EXPLORING TYPES AND LEV ELS OF MOTIVATION OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE (EFL) LEARNERS AT AN EDUCATION FACULTY IN ONE OF INDONESIAN PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES - repository perpustakaan
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Method of the Research Descriptive method was used in carrying out this research. Descriptive
method can be defined as a method that is intentionally done to collect information about a phenomenon as in the pure condition. Descriptive method does not need administration and a control toward a treatment. It is only to describe an authentic condition, not to examine a hypothesis (Arikunto, 2010:262).
To do with this, there are several kinds of descriptive method such as survey studies, case studies, developmental studies, follow-up studies, documentary analysis, and correlational studies (Arikunto, 2010:150). Furthermore, this research used survey study to find out and explore types and levels of motivation of EFL learners at Faculty of Education and Teacher Training of an Indonesian private university. The reason why this survey study was chosen better than other kinds of descriptive method was that it was more economic and faster in presenting the research data. In addition, it is a benefit when identifying characteristics of a population based on a small group of individuals (sample) (Fowler (2002) as cited in Creswell, 2013:217).
Survey studies include cross-sectional and longitudinal studies using questionnaires or structured interviews for data collection, with the intent of generalizing from a sample to a population (Babbie (1990) as cited in
31 Creswell, 2003:14). Specifically, the kind of survey study used in this research was cross-sectional survey where the researcher collected data one by one in one time (Creswell, 2013:217).
B. Schedule and Time of the Research
4
32
4 Analyzing data and making report
3 Collecting data
2 Making instrument
1 Designing proposal
This research was conducted at Faculty of Education and Teacher Training of an Indonesian private university in academic year 2015/2016.
Regarding to university’s academic calendar, the schedule of the research was shown in the following table:
3 4 1 2
2
3 4 1
No Activities November December January February 1 2 3 4 1 2
Third semester EFL learners of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training in academic year 2015/2016 were chosen as the population in this research except English Education Department learners. English Education Department learners were excluded because learners coming from that department have different English materials in the classroom
Participants of the Research 1. Population
Table 3.1. The Schedule of the Research C.3
33 and they study English in every semester. It is different from other departments, learners coming from those departments study English when they are on the first-four semesters with the same English material of each. Those learners have the same characteristics and competences as they have passed the test (including English test) to enter the university and they are all third semester learners.
Additionally, eight departments of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training were chosen with the number of third semester learners of each department namely Indonesian Education Department = 124, Mathematics Education Department = 87, Biology Education Department = 39, History Education Department = 18, Civics Education Department = 15, Geography Education Department = 33, Elementary Education Department (PGSD) = 276, Early Childhood Education Department (PG PAUD) = 13. Learners coming from those departments are categorized as EFL learners because there is English lecture in their syllabuses in the first-four semesters. The total numbers of third semester EFL learners of eight departments of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training in academic year 2015/2016 are 605 learners in this research.
2. Sample
Since the population of this research was more than 100 subjects, this research took 25% from the population as samples. The samples got from the population were 151 third semester EFL learners comprising
34 non-English majors of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training in academic year 2015/2016.
3. Sampling Technique
This research used probability sampling, specifically simple random sampling to take samples from the population. It is called simple random sampling because the researchers take samples randomly from the population. It is done if the number of population is considered homogenous (Sugiyono, 2012:120). Those third semester EFL learners of eight departments of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training in academic year 2015/2016 are considered homogenous because they have passed the test (including English test) to enter the university, they are studying English and they are all also third semester learners. Additionally, all eight departments consist of one class except three departments namely Indonesian Education Department, Mathematics Education Department, and Elementary Education Department which have several classes of third semester learners due to the number of learners. All classes of third semester learners of those three departments are considered homogenous because there is no consideration in putting learners from class A to E. Therefore, two classes were chosen to take samples namely class A and B from Mathematics and Indonesian Education Departments and three classes of Elementary Education Department namely class A, B, and C were chosen to take samples as well. The way this research chose learners as samples in every class was by taking the odd learners’ number.
Because this research needed 151 participants to be the samples, on the other hand, the proportion of learners of each department was different, this research pursued the following calculation to take the samples from each department so that the taken samples were proportional:
Indonesian = 124/605 x 151 = 30.94 =
31 Mathematics = 87/605 x 151 = 21.71 =
22 Biology = 39/605 x 151 = 9.73 =
10 History = 18/605 x 151 = 4.49 =
4 Civics = 15/605 x 151 = 3.74 =
4 Geography = 33/605 x 151 = 8.23 =
8 Elementary = 276/605 x 151 = 68.88 =
69 Early = 13/605 x 151 = 3.24 = 3 + SUM = 151
(adapted from Sugiyono, 2012:130) D.
