· Web viewThis study indicates that the students use all direct and indirect strategies in improving their writing proficiency. The use of language learning strategies by the students

LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES AND WRITING PROFICIENCY(A Descriptive Study at SMP Islam Gondang, Tulungagung)

Rosanita Tritias Utami, M.Pd.Dosen STKIP PGRI Tulungagung

ABSTRACT

Many people still believe that the success of learning is absolutely determined by teacher's factor in terms of his/her teaching strategy. In fact, learning strategies are one of the most factors accounting for individual differences in second language acquisition. In other words, language learning strategies determine one's language proficiency. Researchers have also stressed that effective learners use a variety of different strategies and techniques in order to solve problems that they face while acquiring or producing the language. This study aims to examine the kinds of strategies used by junior high school students in learning English as a foreign language, particularly in improving their writing proficiency. It also aims to identify the relationships between the students' writing related language learning strategies and their writing proficiency.

There are 84 students of SMP Islam Gondang Tulungagung, East Java, were selected as sample using total sampling technique. Data were gathered using a modified SILL questionnaire to collect data on the use of language learning strategies, and three writing tests were used to collect data on writing proficiency. Data were analyzed using SPSS, Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 12.0. Pearson coefficient correlation and Spearman rank order formulas were used to identify the relationships between the students' wiring related language learning strategies and their writing proficiency. The first formula was employed to identify the overall correlation of students' writing related LLS and their writing proficiency, while the second one was used to identify good language learners' writing related LLS and their writing proficiency.

This study indicates that the students use all direct and indirect strategies in improving their writing proficiency. The use of language learning strategies by the students can be categorized or considered as a moderate use, indicated with overall mean score (2.71), and the range of the mean scores of the six categories of strategies was from 2.39 to 3.10. Another finding of this study was that metacognitive strategies were reported to be the most frequently used, while compensation were the ones which were the least frequent. Furthermore, it was also found

Rosanita Tritias Utami: Language Learning Strategies And Writing Proficiency 135

that the students' writing related language learning strategies and their writing proficiency were significantly positive correlated. However, the good language learners' LLS did not correlate significantly with their writing proficiency. Further research involving more participants and learners' variables (gender, learning style, and level of proficiency), is recommended, particularly in experimental design, to enrich empirical data on language learning strategies study and to examine the effectiveness of learning strategies on writing proficiency. Moreover, qualitative approach is required to deepen the investigation.

Background of the Study

In the 1960s, there was a

gradual but significant shift within the

field of education, from teacher-

centered to learner-centered approach

(Nunan, 1988). One consequence of

this shift was an increasing awareness

and interest in resources for learning

styles and language learning strategies

in foreign and second language teaching

and learning. This was supported by the

nature ofclassroom practice that was

found by teachers and researchers. They

found that many students appear to be

more successful in learning than others

(Ambrosi Randić and

KostićBobanović, 2008).

Researchers such as Oxford

(1990); Cohen (1987); and O'Mallay

and Chamot (1990) have also stressed

that effective learners use a variety of

different strategies and techniques in

order to solve problems that they face

while acquiringor producing the

language. Moreover, Fedderholdt (1997

cited in Rasyid, 2007) argues that a

language learner who is capable of

using a wide variety of language

learning strategies appropriately can

improve his language skills in a better

way.

Language learning strategies are

very important in learning language

since it can help students to be more

active and self directed (Oxford,

1990:10). The self direction is necessary

for learners for developing

communicative competence, since

teachers are not always able to help

them to use the language outside the

classroom.

Besides developing the

communicative competence of the

students, teachers who train students to

use language learning strategies can

help them become better language

learners. Helping students understand

good languagelearning strategies and


training them to develop and use such

good language learning strategies can

be considered to be the appreciated

characteristics of a good language

teacher (Lessard-Clouston 1997:3

quoted by Hismanoglu, 2000).

The use of language learning

strategies is related to increased

language achievement and proficiency.

(Oxford and Nyikos, 1989; O’Malley

and Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1993.

