An Analysis Of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)

1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
Since the beginning of 1970s, pioneered by Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975), research in
TEFL has shifted its focus from the teacher to the learner (taken from Mistar, 2002).
The process of learning itself nowadays does not only find out what they learn but also
put the attention on finding out how and why learners learn (Wenden 1991:11). In other
words, the process of language learning has become part of the content of learning.
Oxford (1980:5) states that
Interest has been shifting from a limited focus on merely what students
learn or acquire –the product or outcome of language learning and
acquisition –to an expanded focus that also includes how students gain
language- the process by which learning or acquisition occurs.
Therefore, according to Chamot (2005:113), studying the learners’ language
learning strategies is considered as the best way to uncover the process of language
learning. Furthermore Ellis (1994:537-8) lists the three major classifications in the
language learning strategies (henceforth: LLS) those are “cognitive strategies” which
relate to how students think about their learning (ex: I try to find pattern in English),
“metacognitive strategies” which relate to how students manage their own learning (ex:
I plan my English course), and “social strategies” which relate to how student interact
with others through the language (ex: I practice my language with my friends). The

2
classifications are variously elaborated by some researches like Rubin (1981), O’Malley
and Chamot (1987), and Oxford (1990) which will be elaborated in Chapter 2 and 3.
As mentioned before that learning strategies have been discussed by various
scholars, a range of terms here have emerged with regard to the field. First of all,
Oxford and Crookall (1989:404) collected some terms that define learning strategies
First is “ the learning techniques (Stern, 1983) or “learning behaviors” (Weinstein and
Mayer,1986) which occurs when learners adopt some forms of language learning
actions in order to cope problems in particular areas of language learning such as
grammar. Seliger uses “tactics” which is used when learners try “to organize a learning
situation, respond to the learning environment, or cope with input and output demand”
(Seliger, 1984, cited in Ellis 1994:531). The last and most common used term for LLS
is “strategy” (Oxford, 1990:8) defined as “behaviors or actions which learners use to
make language learning more successful, self-directed, and enjoyable”. Therefore based
on the terms collected, it shows that learners attempt to deal with their learning process
such various ways in order to make the process become easier and interesting.
In addition, Lessard-Cluston (1997, cited in Dakun, 2004) summarizes some
basic characteristics in the generally accepted view language learning strategies. Firstly,
language learning strategies are consciously generated by learners; they are actions or
steps taken by language learners to facilitate learning tasks. Secondly, language learning
strategies enhance language learning and help develop the learner’s skills in listening,
speaking, reading, or writing the second language. Thirdly, the main goal of language
learning strategies is to affect the way in which the learner selects, acquires, organizes,

3
or integrates new knowledge. Fourthly, language learning may be visible behaviors,
steps, and techniques or unobservable thoughts and mental processes. Finally, the other
generally accepted features of language learning strategies include allowing learners to
become more self-directed, expanding the role of language teachers, being problem-
oriented, flexible and teachable. Oxford also adds that learning strategies help improve
learners’ proficiency and build their greater self-confidence (Oxford, 1990:9)
In Indonesia, according to Khairul (2004), research on language learning
strategies used by the Indonesian-speaking learners to learn English as a foreign
language has rarely been conducted. For example, ‘CBSA’ (Cara Belajar Siswa Aktif),
which is a method that aims to activate learners’ critical thinking and has been
developed by the Department of Education since 1990s, still does not give any
satisfactory result for Indonesian learners. Consequently, there was not enough
empirical information about language learning strategies used by Indonesian-speaking
learners in learning English as foreign language. So far in the case of Indonesian
learners of English, research in language learning strategies has been conducted in order
to answer whether Indonesian learners have employed these strategies during their
learning process (Manurung, 2005; Mistar, 2002; Weda, 2005). The aim is to introduce
the language learning strategies to various levels of learners, since there are certain
reasons why learning strategies are ignored by some learners. First reasons, cited by
Sadtono (1995, in Mistar, 2002) indicate that most Indonesian learners probably do not
use effective techniques or strategies for learning English. He notes that Indonesian
learners of English do not realize that learning a foreign language requires

4
perseverance, discipline, knowledge of techniques of assimilating new habits, self-
evaluation, a great deal of practice, and that the whole business takes a long time.
Another explanation, mentioned by Weda (2005), is that learners are not trained to
overcome their learning problems or they are too dependent on their language teachers.
In line with Weda, Manurung (2005) adds that the situation occurs because the majority
of Indonesian students have always learnt language in a context where a “guru” (an
expert) is the main focus of the teaching-learning activities. Thus, the language learning
researchers indicate that language teacher should not only teach the language but also
teach learners how to learn (Nunan, 1996; Oxford, 1990).
On the other hand, there are also some Indonesian learners who are considered
to be applying the learning strategies when they solve their learning problems, even
though they probably do not realize that their learning techniques are actually a part of
the language learning strategies. Certain groups seem to choose some strategies
different than the others, for example the college students prefer to use cognitive
strategy than the English teachers who chose metacognitive, and meanwhile they are
both considered as language learners. For the other group of learners like the office
workers, who also need to use English for their professional career, probably could use
social strategies during their learning processes. Obviously, these learners employ some
behaviors and techniques that could help them improve their potential in developing
their language ability whether they realize it or not.
Therefore, this thesis attempts to investigate the most frequent strategies
employed by three groups of learners. Those groups are divided into the college

5
students, the English teachers, and the office workers. In other words, the study reported
here tries to focus on how the learners from different background level learn a foreign
language by using their language learning strategies.
1.2 Statement of The Problem
With regards to the previous section, this study aims to examine the process of learning
English as a foreign language especially from the learners’ point of view. In order to
reach this goal, this study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. What are the most frequently used strategies employed by all the groups of
learners?
2. What is the individual language learning strategy used by each group of
learners?
1.3 Significance of The Study
This study intends to compare the language learning strategies among the learners and
hopefully the findings can help language teachers facilitate teaching and learning more
effectively by focusing not only on the teaching methods but also on at the strategies
that learners employed.

6
1.4 Objective of The Study
In order to fulfill the goal of the study, this study has two fundamental objectives:
1. It intends to investigate which group of learning strategies is believed to be used
most frequently by the learners.
2. It intends to investigate which individual LLS is used by each group of learners.
1.5 Limitation of The Study
This study offers a closer look at the problem of learning strategies for language
learners. As explained previously, many experts and researchers have identified the
learning strategies used by some language learners. The present study, however, only
adapts the LLS and its categorization as listed by Oxford (1990)

7
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES
This chapter reviews the relevant literatures of language learning strategies by
examining the background, the issues along the definition, the characteristics, and
the categories of the language learning strategies. The first part of the chapter
discusses the development of language learning strategies based on some research
conducted by several researchers. The second part provides about the definitions
and characteristics of language learning strategies and the third part describes
categories in the language learning strategies. The third part discusses about factors
that influencing the strategy choice and some method used in investigating the
LLS. For the last part, it presents surveys by previous research methodologies in
investigating the language learning strategies.
2.1. The Good Language Learner
Language learning strategies research began in the 1970s with the work of Joan
Rubin (1975), who suggested the model of “the good language learner” (henceforth
GLL) which was taken from the successful language learners and differentiated
from the less successful ones.
Furthermore, Rubin comes up with the strategies that were being employed
by the successful learners and those are:

8
1. The good language learning is a willing and accurate guesser
2. The good language learner has a strong drive to communicate or to
learn from a communication.
3. The good language learner is often not inhibited. He is willing to
appear foolish if reasonable communication results.
4. In addition to focusing on communication, the good language learner
is prepared to attend to form
5. The good language learner practices
6. The good language learner monitors his own and the speech of
others
7. The good language learner attends to meaning
(Rubin, 1975: 21-23)
However, according to Graham, Stern (1975) is the first one who contributed the
idea of “the good language learner” (cited in Graham, 1997:37). He has classified
learning strategies which he drew up based on his own experience as a learner and
teacher and the background literature on language learning. Stern argues that the
good language learner “must fit into a theory of language learning and such a theory
can be developed in five progressive stages, those are;
(1)What it means to know a knowledge: competence, (2) What it means
to know more than one language, (3) What is involved in first-language
learning (4) What is involved in second- language learning, (5) What is
the distinction between the strategies of the good and the poor language
learner.
Based on the five stages, Stern (1975, cited in Croft: 1980) further took three of
them and explains about some principles that underlie the strategies of the GLL. The
first one is “knowing a language: competence”, by competence he means that GLL
also should learn from what native speakers’ knowledge on the language and how
they intuitively use form, meaning, communication, and creativity in their language.
The second stage is by starting his language learning process which is divided into

9
(a) initial stage, where learners start to learn the new language; (b) learning process
where learners collected the new information and build the new system according to
the new language he learnt; (c) the ideal end point: native-like competence”. Here
Stern argues that” the second-language learner comes close to the native-like
competence when he has internalized, interiorized, or incorporated the rules of the
new language” (Stern 1975, cited in Croft 1980: 55-62). The third stage, he
explains about the three major problems of learning which are explained as follows:
(1) The discrepancy between first and second languages (he states that GLL
should be able to overcome the difference in the language system between L1
and L2).
(2) The code-communication dilemma (it is the problem whenever the learner
have to use the language either “formally” (focus on grammar, sound system,
etc) or “functionally” (focus on communication))
(3) The choice between rational and intuitive learning (it is mentioned that
learners have their “dilemma” when they want to use the language
“naturally/intuitively” or they should also pay attention on “the concepts” and
“systems”).
(Stern 1975, cited in Croft 1980: 55-62)
Therefore, based on the three-progressive stage mentioned, Stern concluded some
features from the GLL as their result of his observation. The following are the
features.

