t bing 0907703 chapter3

Chapter III

Research Methodology

This chapter begins with the discussion concerning the research method, next it is followed by the choice of the research method, the research site and the participants. Furthermore, it presents the techniques of collecting the data as well as the validity of the data. The chapter will finally end with the elaboration of the technique of the data analysis.

3.1 Research Method

This study was descriptive with an ex-post facto design and it was qualitative in nature since this study was conducted inductively by collecting the data from the field and analysis which focused on language learning strategies in developing speaking skill which were employed by high achiever, middle achiever, and low achiever students; next, this study focused on the reasons why they employed those strategies.

As mentioned above, this study was descriptive based on the considerations that the method was characterized by attempting to describe characteristics and events that exist (Kamil, 1985). Furthermore, the design was ex-post facto on the basis that the data were collected after the problems to be viewed happened (Sudjana, 1999: 54). In line with this, Kral (1996: 101) covers that the ex-post facto design strategy may be used when the study is determined to investigate the influence of variables such as home environment, gender, motivation, intelligence, or habits. The characteristics that Kral (1996) mentioned above are what a subject had possessed before the study began. The

researcher in this case had no direct control over these variables and could only try to determine their incidence on an observed consequence.

Based on the characteristics stated above, it can be concluded that the language learning strategies are one of the factors that have been possessed by the language learners before they learn a language, so the application of the design fitted the purpose of this study.

3.2 Research Site

This study was conducted at one of the universities in Bandung. The researcher chose this university as the setting of the study on at least three reasons. First, this university was conducting the three-month English for Job Seekers program for its students. The aim of conducting this program was, among others, to enable the participants to be ready for the interview sessions on their future job interviews. Second, it was easy to get the access and communicate with the students as well as with the other lecturers working in that university. Third, it is one of the well-known universities in Bandung.

3.3 Research Participants

The participants of the research were the 8th semester students who were taking the English for Job Seekers program as one of the three-month extracurricular program supported by the university. There were six participants in this study. The participants consisted of three male and three female students. They were categorized into three kinds of participants namely: low achiever, middle achiever, and high achiever students.

The categorization of the students’ achiever levels was based on the students’ average speaking scores. The average scores were taken from their mid-term test and final test scores. Students who got 5 (excellent) - 6 (outstanding) points were categorized as high achiever students, 3 (good) - 4 (very good) points were categorized as middle achiever students, and 1 (below average) – 2 (average) points were categorized as low achiever students.

The aim of the students’ categorization was to know the various language learning strategies employed by these students in mastering speaking skill. The study involved the 8th semester students due to some reasons. First, they have studied English at least for two semesters in the university. Second, they were taking the three-month English for Job Seekers program. Third, they are going to finish their study at the university and are going to search for jobs as soon as they finish their study.

In selecting the participants, this study made use purposeful sampling to gain the important information from the participants (Alwasilah, 2002: 146). The selection of the participants related to the participants’ categorization. The categorization of these participants will be presented in the discussion below.

3.4 The Participants’ Categorization Procedure

The categorization of the participants was based on the American Foreign Service Institute (FSI) interview procedure and scoring system. The American FSI interview procedure requires two testers to rate the participants on a six-point scale for each of the following: pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. The reason of having two testers is to achieve a less subjective scoring (Huge, 1996: 114).

Furthermore, to make the scoring more reliable, American FSI interview procedure requires recordings of the interview session.

The American FSI scoring system was employed in this study. The reason for using FSI scoring system was because it contains written descriptions of speaking proficiency levels. Hughes (1996: 110) states that scoring will be valid and reliable only if: (1) it is clearly recognizable, (2) the appropriate descriptions of criteria levels are written, and (3) there is more than one scorer for each performance.