Moreover, many empirical studies

particularly in university student

context, have investigated the

relationships between learners’ L2

proficiency and strategy use with the

majority indicating that conscious,

customized use of strategies is related

to language achievement and

proficiency, and successful learners

employ a wider variety of strategies to

improve their language skills and

performance (Oxford 1996: xi;

Bialystok’s, 1981; Oxford and

Nyikos,1989 Ehrman and

Oxford’s ,1989; Dreyer and Oxford’s,

1996; Kaylani, 1996; Lengkanawati,

1996; Wharton’s, 1997; Park, 1997;

Bremner, 1999; Yu, 2003; Shmais,

2003; Yang, 2007.

Meanwhile, the young English

learners' (ESL/EFL) voices are still rare.

The research conducted by Lan and

Oxford (2003) investigated students of

elementary school in Thailand, Sugeng

(1997) studied 240 Indonesian

elementary students indicate that there

is a significant correlation between

students' language learning use and

their language proficiency.

However, some research

findings reveal a different story

regarding relationship between strategy

use and proficiency. Green (1991 cited

Bedell & Oxford 1996: 49) studied 213

students of English and found that high

proficiency students used more

strategies than low proficiency ones, but

moderately proficient students used

more strategies than either high or low

proficiency students, thus a curvilinear

pattern. The study by Mullines (1992

cited in Bedell & Oxford 1996: 50) on

110 English majors in Thailand failed to

reveal significant correlation between

any of the three proficiency measures

and overall strategy use although they

did correlate with certain strategy

categories.

Concerning the problem above,


this study aims to investigate the

languagelearning strategies used by

students, particularly Junior High

School students, in Indonesian context

to find the relationship between the

students' language learning strategies

and their language proficiency,

particularly in writing.

The objective of the research is

to find the correlation between the


and their writing proficiency. In

examining the correlation, the present

study chooses null hypothesis (Ho).

Therefore, the hypothesis is formulated

as follows: there is no significant

correlation between the students'

writing related language learning

strategies and their writing proficiency.

2. Review of Related Literature

In addition, the term 'language

learning strategy' has also been defined

by Wenden (1991:7) as techniques,

tactics, potentially consciously plans,

consciously employed operations,

learning skills, functional skills,

cognitive abilities, language processing

strategies, problem solving procedures.

Wenden and Rubin define learning

strategies as "... any sets of operations,

steps, plans, routines used by the learner

to facilitate the obtaining, storage,

retrieval, and use of information."

(1987:19). Richard and Platt (1992:

209) state that learning strategies are

intentional behavior and thought used

by learners during learning so as to

better help them understand, learn, or

remember new information. There are

10 theoretical underpinnings and

assumptions on learning strategies (ubin

in Wenden and Rubin, 1987: 15). The

first is that some languagelearners are

more successful than others. Teachers

and researchers have all observed that

some students approach the language

learning task in moresuccessful than

others in learning a second and foreign

language. The learningstrategy

literature assumes that some of this

success can be attributed to particular

sets of cognitive and metacognitive

behaviors which learners engage in. It is

assumed that successful learners will

differ to some extent in the particular

sets of cognitive processes and

behaviors which they use to enable

them to be successful. The second is

that the learning process includes both

explicit and implicitknowledge.


Research into learning strategies rests

on the assumption that bothexplicit and

implicit knowledge can contribute to

learning (the process ofobtaining or

getting, storing, retrieving, and using

information). A number of researchers

support a model of learning in which

the process of learning is not limited

to information gotten in an unconscious

manner (Bialystok, 1978; Smith,

1981; and McLaughlin, 1978 all cited in

Wenden and Rubin, 1987. The third is

that consciousness rising is not

incidental to learning. It is assumed that

making learning decisions conscious

can lead both poorer and better to

improve the obtaining, storing,

retrieving and using of information, that

is, can lead them to learn better. Not all

learners do their best by approaching

the learning task through an intuitive,

subconscious, natural process. For

example, although cognates may be

deliberately used in language texts, if

they are not explained many students

never see the relationship of these

cognates to words in their own

language. The forth is that successful

strategies can be used to good effect by

less effective learners. The fifth is that

teacher can promote strategy uses.The

sixth is that students become the best

judge of how to approach the learning

task after training.The seventh is that

self direction promotes learning both

inside and outside the classroom. The

eight is that language learning is like

other kinds of learning.The ninth is that

the success of learner training in other

subjects is applicable to language

learning. The tenth is that the critical

faculty used by all humans in

communicating is important in

language learning.