10
1. A personal learning style or positive learning strategies
2. An active approach to the learning task
3. A tolerant and outgoing approach to the target language and empathy with
its speakers
4. Technical know-how about how to tackle a language
5. Strategies of experimentation and planning with the object of developing
the new language into an ordered system of revising this system
progressively.
6. Constantly searching for meaning
7. Willingness to practice
8. Willingness to use the language in real communication
9. Self-monitoring and critical sensitivity to language use
10. Developing the target language more and more as a separate reference
system and learning to think in it.
(Stern, 1975 cited in Croft, 1980: 68)
Research on the good language learners continue to develop. Another
research conducted by Naiman et al (1978) also interested in comparing the less
successful students with the unsuccessful ones. The research reported by them had
three main aims. One was to identify the strategies that good learners used. Second,
they wondered whether there were any correlations between successful learning and
the variables, particularly the personality and cognitive style ones. The third was to
learn something about what teachers do in classrooms. Two case studies were
conducted from the interviews from 32 adult learners and students at grade 8, 10, 12
of French in Toronto. The result was cited in Graham (1997:39) as follows,
The interviews with the adult subjects produced several pertinent
insights into the language learning process. Most thought they had a
good memory (50%) and were interested in analyzing languages (66%);
47% thought motivation was important; 82% favoured actively
producing the language from the start of learning. Interestingly, 94%
saw learning as a largely conscious process, whereas the unsuccessful
learners felt it was something one effortlessly acquires; 78% thought it
was a help to have learned more than one language; 85% had felt some

11
discouragement, frustration, impatience or confusion during learning.
About half had left inhibited or embarrassed. Many emphasized the
importance of action in learning, seeking out speaking situations to
overcome shyness (Naiman et al., 1978:13-15)
As the result, Naiman et al. (1978, cited in Graham 1997:39) went on to classify
such observations into strategy types, which are summarized as follows:
1. An active task approach, active involvement in the learning process,
seeking out learning opportunities
2. Realization of language as a system, e.g. analyzing the L2 and making
inferences
3. Realization of language as a means of communication and interaction, e.g.
looking for situations involving communication, emphasizing fluency rather
than accuracy in the initial stages of language learning.
4. Management of affective demands, e.g. learning to laugh at oneself
5. Monitoring of L2 performance, e.g. asking native speakers for corrections
Based on some research on GLL studies, it can be seen that the results provide some
answers regarding to the question why some students fail or probably have some
serious learning problems while the others were capable to face them. By
discovering how successful language learners produce some strategy to overcome
their learning problems, it is hoped the less successful learners can also produce
some strategy to overcome their learning problems.
Furthermore the recent research on investigating language learners’
strategies has developed rapidly. Some researchers include Rubin (1981), Wenden
(1983a, 1986b), O’Malley et al (1985) and Oxford (1990) conduct the LLS research
included the relationship to its variables such as in gender, age, culture, etc. Further
discussion in the language learning strategies will be presented in the sections that
follow.

12
2.2 Terminology in Language Learning Strategies (LLS)
Based on Griffith (2004), the term ‘strategy’ has been used by many prominent
writers (such as Rubin, 1975; O’Malley et al, 1985; Oxford, 1990). She further
explains that some researchers prefer to use the terminology such as “learning
behaviours” (Wesche, 1977; Politzer and McGroarty, 1985 cited in Graham 2004),
“tactics” (Seliger, 1984 cited in Ellis 1986) and “techniques” (Stern, 1992 cited in
Ellis 1986).
The learning strategies also have been defined by several experts. For example
Oxford (1990:8) defines it as “the specific actions taken by the learner to make learning
easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable
to new situations”. In line with her, O’Malley and Chamot (1990:1) mention learning
strategies are “special ways of processing information that enhance comprehension,
learning, or retention of information”. Ellis is another author who views strategies for
learning and strategies for using, including communication strategies or “devices for
compensating for inadequate resources” (Ellis, 1986:165), as quite different
manifestations of a more general phenomenon which he calls learner strategies.
Besides the definitions, categorizing in LLS also has variously explored,
furthermore the following section will explain each characteristic and some categories
in language learning strategies.

13
2.3. Characteristics of Language Learning Strategies
Researchers such as Wenden (1987: 7-8), Lessard- Clouston (1997: cited in Internet
TESL Journal and Oxford (1990a:9) list some characteristics that define the language
learning strategies. The characteristics of language learning strategies are summarized
in the table below.
Table 2.1: Characteristics of LLS
Wenden (1987:7-8) Lessard- Clouston
(1997: Internet TESL
Journal)
Oxford (1990a:9)
1. Contribute directly
and indirectly to
learning
2. Observable and
unobservable
3. Problem oriented
responding to the need
4. Specifications/techniq
ues
5. Deplorable and
automatized
6. Behaviour which are
amenable to change
1. Enhance language
learning and develop
competency
2. Visible or unseen
3. Involve information and
memory
4. Learner generated-
deliberate steps
1. Contribute to communicative
competence
2 Observable and unobservable
3 Are problem oriented
4 Are action based
5 Expand the role of language
teachers
6 Can be taught
7 Allow learners to become
more self-directed
8 Often used consciously
9 Involve in any aspects, not
just cognitive
10 Are influenced by a variety of
factors
11 Support learning directly
/indirectly
12 Are flexible
As can be seen in Table 2.1, Wenden (1987), Lessard-Clouston (1989) and Oxford
(1990) agree that LLS enhance learning and can be both observable which include the
actions and techniques, or unobservable which include the memory and cognitive
aspects. Furthermore it also shows that both Wenden and Oxford feel that LLS are
problem-oriented and are applied when a problem exists. Though Lessard-Clouston

14
places learners as playing a greater role (that is being learner-generated), in the other
hand Oxford places teachers as having a greater role. Nevertheless, for successful
learning to take place, it is obvious that learners need to participate actively in the
learning process, although the teachers can help to enhance their learning process.
2.4. Taxonomy of Language Learning Strategies
Some researchers identified three major strategies used by the language learners,
those which are dealing indirectly and directly to the process of learning such as
metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies and social/affective strategies
(O’ Malley et al 1983, Rubin and Wenden 1987, Ellis 1994). Based on Rubin’s
classifications, metacognitive strategies refer to “make use knowledge about
cognitive processes and constitute an attempt to regulate language learning by
means planning, monitoring, and evaluating” whereas cognitive strategies refer to
“the steps or operations used in problem solving that require direct analysis,
transformation, or synthesis learning materials” (Wenden and Rubin 1987:23).
Social strategies, on the other hand is “the ways in which learners elect to interact
with other learners or native speakers of the target language” such as cooperation
and questioning for clarification (Ellis 1994:538)
Therefore, O’Malley and Chamot (1985), Oxford (1990) and Rubin (1981)
have first categorized the strategies under direct and indirect strategies which are
further sub-categorised and samples of such taxonomies of language learning
strategies by the key figures in the field are as summarized in table 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4.

15
Table 2.2. O’Malley and Chamot’s typology of learning strategies
(1985, taken from Ellis 1994: 538)
Learning Strategy Sub-strategies
Metacognitive
Advance organizers
Directed attention
Selective attention
Self-management
Advance preparation
Self-monitoring
Delayed production
Self-evaluation
Cognitive
Repetition
Resourcing
Directed physical response
Translation
Grouping
Note-taking
Deduction
Recombination
Imagery
Auditory representation
Key word
Contextualization
Elaboration
Transfer
Inferencing
Social/ affective Cooperation
Question for clarification
Chamot and O’ Malley provide the first clear contrast between cognitive and
metacognitive strategies. Metacognitive strategies include the processes by which
learners plan, monitor (considered in a broad sense), and evaluate their learning. For
cognitive strategies, Chamot (1987, cited in Ellis, 1994: 536) argues that techniques
such as “repetition (imitating a language model, either covertly or overtly), “note-
taking” (writing down information presented orally), and “elaboration” (relating
new concepts to other information in memory) appear to be directly linked to the

16
performance of particular learning tasks. Social/affective strategies, on the other
hand, concern the ways in which learners elect to interact with other learners and
native speakers.
Rubin’s classification on LLS divides into four types, however besides the
cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, and social, she also adds
communicative strategies between them. The communication strategies employed
by learners when they practice their language with others, it covers participating in
a conversation, getting meaning across and clarifying. Whereas social strategies
deal with opportunities to use the language that learners have.
Table 2.3 Rubin’s typology of learning strategies (in Ellis 1994:534)
Learning Strategy Sub-strategies
Cognitive Strategies
Clarification/ Verification
Guessing/ Inductive
Inferencing
Deductive Reasoning
Practice
Memorization
Monitoring
Metacognitive Strategies
Planning
Prioritising
Setting goals
Self-management
Communicative Strategies
Participating in a
conversation
Getting meaning across
Clarifying
Social Strategies
Opportunities to be exposed
to the knowledge
Opportunities to practise the
knowledge