For the purpose of this study, the American FSI speaking proficiency descriptions were modified and it was utilized during the mid-term test as well as the final test scoring stages. The researcher was assisted both in the mid-term test and final test scoring stages by the other English language lecturer from the university where this study was conducted. Both the researcher and the other English language lecturer made use of the American FSI speaking proficiency descriptions as the basis to score the students’ speaking ability. Moreover, the students’ interview sessions in the mid-term test and final test stages were recorded. The speaking proficiency descriptions used in this study can be seen in appendix (1).

3.5 Data Collection

In qualitative research the trustworthiness and authenticity of the data collection play a very significant role (Lincoln and Guba, 1985, as cited in Musthafa, 2000). In collecting the data, the researcher employed questionnaires, and interviews.

3.5.1 Questionnaires

A questionnaire is not simply a list of questions or forms to be filled out. Oppenheim (1982:2) believes that questionnaire is a scientific instrument of measurement and it is used for collecting particular kinds of data.

As stated in Chapter I, the purposes of this study were to investigate the strategies employed by high achiever, middle achiever, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills, as well as to reveal the reasons why they employed those strategies.

The above questions would be answered by the items in the questionnaire. The questionnaire used was modified from Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) Version 7.0 developed by Oxford (1990) especially for speakers of other languages learning English. The questionnaire covers six strategies, namely: memory, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive, affective, and social strategies.

There were 45 questions administered to the participants. Those questions were used to investigate the students’ learning strategies in developing speaking skill. All of the questions numbers and strategies from the questionnaire can be seen from the table on the next page followed by the key to understand the average of language learning strategies.

The Questions’ Numbers and Strategies from the Questionnaire

No Questions Number The Questions were Used to Investigate

1 1 to 9 Memory Strategies

2 10 to 20 Cognitive Strategies

3 21 to 25 Compensation Strategies

4 26 to 33 Meta-cognitive Strategies

5 34 to 39 Affective Strategies

6 40 to 45 Social Strategies

Table 8 The Questions’ Numbers and Strategies from the Questionnaire

Key to Understand the Average of Language Learning Strategies

High

Always or almost always used 4.5 to 5.0

Usually used 3.5 to 4.4

Medium Sometimes used 2.5 to 3.4

Low

Generally not used 1.5 to 2.4

Never or almost never used 1.0 to 1.4

Table 9 Key to Understand the Average of Language Learning Strategies

Besides SILL, the Background Questionnaire was included to provide additional information on students’ characteristics (Oxford, 1990: 281). The Background Questionnaire and SILL were tried out to the participant non sample respondents in order

to know their readability, their validity and reliability since they were originally written in English and were translated into Bahasa Indonesia for the purpose of the study; so that the respondents would not find any difficulties in answering the items existed in the questionnaires.

From the tried out, some inputs had been encountered; and based on that, some items were revised and needed to be explained more at its administration in order that there would not be any misunderstanding of what the items exactly meant.

Before working on the questionnaires, the respondents were given some explanation orally on how to answer the items and some words that might not be understood such as the phrases flashcard, rhymes. The respondents were also given chances to notice any other words that might hindrance them in understanding the items and they were asked to deliver the questions.

In terms of the reliability and validity, the SILL has been used worldwide for students of second and foreign languages in settings such as university, school and government. The internal consistency reliability of the SILL is .94 based on a 505-person sample (Yang, 1992) and .92 based on a 315-person sample (Watanabe, 1990). Content validity is .99 based on independent raters (Oxford, 1986; Oxford and Burry-Stock, 1995 as cited in Yang, 2007). These mean that the Oxford’s SILL questionnaires can be considered valid and reliable. The questionnaires can be seen in appendix 2 (Background Questionnaire) and appendix 3 (Strategy Inventory for Language Learning).

3.5.2 Interview

To validate the data from the questionnaire, this study utilized interviews. According to Creswell (2008: 226), by interviewing, the researcher will get useful information that cannot be directly observed from the questionnaire. Interview permits participant to describe in detail some personal information and it has better control over the type of information ‘filtered’ through the views of the interviewer. Fraenkel and Wallen (2007: 10) claim that interview is an important way for researcher to check the accuracy.