Technique of Data Collection
To collect the data, this research used questionnaire to know the learners’ types and levels of motivation. This research only used questionnaire as the mean to collect data because it was the most appropriate technique to collect the intended data. Indeed, to get the complete and objective data needs several techniques to collect the data, but if one technique is considered enough and able to answer research questions, other used techniques will be inefficient (Creswell, 2013:231; Sugiyono, 2012:391).
35
36
1. Questionnaire and Likert Scale The questionnaire in this research was “closed” questionnaire.
The reason why this research used “closed” questionnaire was because it was appropriate to restrict the respondents’ answers to the expected answers and it also helped respondents respond the questions / statements fast, it was easier in analyzing the data toward collected questionnaire as well (Sugiyono, 2012:201).
To know types and levels of motivation, motivational questionnaire was administered. It consisted of two types of motivation namely integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. This research followed Gardner’s types of motivation. The reason why this research followed Gardner’s types of motivation was because a lot of research dealing with types of motivation used these types. Furthermore, the previous research done in Indonesia also used Gardner’s types. Eventually, this researc h’s findings could confirm or rebut the findings of the previous research.
The total number of items in the questionnaire were 26, it was in line with Sugiyono’s (2012:202) suggestion that whenever researchers want to construct a questionnaire, it is better to give questions or statements between 20
- – 30 items in order not to make respondents feel saturated and tired in filling it, so that respondents will fill it honestly and objectively.
37 In the questionnaire, the items were rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree” with the following values assigned to the rating options: “Strongly disagree” = 1, “Disagree” = 2, “Neither agree nor disagree” = 3, “Agree” = 4, “Strongly agree” = 5. To know levels of motivation, high score indicated high levels of learners’ motivation.
Several items of questionnaire were taken and adapted from relevant research (e.g., Alrabai, 2014; Dornyei, 1994; Dwinalida et al., 2015; Gardner, 1985). The questionnaire was administered in Bahasa Indonesia, the learners’ native language, to eliminate the risk that limited English competence of some respondents would affect their ability to respond all questions / statements.
a. Validity of the Instrument This research used grille and indicators to acquire validity of the instrument. Consultation to the expert, Dr. Furqanul Aziez,
M.Pd, was also done as well to obtain a really steady research instrument. Table 3.2. was the grille and indicators of the instument.
b. Reliability of the Instrument To acquire reliability of the instrument, this research administered the instrument twice to the part of population (N=20) which were, of course, not the samples within two weeks as the gap. It was done after the validity of the instrument was acquired. Having administered the instrument twice, it was revealed that the mean
38 scores of each item of the instrument from the first administration and the second administration were almost the same (see appendix).
So, the instrument in this research was considered reliable.
Table 3.2. Indicators of QuestionnaireItem No. Types of Motivation Indicators
Number Interaction with native speaker
1 Recognition to the life of English-
3 speaking nations Desire to have English-speaker
5 friend Desire to recognize and appreciate
7 English art and literature Desire to continue studying English
9 Desire to study English even if it
11
1. Integrative Motivation were not required by this university Desire to be a part of English-
13 speaker Participation in other cultural
15 group’s activity Sensation in studying English
17 Feeling proud of speaking English
19 Desire to have knowledge
21 Experience while using English
23 Goal of learning English
25 Usefulness in getting job
2 Requirement to pass exam
4 Usefulness in getting information
6 and material in English Usefulness in travelling
8 Usefulness to continue study
10 Impact to the salary
12 Instrumental
2. Impact to the career
14 Motivation Impact to the life
16 Good grade for the course
18 Respect from others
20 Requirement of certain jobs
22 Desire to understand English
24 movies of program Role of reward and punishment
26
39 E.
Technique of Data Analysis
This research used percentage and descriptive analysis including mean and standard deviation to analyze the data.
1. The percentage formula is as follow: =
× 100% Where: P = Percentage of Students Respond F = Number of Students who answered an item N = Total Number of Students
2. Descriptive Analysis The collected data were subjected to descriptive analysis including mean and standard deviation, which were computed to identify learners’ types of motivation. Learners’ types of motivation were assessed based on learners’ responses using the mean scores of types of motivation examined in this research. To determine the mean, the following formula was used:
Σs =
Where: M = the mean Ʃs = the total of scale N = the number of respondent
40 To make the calculation of mean and standard deviation easier,
Microsoft Excel 2016 was used. Microsoft Excel is one of Microsoft Office applications which has function to number processing. It is utilized by many calculation features in the form of formulas. Once a formula is created, the other data may be processed automatically. Furthermore, the results were calculated and analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2016 as well.
To measure the levels of motivation, the data interpretation which was in the form of mean was used based on the following guide:
1.0
- – 3.0 = lowly motivated
3.1
- – 4.0 = moderately motivated
4.1
- – 5.0 = highly motivated (adapted from Alrabai, 2014; Dornyei, 1994)