Enhancing students` learning autonomy through the collaborative audio-journal project in listening comprehension III - USD Repository

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ENHANCING STUDENTS’ LEARNING AUTONOMY

THROUGH THE COLLABORATIVE AUDIO-JOURNAL PROJECT

  

IN LISTENING COMPREHENSION III

A Thesis

  Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

  By Priyatno Ardi

  Student Number: 031214097

  

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

2007

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

“when you want something, all the universe conspires

in helping you to achieve it”

  (Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist)

  I dedicate this thesis to my future life

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ABSTRACT

  Ardi, Priyatno. 2007. Enhancing Students’ Learning Autonomy through the

  

Collaborative Audio-Journal Project in Listening Comprehension III . Yogyakarta:

Sanata Dharma University.

  Learning autonomy is one of formal educational goals, supporting the idea that learning is a lifelong process hence. The field of English language teaching and learning in Indonesia needs to promote learning autonomy to assist the students to face globalization. In so doing, the teacher provides the autonomous learning setting encouraging the students to actively involve in the learning processes. Since the autonomous teacher tends to encourage the students to learn autonomously, addressing the autonomous learning to English teacher candidates becomes the first step to enhance students’ learning autonomy in Indonesia.

  The present study investigated the innovation of English learning program, namely the collaborative audio-journal project, implemented in Listening Comprehension III of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. It was to increase students’ learning autonomy. There were three questions addressed. The first question discussed the procedures of the implementation of the collaborative audio-journal project. The second and third question explored students’ experiences in the project accomplishment. The second question talked about students’ perceptions toward the project, whereas the third question figured out the employed metacognitive strategies.

  To answer the research questions, the researcher employed a qualitative method. Two instruments were used to obtain the data, namely reflection sheet and interview. There were three results obtained from the study. First, based on the discussion of the procedures, the project was indeed intended to enhance students’ learning autonomy through the small group interaction bearing self- interdependence and the reflection raising self-awareness. Second, the students felt the anxiety in their first encounter with the project but they changed it into the enjoyment as they went through it. Third, students employed the metacognitive strategies, including planning, problem solving, monitoring, and evaluating. The planning proposed by the students were time and quality, creativity, and strategy. The students encountered the constraints, such as facilities, time management, language proficiency, and restlessness, which entailed problem solving strategies. The students monitored the project by rereading, re-listening, and comparing. Lastly, the students conducted self-evaluation on the process and the product.

  The researcher concluded three important points. First, learning autonomy enhanced through the project was reactive autonomy, functioning as the beginning of students’ proactive autonomy in their future learning. Second, students’ developmental perceptions suggested that motivation and willingness increase. Third, the employed metacognitive strategies implied that the students controlled their learning management. Suggestions were given to (1) the teacher to give sufficient feedback on students’ journal responses, (2) the students to keep on managing their learning, and (3) future researchers on learning autonomy to further investigate the psychological constructs related to the development of

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ABSTRAK

  Ardi, Priyatno. 2007. Enhancing Students’ Learning Autonomy through the

  

Collaborative Audio-Journal Project in Listening Comprehension III . Yogyakarta:

Universitas Sanata Dharma.

  Kemandirian belajar menjadi salah satu tujuan pendidikan formal yang mendukung pembelajaran sepanjang hayat. Bidang pengajaran dan pembelajaran bahasa Inggris di Indonesia perlu mengembangkan kemandirian belajar untuk mempersiapkan para siswa menghadapi era globalisasi. Dalam hal ini, guru hendaknya menciptakan kondisi belajar yang mendukung perkembangan kemandirian belajar para siswa (autonomous learning) sehingga mereka terdorong untuk semakin berperan aktif dalam proses pembelajaran. Karena guru yang mandiri cenderung mendukung para siswanya untuk mandiri, autonomous learning perlu diterapkan pada para calon guru bahasa Inggris sebagai langkah awal untuk mengembangkan kemandirian belajar para siswa di Indonesia.