Classification of Language Learning

Strategies

Language learning strategies are

classified into (1) metacognitive

strategies, e.g. directed attention, self-

management, self evaluation; (2)

cognitivestrategies, e.g. repetition, note-

taking, deduction, and (3)

social/affective strategies, e.g. co-

operation, question for clarification.

There are a total of 25 strategies with 8

for the metacognitive, 15 for the

cognitive and 2 for the social/affective

category (O’Malley and Chamot, 1987).

Identification of Language Learning

Strategies


There are a number of

procedures that are used in examining

LLS. Some of the most important

strategy assessment approaches are

observation, interview, think aloud

procedures, note taking, diaries or

journals, self report surveys and the

SILL. First is observation. Many

language learning strategies occur

mentally and cannot be observed. For

example, associating / elaborating,

using imaginary, and guessing

intelligently are invisible or mental

strategies in term of standard

observation schemes. Strategy which

can be directly observed are cooperating

with peers, asking for clarification or

verification, and overcoming limitations

in speaking through gesture or mime

(Oxford, 1990:194). Second is think

aloud interview. Third is note taking.

There are three note taking techniques

for strategy inventory (Oxford, 1990:

197). Fourth is diaries or journals.

Diaries or journals are forms of self

report which allow learners to record

their thoughts, feelings, achievements,

and problems as well as their

impressions of teachers, peer students,

and nativespeakers (Oxford, 1990:

198). Fifth is a self report survey. Sixth

is Strategy Inventory for Language

Learning (SILL).

Factors Influencing the Choice of

Second Language Learning Strategies

Oxford (1990) points out many factors

that contribute to the choice of

strategies used among students learning

a second or foreign language. They are

degree of awareness, stage of learning,

task requirements, teacher expectation,

age, sex, nationality/ethnicity, learning

style, personality traits, motivation, and

purpose of learning the language.

Writing

Pinter (2006: 74) defines writing as a

complex skill that grows from the level

of copying familiar words and phrases

to the level of developing awareness of

text structures, genres, the process of

drafting and editing, and writing for a

reader. Meanwhile, Abisamra (2001)

states that a well written piece can be

described as integrating writing

elements in such a way that a reader is

able to experience the author's proposed

meaning, understand the author's idea,

accept or reject the author's point of

view. Every piece of text has its own

purpose(s). For instance, it is aimed at


summarizing the main points of another

text in a condensed form; expressing a

view point on a topic in an effort to

convince others; narrating story,

evaluating something to determine its

value based on a set of criteria;

analyzing a topic into its component

parts to examine the relationship among

the parts; responding in a direct

dialogue with another text; examining a

topic to discover facts that are not

widely known or accepted; observing

the reader to see and understand a

person, place, object, image or event

that reader has directly experienced

through detailed sensory descriptions

(Weida, 2007). The competence in

writing, particularly at responsive and

extensive levels, can be assessed

through three approaches, holistic,

primary trait, and analytical (Brown,

2004).

Research on Language Learning

Strategies and Language Proficiency

Many researches indicated that there is

a significant relationship between


and their proficiency (Park, 1987;

Dreyer and Oxford, 1996; Sugeng,

1997; Lengkanawati, 1997; Shmais,

2000; Kim, 2000; Vidal, 2002; Carol,

2003; Lan and Oxford, 2003; Griffiths,

2003; Hou, 2008). However, research

on the relationship between language

learning strategies and specific language

skills or specific classroom tasks are

still limited. Some research findings on

the relationship between language

learning strategies and specific language

skills are mentioned that there is a

significant positive relationship between

language learning strategies and

students' speaking proficiency.

3. Research Design

This study belongs to descriptive study.