17
The classification of language learning strategies reflects more or less the
same categorization. A comparative study O’Malley and Chamot (1990), Oxford’s
(1990), and Rubin (1981) classification systems used in the field however
concludes that Oxford’s (1990) system of language learning strategies is superior in
accounting for the variety of strategies used by language learners (Chamot, 2004).
Oxford’s (1990:17) taxonomy of language learning strategies consisting of direct
and indirect strategies are further subdivided into six categories as can be seen as
follows,
Table 2.4 Oxford’s typology of learning strategies (1990)
Learning Strategies Sub-strategies
A. Direct Strategies
Memory Strategies
Are devices used by learners to
make mental linkages to enable
new information especially
vocabulary to be retained by
learner.
Creating mental linkage
Grouping
Associating/elaborating
Placing new words into context
Applying images and sounds
Using imagery
Semantic mapping
Using keywords
Representing sounds in memory
Reviewing well
Using action
Cognivtive strategies
Are used by learners to process
language and accomplish tasks.
Practising
Repeating
Formally practicing with sounds and
writing systems
Recognizing and using formulas and
patterns
Recombining
Practising naturalistically
Receiving and sending messages
Getting the idea quickly

18
Using resources for receiving and sending
messages
Analyzing and reasoning
Reasoning deductively
Analyzing expressions
Analyzing contrastively (across languages)
Translating
Transferring
Compensation strategies
Are used by learners to make up
for their missing knowledge. They
include the use of gesture,
rephrasing, asking for help and
making guesses.
Creating structure for input and output
Taking notes
Summarizing
Highlighting
Overcoming limitations in speaking and
writing
Switching to mother tongue
Getting help
Using mime or gestures
Avoiding communication partially or
totally
Selecting the topic
Adjusting or approximating the message
Coining words
Using a circumlocution or synonym
B. Indirect Strategies
Metacognitive strategies
Are used by learners to plan,
organize, evaluate and monitor
their own language learning.
Centering your learning
Overviewing and linking with already
known material
Paying attention
Delaying attention
Delaying speech production to focus on
listening
Arranging and planning your learning
Finding out about language
Organizing
Setting goals and objectives
Identifying the purpose of a language task
Planning for a language task
Seeking practice opportunities
Evaluation your learning
Self-monitoring
Self-evaluating

19
Affective Strategies
Are used by learners to deal with
their emotions, motivations and
attitudes when learning English.
Lowering your anxiety
Using progressive relaxation/ deep
breathing/meditation
Using music
Using laughter
Encouraging yourself
Making positive statements
Taking risks wisely
Rewarding yourself
Taking your emotional temperature
Listening to your body
Using a checklist
Writing a language learning diary
Discussing your feelings with someone
else
Social Strategies
Refer to how learners use
language learnt to interact and
learn from others.
Asking questions
Asking for clarification or verification
Asking for correction
Cooperating with others
Cooperating with peers
Cooperating with proficient users of the
new language
Empathizing with others
Developing cultural understanding
Becoming aware of others’ thoughts and
feelings.
2.5. Factors influencing the choice of LLS
Discussions on individual, situational and social factors which could be the factors
that influencing learners choices will be elaborated in the following sections even
though the relationship between learner’s factors and the choice of LLS is not
going to be the main focus in the thesis. However these factors will enrich our
insights on LLS.

20
2.5.1 Learner’s belief about language learning
Wenden (1987:23) found that learners who emphasized the importance of learning
tended to use cognitive strategies that helped them to understand and remember
specific items of language, while learners who emphasized the importance of using
language employed few learning strategies, used more on communication
strategies. However, learners who stressed personal factors did not manifest any
distinctive pattern of strategy use.
2.5.2 Age and Learning Experience
In terms of age that is also related to the extent of learning experience, young
learners have been observed to employ task-specific strategies while older learners
employ generalized strategies more flexibly. Ehrman and Oxford (1989:1) reported
that “adults use more complex and sophisticated strategies”. It explains why older
learners generally learn grammar and vocabulary faster initially than younger
learners and not so in pronunciation.
2.5.3 Affective States
Investigation on the influences of the affective domain of learners dealing with
variables such as learners, attitude towards language and motivation has carried out
by Green and Oxford (1995). Studies into the area suggest that motivation seems to
be the most important of the learner variables since how learners deal with their
emotions affects the strategies they employ.

21
2.6. Previous LLS Research Methodologies
Learning strategies has been identified through various self-report procedures.
They range from listing the strategies through intuitions and making informal
observation to conducting interviews, coming up with self-exploration data and
finally designing questionnaires to collect data. The major methodologies that have
been employed previously are detailed in this section.
In general two categories have been used in the study of language learning
strategies, namely observation and self-report. For observation, researchers have
either used informal observations or scheduled observation. Self-report methods
include interviews, diary studies and questionnaires. These methods are discussed in
detail in the sections that follow.
2.6.1. Interviews
Oxford and Crookal (1989:404) listed some methods and findings on the LLS and
interviews are the first research methodology used in this field. Interviews are
conducted to find out how learners describe what they are thinking and doing in a
recently completed task. However, learners may forget details of the mental
processes or even describe what they thought are right. A more accurate method of
learning the strategies actually applied by learners is through the use of “stimulated
recall interview”. For stimulated recall interview, the learners are asked to describe

22
their thoughts as videotapes of students performing a certain task are played.
(Chamot 2005:113)
2.6.2. Diaries and Journals
Written diaries and journals have also been used to identify language learners’
strategies. In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning
experiences and the ways in which they attempted to solve language problems.
Rubin (2003:78 cited in Oxfrod and Crookal 1989:408) suggests using diaries for
instructional purposes to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their
own learning processes and strategies. The diary studies also have been primarily
used to shed light on the learners’s affective states and how these influence learning
(Brown 1985, Parkinson and Howell-Richardson 1990, cited in Oxford and Crookal
1989: 408)
2.6.3. Thinking-aloud protocols
A think-aloud protocol can be used for individual interviews in which the learner is
given a target language task and asked to describe his or her own tasks while
working on it (Chamot 2005:114). In general, think-aloud tasks may tell us more
about skill learning than language strategies. This self-report may be inaccurate if
learners do not report truthfully or cannot remember their thinking. As Grenfell and
Harris have pointed out: “It is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human
brain and find out what is going on there” (1999:54, cited in Chamot 2005:115)

23
2.6.4. Questionnaires
The most frequently used method for identifying students’ learning strategies is
through questionnaires. Most descriptive studies have relied on a questionnaire
developed by Oxford (1990:293-6), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning
(SILL). The SILL is a standardized measure with version for English as a second
language (ESL) students and students of a variety of other languages, and as such
can be used in studies to correlate strategy use with variables such as learning styles,
gender, proficiency level, culture, and task.
Oxford argues that her classification on LLS has been acknowledged to be
“more systemic in linking individual strategies, as well as strategy groups” (Oxford
1990:14) and also “the most comprehensive classification” (Ellis 1994:539)
Furthermore, Oxford’s SILL has been adopted for this research since it is also
formulated for learners who study English as their foreign language so each
question were designed understandable.
2.7. The Importance of LLS and Current Study
Early research into language learning strategies has been concerned with establishing
what good language learning strategies might be. The findings from research conducted
by Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) suggest that the successful learners have employed a
number of positive strategies. Oxford (1990a:1) stresses that language learning
strategies are important for language learning because they are “tools for active, self-
directed involvement essential for developing competence”. Graham (1997:20)

24
indicates that second and foreign language teachers can help learners understand good
LLS and should train learners to develop and use them. Lessard-Clouston (1997) poses
the question of what types of language learning strategies appear to work best with what
learners in what context. Oxford (1993:25) stresses the importance of further research in
different learning environments regarding learners’ language learning strategy use:
“investigations should be replicated so that more consistent information becomes
available within and across groups of learners”.
Based on the findings and recommendations made by the various researchers,
the current study thus seeks to find the language learning strategies employed by
Indonesian learners according to their context. It is hoped that the findings will provide
insights for teachers and researchers in similar and almost similar context to reflect and
improve on their teachings as well as help their learners learn more effectively.
2.8. Research into Language Learning Strategies
Furthermore, some Indonesian research has conducted LLS research among
Indonesian learners’. The research studies attempt to reveal what the strategies
employed by the learners relating to their language proficiency test. Other research
discussed factors influencing learners in choosing their strategies. The following is
the review from the previous research.

25
2.8.1 Studies of the effects of strategy instruction
Some researchers like Weda (2005) and Manurung (2005) conduct the research in order
to find out the strategies employed by the learners. As the result, learners’ proficiency
level showed increasing as they applied the strategies. The following the studies on the
strategy instruction.
2.8.1.1. Weda (2005)
The study is designed to identify the range and types of learning strategies used by
students learning English and to give information about the use of particular language
learning strategies which can explain the success in language learning. Weda research
also provides information about the students’ assessment towards teachers’ performance
in the classrooms, and suggests a model of training learner or learning how to learn
based on the findings.
The research method was quasi-experimental and was carried out in the
population of 85 students from two classes which focused on social science. Two main
instruments were being used, they are (1) the self-administered questionnaire (a 40-item
Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and the seven strategies employed by
good language learners (GLL) (2) proficiency test which covers English Structure,
Vocabulary and reading comprehension.
For the first group (IPS 1), the pre-test result showed that Metacognitive and
Social strategies were the highly usage and after the treatment the strategies highly used
were Metacognitive and Memory strategies respectively. Furthermore, for the GLL