  Studi ini mengkaji inovasi program pembelajaran, yaitu the collaborative

  

audio-journal project , yang diterapkan di kelas Listening Comprehension III,

  Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma. Program ini bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kemandirian belajar mahasiswa. Ada tiga permasalahan dikemukakan dalam penelitian ini. Permasalahan pertama membahas prosedur penerapan program tersebut. Permasalahan kedua memaparkan pandangan mahasiswa terhadap program tersebut. Permasalahan ketiga membahas strategi metakognitif yang digunakan oleh mahasiswa.

  Peneliti menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif. Ada dua alat yang digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data, yaitu lembar refleksi dan wawancara. Ada tiga hasil yang diperoleh. Pertama, berdasarkan pembahasan prosedurnya, program ini memang benar bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kemandirian belajar mahasiswa melalui kelompok kecil yang mendukung self-interdependence dan refleksi yang meningkatkan kesadaran belajar. Kedua, para mahasiswa mengalami kecemasan ketika pertama kali diberi tugas tetapi kecemasan itu berubah menjadi kegembiraan seiring dengan proses pengerjaannya. Ketiga, mahasiswa menggunakan strategi metakognitif. Mereka merencanakan pengerjaan tugas, seperti waktu dan kualitas, kreativitas, dan strategi. Mereka menemukan masalah, seperti fasilitas, pengaturan waktu, kemampuan bahasa, dan kemalasan. Mereka menggunakan strategi pemecahan masalah untuk mengatasinya. Mereka memantau melalui tiga cara, yaitu membaca kembali, mendengarkan lagi, dan membandingkan. Mereka mengevaluasi, baik proses maupun hasilnya.

  Peneliti menyimpulkan tiga poin penting. Pertama, kemandirian belajar yang diciptakan melalui program ini adalah reactive autonomy. Kedua, perubahan pandangan mahasiswa terhadap tugas tersebut menggambarkan perkembangan kesediaan dan motivasi mereka dalam mengerjakannya. Ketiga, penggunaan strategi metakognitif menunjukan bahwa mahasiswa sungguh mengatur belajar mereka. Peneliti memberi saran kepada (1) dosen agar memberi masukan pada jurnal respon mahasiswa, (2) mahasiswa agar tetap mengatur sendiri belajar mereka, dan (3) peneliti mendatang agar mengkaji lebih dalam faktor psikologis

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

  I hardly imagine having accomplished my thesis entitled “Enhancing Students’ Learning Autonomy through the Collaborative Audio-Journal Project in Listening Comprehension III” without the blessing of my only Lord, Jesus Christ.

  His kind and sacred heart faithfully accompanied me in the thesis accomplishment, both in my ups and my downs. My gratefulness is worth giving to Mother Mary, to whom I go whenever I feel burdened and frustrated. Her sincere smile touches me very much, reminding me of the words of wisdom “Dum Spiro, Spero”.

  In the last six months, I owe much to Markus Budiraharjo, my major sponsor, for giving me attention, suggestions, guidance, and motivation during the finishing process of my thesis. Finishing this final project, I am greatly indebted to

  

Christina Kristiyani, my co-sponsor, who gave valuable feedbacks, support and

  guidance. My sincere gratitude also goes to all PBI lecturers, who have guided me to be a mature person, and the secretariat staffs (Mbak Tari and Mbak Dani), who have supported me during the last four years.

  I would like to thank my family, my father, Ag. Subardi, my mother, Yuli

  

Supriyatini, and my brother, Budi Astika, for their stories, support, love,

  kindness, and warmth. My deepest love and gratitude go to my girlfriend, Ayus, for love, patience, care, warmth, kindness, sharing moments, and support.

  Who I am now is inevitably under the influence of persons who took part in my past life. Hence, this thesis is worth dedicating to all of my former

  

teachers, who had educated me for years so as to make me who I am now, and my

previous formatores, especially Rm. A. Budi Wihandono, Pr. and Rm. Fx.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

Sukendar, Pr., who always pray for me, especially in my hard times of the thesis

  accomplishment. I also intend to offer my greatest thankfulness to all my friends in “Be Still My Friends (BSMF) Community”, particularly those who join bsmf_mu2003@yahoogroups.com, for sharing moments and laughs we have.