It is a non experimental research which

is used to describe and interpret recent

phenomena or correlation between

variables (Best, 1977 cited in

Lengkanawati, 1997). Furthermore, this

descriptive study used an ex post facto

design, since it looks at the strength of

correlation between independent and

dependent variable without considering

what went on in the process. In

addition, the present study is largely

quantitative. The quantitative

procedures employed were descriptive

statistics and correlational statistics.


Descriptive statistics was used to

identify trends of writing related

language learning strategies used by the

students (Independent variable) and to

identify their writing proficiency

(dependent variable), while correlation

statistics wasemployed to identify the

correlation coefficient of the two

variables.

Data Collection Technique

The research was conducted at an SMP

Islam Gondang in Tulungagung East

Java. The population observed in this

study is of the eight year students of the

school academic year 2012-2013. There

are 87eighth graders of this school

spreading into three classrooms. There

are 87 students of class two in that

school, so by using total sampling

technique, the present study involved 87

eighth graders of that school.

Unfortunately, there were only 84

students who were able to fully

participate in this study.

Based on the research questions, this

study employed two research

instruments, a modified SILL and

writing tests.Before giving the students

the modified SILL questionnaires, the

researcher explained to them that there

was no right or wrong response to

statements. Moreover, they were

allowed to ask the researcher in case

they found difficulty in understanding

the questionnaires. These were done in

order that they were relaxed, and in

turn, they responded honestly to the

questionnaires.

Writing Tests. After identifying

students' language learning strategies,

one month laterthe researcher gave the

students writing tests to examine their

writing proficiency. Students' writing

proficiency was identified from their

three writing test scores which had been

scored by their teacher and the

researcher in order to get reliability.

Data AnalysisThere are two kinds of

data employed in this study: the SILL

scores and writing scores. First,

students' language learning strategy

scores were analyzed based on the

intensity of use by the students. The

SILL uses a 5 Likert-scale for which the

learners are asked to indicate their

response (1,2,3,4,5) on each item. They

refer to never or almost never true of

me, usually not true of me, somewhat

true of me, usually true of me, and

always or almost true of me,


respectively). Data of students' SILL

responses were counted to find the

frequency of strategies used by the

students, then classified into very high,

high, medium, low, and very low

(Oxford, 1990) see also Brown (1994,

2001). Moreover, the data of students'

language learning strategies (LLS)

revealed which strategies are more often

used by the students. Meanwhile,

students' writing proficiency was

obtained from the score of three writing

tests which have been marked by the

researcher and their teacher by using

holistic or impression method of scoring

writing. The students' writing works

were scored based on five-scale (1, 2, 3,

4, and 5) as proposed by Cohen (1994:

327-328). The scores of students'

writing tests, which had been marked by

the two raters, were summed up, and

then, divided by two in order to get

mean scores. After inter-rater reliability

analysis had been conducted, the mean

scores of the three tests were summed

up then divided by three in order to get

students' writingscores. After

identifying the students' writing

proficiency, the next step was

examining the normality and linearity.

They are the prerequisite for the

application of And finally, Pearson

Product Moment formula. The formula

was used to identify the degree of

correlation between students' learning

language strategies and their writing

proficiency. The Statistical Package for

Social Sciences (SPSS) version 12.0

was used to analyze and calculate the

data. The SPSS was used in identifying

linear regression, normality, reliability

and correlation.4. Research Findings

and Discussion

Overall Students' LLS Profile

The overall students' LLS profile is

identified by counting the overall

average of the SILL sores. The overall

average is obtained by computing total

sum by number of items of

questionnaires (see Appendix 1). They

consist of 27 items involving the six

strategy groups, Memory, Cognitive,

Compensation, Metacognitive,

Affective, and Social.

The research result shows that the six

language learning strategies both direct

and indirect strategies were used by

the students. The use of the six strategy

groups was almost the same. They

belong to medium level, except for


compensation strategies which belong

to low level. The overall average is

2.71. It belongs to medium level,

which means that the students

sometimes use the language learning

strategies. Moreover, the table indicates

that Metacognitive strategies were the

ones which were widely used by the

students (3.10) followed by Affective

strategies, Social strategies, Memory

strategies, Cognitive strategies, and

Compensation strategies (score 2.96,

2.72, 2.52, 2.50, and 2.39, respectively).

