COMP25 use gestures

3.6 0.93 4.05 1.18 3.6 1.25

COMP26 Make up new words 3.4 1.31 3.5 1.14 3.05 1.27

COMP27 Read English

without looking up every

new word

3.4 1.36 3.2 1.01 3.2 1.14

65

COMP28 Try to guess what the

other person will say next

in English

3.3 1.21 3.2 0.78 3.4

1.02

COMP29 use a word or phrase that

means the same thing

3.8 0.89 4.3 0.80 4.15 1.03

Figure 4.5. Overall result of compensation strategies

For the college students, 70% of them use gestures (COMP 25) and make guesses

(COMP24) when they try to overcome their limitation in speaking and also in writing.

While in guessing intelligently, around 75% of them use a word or phrase that means

the same thing (COMP29). The results is shown in the table 4.21 below.

66

Table 4.21 Most frequently compensation strategies used by the college students

Answers COMP24 % COMP25 % COMP28 % COMP29 %

1 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 %

2 2 10 % 3 15 % 2 10 %

3 2 10 % 5 25 % 8 40 % 3 15 %

4 9 45 % 10 50 % 4 20 % 11 55 %

5 6 30 % 4 20 % 4 20 % 4 20 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

Almost all the categories in compensation strategies are highly used by the English

teachers. While the college students tend to use gestures, for English teachers the result

in the table 4.22 shows that almost 85% prefer to use a word or phrase that means the

same thing to overcome their limitations. The other 80% of teachers prefer to use

linguistic clues when they guess the meaning of a word (COMP24). The data also

shows that 70% of them use gestures whenever they find difficulties in explaining.

Table 4.22 Most frequently compensation strategies used by the English teachers

Answers COMP24 % COMP25 % COMP26 %

1 2 10 % 1 5 %

2 1 5 % 1 5 % 2 10 %

3 5 25 % 3 15 % 6 30 %

4 5 25 % 10 50 % 6 30 %

5 9 45 % 4 20 % 5 25 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100.0% 20 100 %

67

Similar with the previous group, whenever they try to overcome the limitations, more

than 80% of the office workers, in table 4.23, choose to use other words or phrases, and

65% of them use gestures. However, only 50% of them use the guessing strategy.

Table 4.23 Most frequently compensation strategies used by the office workers

Answers COMP27 % COMP29 %

1

2 3 15 % 1 5 %

3 5 25 % 2 10 %

4 8 40 % 8 40 %

5 4 20 % 9 45 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 %

Answers COMP24 % COMP25 % COMP29 %

1 1 5 %

2 4 20 % 2 10 %

3 6 30 % 5 25 % 3 15 %

4 4 20 % 6 30 % 10 50 %

5 6 30 % 7 35 % 6 30 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

68

4.2.2.4. The result of metacognitive strategies used by each group of learners

Metacognitive strategies are the most frequently employed strategies among the other

categories. The popularity of these strategies is supported with data on the use of five

individual strategies which fell under this category of strategies. Five individual

strategies which were grouped into metacognitive strategies had mean scores of 3.5 or

above.

The lack of exposure of using English in the learners’ daily life probably forced

them to make their own efforts in order to have enough opportunities to learn by

themselves. In the poor-environment area, without having the habit of autonomous

learning, the desire to possess a foreign language is difficult to realize. Another more

probable cause of the high use of metacognitive strategies is that the students are

commonly concerned with their grades. Consequently, they keep on monitoring their

learning process and evaluating what and how well they had learnt. In other words, the

learners might be instrumentally motivated to learn English language.

Based on the result, learners try to learn from people who speak English better

than them. However, since the lack of exposure to English, the strategy look for people

to talk English became the least used strategy for the college students and office

workers.

69

Table 4.24: Results of metacognitive strategies used among the group learners

College

Students

English

Teachers

Office

Workers

Category Metacognitive Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

MET30 Find as many ways to make use

the English

3.2 0.99 3.9 1.02 3.9 1.20

MET31 notice one’s English mistakes

4.05 0.81 4.3 0.58 4.3 0.93

MET32

pay attention when someone is

speaking English

4.05 0.78 4.4 0.73 4.6 0.68

MET33 Try to find out how to be a better

learner of English

4 1 4.05 1.10 4.4 0.80

MET34 Plan a schedule to learn English 2.9 1.35 3.1 0.93 3.1 1.44

MET35 Look for people to talk English 2.8 1.25 3.55 1.14 3.1 1.45

MET36 look for opportunities to read in

English

3.5 0.94 3.8 1.08 3.5 1.23

MET37 Have goals for improving

English skills

3.3 0.83 3.5 0.86 3.3 1.08

MET38 think about one’s progress in

learning English

3.6 0.76 4.2 0.91 3.9 1.12

70

Figure 4.6 Overall results of metacognitive strategies

As mentioned earlier, the strategy centering one’s learning such as in MET32 has

become the most frequently used strategy. Therefore, results in table 4.25 shows that

more than 85% of the college students choose this strategy, moreover nearly 90% of

them select ‘notice one’s English mistakes’ (MET31). The other strategy is arranging

and planning the learning process. That is, 80% of college students set their goals and

find out how to be a better learner (MET38)