  My deepest gratefulness goes to my friends of PBI’03, especially Leli,

  

Niko, Tony, Fendi, Dudi, Wiwid, Datu, Dame, Ipad, Titin, Arum, Siwi, Nina,

Yusta, Yoyok, Anas, Ayuni, Fitrianingsih, Utik, Krisna, Rere, Santi, Febri,

Andri, Siwi, Lukas, Jii, Tika, Mirta, Suki, Bayu, Punto, Bagong, Upik, Neti,

Ucik, Linda, Melani, Lisa, Dita, Nita, Reta, and Lintang, for friendship,

  discussion, and support we ever had during my four-year study. I owe a debt of gratitude to all of my participants for spending times to give me precious data.

  My appreciation also goes to the following persons: Septi PBI’05 for helping me type the reflection sheet; Sisca PBI’05 for sharing moments we have; Bu Yuseva for willingness to read and give valuable feedbacks on my thesis. Lastly, I thank persons whose names cannot be mentioned one by one, who helped me in the finishing process of my thesis.

  Priyatno Ardi

  PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI TABLE OF CONTENTS

  Page

  

TITLE PAGE .................................................................................................. i

APPROVAL PAGE ......................................................................................... ii PAGE OF BOARD OF EXAMINERS ........................................................... iii PAGE OF DEDICATION ............................................................................... iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY .............................................. v

ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... vi

ABSTRAK ........................................................................................................ vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. x LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................... xiii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... xiv LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................. xv

  CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ............................................................................... 1 B. Problem Formulation ..................................................................................... 5 C. Problem Limitation ........................................................................................ 5 D. Objectives of the Study ................................................................................. 6 E. Benefits of the Study ..................................................................................... 7 F. Definition of Terms ....................................................................................... 7

  CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Theoretical Description ................................................................................. 10

  1. Theory of Second Language (L2) Listening ......................................... 10

  a. Cognitive Processes in Listening Comprehension .......................... 12

  b. Communicative Perspectives of Teaching L2 Listening ................ 14

  c. Journal as Low Stakes Writing ........................................................ 17

  d. Listening Project ............................................................................. 18

  2. Metacognition ....................................................................................... 19

  a. Metacognitive Knowledge .............................................................. 20

  b. Metacognitive Strategy ................................................................... 23

  3. Learning Autonomy in Language Learning .......................................... 26

  a. Reason for Learning Autonomy ...................................................... 26

  b. Concept of Learning Autonomy ...................................................... 28

  c. Language Learning Autonomy in Asia ........................................... 33

  d. Collaborative Learning ................................................................... 34

  B. Theoretical Framework ................................................................................. 37

  CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY A. Research Method .......................................................................................... 39 B. Research Participants ..................................................................................... 40 C. Research Setting ............................................................................................ 41 D. Research Instruments .................................................................................... 42 E. Data Gathering Techniques ........................................................................... 43 PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  G. Research Procedures ..................................................................................... 47

  CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Procedures of the Collaborative Audio-Journal Project ................................ 48 B. Students’ Experiences ................................................................................... 52

  1. Students’ Perceptions ............................................................................ 53

  a. Students’ Initial Perceptions ............................................................ 53

  b. Students’ Developmental Perceptions ............................................ 56

  2. Metacognitive Strategies ....................................................................... 60

  a. Planning ........................................................................................... 60

  b. Problem Solving .............................................................................. 66

  c. Monitoring ....................................................................................... 72

  d. Evaluating ....................................................................................... 78

  CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions ................................................................................................... 84 B. Suggestions .................................................................................................... 86

REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 88

APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 92

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  

LIST OF FIGURES

  Page

  2.1 Integrated Skill Models ................................................................................ 15

  2.2 Control over Cognitive Process ................................................................... 30

  3.1 Data Triangulation of the Third Research Question .................................... 46

  3.2 Research Procedures .................................................................................... 47

  PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

LIST OF TABLES

  Page

  3.1 Coding of Participants’ Names .................................................................... 41

  3.2 Points of Reflection ...................................................................................... 42

  3.3 Points of Interview ....................................................................................... 43

  3.4 Format of Data Coding of the Reflection Sheet ........................................... 45

  3.5 Format of Data Coding of the Interview ...................................................... 46

  4.1 Schedule of Journal Response Submission .................................................. 49

  4.2 Procedures of Project Accomplishment ....................................................... 50

  PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

LIST OF APPENDICES

  Page Appendix 1: Listening Comprehension III Syllabus .......................................... 92 Appendix 2: Transcripts of Teacher-Made Audio-Journals ............................... 95 Appendix 3: Examples of Students’ Written Journal Response ........................ 105 Appendix 4: Guiding Questions of Reflection .................................................. 111 Appendix 5: Participants’ Reflection ................................................................ 112 Appendix 6: Guiding Questions for Interviewing the Participants ................... 124 Appendix 7: Transcripts of Interview ............................................................... 125

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In this chapter, the researcher elaborates six major underlying issues,

  namely background of the study, problem limitation, problem formulation, objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms. Hence, the introduction is intended to build the main rationale for conducting the research.

A. Background of the Study

  Learning autonomy is indisputable to be one of formal educational goals (Bould, 1988, cited in McClure, 2001), of which the orientation is to develop the attitude that learning is a lifelong process (Knowles, 1968, cited in Wenden, 1987).

  In this respect, the objective involves a requirement that the educational practitioners promote students’ learning autonomy in teaching-learning processes.

  Fostering learning autonomy means increasing students’ active involvement and minimizing teacher’s intervention in learning processes. As a result, the students increase responsibility for their own learning by decision or choice making (Littlewood, 1996) and ultimately keep on learning after finishing formal education (Littlewood, 1999).

  The field of language teaching and learning also gives special attention to learning autonomy as an indispensable issue having been a widespread discussion since the Council of Europe’s Modern Languages Project (1971) (Benson, 2001). Even though the birth of the idea is in western context, the influence spreads to all

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  2

  is recently argued that students’ control over language learning becomes greater due to the proliferation of technology. An interactive video program called A la

  

recontre de Philippe , for instance, offers a simulated target community in which

  the students can involve in daily activities and interact with the target language (Murray, 1999). Apparently, to promote learning autonomy also means to give the students an opportunity to deal with the available resources.

  As a response to globalization, the issue of learning autonomy is indeed worth considering in teaching English as foreign language in Indonesia. Since English is a global language and a lot of knowledge is conveyed through English, possessing “a working knowledge of English” becomes a requirement for Indonesians to take part in international communication, to improve “global literacy” (Hart, 2002: 35), and to share values with other countries. In other words, mastering English is an urgent need for Indonesians to be knowledgeable about the world. Notwithstanding, it seems difficult to acquire the condition for the growth of English knowledge in Indonesia, considering the fact that English is regarded as no more than a compulsory subject taught in school and unfortunately most of the students rely much on the teacher in learning English.

  It is undeniable that most of the students hardly possess self-initiatives to learn English on their own. As to East culture, the teacher is viewed as the decision maker of learning process (cf. Littlewood, 1999). As a result, the students merely accept and follow teacher’s policy. However, this indeed signifies a challenging task for the teacher to provide autonomous learning settings which exercise the greater degree of students’ learning autonomy. Consequently, the students are

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  3

  that learning occurs only in classroom is altered into the notion that learning takes place every where and every time. Hence, the role of teacher is strategic to encourage the students to direct their own learning so as to master the working knowledge of English.

  Nonetheless, regarding the vital and strategic role of the teachers to promote learning autonomy, Sert (2005) maintains that the teachers who do not experience learning language autonomously will hardly foster the students to take control of their own learning. In other words, autonomous teachers tend to have a great deal to initiate autonomous students. Indeed, it also constitutes that promoting learning autonomy to English teacher candidates is a first path to develop future students’ learning autonomy in Indonesia. For this reason, it is necessary to address the autonomous learning setting to the English teacher candidates.