Open-ended questions were carried out in this study to investigate the speaking strategies employed by the participants and the reasons why they employed those strategies. Patton (1987: 122) as well as Fraenkel and Wallen (2007: 374) propose that an open-ended interview permits the person being interviewed to respond in his or her own terms, moreover, an open-ended interview has the advantage because it permits follow-up by interviewer. The researcher utilized a tape recorder to record the interview because a tape recorder is part of indispensable equipment of the evaluator using qualitative method (Patton, 1987: 137). The researcher also made use of note-taking during the interview process. When a tape recorder is being used during the interview, notes will provide key phrases, list of major points made by the respondents. Patton (1987: 138) points out that the key terms or word shown quotation marks that capture the interviewee’s own language. The interviewees in this study were six students categorized as high, middle and low achievers. As mentioned earlier, students who got 5 (excellent) - 6 (outstanding) points were categorized as high achievers, 3 (good) - 4 (very good) points were categorized as middle achiever students, and 1 (below average) – 2 (average) categorized

as low achiever students. Instances of the interview questions can be seen on appendix (4).

3.6 Data Analysis

The data from questionnaire were analyzed using Likkert scale from 1 to 5. Using this scale, the students were asked to answer the items on the questionnaire based on five possible options namely: always, frequently/usually, sometimes, rarely and never. Each answer has its own score starting form 5 point to 1 point.

Five point means that the participant always used the strategy, 4 point means that the participant usually/frequently used the strategy, 3 point means that the participant sometimes used the strategy, two means that the participant rarely used the strategy, while one means that the participant never used the strategy mentioned on the questionnaire. The scale of questionnaire items taken from Oxford (1990: 294) is presented as follows:

Frequency Scale point

Always 5

Usually/Frequently 4

Sometimes 3

Rarely 2

Never 1

Table 10 The Scale of Questionnaire Items

The interviews were analyzed using five main approaches (Kvale, 1996: 187) which are: categorization of meaning, condensation, structuring, interpreting of meaning

through narrative, interpretation of meaning and ad hoc method for generating meaning. The analysis was based on the research questions mentioned earlier: (1) the learning strategies which were employed by high achievers, middle achievers, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills, as well as (2) the reasons why they employed those strategies.

3.7 Conclusion

This chapter has discussed the research design. In collecting the data, the study was used qualitative method. In collecting the data, the study was utilized questionnaires and interview. The data from the questionnaires was analyzed using Likert scale, while the data from the interviews were analyzed using five main approaches (Kvale, 1996: 187) namely: categorization of meaning, condensation, structuring, interpreting of meaning through narrative, interpretation of meaning and ad hoc method for generating meaning. The next discussion will focus on data presentation and analysis.

The Questions’ Numbers and Strategies from the Questionnaire

No Questions Number The Questions were Used to Investigate

1 1 to 9 Memory Strategies

2 10 to 20 Cognitive Strategies

3 21 to 25 Compensation Strategies

4 26 to 33 Meta-cognitive Strategies

5 34 to 39 Affective Strategies

6 40 to 45 Social Strategies

Table 8 The Questions’ Numbers and Strategies from the Questionnaire

Key to Understand the Average of Language Learning Strategies

High

Always or almost always used 4.5 to 5.0

Usually used 3.5 to 4.4

Medium Sometimes used 2.5 to 3.4

Low

Generally not used 1.5 to 2.4

Never or almost never used 1.0 to 1.4

Table 9 Key to Understand the Average of Language Learning Strategies

Besides SILL, the Background Questionnaire was included to provide additional information on students’ characteristics (Oxford, 1990: 281). The Background Questionnaire and SILL were tried out to the participant non sample respondents in order

to know their readability, their validity and reliability since they were originally written in English and were translated into Bahasa Indonesia for the purpose of the study; so that the respondents would not find any difficulties in answering the items existed in the questionnaires.

From the tried out, some inputs had been encountered; and based on that, some items were revised and needed to be explained more at its administration in order that there would not be any misunderstanding of what the items exactly meant.