Table 4.25 Most frequently metacognitive strategies used by the college students

Answers MET31 % MET32 % MET33 %

2 1 5 % 1 5 %

3 5 25 % 1 5 % 6 30 %

4 7 35 % 10 50. % 5 25 %

5 8 40 % 8 40 % 8 40 %

71

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

Answers MET36 % MET38 %

1

2 3 15.0%

3 7 35.0% 4 20.0%

4 7 35.0% 8 40.0%

5 3 15.0% 8 40.0%

Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

Furthermore 85% of the English teachers select the strategy centering the learning

process. Additionally, 80% of the English teachers also evaluate their mistakes

(MET31). For the strategy setting goals and objectives, 75% of them choose think about

the progress (MET38) and 65% choose have goals for improving English skills

(MET37). The other strategies like looking for opportunities to use their English are

selected by 70% of the English teachers such as in MET36, and 50% in MET35. The

result shown in table 4.26 as follows

Table 4.26 Most frequently metacognitive strategies used by the English teachers

Answers MET30 % MET31 % MET32 % MET33 %

1 1 5 %

2 3 15 %

3 5 25 % 1 5 % 3 15 % 1 5 %

4 8 40 % 11 55 % 6 30 % 5 25 %

5 6 30 % 8 40 % 11 55 % 11 55 %

Total 20 100 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

72

Answers MET35 % MET36 % MET37 % MET38 %

1 1 5 %

2 2 10 % 3 15 % 2 10 % 2 10.0%

3 7 35 % 6 30 % 5 25 % 3 15.0%

4 5 25 % 5 25 % 10 50 % 10 50.0%

5 5 25 % 6 30 % 3 15 % 5 25.0%

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100.0%

Similar to the result of previous groups, table 4.27 shows 90% of the office workers

choose centering their learning by paying attention (MET32) and 65% of them choose

try to find as many ways to use one’s English (MET30). However in looking for

opportunities, it shows that only half of the office workers apply this strategy (MET36).

In setting goals, only 50% of them think about their progress (MET38).

Table 4.27 Most frequently metacognitive strategies used by the office workers

%


1

2 4 20 % 2 10 %

3 5 25 % 4 20 % 2 10 %

4 3 15 % 9 45 % 6 30 %

5 8 40 % 5 25 % 12 60 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

73


1 2 10 %

2 1 5 % 4 20 %

3 4 20 % 5 25 % 4 20 %

4 6 30 % 7 35 % 6 30 %

5 10 50 % 5 25 % 6 30 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

4.2.2.5. The result of affective strategies used by each group of learners

Of all the language learning strategies, affective strategies are the least-frequently used

strategies with the mean score of 3.12. However, for the individual strategy itself, the

result shows that encourage oneself to speak English (AFF40) is the most-frequently

used strategies by all learners. This provides us with a clue that most learners lack

confidence in speaking English. Furthermore, the strategy trying to relax helps them

overcome their problems. This strategy is also used most frequently by all learners.

74

Table 4.28: Results of affective strategies used among the group learners

College

Students

English

Teachers

Office

Workers

Category Affective Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

AFF39 try to relax 3.8 0.94 3.3 0.94 3.4 1.09

AFF40 Encourage oneself to

speak English

4.05 0.99 3.75 0.96 4.3 0.80

AFF41 Give oneself a reward

2.8 1.44 2.9 1.33 3.1 1.19

AFF42 Put a notice when they

feel tense or nervous

3.2 1.31 3.05 1.09 3 1.25

AFF43 Write down their feelings

in a language learning

diary

2.4 1.60 2.4

1.43

2.4 1.43

AFF44 Communicate the feeling

about learning English to

someone

2.5 1.12 2.7 1.20 2.8 1.36

75

Figure 4.7 Overall results of affective strategies

Based on the six types of affective strategies, almost all the respondents choose the

same individual strategies. Lowering anxiety is the strategy that is most-frequently used

both by the English teachers and college students. The college students result shows that

trying to relax (AFF39) is chosen by 60% of the college students and by 75% by the

English teachers. While for the office workers, they only apply one type of affective

strategies, i.e., 75% of them choose encourage oneself to speak English. The results of

the affective strategies are listed in the table 4.29 up to 4.31.