  The English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, which prepares its students to be English teachers, seeks to contribute autonomous English teacher candidates who will ultimately be beneficial for the development of learning autonomy among their future students. Providing innovations in teaching happens to be a new challenge for the lecturers to enhance students’ learning autonomy. One of the efforts is the collaborative audio-journal project implemented by one of lecturers in Listening Comprehension III, treated as a biweekly home assignment during the odd semester of 2006/2007 academic year.

  Based on an informal interview with the lecturer, the implementation of the project is triggered by the fact that most of the students consider Listening

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  4

  just come and sit passively waiting for the lecturer to play the recordings. In the same way, they are not required to accomplish home assignments and/or to prepare themselves to join the class. Those indeed suggest students’ passive role in the teaching-learning processes for the students are not exercised to actively manage the learning processes on their own. Students’ dependence on the lecturer is greatly apparent instead.

  Incorporating portable MP3 or MP4 players, the project facilitates the students to accomplish the given tasks outside the classroom, expanding from classroom boundaries. In this sense, student centeredness is practically displayed in order that the students actively pace themselves to accomplish the project. As a consequence, the students themselves plan, monitor, and evaluate the project accomplishment. Thereby, it can be inferred that the project “provides a principled and practicable route toward autonomy” (Thomas, 1991, cited in Benson, 2001: 21).

  The project also seeks to integrate and improve simultaneously English literacy skills, such as listening, writing, vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar.

  Hence, the project is to contribute the communicative endeavor of teaching listening since the other productive skills are integrated to facilitate the communication (Norman, Levihn, and Hedenquist, 2001). The brief explanation of the project accomplishment is as follows. First, the students listen to the recording and find the idea of the teacher made-audio journals. Second, the students respond to the journals in a piece of writing. In this regard, vocabulary development, grammar, and organized ideas are taken into account simultaneously. Third, the

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  5

  journals, speaking skills and pronunciation are emphasized. Overall, the project aids the students to view that language is a concurrently working system rather than a collection of segregated skills.

  As its name suggests, the activities of the project accomplishment give a preference to collaborative learning which allows the students to involve in group work in order to accomplish the task. Little (2004: 1) asserts that “self-instruction is a matter of internalizing social interactive processes”. The students’ interaction in completing the project enables them to negotiate meaning and finally reach interdependent problem solving. Thus, the self-interdependence shapes considerably the concept of learning autonomy adhered to Asian learners (cf. Littlewood, 1999; Dardjowidjojo, 2006).

  B. Problem Formulation

  The questions addressed in the research are:

  1. How do the procedures of the collaborative audio-journal project foster students’ learning autonomy?

  2. How do the students perceive the collaborative audio-journal project?

  3. How do the students employ the metacognitive strategies in the project accomplishment?

  C. Problem Limitation

  The research is limited to the collaborative audio-journal project which is implemented in Listening Comprehension III. The project is an attempt to

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  6

  procedures established by the teacher, which are intended to give the students general direction in accomplishing the project. In this case, the procedures, to a certain extent, also picture the learning autonomy which is intended to enhance. As the students deal with the project, they build perceptions toward it. The perceptions are taken into account since they portray students’ motivation and willingness to complete the project.

  Through the presence of portable MP3 or MP4, the students are also facilitated to manage their own paces in the project accomplishment. As a result, during the project accomplishment, they themselves are likely to plan, monitor, evaluate, and solve the encountered problems. Such metacognitive strategies (cf.

  Chamot et al., 1999) are considered in this research for they represent students’ learning autonomy, particularly in the control over learning management (Benson, 2001).

