44
Self-Monitored but there are also indications telling otherwise. It would be misguiding to conclude with absolute confidence that Participant No.1 was indeed
Self Monitored. At this point, the researcher concluded that Participant No.1 was entering Self-Monitor while once in a while, struggling backward with his Self
Direction. Table 4.7 shows that Participant No.2 had even further stepped in the
autonomy continuum See Appendix E. She had been monitoring her learning, on purpose and without force. Throughout three final meetings of the test, Participant
No.2 regularly monitored her progress. It indicates that Participant No.2 has reached initial phase of Self Regulation.
When discussing Participant No.3’s strategies on Monitoring, Clarifying and Evaluating, it has been agreed that she showed no interest in monitoring her
listening process and progress. More to the point, there was nowhere to be found in her Listening Journal indications of Self Monitor. The researcher is left with a
conclusion that Participant No.3 was not Self Monitored. To this point it is clear that Participant No.3 stopped at Self-Direction,
Participant No.1 started to Self Monitor yet not quite Regulated and Participant No.2 just started Self Regulating her learning. In other words, Participant No.2 was the
most autonomous, Participant No.1 was the second most autonomous and Participant No.3 was the least autonomous.
If seen more thoroughly, the act of self-direction and self monitor on some participants, started after meeting 5. That means after half of the program had been
done, participants started to seek ways to use the media provided and other means to improve their listening. It is clearly visible that they were motivated by their
45
willingness to avoid embarrassing reflection and to reach personal victory in the program.
One might think that there were chances in which participants were already autonomous before undergoing the treatment, that was writing listening journals. To
conclude that a participant had involved his or herself in the autonomy continuum, there should be indication that the participants are self- aware and self-directed,
which enabled them to self-regulate their learning. While participants were found to be self-aware, referring to the initial listening
journal and interview, there was no indication that participants were already self- directed. As concluded, therefore, self-direction was developed during and after the
use of listening journal. Figure 4.1 summarizes the discussion in this section. The Listening Journal gives the way to that motivation to arise. Therefore, the
researcher concludes Listening Journal affects beneficially to participants’ position in the learning autonomy continuum; that, despite the fact that Listening Journal
SELF AWARENESS SELF DIRECTION
SELF REGULATION SELF MONITOR
SELF ASSESSMENT SELF MANAGEMENT
AUTONOMY PARTICIPANT NO.2
PARTICIPANT NO.3 PARTICIPANT NO.1
Figure 4. 1 Summary of the effect of Listening Journal
46
failed to position participants to constant Self Regulation, Listening Journal could encourage participants to Self Monitor as an initial phase in Self Regulation.
B. Other Findings 1. Listening Journal Limitation
a. The difficulty level of text and task
There seem to exist a tendency that the more difficult a text, the more pieces of writing a participant made. In this research, the difficulty of the text and task was
designed to be steadily increasing. However, to different participants, certain tasks were easier and others were more difficult to manage. More often than not, the
factor which revealed the strategies, affective aspects and any other aspect poured in the reflection sheets was the difficulty of the task and text. Each time a listener felt
that the text or task was easy, the less he or she wrote about whether and why the listening activity was important.
When asked whether or not writing the journal was a monotonous activity, all participants answered ‘yes’. The reasons were usually the lack of variation of the
questions in the listening journal. Other reasons were related to the presence of special impressions or challenge experienced on the corresponding test day.
It then affects their reflection about what disappoints them, because if there was little or no disappointment in the activity, that is if participants felt nothing
wrong about his or her performance in accomplishing the task, there would be very little to be revealed about what important things required from them to improve their
listening capacity. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
47
b. Participants’ Learning Style
The reason that a Listening Journal might not work to elicit participants’ self awareness often lies on participants’ mood. Sometimes when participants were not
in the mood for listening and suffered from loss of focus due to abundance of school homework, they reported that points of writing could disappear.
Mood is not the only factor to blame. Personality also matters. On the case of Participant No.1, the preference of oral explanation over written one drove him to
avoid writing explicit and comprehensive details of what he actually thought of happening in his mind. Often, it is the way a participant perceives the Listening
Journal and the way he or she perceives his or her own Learning. Therefore, attention needs to be paid when implementing Listening Journal to certain types of
Learners. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
48
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions
From the study, it was understood that Listening Journal does not necessarily contribute improving effects to Participants’ Listening Comprehension Skill. It was
also discovered that Listening Journal is able to encourage participants to improve their listening capacity. However, the encouragement from the use of Listening
Journal, in this study, did not increase Participants’ Listening Comprehension Skills. It was also understood from the study that Listening Journal does contribute
beneficial effects to Participants’ Learning Autonomy. Listening Journal had driven participants to possess Self Awareness and Self Direction. Furthermore, it even
fosters participant’s learning autonomy up to an initial phase of Self-Regulation. The initial phase is Self-Monitor. However, there was no evidence of Self-Assessment
and Self-Management. Some other findings related to the use of Listening Journal were also
discovered. It was discovered that participants found writing Listening Journal monotonous and that that the more challenging a text or task was, the more
participants wrote in the Listening Journal. In addition, participants’ learning style also affected the depth of a Listening Journal.
B. Implications for Teaching
Teachers interested in using the Listening Journal as part of classroom routines should consider the variety of questions in the reflection sheets to avoid overly
48 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