Before working on the questionnaires, the respondents were given some explanation orally on how to answer the items and some words that might not be understood such as the phrases flashcard, rhymes. The respondents were also given chances to notice any other words that might hindrance them in understanding the items and they were asked to deliver the questions.

In terms of the reliability and validity, the SILL has been used worldwide for students of second and foreign languages in settings such as university, school and government. The internal consistency reliability of the SILL is .94 based on a 505-person sample (Yang, 1992) and .92 based on a 315-person sample (Watanabe, 1990). Content validity is .99 based on independent raters (Oxford, 1986; Oxford and Burry-Stock, 1995 as cited in Yang, 2007). These mean that the Oxford’s SILL questionnaires can be considered valid and reliable. The questionnaires can be seen in appendix 2 (Background Questionnaire) and appendix 3 (Strategy Inventory for Language Learning).

3.5.2 Interview

To validate the data from the questionnaire, this study utilized interviews. According to Creswell (2008: 226), by interviewing, the researcher will get useful information that cannot be directly observed from the questionnaire. Interview permits participant to describe in detail some personal information and it has better control over the type of information ‘filtered’ through the views of the interviewer. Fraenkel and Wallen (2007: 10) claim that interview is an important way for researcher to check the accuracy.

Open-ended questions were carried out in this study to investigate the speaking strategies employed by the participants and the reasons why they employed those strategies. Patton (1987: 122) as well as Fraenkel and Wallen (2007: 374) propose that an open-ended interview permits the person being interviewed to respond in his or her own terms, moreover, an open-ended interview has the advantage because it permits follow-up by interviewer. The researcher utilized a tape recorder to record the interview because a tape recorder is part of indispensable equipment of the evaluator using qualitative method (Patton, 1987: 137). The researcher also made use of note-taking during the interview process. When a tape recorder is being used during the interview, notes will provide key phrases, list of major points made by the respondents. Patton (1987: 138) points out that the key terms or word shown quotation marks that capture the interviewee’s own language. The interviewees in this study were six students categorized as high, middle and low achievers. As mentioned earlier, students who got 5 (excellent) - 6 (outstanding) points were categorized as high achievers, 3 (good) - 4 (very good) points were categorized as middle achiever students, and 1 (below average) – 2 (average) categorized

as low achiever students. Instances of the interview questions can be seen on appendix (4).

3.6 Data Analysis

The data from questionnaire were analyzed using Likkert scale from 1 to 5. Using this scale, the students were asked to answer the items on the questionnaire based on five possible options namely: always, frequently/usually, sometimes, rarely and never. Each answer has its own score starting form 5 point to 1 point.

Five point means that the participant always used the strategy, 4 point means that the participant usually/frequently used the strategy, 3 point means that the participant sometimes used the strategy, two means that the participant rarely used the strategy, while one means that the participant never used the strategy mentioned on the questionnaire. The scale of questionnaire items taken from Oxford (1990: 294) is presented as follows:

Frequency Scale point

Always 5

Usually/Frequently 4

Sometimes 3

Rarely 2

Never 1

Table 10 The Scale of Questionnaire Items

The interviews were analyzed using five main approaches (Kvale, 1996: 187) which are: categorization of meaning, condensation, structuring, interpreting of meaning

through narrative, interpretation of meaning and ad hoc method for generating meaning. The analysis was based on the research questions mentioned earlier: (1) the learning strategies which were employed by high achievers, middle achievers, and low achiever students in mastering speaking skills, as well as (2) the reasons why they employed those strategies.

3.7 Conclusion

This chapter has discussed the research design. In collecting the data, the study was used qualitative method. In collecting the data, the study was utilized questionnaires and interview. The data from the questionnaires was analyzed using Likert scale, while the data from the interviews were analyzed using five main approaches (Kvale, 1996: 187) namely: categorization of meaning, condensation, structuring, interpreting of meaning through narrative, interpretation of meaning and ad hoc method for generating meaning. The next discussion will focus on data presentation and analysis.