26
strategies was Attend to form and Attend to meaning strategies, while in post-
questionnaire, it was found that the high usage of GLL strategies was Monitor speech
and Attend to Meaning strategies. The second group (IPS 2), it was found that Attend to
Meaning strategies was the highest usage, and the highest use of LLSs in post-
questionnaire was also Attend to Meaning strategies. From this description, it can be
seen that the students who used Attend to Meaning and Monitor Speech strategies have
score improvement in post test.
2.8.1.2. Manurung (2005)
The research discusses the effect of language learning strategy instruction on the
improvement of the four language skills at tertiary education level. It focuses on two
main points, of which the first is related to the effect of instruction in the use of
language learning strategies prior to undertaking autonomous language learning as self-
access center on the improvement of the four language skills, and the second relates to
the language learning strategies used in the self-access center where autonomous
language learning takes place. The subjects of the study were 126 first year non-
language department students registered for General English, a compulsory course at
the Language Training Centre (LTC) at a university in Indonesia. The subjects were
divided into two groups, 63 students as the experimental group and other 63 as the
control group. The experimental group was given instruction in the use of effective
language learning strategies before they use the self-access centre, while the control
group was assigned only to do self-access language learning. The result of the language

27
learning strategy instruction in the present study indicates that students in the
experimental group benefited from the language learning strategy instruction.
Furthermore, this study shows that the students in the experimental group improved
more in their EFL performance than their counterparts in the control group
2.8.2 Studies investigating factors affecting strategy choice
Use of appropriate learning strategies enable students to take responsibility for their
own learning furthermore, it is said that better language learners generally use strategies
appropriate to their own stage of learning, personality, age, purpose for learning the
language and type of language (Bialystok, 1981) as taken from Oxfrod and Nyikos
(1989). These factors are important because learners need to keep on learning even
when they are no longer in a formal classroom. The following are some research that
has been conducted in order to find out the relation between the language learning
strategies employed by the students with their culture backgrounds.
2.8.2.1. Lengkanawati (1999)
The study reported about the learner variable in relation to the language learning
strategy use. Language learning strategy choices used by the EFL students in Indonesia
and Indonesian as a foreign language in Australia related to the possible influences of
the learner’s cultural background were investigated. The data were collected through
observation, self-report survey using modified Strategy Inventory for Language
Learning (SILL) and interviews. This research reveals some evidence of the differences

28
in the degree of strategies used by both groups. The use of memory , metacognitive, and
affective strategies by EFL students in Indonesia is more frequent than the use of those
by IFL students in Australia. On the other hand, the use of cognitive, compensation, and
social strategies is higher in Australia than in Indonesia. Furthermore, the study
attempted to analyze the differences among the students’ point of view of their cultural
background. Furthermore, the statistical result showed that among the six categories of
language learning strategies, five strategies are proven to have significant differences in
the intensity of using memory, cognitive, compensation, affective, and social strategies
between EFL learners and IFL learners. There is no significant difference in the use of
metacognitive strategies by EFL and IFL learners. The influence of the students’
cultural background on the use of these strategies is very obvious. Very few of the
respondents involved in this research dared to put forward questions to the teachers. The
other influence is the low-used strategy in cooperating with peers or with proficient user
of the target language. This is probably because Indonesian students are very shy to
reveal that they do not know something.
2.8.2.2. Sugeng (1997)
Five research questions are asked concerning the profiles of students' learning strategies
in terms of general categories and subordinate categories. Three hypotheses are
proposed concerning the influences of Language, Gender, and Grade on students'
learning strategies. Observation was conducted by trained student observers using a

29
modified guide (Oxford, 1990) involving a total of 240 elementary school students.
Percentages were used as the statistics for the descriptive analyses. For hypothesis
testing a three-by-four multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used.
MANOVA is methods to cover cases where there is more than one (correlated)
dependent variable and where the dependent variables cannot simply be combined.
Further the research followed by three-way analyses of variance (ANOVA), which is a
stasticial analysis based more than two variables, for the four strategy categories.
Correlation was calculated for the four strategy categories and non- parametric ANOVA
was conducted for the metacognitive category. Use of the students' learning strategy is
as follows: cognitive (63.31 %), affective (23.79%), social (9.05%), and meta-cognitive
(3.85%). A significant main effect is found for Grade (p = 0.0001), and Language (p =
0.0126). A significant interaction is found for Grade and Language (p = 0.0001). For
metacognitive a significant interaction is found between Grade and Gender (p =
0.0012). A significant main effect of Grade was found for cognitive (p = 0.0009) and
for affective (p = 0.01).

30
CHAPTER III
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter is divided into two major sections. The first section describes and explains
some underlying theories in the language learning strategies. It discusses some features
in the language learning, which will be explained in details based on Oxford’s (1990)
language learning strategies classifications. The second section is concerned with the
research methodology and the data analysis.
3.1 Direct and Indirect Strategies
Oxford studied the learning strategies and classified them. She refers to it as
“Oxford’s Strategy Classification System” (Ehrman and Oxford, 1990). For the use
of the strategies when one is learning the target language, Oxford divided it into two
general classifications, namely direct strategies and indirect strategies.
3.1.1 Direct Strategies
Oxford states that direct strategies are the strategies that “require mental processing”
of the language even though the processing is differentiated according to its purpose
(1990:37). She illustrates direct strategies as “the performer in a state play” which
when learners express their specific actions with the language. Direct strategies

31
categorized into memory strategies, cognitive strategies, compensation strategies
therefore the following are the explanation of each category.
3.1.1.1 Memory strategies
First of all, Thompson (1987, cited in Wenden 1987) describes some techniques in
memory strategies. She calls the memory strategies as “mnemonic” which means
“aiding memory” (Higbee, 1979 cited in Thompson 1987) or is often also referred to
as ‘memory tricks’. There are several ways the mnemonics can be adapted by the
learners. She puts her ideas as follows:
1. By using linguistic mnemonics the learners try to remember every new word
by linking them to the other words. There are two ways in relating the new
words. The first is called the peg method which uses the unrelated item and
then links them with a set of memorize “pegs or hooks” like: red with bed,
green with clean, blue with glue, etc. The second one is called the keyword
method which by rhyming the new word with the learners’ L1, for example
in Indonesian, the word sound of house is almost similar to haus.
2. By using spatial mnemonics, the learners can apply it in three ways. First,
the loci method is sometimes used by the learners to memorize speeches
(Yates, 1966 in Thompson 1987) when they imagine the word and then put
each word into each room therefore whenever the person visits “the rooms”,
the location selected will help him/her to remember those words. Second,
the spatial grouping which the learner put the new words by drawing in a

32
pattern of triangle or circle. The last one is called the finger method, in
which the learner associates the item to be learned with a finger (first
item=left pinky, second item=left ring finger, etc)” (1987:45).
3. By using visual methods, here the learners can use pictures that represent the
new word or visualize the new word or a content of a passage.
4. By using the physical response, the learners pretend to act out a sentence or
words that they have just learnt. For example “pretend that you are writing a
book”, which is easier to remember than “I am writing a book”.
5. By verbal elaboration methods, the learner can apply it in three ways. The
first one is by grouping a certain words according to their classes such as
animals, colors, vegetables, and so forth. The second one is by using the
word chain, that is by associating each word according to what comes first
and then relating it to the next word. Thompson (1987:46) gives examples
like to remember “car”, “house”, “flower”, and so forth, one forms an image
a car in front of a house, a house surrounded by flowers, etc. The third
method, called the narrative chain, is just the same as the word chain. Here
the association is done by putting the new words into a story that might help
learners to remember easier.
Some techniques on the memory strategies that are listed by Thompson (1987) were
also adopted by Oxford, which fall into four sets: creating mental linkages, applying
images and sounds, reviewing well, employing action. Furthermore, Oxford
(1990:40-43) abbreviates these strategies as CARE, as illustrated by her statement

33
“Take CARE of your memory and your memory will take CARE of you”. “Creating
mental linkages” strategies form the corner stone for the rest of the memory
strategies by classifying or reclassifying language material into meaningful units, by
associating/elaborating, and by placing new words into a context. “Applying images
and sounds” strategies include: using imagery (the visual imagery is used either in
the mind or in actual drawing), using keywords (remembering a new word by using
auditory and visual links), semantic mapping (relating words, pictures, and means of
lines or arrows) and representing sounds in memory (remembering new language
according to its sound). “Reviewing well” strategy is done by reviewing carefully
spaced intervals, which is also called spiraling. “Employing action” includes two
ways, namely by using physical response or sensation and by using mechanical
techniques.
Based on the classification given, it seems that making mental pictures,
linking words from one to another, and exposing an action are the memory
strategies learner use mostly.
3.1.1.2 Cognitive Strategies,
These strategies are typically found to be the most popular strategies with the
language learners (Adler and Vogler, 1986, taken from Oxford, 1990:43).
Cognitive strategies are defined by Rubin (1987) as “the steps, or operations used
in problem solving that require direct analysis, transformation or synthesis of
learning materials”. There are four types of cognitive strategies, namely

34
“practicing, receiving and sending messages, analyzing and reasoning, and creating
structure for input and output”. Oxford creates the acronym PRAC, as illustrated in
her statement “Cognitive strategies are PRACtical for language learning.
“Practicing” is the most important type of cognitive strategies. It includes
repeating, formally practicing with sounds and writing systems, recognizing and
using formulas and patterns (being aware of and/or using routing formulas),
recombining (combining known elements in new ways to produce a longer
sequence), and practicing naturalistically (as in participating in a conversation,
reading a book or article, listening to a lecture, or writing a letter in the new
language). “Receiving and sending messages” can be used by learners to extracting
the new ideas by using a variety of resources for understanding or producing
meaning. “Analyzing and reasoning” are concerned with logical analysis and
reasoning as applied to various target language skills. The strategies contain
deductive reasoning deductively (by applying the general rules to the new target
language situations); analyzing expressions (using the meanings of various parts to
understand the meaning of whole expression); translating; transferring (applying
knowledge of words, concepts, or structures from one language to another).
“Creating structure for input and output” combines three ways to create structure,
namely taking notes, summarizing, and highlighting.
3.1.1.3 Compensation Strategies