These findings corroborate Vidal

(2000) study which indicates that

metacognitive strategies were most

frequently used by the students of

Brazilian. Those scores are interpreted

as Medium – sometimes used by the

students, except compensation

strategies whose score was 2. 39. The

score belongs to low level, which means

that the students were generally unused

the strategies.

Metacognitive strategies involve

exercising "executive control" over

one's language learning through

planning, monitoring, and evaluating.

They are techniques that are used for

organizing, planning, focusing and

evaluating one's learning. In general,

these strategies help learners to gain

control over their emotions and

motivations related to language learning

through self-monitoring. The high use

of Metacognitive strategies among the

students is similar to that observed

among students from Asian countries

like Japan, China, Korea and Taiwan

(Shmais, 2003).Meanwhile,

compensation strategies were the ones

said to be the least favored (2.39). It

means that compensation strategies are

rarely used by the students. Among the

most used Metacognitive strategies are:

arranging and planning learning,

indicated by seeking practice

opportunities, which reflected in item

no.15 and evaluating learning, indicated

by self monitoring and self evaluating

as reflected in item no.16. I notice my

English mistakes and use that

information to help me do better", were

both said to be more frequently used.

As far as Affective strategies are

concerned, lowering anxiety which item

no. 21 item no. 23, modified from " I

notice if I am tense or nervous when I

am studying or using English", were

reported to be more frequent.


Students' Writing Proficiency

Profiles

To obtain the overall students'

writing proficiency, the researcher

administrated three writing tests based

on the English curriculum of KTSP for

eighth grader of junior high school, in

line with the Decree of the Minister of

National Education (Permendiknas) No.

22, 2006 on Standard of Content, and

No 23, 2006 on Standard of Graduate

Competence for SMP/MTs. The

students were asked to write three

compositions of different kinds of text;

i.e. procedure, recount, and descriptive

texts.

The Correlation between the

Students' LLS and Their Writing

Proficiency

The coefficient correlation showed

0.69. This finding indicates that there is

a correlation between the students'

writing-related language learning


This was proven with the comparison

between r observed and r table, where

the r observed was greater than r table.

It means that the relationship between

the two research variables is substantial.

From the analysis of multiple

regressions, it was found that

Metacognitive

(Sig. 018) and Cognitive strategies

(Sig. 0.20) were significantly related to

the students' writing proficiency since

the significance score of the two

strategies were less than 0.05 (critical

value). Meanwhile, the other four:

Memory, Compensation, Affective, and

Social strategies were not related to

students' writing proficiency, since the

significance scores were more than

0.05.

The Good Language Learners' LLS

and Their Writing proficiency

Correlation

The correlation of good

language learners LLS and their writing

proficiency was obtained by applying

Spearman Rank Order formula. The

correlation coefficient of good language

learners' LLS and their writing

proficiency was 0.52. This indicates that

there is a correlation between good

language learners' writing related

language learning strategies and their

writing proficiency. However, after

consulting the rho table, it was found

that the rho critical (0.54) was bigger

than rho-observed (0.52). It indicates


that the correlation was not significant

at two-tailed test with degree of

freedom (df) 15, and level of

significance 0.05. After identifying the

correlation between writing related

language learning strategies and writing

proficiency, the next step was testing

the hypothesis. The hypothesis to be

tested in this study is the null hypothesis

(Ho) which states that there is no a

significant correlation between students'



Based on the statistical data result, the

researcher concluded that with df = 82

at two-tailed test of α 0.05 level of

significance, the r-obtained was greater

than r-table. Thus, the null hypothesis

was rejected. It means that there is a

significant correlation between students'



5. Conclusion and Suggestion

Considering the first research

question above, it is found that the six

groups of strategies both direct and

indirect were used by students in

improving their writing proficiency.