D. Objectives of the Study

  The objectives of the study are to answer three questions. The answer to the first question covers the discussion about the procedures of the collaborative audio-journal project. It finally attempts to decide the kind of autonomy which is intended to enhance through the project accomplishment. The answer to the second and third question explores students’ experiences in accomplishing the project. The second question explores students’ initial and developmental perceptions. The third question depicts students’ project management through planning, problem solving, monitoring, and evaluating strategies. The experiences

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  7 E. Benefits of the Study

  The study hopefully benefits those who deal with language teaching and learning, particularly teachers, students, and future researchers in Indonesia. First, it provides the teachers with the knowledge of language learning autonomy and its essential effects on language learners’ self-management in learning language. As a result, the teachers are likely encouraged to create atmospheres which foster students’ learning autonomy. Second, the study makes language learners more aware that they themselves are responsible to manage their learning. As a result, they consider that learning is self-driven so as to be well prepared in the lifelong learning process. Third, the study benefits future researchers because it can be used as the basis for conducting further researches on language learning autonomy.

F. Definition of Terms

  This section presents the definition of terms which is intended to avoid confusion and misconception, namely learning autonomy, autonomous learning, collaborative audio-journal project, and Listening Comprehension III.

  1. Learning Autonomy The original and mostly cited definition of learning autonomy in language learning appears to be Holec’s definition (1979: 3), unfolding that “learning autonomy is the ability to take charge of one’s own learning”. To hold learning autonomy as an observable field, Benson (2001: 47) alters the term “take charge” into “take control” and thereby defines learning autonomy as “the capacity to take

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  8

  of learning autonomy, which is identified through students’ experiences in the process of accomplishing the project.

  2. Autonomous Learning Autonomous learning differs from learning autonomy. As learning autonomy is defined as the capacity to take control of one’s own learning, autonomous learning is “learning in which the students’ capacity for autonomy is exercised and displayed” (Benson, 2001: 110). It is then characterized by particular procedures and relationship between students and teacher, whether it is more or less self-driven. Thereby, in this study, the collaborative audio-journal project functions as an autonomous learning that enables the students to take the greater control of their learning.

  3. Collaborative Audio-Journal Project The collaborative audio-journal project refers to the out-of-class activity of

  Listening Comprehension III. In this respect, the students listen to the six teacher made-audio journals, respond to those journals in the written form, and finally record the written responses in MP3 format. Inasmuch as the project is out-of-class activity, the students are addressed to a great opportunity to pace themselves in accomplishing the project, such as planning, monitoring, and evaluating. Besides, the project also aims to improve students’ English literacy skills in tandem and to encourage collaborative skills among students. Hence, this study regards the collaborative audio-journal project as an innovative and autonomous learning

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  9

  4. Listening Comprehension III Listening III is a compulsory subject taken by the students of the English

  Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. Nurwidasa et al. (2004: 84) convey that the main goal of Listening Comprehension III is “students understand short and longer dialogues, and monologues of TOEFL, so that they can reach the score of 450 and above”. Inasmuch as the study focuses much on the out-of-class activity, Listening Comprehension III works as a general setting in which the study is conducted.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE This chapter is intended to review some theories related to the issue of the

  study and to formulate the theoretical framework. For this reason, the researcher divides this chapter into two major sub-headings, namely theoretical description and theoretical framework. The theoretical description provides the theoretical review of the issues, whereas the theoretical framework explains the thread of the theories to formulate the orientation of the study.

A. Theoretical Description

  There are three main issues raised in the study, namely theory of second language (L2) listening, metacognition, and learning autonomy. Accordingly, the discussion of those three issues was based on the previous literatures or researches.

1. Theory of Second Language (L2) Listening

  It is incontrovertible that listening skill plays a critical role in language acquisition and is thus worthwhile to consider in teaching language. Its function, by most experts, is frequently juxtaposed to the input hypothesis, i.e. providing comprehensible language inputs enriching one’s linguistic stock articulated through the other productive skills afterward (Krashen and Terrell, 1983). Indeed, comprehension is the central part of acquiring and learning language. Citing Færch and Kasper (1986), Goh (2002a) argues that L1 and L2 comprehension process