35
These are some strategies that help learners when comprehending and producing the
new language. There are two types of compensation strategies included; “guessing
intelligently in listening and reading”, and “overcoming limitations in speaking and
writing”. The acronym created by Oxford (1990:47-50) for this category is GO as
illustrated by her statement, “language learners can GO far with compensation
strategies”. The strategy is considered very useful when the learners try to make
educated guesses rather than become panic and tend to use whatever words they can
find. In “guessing strategies”, there are two strategies that can be used, namely using
linguistic clues (language-based clues) and using other clues (non language-based
clues). The second strategy, “overcoming limitations”, as applied in speaking and
writing, such as switching to the mother tongue, getting help, using mime and gesture,
avoiding communication partially or totally, selecting the topic, adjusting or
approximating the message, coining words, and using a circumlocution or synonym.
3.1.2 Indirect strategies
For the indirect strategies, Oxford mentions it as “The Director, … is an internal
guide and support the Performer” (1990:15). Furthermore she argues that the learner
attempts to take self-control of his/her learning process while the teacher seems put
a less focus in this part. The classifications under this strategy are metacognitive
strategies, affective strategies, and social strategies.
3.1.2.1 Metacognitive strategies

36
These are the strategies that go beyond the cognitive and the way learners manage their
own learning process. Wenden (1982 cited in Wenden 1987:25) listed several planning
that learners use, those are when learners “choose” what and how they want to learn the
language and then they “prioritize “ which part of the language they prefer to learn first
and finally they could set up their own learning “goals”. Metacognitive strategies
therefore facilitates learners to make a self-control to their own learning process, if they
feel that what they have planned consider as not successful they could re-organized
according to what fit them best.
Furthermore, Oxford categorizes the metacognitve strategies as “centering your
learning, arranging and planning your learning, and evaluating your learning” (Oxford
1990:138-40). The acronym is created as CAPE, that is, metacognitive strategies make
language learners more CAPE-able. “Centering your learning” helps learners to keep
focusing on certain language tasks, activities, skills, or materials. These strategies
include activities such as overviewing and linking with already known material; paying
attention to specific aspects of the language or to situational details; and delaying
speech production to focus on listening. “Arranging and planning your learning”
include strategies used in finding out about language learning; organizing; setting goals
and objectives; identifying the purpose of language task; planning for a language task;
seeking practice opportunities. “Evaluating your learning”, by applying self-monitoring
such as identifying errors in understanding or producing is used the new language or by
self-evaluating by checking one’ progress in a certain month or week.
3.1.2.2 Affective strategies

37
These strategies refer to the learners’ emotions, attitudes, motivations, and values
towards their learning process, as illustrated in the following statement “good language
learners are often those who know how to control their emotions and attitude about
learning” (Savignon: 1983, taken from Oxford :1990:141), since the unstable emotions
and motivations would influence the learners’ effort during the learning process. There
are three ways used by learners to maintain their affective personality, namely
“lowering your anxiety, encouraging yourself, taking your emotional temperature”
(Oxford 1990:143-4). “Lowering your anxiety” can be applied by using progressive
relaxation, deep breathing, or meditation; by listening to music, or also by using
laughter when watching or reading fun stuffs. “Encouraging yourself” includes
activities like making positive statements, taking risks wisely, and rewarding yourself.
“Taking your emotional temperature” consists of activities like listening to one’s body;
using a checklist to discover feelings, attitudes, and motivations concerning language
learning in general; writing a language learning diary, and discussing your feeling with
someone else.
3.1.2.3 Social strategies.
Learning a new language requires a learner to be able to communicate in the new
language in a community. The strategies help learners when engaging in a
conversation. The strategies include activities such as “asking questions, cooperating
with others, and empathizing with others”(Oxford 1990:146-7). “Asking questions”
consists of activities like asking for clarification by paraphrasing, slow down, or give

38
example; and also asking for correction when the learner makes a mistake.
“Cooperating with others” can be done with peers or with proficient users of the new
language. “Empathizing with others” is applied by developing cultural understanding
and also by becoming aware of other’s thoughts and feelings
3.2 Research Methodology
This section describes the research framework, setting and respondents and the research
instruments and procedure. Both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods
and a number of descriptive as well as statistical analyses to seek answers to the
following research questions; (1) what is the most frequently used strategies that are
employed by all the groups of learners? And (2) what is the individual language
learning strategy used by each group of learners?
3.2.2 Setting and Respondents
This research attempts to investigate the LLS used by English language learners who
have been using the English language in their daily activities. The sampling includes
sixty respondents that are divided into three different groups, namely 20 college students,
20 English teachers, and 20 office workers.
The twenty college students were first semester students majoring in English
language. Their experiences in language learning were quite varied; most of them have
taken English course outside their formal institution while other respondents have learnt
it through the formal institution only. The twenty English language teachers have taught

39
English for more than five years. They teach English from kindergarten up to college
students. The third group, twenty office workers who were taken from different
professions such as; doctors, tour consultants, tax consultants, executive secretaries,
accountings, technician, and bank officers. These office workers showed more varied
experiences in their language learning process especially when dealing with their
professions. In addition to their formal education, some of the respondents indicate that
they studied in the English course before.
3.2.3 Research Instruments
The research adapts Oxford’s (1990) SILL which is considered to be more
comprehensive in accounting for strategies used by learners. The adapted Oxford’s
(1990) SILL was divided into six sections, A to F, based on Oxford’s (1990)
categorization of strategies as mentioned and explained earlier (see page 18). Each item
from the questionnaire were adopted precisely in this thesis, since the questions were
designed for foreign language learners on the other hand it uses simple words and easy
to understand by the respondents. Furthermore, strategy description was based on the
five-point Likert-scale, namely; 1 = never or almost never true of me, 2 = usually not
true of me, 3 = sometimes true of me, 4 = usually true of me and 5 = always or almost
always true of me. Table 3.2 shows the categorization of items in the questionnaire.
Items under each category in SILL questionnaire,
A. Memory strategies (9 items); 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9
B. Cognitive strategies (14 items);10, 11, 12,13,14,15,16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23
C. Compensation strategies (6 items); 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29

40
D. Metacognitive strategies (9 items); 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38
E. Affective strategies (6 items); 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44
F. Social strategies (6 items); 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, and 50
The main procedure used in collecting quantitative data was done by distributing
questionnaire. To enrich the quantitative data, qualitative data were collected through
guided interview questionnaires.
3.2.4 Data Analysis
After the data were collected, they were coded and analyzed. Both descriptive and
inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The descriptive data used include the
means and standard deviations. Based on the classification in this study, LLS are
analyzed in terms of its frequency of use based on Oxford’s classification of the SILL
average analysis (Oxford, 1989, cited in 1990) as follows:
Classification Frequency of use Average score
High Always or almost always true of me
Usually used
4.5 to 5.0
3.5 to 4.4
Medium Sometimes used
Generally not used
2.5 to 3.4
1.5 to 2.4
Low Never or almost never used 1.0 to 1.4
Based on the categorization above, the data reported in this study work are analyzed
statistically by using SPSS.
CHAPTER IV

41
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter presents and analyzes the data obtained from using the Oxford’s SILL
questionnaires. The first section of this chapter will mainly describe the data of the
respondents and their backgrounds. The data include the age, gender, and education.
The second section of this chapter will present analyses on the correlation between
some variables in language learning strategies and their accounts for answering the
research questions mentioned earlier in Chapter 1.
4.1 Data
a. The age of respondents
The data indicate that more than 60% of the student respondents are between the age 18
– 22 years old, around 70% of the teachers and workers respondents are between 24 –
35 years old. The minimum age is 18 and the maximum age is 60 years old. Based on
table 4.1 it could be seen that most student respondents are of young learners while
teachers and workers respondents are of adult learners.
Table 4.1 Age

42
Age student teacher Worker
Count % Count % Count %
18 13 65.0%
19 4 20.0%
20 1 5.0%
21 1 5.0%
22 1 5.0%
24 1 5.0% 6 30.0%
25 1 5.0%
26 2 10.0%
27 2 10.0% 2 10.0%
28 2 10.0% 2 10.0%
29 3 15.0% 1 5.0%
30 1 5.0% 2 10.0%
31 1 5.0%
32 2 10.0% 1 5.0%
34 1 5.0% 1 5.0%
35 2 10.0% 1 5.0%
37 1 5.0%
38 1 5.0%
39 1 5.0%
55 1 5.0%
58 1 5.0%
60 1 5.0%
Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%
b. English learning experiences
The respondents gave a variety of responses based on their English learning experience.
The English learning experiences ‘table (figure 4.1) below indicates that the
respondents' experience in learning English is more than ten years in average. Most of
them stated that their first encounter with the language started when they were in junior
high schools. Some of them were introduced to English when they were at elementary
schools. Table 4.2 indicates that the respondents' English learning experience ranges
from 3 to 35 years.