76

Table 4.29 Most frequently affective strategies used by the college students

Answers AFF39 % AFF40 %

1

2 3 15 % 3 15 %

3 5 25 % 7 35 %

4 9 45 % 6 30 %

5 3 15 % 4 20 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 %

Table 4.30 Most frequently affective strategies used by the English teachers

Answers AFF39 %

1

2 2 10.0%

3 3 15.0%

4 9 45.0%

5 6 30.0%

Total 20 100.0%

Table 4.31 Most frequently affective strategies used by the office workers

Answers AFF40 %

2

3 5 25.0%

4 8 40.0%

5 7 35.0%

Total 20 100.0%

77

4.2.2.6. The result of social strategies used by each group of learners

Social strategies stand as the moderate frequently used strategies furthermore among the

three. College students were found to be the least users of these strategies (3.24) and

English teachers were found to be the highest users (3.62). Interestingly, the overall

result of the individual strategies shows that all the three groups chose SOC45 asking

for questions, especially in clarification, whenever they feel unsure about the new

information. However, since the opportunity to exposure the language is limited only in

the classroom setting, it may explain why the social strategies were only used once in a

while. If we examine the previous findings in MET32, it shows that learners have the

tendency to focus on other speakers when they speak English but when it comes to

exposure to the language, the result shows that they have less interest in that area such

as in SOC 46, SOC47, SOC,48, SOC49. This could be occurred because they do not

feel confident enough to speak the language with others or probably they are afraid of

making mistakes.

Table 4.32 Results of social strategies used among the group learners

College

Students

English

Teachers

Office

Workers

Category Social Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

SOC 45 ask the other person to slow

down or say it again

4.1 0.87 4.4 0.85 4.6 0.74

SOC46 Ask the English speakers to

correct them when they talk

3.2 1.31 3.5 1.31 3.3 1.48

78

Figure 4.8 Overall results of social strategies

The result in social strategies for the college students, table 4.33 shows that 80% of

them ask for clarification or verification whether with peers or with the other users of

the target language. This strategy is the only one strategy that is used most frequently by

the college students.

SOC47 Practice English with other

students

3.3 1.20 3.8 1.20 3.9 1.08

SOC48 Ask for help from English

speakers

3.1 1.28 3.3 1.03 2.8 1.49

SOC49 Ask questions in English 3.1 0.89 3.5 0.88 3.1 1.23

SOC50 Try to learn about the

culture of English speakers

2.6 1.38 3.1 1.19 3.2 1.28

79

Table 4.33 Most frequently social strategies used by the college students

For the English teachers, the result in table 4.34 shows 85% of them also use the

strategy in asking for clarification and 75% ask questions in English. Besides asking

questions, more than 50% of the English teachers seem to develop their empathy to the

target culture by developing their cultural understanding (SOC50).

Table 4.34 Most frequently social strategies used by the English teachers

SOC45 % SOC49 % SOC50 %

1 2 10.0%

2 1 5.0% 1 5.0% 1 5.0%

3 2 10.0% 4 20.0% 6 30.0%

4 8 40.0% 9 45.0% 8 40.0%

5 9 45.0% 6 30.0% 3 15.0%

Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

Social strategies are used most frequently by the office workers and the result shows

that almost more than 50% of them apply this strategy. It indicates that 95% of them

always ask for clarification every time they do not understand the given information.

Answers SOC45 %

2 1 5.0%

3 3 15.0%

4 8 40.0%

5 8 40.0%

Total 20 100.0%

80

Table 4.35 Most frequently social strategies used by the office workers

SOC45 % SOC46 % SOC47 %

1 2 10 %

2 1 5 % 3 15 % 4 20 %

3 3 15 % 4 20 %

4 4 20 % 2 10 % 7 35 %

5 15 75 % 10 50 % 5 25 %

Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

81

Chapter 5

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study provide a better understanding of the ways ESL learners

approach learning. It reveals differences between the three groups of learners: college

students, English teachers, and office-workers. A comparison among these groups is

expected to promote effective teaching in learning strategies and prevent any obstacles

that could impede the progress during the learning process.

All language learning strategies covered in the Strategy Inventory for Language

Learning (SILL) were employed by all the group of learners at formal institutions.

