CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
In this chapter, the findings of the research would be discussed based on the steps that had been planned in the previous section. The first part would
discuss the finding based on the action taken. The findings were from the two instruments used in this study. The first data would be quantitative data presented
in the form of lists of table. The data were obtained from questionnaire from SILL taken from Oxford 1990. The second data would be qualitative data obtained
from interview. The interview guide was generated following the six theory of learning strategies taken from Oxford 1990. Then the second part would present
the discussion of the findings.
A. Findings
1. Findings Based on Questionnaire
The first findings would be the result of the questionnaire that had already been filled by the participants and later had been processed by the SPSS Data
Editor for Windows programme. The following would be presented the summary of the questionnaire. The original summary of the questionnaire could be seen at
the end of the page in Appendix 2. There are 50 statements on SILL that divided into six parts. The table describes the statistic calculation for part A to part F from
88 respondents. The table below could be explained as follows. The first column shows the
part and the number of statements based on the Oxford‘s SILL. The second column shows the frequency number. Next, the third column showed the
percentage of the questionnaire ranging from 1 to 5. Then the next column is the
mean derived from the total score of the summary score divided by the total number of the participants. And the last column was standard deviation. Based on
Oxford‘s classification, the range of mean could be described as follows. The first one was the highest range, which was 4.5 to 5; meant the strategy was ‗always or
almost always used‘, then the second was ranged from 3.5 to 4.4; meant the strategy was sometimes used, and the third was ranged from 2.5 to 3.4; meant the
strategy ‗generally not used‘, and the last was ranged from 1.0 to 1.4; meant that the strategy was ‗never or almost never used‘. Then, only strategies which had
mean above 3.5 would be discussed later in discussion part.
Part A Statement
Frequency Percentage
Mean St. Dev
1 2
3 4
5 1
2 3
4 5
Par t A
1. 1
5 32 33 17
1.1 5.7
36.4 37.5 19.3 3.6818 .89115 2.
1 7
42 29 9 1.1
8.0 47.7 33.0 10.2 3.4318 .82762
3. 6 17 27 23 15 6.8 19.3 30.7 26.1 17.0 3.2727 1.16192
4. 8 19 27 24 10 9.1 21.6 30.7 27.3 11.4 3.1023 1.14510
5. 12 31 23 17 5 13.6 35.2 26.1 19.3 5.7 2.6818 1.10947
6. 29 29 19 8
3 33.0 33.0 21.6 9.1 3.4 2.1705 1.09567
7. 6 16 30 28 8
6.8 18.2 34.1 31.8 9.1 3.1818 1.05640 8.
1 20 43 19 5 1.1 22.7 48.9 21.6 5.7 3.0795 .84719
9. 8 11 25 25 19 9.1 12.5 28.4 28.4 21.6 3.4091 1.21897
Mean Total 3.1124
Table 3.1 Statistic result part A There are nine statements in part A. According to Oxford‘s classification,
only one number that fulfilled the average of the statement which showed the term ―usually used‖, that has mean above 3.5. These were the statement number 1,
number 2 and number 9. The highest score was the statement number 1 with mean
Kategori