43
3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 17 18 20 25 35
education
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Count
Table 4.2 English learning experiences
Years
student teacher worker
Count % Count % Count %
3 1 5.0%
5 2 10.0% 1 5.0%
6 1 5.0% 1 5.0%
7 2 10.0% 6 30.0%
8 9 45.0% 1 5.0% 3 15.0%
9 2 10.0% 2 10.0% 4 20.0%
10 4 20.0% 2 10.0%
11 1 5.0%
12 3 15.0% 1 5.0%
13 1 5.0% 2 10.0%
15 1 5.0% 3 15.0%
17 1 5.0%
18 1 5.0% 1 5.0%
20 1 5.0%
25 2 10.0%
35 1 5.0%
Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%
Figure 4.1
4.2. The overall result of Language Learning Strategies

44
The overall mean language learning strategies score of 3.45 indicates that all learners
are moderate users of language learning strategies. However there is a difference
between the group of students and the groups of teachers and workers. The students are
moderate users (3.29), whereas the teachers and workers are considered as high users of
language learning strategies, the mean results are 3.54 and 3.51. For the overall result of
the strategies used by respondents is shown in table 4.3 Results of the strategies used
Table 4.3: The overall result of the strategies used
The strategies Mean S.D. Rank
Memory strategies 3.13 0.63 5
Cognitive Language Learning Strategies 3.55 0.59 2
Compensation Language Learning Strategies 3.42 0.62 4
Metacognitive Language Learning Strategies 3.71 0.71 1
Affective Language Learning Strategies 3.12 0.73 6
Social Language Learning Strategies 3.48 0.81 3
It can be seen that the memory and affective language learning strategies are the least
frequently used by the respondents. It demonstrates that most learners hardly learn a
language by memorizing it. As a result, the highest score occurs in metacognitive
strategies and the second highest score occurs in the compensation language learning
strategies.
Next at the table 4.4 (Results of the individual strategies used) listed the highest score of
the individual-strategies employed by the learners:

45
Table 4.4: Results of the individual strategies used
Individual Strategies Mean S.D %
“I pay attention when someone is speaking
English”(MET32)
4.38 0.73 88%
“If I do not understand something in English, I ask the
other person to slow down or say it again” (SOC 45)
4.35 0.84 86%
“I try to find out how to be a better learner of English
(MET33)
4.16 0.95 76%
“I notice my English mistakes and use that information
to me do better” (MET 31)
4.11 0.80 80%
“if I can’t think of an English word, I use a word or
phrase that means the same thing” (COMP 29)
4.03 0.90 80%
“I encourage myself to speak English even when I am
afraid of making a mistake” (AFF 40)
3.98 0.91 68%
“I think about my progress in learning English”
(MET38)
3.93 0.95 71%
The result shows that there are three individual strategies chosen under the
metacognitive strategies, namely one individual strategies chosen under the social
strategies, one individual strategies chosen under the compensation strategies, and one
individual strategies chosen under the affective strategies. Therefore, no memory
strategies are chosen as the highest strategy.
As explained earlier, the metacognitive strategies turn out to be the most
frequently used strategies used by the English learners, that is almost 88% respondents
choose MET32 paying attention when someone is speaking English as their most-
frequently used strategies.

46
4.2.1. Overall LLS used by EFL Learners
For the overall LLS used by EFL learners, the result will be analyzed based on Oxford’s
LLS classifications (1990). The results of the most and least frequently strategies used
by all groups of learners are listed in the table 4.5 up to table 4.10 in the following
sections.
4.2.1.1. Memory LLS used by EFL Learners
Oxford (1990:41) further explains that the strategies can be classified into “simple or
complex, mundane or strange”. Here, learners associate the new language into things
that they have already known in order to remember the new information easily. This
strategy is part of semantic mapping which means “connecting the key concept placed
in the center and linked it with the relative words or concepts”.
Table 4.5: Results of the memory strategies
4.2.1.2. Cognitive LLS used by EFL Learners
The most-frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D Rank
MEM1
I think of relationships between what I already
know and new things I learn in English
1 5 3.65 1.03 1
The least-frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D. Rank
MEM5
I use rhymes to remember new English
words
1 5 2.70 1.013 1

47
As we could see from the tables below, learners most favorite cognitive learning
strategies are watching English language TV shows or going to movies spoken in
English’ (COG15). Learners who apply cognitive strategies actually try to practice
naturalistically. Rubin further explains that “Language learners often feel besieged by
‘whirling words’ from radio and TV programs, films, lectures, stories, articles, and
conversations’ (1975:45). The other strategies such as in practicing and practicing
naturalistically are mostly employed by the learners (COG12, COG11). While the
second frequently chosen category is in COG17, where the learners try to create
structure for input and output that could help them comprehends and produces the new
language. For the least frequently used strategies is to start conversation in English
(3.33).
Table 4.6: Results of the cognitive strategies
The most frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D. Rank
COG11
I try to talk like native English speakers
1 5 3.62 1.059 5
COG12
I practice the sounds of English
1 5 3.62 1.027 4
COG15
I watch English language TV shows spoken in
English or go to movies spoken in English.
1 5 3.90 .986 1
COG17
I write notes, messages, letters, or reports in
English
1 5 3.72 1.136 2
COG18
I first skim an English passage (read over the
passage quickly) then go back and read
carefully
1 5 3.57 .927 6
COG20 2 5 3.55 .946 7

48
4.2.1.3. Compensation LLS used by EFL Learners
In order to compensate for the meaning of new words, here learners use guessing
strategies which are sometimes called inferencing. Therefore, when they apply this
strategy, learners try to overcome their limitations in speaking or in writing. The other
strategies which are most frequently used include guessing the unfamiliar words (3.85),
guessing what the other person will say in English (3.45), and by using gestures (3.78).
The least frequently used strategy in this part is ‘by making up new words’ and reading
English without looking up every new word.
Table 4.7: Results of the compensation strategies
I try to find patterns in English
COG21
I find the meaning of an English word by
dividing it into parts that I understand
1 5 3.50 1.066 8
COG22
I try not to translate word-for-word
1 5 3.65 1.132 3
The least-frequently used strategy Min Max Mean S.D Rank
COG14
I start conversation in English
1 5 3.33 1.115 2
COG23
I make summaries of information that I
hear or read in English
1 5 3.32 1.214 1

49
4.2.1.4. Metacognitive LLS used by EFL Learners
For metacognitive strategies, learners choose paying attention when someone is
speaking English’ (4.38). By applying this strategy, learners basically try to centering
their learning. Furthermore as the second and third strategy, learners choose noticing
their English mistakes and using it to become better (4.12) and thinking about one’s
progress in learning English (3.93). The highest score also shows that learners applying
the strategy in arranging and planning one’s learning, in this category they chose ‘to
find as many ways as he/she can use the English’ (3.67) and ‘ to look for opportunities
COMP24
To understand unfamiliar English words,
I make guesses
1 5 3.85 1.087 2
COMP25
When I can't think of a word during a
conversation in English, I use gestures
1 5 3.78 1.043 3
COMP28
I try to guess what the other person will
say next in English
1 5 3.45 .999 4
COMP29
If I can't think of an English word, I use a
word or phrase that means the same thing
1 5 4.03 .901 1
The least frequently used strategies Min Max Mean S.D. Rank
COMP26
I make up new words if I do not know
the right ones in English
1 5 3.22 1.195 1
COMP27
I read English without looking up every
new word
1 5 3.28 1.195 2

50
to read as much as possible’ (3.60). In the least strategies used, they choose organizing
one’s schedule (3.05), seeking practice opportunities (3.17), setting goals and
objectives (3.37)
Table 4.8: Results of the metacognitive strategies
MET30
I try to find as many ways as I can to
use my English
1 5 3.67 1.020 4
MET31
I notice my English mistakes and use
that information to me do better
2 5 4.12 .804 2
MET32
I pay attention when someone is
speaking English
2 5 4.38 .739 1
MET36
I look for opportunities to read as
much as possible in English
1 5 3.60 1.077 5
MET38
I think about my progress in learning
English
2 5 3.93 .954 3
MET34
I plan my schedule so I will have enough
time to study English
1 5 3.05 1.241 1
MET35 1 5 3.17 1.251 3

51
4.2.1.5. Affective LLS used by EFL Learners
Even though affective strategies are one of the least frequently used strategies, however
there is one affective strategy which is considered highly being used by all learners and
that is ‘encouraging oneself to speak English even when he/she is afraid of making a
mistake (3.98). This self-encouragement includes saying supportive things, prodding
oneself to take risks wisely, and providing rewards (Oxford 1990:143). For the least
strategy used in this category is ‘to write down one’s feelings in a language learning
diary’ (2.43)
Table 4.9: Results of the affective strategies
I look for people I can talk to in English
MET37
I have a clear goal for improving my
English skills
1 5 3.37 .920 2
AFF39
I try to relax whenever I feel afraid of
using English
1 5 3.58 1.013 2
AFF40
I encourage myself to speak English
even when I am afraid of making a
mistake
2 5 3.98 .911 1
AFF41
I give myself a reward or treat when I
do well in English
1 5 2.93 1.300 4
AFF42
I notice if I am tense or nervous when I
1 5 3.12 1.195 3

52
4.2.1.6. Social LLS used by EFL Learners
For the social strategies, learners prefer asking for clarification or verification from the
opponents every time they do not understand of what have been said previously, while
the second highest score is in cooperating with peers. Oxford explains that this strategy
can involve a regular learning partner or a temporary pair or small group. Further she
adds that this strategy involves “controlling impulses toward competitiveness and
rivalry”. (Oxford 1990:147)
Table 4.10: Results of the social strategies
am studying or using English
AFF43
I write down my feelings in a language
learning diary
1 5 2.43 1.345 6
AFF44
I talk to someone else about how u feel
when I am learning English
1 5 2.68 1.214 5
SOC45
If I do not understand something in
English, I ask the other person to slow
2 5 4.35 .840 1