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  Furthermore, Goh (2002a) unfolds that listening is as a skill, product, and process. As a skill, listening obviously emerges to be one of four language skills in spite of speaking, reading, and writing. Listening can also be broken down into a large number of sub-skills (Lynch and Mendelsohn, 2002), such as listening for gist, drawing inferences, making prediction, and many others, which are, according to Rhodes (1987), cited in Feyten (1991), crucial to the success of listening comprehension. Nevertheless, those sub-skills are covert and only identified through the observable behaviors of completing the given tasks aiming to elicit students’ comprehension. The answers to the given questions are, by no means, taken into consideration and thereby constitute the notion that listening is a product, showed in “the number of correct and incorrect answers” (Goh, 2002a: 4). To arrive at such a performance, an underlying mental process occurs within the listeners, shaping the idea that listening as a process.

  A traditional view, however, reveals that the process of listening is passive for it is categorized as a receptive skill (Helgensen, 2003), meaning that listeners merely receive the information effortlessly. This view is extremely influenced by behaviorist theory highlighting that learners are passive processor (Hutchinson and Waters, 1987). Currently, the belief shifts into the concept that listening is an active mental process of meaning making, depicted in the process of interpreting the message. Citing Buck (1995), Helgensen (2003) argues that the meaning does not remain in what to listen to but is built through the interaction between the listeners and the text itself. In this respect, listening is believed as an interpretive process (Lynch and Mendelsohn, 2002), taking into account the constructive

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  a. Cognitive Processes in Listening Comprehension Carrier (1999) argues that most L2 listening researches focus on cognitive factors due to the fact that cognitive factors apparently give much contribution to the success of listening comprehension. Besides, understanding the cognitive process may account for how “linguistic information is processed by a number of cognitive systems: attention, perception, and memory” (Goh, 2002a: 4) and it hence pictures that listeners do process the information actively. For this reason, this section views the cognitive perspective of listening comprehension process. The mostly agreed and discussed cognitive process deals with the dual perspectives of listening, namely bottom-up and top-down processes.

  1) Bottom-Up Processing Bottom-up processing requires the listeners to process the information, started from smaller component parts of language, i.e. sounds, into larger parts, such as words, phrases, clauses, and sentences (Morley, 2001) prior to understanding the aural input (Goh, 2002a). Directing attention to specific linguistic inputs, the L2 listeners take advantage of this process as it helps them identify the target language. Regarding this view as a passive rather than active process, quoting Anderson and Lynch (1988), Lynch and Mendelsohn (2002: 197) consider the listeners as “tape recorder” for successful comprehension is viewed as the ability to memorize and recall word-for-word the speaker says. Though the level of bottom-up processing is thought to be lower than that of top-down processing (Peterson, 2001), Goh (2002a: 5) tends to accept that this process

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  because the listeners, particularly those of L2, decode linguistic inputs through active mental process.

  2) Top-Down Processing As the initial process of bottom-up is linguistic inputs forming meaningful units, the principle of top-down processing conversely entails the listeners to activate their schema which pertains to the given information prior to reaching comprehension. The schema refers to world knowledge a person has in mind.

  There are two kinds of schema, viz. content and rhetorical or textual schema. The content schema deals with the content of the knowledge resulted from life experiences, while the rhetorical schema is the knowledge of the particular structure or organization (Lynch and Mendelsohn, 2002; Long, 1989). Thereby, making sense of what is listened to, the listeners trigger their existing knowledge to infer and predict the new information to create the meaning in mind (Morley, 2001). In this respect, listener is “an active model builder” for it focuses on the interpretation of the given information rather than the memorization of the stream of speech (Anderson and Lynch, 1988, cited in Lynch and Mendelsohn, 2002: 197).