Some strategies were used at a high level of use, while some others at a medium level of

use, and the others at a low level of use. Based on the mean scores of the strategy used

either in overall strategy or categories of strategies or individual strategies, it can be

concluded that the use of language learning strategies on the SILL can be categorized

into a moderate level.

The individual learning strategy-used, “paying attention when someone uses

English” is the most employed strategy by all the respondents. This is probably because

of the influence of their learning experiences in English when they were in school.

Therefore, almost more than half of the total numbers of the respondents are not only

paying attention moreover they tend to imitate the way their English teachers use the

language.

82

Based on the findings, it can also be concluded that learners must have their own

strategies in learning a foreign language. They need learning strategies in learning a

foreign language because the process of learning itself is not easy to do. Learners do not

know the difficult words in foreign language however learning strategies can help us to

understand the language easier. It does matter which strategy or combination of

strategies one uses: cognitive, metacognitive, social or communication, affective

strategy or socio-affective strategy. Learners can choose which one is the best for them.

The use of learning strategies helps students become self-regulated language

learners because they can use their own variations of learning, but all those things can

happen with the teacher’s help. Teachers help with students’ difficulties, give clear

explanation and solution to every problem, give examples of each strategy, correct

errors and become good listeners whenever their students share their difficulty in

learning a language.

83

REFERENCES:

Chamot, A., et. Al. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL

students. Language Learning Journal, Vol. 35, 21-43.

Chamot, A. (2005). Academic Success for English Language Learners: Strategies for

K-12 Mainstream Teachers… pp.87-101, The Cognitive Academic Language

Learning Approach (CALLA): An Update. In P. A. Richard-Amato & M. A.

Snow (Eds.), White Plains, NY: Longman.

Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Green, J.M., & Oxford, R.L. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2

proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29/2, 261-297.

Griffiths, Carol. 2004. Language Learning Strategies: Theory and Research

Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon

Larsen-Freeman, D. & M.H. Long (1991). An Introduction to Second Language

Acquisition Research. London: Longman.

Lengkanawati, Nenden Sri (1999). EFL Learners' Own Culture and Their Language

learning Strategies. TEFLIN International Seminar 1999

Lessard-Cloustan. (1997). Language Learning Strategies: An Overview for Second

Language Teachers. The Internet TESL Journal, VOL. III.

84

Manurung, Konder (2005). Instructing language learning strategies to promote

autonomous learning. LIA International Conference 2005.

Mistar, Junaidi.2002. Teaching EFL Learners How to Learn. The 50th

TEFLIN

International Conference: Surabaya

Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H.H. & Todesco, A. (1978). The Good Language

Learner. Toronto: Modern Language Centre, Ontario Institute for Studies in

Education.

Oxford, Rebecca. 1990. Language Learning Strategies. Newbury House:

New York

Oxford, Rebecca and Crookall, David. 1989. Research on Language Learning

Strategies: Methods, Findings, and Instructional Issues. The Modern Language

Journal 73 (404-415).

Oxford, R. and Lan, Rae. 2003. Language Learning Strategy profiles of elementary

school students in Taiwan. IRAL 41-4 (339-79).

Oxford, R. and Nyikos, M (1989). Variables affecting the choice of language learning

strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal 73-3 (291-300)

Politzer, R. & McGroarty, M. (1985). An exploratory study of learning behaviors and

their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence. TESOL

Quarterly, 19/1, 103-123.

Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good” language learner” can teach us. Sociolinguistic

Aspects of Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford University Press: Oxford

85

Stern, H.H. (1975).What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian

Modern Language Review, 31, 304-18.

Weda, Sukardi.2005. “English Language Learning Strategies Employed by Senior

Secondary School Students”. Koalita volume 3…, pp.138 – 142

Wenden, A. L. (1991b). Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy. Hemel Hempstead:

Prentice Hall.

Wenden, Anita L.2002. Learner Development in Language Learning. Applied

Linguistics Volume 23 number 1 March 2002

Wesche, M. B. (1975). The Good Adult Language Learner : A Study of Learning

Strategies and Personality Factors in an Intensive Course. Published Doctoral

Dissertation. University of Toronto, Canada.

86

APPENDIX

THE QUESTIONNAIRE

The Analysis of Language Learning Strategies among the English Language

Learners (Questionnaire form)

Dear participant,

You are invited to participate in a research project on language learning strategies. The

project is being conducted by Magdalena Kartikasari Tandi Rerung, from the Atma Jaya

Catholic University majoring Applied English Linguistics. The following questionnaire is

conducted in order to investigate the type of English Language Learning among the English

learners. Further, the result of this project is going to be published and discussed in my thesis

project.