53
4.2.2. Individual LLS used by each group of learners
Based on the strategies chosen, there are 50 items of individual strategies under the six
language learning strategies. Those are 9 individual strategies under the memory strategies,
13 individual strategies under the cognitive strategies, 6 individual strategies under the
compensation strategies, 8 individual strategies under the metacognitive strategies, 6
individual strategies under the affective strategies, and 6 individual strategies under the
social strategies.
Before we go further, the table 4.11 shows the result of overall language
strategies divided by each group of respondents. There are 60 respondents which were
divided into three groups; those are 20 college student, 20 English teachers, and 20 office
workers.
down or say it again
SOC47
I practice English with other students
1 5 3.68 1.066 2
SOC46
I ask English speakers to correct me when I
talk
1 5 3.35 1.338 3
SOC48
I ask for help from English speakers
1 5 3.10 1.272 2
SOC49
I ask questions in English
1 5 3.42 1.030 4
SOC50
I try to learn about the culture of English
speakers
1 5 2.98 1.214 1

54
Table 4.11: Average SILL results by each group of learners
Learner groups College Students English Teachers Office Workers
Strategies used Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev
Memory 3.08 0.55 3.21 0.50 3.10 0.36
Cognitive 3.30 0.26 3.68 0.26 3.67 0.50
Compensation 3.52 0.28 3.75 0.28 3.00 0.47
Metacognitve 3.47 0.46 3.85 0.46 3.82 0.58
Affective 3.12 0.67 3.07 0.67 3.16 0.61
Social 3.24 0.49 3.62 0.49 3.57 0.58
Figure 4.2.Results of each group learners’ LLS
The result above shows all the three groups who used metacognitive as their highest
strategies in the language learning. However, the teachers’ result shows the highest
mean score (3.85), while the workers’ mean score is 3.82 and the college students’

55
mean score is 3.47. For the least-used strategies, the results vary. The memory strategies
are used least frequently by the college students (3.08) and by the office workers (3.10),
whereas affective strategies are used least frequently by the teacher respondents. Results
of the individual strategies will be explained in the following sections.
4.2.2.1. The result of memory strategies used by each group of learners
The result indicates that memory strategies were used least frequently among the other
categories of strategies. Data on the use of individual strategies shows that all individual
strategies, which were grouped into memory strategies, had mean scores in the range of
2.5 to 3.2. The low use of memory strategies could be considered as a surprising result
because this finding was contradictory with Indonesian learning habits. Indonesian
students usually study the facts by learning and remembering however this learning
style highly requires memory and cognitive strategies. As a result, the findings of the
present study provide additional empirical information that supports a tendency that
Indonesian students are not in favor with their traditional learning style (learn and
remember) anymore.
Furthermore, the results show that there are two strategies selected under this
strategy, i.e., those that are dealing with creating mental linkages by associating and
classifying new words into context. However, the strategy in using flash cards and
rhymes is least used. The reason is becaused that both of these techniques are still rarely
used in the schools or institutions where they learn English. The table 4.12 shows the
differences of LLS choice among the groups.

56
Table 4.12: Results of memory strategies used among the group learners
College
Students
English
Teachers
Office
Workers
Category Memory Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
MEM1 Think of relationships
between what I already
know and new things I learn
in English
3.8 0.74 4.05 0.75 3.05 1.27
MEM2 Make use the new words in
order to remember
2.9 0.84 3.6 0.81 3.1 1.14
MEM3 Connect the sound of a new
English by making a mental
picture
3.5 0.91 3.2 1.04 3.7 1.25
MEM4 Making a mental picture of
the word
3.6 1.17 3.6 0.96 3.1 1.13
MEM5 Use rhymes to remember
new English words
2.7 0.85 2.6 1.14 2.6 1.02
MEM6 Use flashcards to remember
new English words
2 1.07 2.6 1.05 2.6 1.03
MEM7 Act out new English words 2.6 0.83 3.1 1.03 3.1 1.05
MEM8 Review English often 3 0.88 3.4 1.39 3.4 1.03
MEM9 Remembering the location
on the page, on the board, or
on the street sign everytime
they find the new words or
phrase
3.3 1.00 2.7 1.11 3.2 1.39

57
Figure 4.3 Overall results of memory strategies
More than 65% of college student and 85% of English teachers use the category in
associating and elaborating (MEM1) as their most frequently used strategies. On the
other hand, for the office workers, 50% of them choose the other strategy, i.e., by using
images in order to remember the new words. Table 4.13- 4.15 show the difference in
the way the memory strategies are used.
Table 4.13 Most frequently memory strategies used by the college students

58
Answers MEM1 % MEM3 % MEM4 %
1 1 5 %
2 2 10 %
3 7 35 % 8 40 % 7 35 %
4 9 45 % 10 50 % 7 35 %
5 4 20 % 1 5 % 4 20 %
Table 4.14 Most frequently memory strategies used by the English Teachers
Answers MEM1 % MEM2 % MEM4 %
1 1 5 %
2 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 %
3 2 10 % 8 40 % 7 35 %
4 12 60 % 8 40 % 7 35 %
5 5 25 % 3 15 % 4 20 %
Table 4.15 Most frequently memory strategies used by the office workers
Answers MEM3 %
1 1 5 %
2 1 5 %
3 5 25 %
4 9 45 %
5 4 20 %
Total 20 100 %
4.2.2.2. The result of cognitive strategies used by each group of learners

59
The result indicates that cognitive strategies were medium to most frequently used. Data
on the use of individual strategies show that all individual strategies, which were
grouped into cognitive strategies, had mean scores in the range of 3.3 to 3.9. Cognitive
learning language strategies were least used by the college students (3.3), whereas
English teachers and office workers were reported as the medium-users of the strategy
(3.6).
Figure 4.4. Overall results of cognitive strategies
Table 4.16: Results of cognitive strategies used among the group learners

60
College
Students
English
Teachers
Office Workers
Category Cognitive Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
COG10 Say or write new words
several times
3.2 0.73 3.3 1.13 3.8 1.13
COG11 talk like native English
speakers
3.5 0.78 3.9 1.11 3.4 1.10
COG12 Practice the sounds of English 3.3 0.89 3.6 0.83 3.8 1.20
COG13 Use the English words in
different ways
3.1 1.14 3.8 1 3.5 1.05
COG14 Start conversations in English 3.1 0.93 3.5 1.04 3.4 1.27
COG15 watch TV shows spoken in
English or go to movies
spoken in English
3.5 1.12 4.3 0.73 4.05 0.99
COG16 Read for pleasure in English 3.5 1.07 3.8 0.95 3.50 1.19
COG17 Write notes, messages, letters,
or reports in English
3.2 1.27 3.9 0.88 4.05 0.88
COG18 skim an English passage first
then go back and read
carefully
3.5 0.77 3.6 1.03 3.6 0.88
COG19 Look for words in L1 that are
similar to new words in
English
3.7 1.04 3.3 0.97 3.3 1.18
COG20 Try to find patterns in English 3.3 0,88 3.6 0.88 3.8 1.05
COG21 Finding the meaning by
dividing the new words into
parts
3.6 0.88 2.4 1.05 3.4 1.12
COG22 Finding the meaning by
dividing the new words into
parts
3 1.15 3.9 0.85 4.05 1.06
COG23 Make summaries of
information in English
2.8 1.04 3.5 1.05 3.6 1.31
The result in table 4.17 shows that the college students are moderate users of
cognitive strategies. We can see that only 50%-60% of the college students apply this

61
strategy like in practicing naturalistically (COG11, COG15, and COG16). It also shows
that the college students use analyzing and reasoning such as in COG21
Table 4.17 Most frequently cognitive strategies used by the college students
On the other hand, the English teachers’ result (Table 4.18) use almost all the strategies
in the cognitive categories. Here, more than 60 % of English teachers practice their
language naturalistically such as in COG 11, COG 15, COG 17, COG 16, COG 13,
COG 14. Some of these strategies are related to their speaking ability. Like in COG15,
Answers COG11 % COG15 % COG16 %
1 1 5.0% 1 5.0%
2 1 5.0% 1 5.0% 2 10.0%
3 8 40.0% 9 45.0% 6 30.0%
4 10 50.0% 4 20.0% 8 40.0%
5 1 5.0% 5 25.0% 3 15.0%
Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%
COG18 % COG19 % COG21 %
1 5.0% 2 10.0% 2 10.0%
10 50.0% 8 40.0% 8 40.0%
7 35.0% 4 20.0% 6 30.0%
2 10.0% 6 30.0% 4 20.0%
20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%

62
almost 90% of them “watch TV shows or movies spoken in English”, 70% of them
chose COG12 practice the sound of English, 70% of them use COG11 try to talk like
native speakers, and 60% use COG14 start conversations in English. Besides
practicing, the English teachers also use analyzing and reasoning strategies such as in
COG20 try to find pattern in English and COG21 find the meaning of an English word
by dividing it into parts. The following is the percentage of the most frequently used
cognitive strategies by the English teachers.
Table 4.18 Most frequently cognitive strategies used by the English teachers
Answers COG17 % COG18 % COG20 % COG21 % COG22 % COG23 %
1 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 %
2 1 5 % 3 15 % 1 5 % 1 5 % 3 15 %
3 8 40 % 6 30 % 4 20 % 9 45 % 5 25 % 4 20 %
4 5 25 % 9 45 % 11 55 % 6 30 % 9 45 % 7 35 %
5 7 35 % 3 15 % 2 10 % 3 15 % 5 25 % 5 25 %
Total
20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
Similar to the English teachers’ result, the office workers in table 4.19 also try to
practice their language naturalistically, such as in COG11 (50%), COG 17 (70%). For
Answers COG11 % COG12 % COG13 % COG14 % COG15 % COG16 %
1 1 5 % 1 5 %
2 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 % 5 25 % 1 5 % 1 5 %
3 4 20 % 6 30 % 7 35 % 4 20 % 2 10 % 8 40 %
4 7 35 % 8 40 % 6 30 % 7 35 % 8 40 % 6 30 %
5 7 35 % 4 20 % 6 30 % 4 20 % 9 45 % 5 25 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