  It is noteworthy that either bottom up or top-down processing is taken into account in listening and even frequently applied simultaneously by the listeners, of which the process is called an interactive processing (Peterson, 2001). Nonetheless, the extent to which one model is used depends on the purpose for listening (Vandergrift, 2004). Focusing on content-oriented listening, for example,

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  situational experiences rather than the linguistic inputs for the sake of comprehension.

b. Communicative Perspectives of Teaching L2 Listening

  The emphasis of teaching language gradually shifts from the grammar primarily emphasized instruction to the communication focused instruction. Up to the late 1960s, the audio-lingual method had dominated language teaching. Influenced heavily by behavioral psychology and structural linguistics, it emphasized mimicry and memorization on learning to reach the habit formation of structural pattern. In teaching listening, the learners were exposed to drilling and repeating what speaker said; hence, it is in accord to Anderson and Lynch’s analogy (1988), as cited in Lynch and Mendelson (2002) that the listener is as a tape recorder. Comprehension was, thereby, accounted if the listeners were able to memorize whatever the speaker said. In 1970s, the communicative language teaching movement (CLT) began influencing language teaching, hence enlightening the communicative nature of language and replacing the audio-lingual method. Considered as a major source of comprehensible input (Helgesen, 2003), listening for meaning appeared to be the primary focus of teaching listening (Rost, 2002). Finally, since 1990, the principles of communicative approach have been adopted and been a new trend in language teaching.

  The main idea of communicative language teaching is to encourage the students to use language for communicative purposes – knowing about and how to use the target language. Influencing someone with purposes is recognized as the

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  communication is identified through the change of behaviors or linguistic responses. In listening, the linguistic responses are mediated by the productive skills. Therefore, to facilitate the communicative linguistic outcomes, the teaching of listening skills is integrated with the other productive skills. Figure 2.1 depicts two different integrated skill models offered by Norman et al. (2001), of which the primary focus is listening.

  Speaking Writing Listening Writing Speaking

Figure 2.1 Integrated Skill Models (Source: Norman et al., 2001: 10)

  From Figure 2.1, it is apparent that language input obtained through listening is produced via speaking and writing. The responses generated through those productive skills can also picture how far the listeners interpret the message the speaker conveys (cf. Norman et al., 2001). Accordingly, the given responses suggest “a personal, relevant response to the information or ideas presented” (Rost: 2002: 155).

  It is also worth noting that the communicative approach not only alters the grammar focused instruction but also entails other significant consequences in language learning and teaching. Quoting Jacobs and Farrell (2003), Richards (2005: 27-28), unveils eight changes in today’s language teaching pedagogy predisposed by CLT approach. The changes are as follows.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  1) It is important to provide a greater chance for the learners to manage their own learning, either content or process, thus breeding learner autonomy, a topic discussed in greater depth in section 3 of this chapter. 2) Inasmuch as learning is social endeavor, providing collaborative learning in classroom, hence requiring the students to accomplish the given task in interaction with others, represents an effort to evoke the social nature of learning and significantly supports learning autonomy due to students’ interdependence in negotiating the meaning. 3) The curricular integration seeks to link English tasks to other subjects so that project work calls for “exploring issues outside of the language classroom”.

  4) The content becomes the heart of language learning so as to elicit meaningful language.

  5) Appreciating students’ differences, i.e. by noticing students’ strengths and weaknesses, needs thinking in the communicative language teaching.

  Consequently, developing students’ use and awareness of their own learning strategies becomes the emphasis of instruction.

  6) Valuing higher-order thinking skills, known as critical and creative thinking, serves the students to use the language beyond the language classroom, facilitating the students to become ready in a life-long learning process accordingly.

  7) Learning assessment conducted using the multiple-choice items or other items merely testing the lower-order skills does not work. Yet, the multiple forms to attain the comprehensive picture of the students, such as portfolio, interviews,

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

  8) The role of the teacher also changes from the only knowledge source into the facilitator.

c. Journal as Low-Stakes Writing

  The previous section reveals that communicative teaching of listening needs the other productive skills so as to identify whether the listeners understand the intended messages. Writing is a medium to picture the listeners’ comprehension. In this case, the listeners may respond to the speaker in the form of journal writing. Although the journal response is often applied in teaching reading, well known as reader response, it is also possible to employ the journal response in teaching listening. The students are then assigned to write their response to what they listen to. The written journal may contain students’ generated ideas, students’ analytical thinking, students’ feeling, and the like.