All you need to do is complete this questionnaire. There are two parts of

questionnaires those are LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES (50 items) and LANGUAGE

LEARNING STYLES (4 items). Your participation is voluntary. For your information, responses

will be completely anonymous; your name will not appear anywhere on the survey. Finally,

thank you for have been participated in this project.

I appreciate for your involvement.

Sincerely,

Magdalena Kartikasari T.R.

87

Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL)

Version 5.1

R. Oxford, 1989

Please choose your answer between the number 1 up to 5 (Separated answer sheet)

1. Never true of me: also includes 'almost never true of me'- it doesn't happen very

often in your learning behaviour

2. Usually not true of me: it happens occasionally in your learning behaviour

3. Somewhat true of me: it happens in a fairly regular pattern in your learning

behaviour

4. Usually true of me: it happens regularly and represents an obvious pattern in

your learning behaviour

5. Always true of me: also includes 'almost always true of me'- it happens almost

all the time and represents a strong pattern in your learning behaviour

Part A

1. I think of the relationships between what I already know and new things I learn in

English.

2. I use new English words in a sentence so I can remember them.

3. I connect the sound of an English word and an image or picture of the world to help

me remember the word.

4. I remember a new English word by making a mental picture of a situation in which

the word might be used.

5. I use rhymes to remember new English words.

6. I use flashcards to remember new English words.

7. I physically act out new English words.

8. I review English lessons often.

9. I remember the new words or phrases by remembering their location on the page, on

the board, or on a street sign.

Part B

1. I say or write new English words several times.

2. I try to talk like native English speakers.

3. I practice the sounds of English.

4. I use the English word I know in different ways.

5. I start conversations in English.

88

6. I watch English language TV shows spoken in English or go to movies spoken in

English.

7. I read for pleasure in English.

8. I write notes, messages, letters, or reports in English.

9. I first skim an English passage (read over the passage quickly) then go back and read

carefully.

10. I look for words in my own language that are similar to new words in English.

11. I try to find patterns in English.

12. I find the meaning of an English word by dividing it into parts that I understand.

13. I try not to translate word-for-word.

14. I make summaries of information that I hear or read in English.

Part C

1. To understand unfamiliar English words, I make guesses.

2. When I can't think of a word during a conversation in English, I use gestures.

3. I make up new words if I do not know the right ones in English.

4. I read English without looking up every new word.

5. I try to guess what the other person will say next in English.

6. If I can't think of an English word, I use a word or phrase that means the same thing.

Part D

1. I try to find as many ways as I can to use my English.

2. I notice my English mistakes and use that information to help me do better.

3. I pay attention when someone is speaking English.

4. I try to find out how to be a better learner of English.

5. I plan my schedule so I have enough time to study English.

6. I look for people I can talk to in English.

7. I look for opportunities to read as much as possible in English.

8. I have clear goals for improving my English skills.

9. I think about my progress in learning English.

89

Your personal information:

Name/ Age :_________________________ / ________

Gender : F / M

Occupation :_________________________

Experiences in learning English Language:

1. English course: __________year(s)

Level:__________________

2. Other institutions (public schools or at university):_________year(s)

Part E

1. I try to relax whenever I feel afraid of using English.

2. I encourage myself to speak English even when I am afraid of making a mistake.

3. I give myself a reward or treat when I do well in English.

4. I notice if I am tense or nervous when I am studying English.

5. I write down my feelings in a language learning diary.

6. I talk to someone else about how I feel when I am learning English.

Part F

1. If I do not understand something in English, I ask the other person to slow down or

say it again.

2. I ask English speakers to correct me when I talk.

3. I practice my English with other students.

4. I ask for help from English speakers.

5. I ask questions in English.

6. I try to learn about the culture of English speakers.

90

SILL (Worksheet)

Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Part F

1. _____ 10. ______ 24.______ 30. ______ 39. ______ 45. ______

2. ______ 11. ______ 25. ______ 31. ______ 40. ______ 46. ______

3. ______ 12. ______ 26. ______ 32. ______ 41. ______ 47. ______

4. ______ 13. ______ 27. ______ 33. ______ 42. ______ 48. ______

5. ______ 14. ______ 28. ______ 34. _____ 43. ______ 49. ______

6. ______ 15. ______ 29. ______ 35. ______ 44. ______ 50.______

7. ______ 16. ______ 36. ______

8. ______ 17. ______ 37. ______

9. ______ 18. ______ 38. ______

19. _____

20. ______

21. ______

22. ______

23. ______

An Analysis of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)

Documents

stimulated

internet tesl

creating mental

require direct

language learning

good language

individual

significant