The use of writing related language

learning strategies was categorized

medium. It means that the students

sometimes use those strategies.

Moreover, metacognitive strategies

were the ones which were mostly used

by the students, while compensation

strategies were the ones which were

unused by the students. With regard to

the second research problem, there are

two kinds of correlation investigated in

this study, i.e. the overall correlation

and good language learners' correlation.

For the first correlation analysis, it was

found that there is a significantly

positive correlation between the

students' writing related language

learning strategies and their writing

proficiency. The correlation coefficient

belongs to moderate correlation.

Meanwhile, for the second correlation,

it was found that there is no significant

correlation between good language

learners' writing related language

learning strategies and their writing

proficiency. Based on the findings, it

can further be stated that there are two

points that can be drawn: First, there is

a potency of language learning

strategies to influence writing

proficiency although the influence is not


cause and effect relationship. Those

who frequently use the strategies may

be better in writing than those who do

not use or rarely use the strategies.

Second, metacognitive strategiesare the

most popular ones among the students.

This may be due to their nature in

boarding school, where most of them

live in. They must follow many

activities from early morning until

night. They are used to arranging

schedule, selecting and planning

activities, and evaluating their progress

in learning. Meanwhile, the least use of

compensation strategies may be due to

their limitation in vocabularies. Besides,

they seemed unconfident of taking risk

in practicing language.

Based on conclusions mentioned

above, the researcher tried to offer some

suggestions as follows: 1. The present

study focuses merely on the use of

language learning strategies in relation

to writing proficiency at junior high

school and involves limited

participants. Therefore, further studies

may involve other school levels,

learners' variables, and more

participants. In addition to this,

experimental design is recommended in

order to investigate theeffectiveness of

language learning strategies on students

writing proficiency. Moreover,

qualitative approach is required to

deepen the investigation.2. The

findings of the present study

recommend teachers to provide a fair

learning activity. The activity of writing

exercise in schools especially in junior

high school (SMP) under study seems

to have a little proportion compared to

other language activities. More various

writing activities need to be provided to

the students. Furthermore, teachers'

understanding on language learning

strategies and the implementation of the

strategies in teaching and learning

process should be improved.

References

Andersen, Oinstein E.2010. Grammatical Error Prediction. Cambridge: University of Cambidge Press.

Andi, Pardiyono. 2001. Bahasa Inggris 16 Tenses. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.

Arifin, S. Zaenal. 2011. Konsep dan Model Pengembangan Kurikulum. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.

Ary, Donald. 2002. Introduction To Research In Education. USA: Wadsworth Group.


Azar, Betty Schrampfer. 1992. Fundamentals of English Grammar. New Jersey: Regent/Prentice Hall.

Brown, H.D. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education

Fachrurrazy.1993. Teaching English Language Skills and Components. Malang: UM Press.

Halim, Nasim. 2004. Kesalahan Umum Penggunaan Bahasa Inggris dan Solusinya. Jakarta: Puspa Swara.

Harris, David P.1969. Testing Writing As A Second Language. New York: Mc Graw. Hill.

Mifflin, Houghton. 1984. Grammar and Composition. USA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Moleong , Lexy J. 2002. Methodology Penelitian Kualitatif . Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.

Mulyasa, E. 2007. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Bandung: Rosda Karya.

Oshima, Allice and Ann hogue. 2006. Writing Academic English: Pearson Education.

Oxford University Press. 2003. Oxford Learner’s Pocket Dictionaries. New York: Oxford University Press

TIM DOSEN STKIP PGRI TULUNGAGUNG, 2011.Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi. Tulungagung: UPPM STKIP PGRI Tulungagung

Wahyuni, Sari. 2012. Qualitative Research Method. Jakarta: Salemba Empat.

Wishon, George E and Julia M. Burks. 1980. Let’s write English. New York: Litton Educational Publishing International.

Yuliani, Marta and Bachtiar Bima M.2011. Bahasa Inggris. Klaten : Intan Pariwara.


Documents

· Web viewThis study indicates that the students use all direct and indirect strategies in improving their writing proficiency. The use of language learning strategies by the students