63
75% of the office workers use analyzing and reasoning for cognitive strategies, like in
COG20 and COG22. The result also shows that around 60% of them choose strategies
for creating structure for input and output, like in COG 18, COG21, COG23.
Table 4.19 Most frequently cognitive strategies used by the office workers
Answers COG10 % COG11 % COG12 % COG13 %
1 1 5 % 1 5 %
2 5 25 % 4 20 % 3 15 %
3 8 40 % 4 20 % 2 10 % 9 45 %
4 3 15 % 5 25 % 7 35 % 3 15 %
5 8 40 % 5 25 % 7 35 % 5 25 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
COG15 % COG17 % COG16 % COG18 %
1 2 10 % 1 5 %
2 1 5 % 2 10 % 1 5 % 1 5 %
3 6 30 % 4 20 % 7 35 % 7 35 %
4 7 35 % 5 25 % 2 10 % 7 35 %
5 6 30 % 9 45 % 8 40 % 4 20 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
COG20 % COG21 % COG22 % COG23 %
1 2 10 % 1 5 % 2 10 %
2 2 10 % 2 10 % 1 5 % 3 15 %
3 6 30 % 6 30 % 3 15 % 3 15 %
4 6 30 % 5 25 % 6 30 % 7 35 %
5 6 30 % 5 25 % 9 45 % 5 25 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

64
4.2.2.3. The result of compensation strategies used by each group of learners
Compensation strategies were used by the learners as a moderate frequently used
strategies with the mean score of 3.42. The data shows that among the three groups,
English teachers are categorized as moderate to most frequent users of the strategy. The
result shows that the English teachers use the strategy mostly in COMP24 “make
guesses” (4.1). The same result is also shown by the college students groups, i.e.,
besides guessing most of them choose using gestures. Oxford (1990) mentions that
guessing strategies are used whenever they are listening or reading whereas making
gestures is used whenever they are speaking. Both could help students when they face
difficulties in expressing their language performance. However, based on the mean
score of 3.0, the office workers seem reluctant in applying these strategies.
Table 4.20: Results of compensation strategies used among the group learners
College
Students
English
Teachers
Office
Workers
Category Compensation
Strategies
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
COMP24 make guesses 3.4 1.15 3.7 0.96 4.15 1.13
COMP25 use gestures 3.6 0.93 4.05 1.18 3.6 1.25
COMP26 Make up new words 3.4 1.31 3.5 1.14 3.05 1.27
COMP27 Read English
without looking up every
new word
3.4 1.36 3.2 1.01 3.2 1.14

65
COMP28 Try to guess what the
other person will say next
in English
3.3 1.21 3.2 0.78 3.4 1.02
COMP29 use a word or phrase that
means the same thing
3.8 0.89 4.3 0.80 4.15 1.03
Figure 4.5. Overall result of compensation strategies
For the college students, 70% of them use gestures (COMP 25) and make guesses
(COMP24) when they try to overcome their limitation in speaking and also in writing.
While in guessing intelligently, around 75% of them use a word or phrase that means
the same thing (COMP29). The results is shown in the table 4.21 below.

66
Table 4.21 Most frequently compensation strategies used by the college students
Answers COMP24 % COMP25 % COMP28 % COMP29 %
1 1 5 % 1 5 % 1 5 %
2 2 10 % 3 15 % 2 10 %
3 2 10 % 5 25 % 8 40 % 3 15 %
4 9 45 % 10 50 % 4 20 % 11 55 %
5 6 30 % 4 20 % 4 20 % 4 20 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
Almost all the categories in compensation strategies are highly used by the English
teachers. While the college students tend to use gestures, for English teachers the result
in the table 4.22 shows that almost 85% prefer to use a word or phrase that means the
same thing to overcome their limitations. The other 80% of teachers prefer to use
linguistic clues when they guess the meaning of a word (COMP24). The data also
shows that 70% of them use gestures whenever they find difficulties in explaining.
Table 4.22 Most frequently compensation strategies used by the English teachers
Answers COMP24 % COMP25 % COMP26 %
1 2 10 % 1 5 %
2 1 5 % 1 5 % 2 10 %
3 5 25 % 3 15 % 6 30 %
4 5 25 % 10 50 % 6 30 %
5 9 45 % 4 20 % 5 25 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100.0% 20 100 %

67
Similar with the previous group, whenever they try to overcome the limitations, more
than 80% of the office workers, in table 4.23, choose to use other words or phrases, and
65% of them use gestures. However, only 50% of them use the guessing strategy.
Table 4.23 Most frequently compensation strategies used by the office workers
Answers COMP27 % COMP29 %
1
2 3 15 % 1 5 %
3 5 25 % 2 10 %
4 8 40 % 8 40 %
5 4 20 % 9 45 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 %
Answers COMP24 % COMP25 % COMP29 %
1 1 5 %
2 4 20 % 2 10 %
3 6 30 % 5 25 % 3 15 %
4 4 20 % 6 30 % 10 50 %
5 6 30 % 7 35 % 6 30 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

68
4.2.2.4. The result of metacognitive strategies used by each group of learners
Metacognitive strategies are the most frequently employed strategies among the other
categories. The popularity of these strategies is supported with data on the use of five
individual strategies which fell under this category of strategies. Five individual
strategies which were grouped into metacognitive strategies had mean scores of 3.5 or
above.
The lack of exposure of using English in the learners’ daily life probably forced
them to make their own efforts in order to have enough opportunities to learn by
themselves. In the poor-environment area, without having the habit of autonomous
learning, the desire to possess a foreign language is difficult to realize. Another more
probable cause of the high use of metacognitive strategies is that the students are
commonly concerned with their grades. Consequently, they keep on monitoring their
learning process and evaluating what and how well they had learnt. In other words, the
learners might be instrumentally motivated to learn English language.
Based on the result, learners try to learn from people who speak English better
than them. However, since the lack of exposure to English, the strategy look for people
to talk English became the least used strategy for the college students and office
workers.

69
Table 4.24: Results of metacognitive strategies used among the group learners
College
Students
English
Teachers
Office
Workers
Category Metacognitive Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
MET30 Find as many ways to make use
the English
3.2 0.99 3.9 1.02 3.9 1.20
MET31 notice one’s English mistakes 4.05 0.81 4.3 0.58 4.3 0.93
MET32 pay attention when someone is
speaking English
4.05 0.78 4.4 0.73 4.6 0.68
MET33 Try to find out how to be a better
learner of English
4 1 4.05 1.10 4.4 0.80
MET34 Plan a schedule to learn English 2.9 1.35 3.1 0.93 3.1 1.44
MET35 Look for people to talk English 2.8 1.25 3.55 1.14 3.1 1.45
MET36 look for opportunities to read in
English
3.5 0.94 3.8 1.08 3.5 1.23
MET37 Have goals for improving
English skills
3.3 0.83 3.5 0.86 3.3 1.08
MET38 think about one’s progress in
learning English
3.6 0.76 4.2 0.91 3.9 1.12

70
Figure 4.6 Overall results of metacognitive strategies
As mentioned earlier, the strategy centering one’s learning such as in MET32 has
become the most frequently used strategy. Therefore, results in table 4.25 shows that
more than 85% of the college students choose this strategy, moreover nearly 90% of
them select ‘notice one’s English mistakes’ (MET31). The other strategy is arranging
and planning the learning process. That is, 80% of college students set their goals and
find out how to be a better learner (MET38)
Table 4.25 Most frequently metacognitive strategies used by the college students
Answers MET31 % MET32 % MET33 %
2 1 5 % 1 5 %
3 5 25 % 1 5 % 6 30 %
4 7 35 % 10 50. % 5 25 %
5 8 40 % 8 40 % 8 40 %

71
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
Answers MET36 % MET38 %
1
2 3 15.0%
3 7 35.0% 4 20.0%
4 7 35.0% 8 40.0%
5 3 15.0% 8 40.0%
Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0%
Furthermore 85% of the English teachers select the strategy centering the learning
process. Additionally, 80% of the English teachers also evaluate their mistakes
(MET31). For the strategy setting goals and objectives, 75% of them choose think about
the progress (MET38) and 65% choose have goals for improving English skills
(MET37). The other strategies like looking for opportunities to use their English are
selected by 70% of the English teachers such as in MET36, and 50% in MET35. The
result shown in table 4.26 as follows
Table 4.26 Most frequently metacognitive strategies used by the English teachers
Answers MET30 % MET31 % MET32 % MET33 %
1 1 5 %
2 3 15 %
3 5 25 % 1 5 % 3 15 % 1 5 %
4 8 40 % 11 55 % 6 30 % 5 25 %
5 6 30 % 8 40 % 11 55 % 11 55 %
Total 20 100 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

72
Answers MET35 % MET36 % MET37 % MET38 %
1 1 5 %
2 2 10 % 3 15 % 2 10 % 2 10.0%
3 7 35 % 6 30 % 5 25 % 3 15.0%
4 5 25 % 5 25 % 10 50 % 10 50.0%
5 5 25 % 6 30 % 3 15 % 5 25.0%
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100.0%
Similar to the result of previous groups, table 4.27 shows 90% of the office workers
choose centering their learning by paying attention (MET32) and 65% of them choose
try to find as many ways to use one’s English (MET30). However in looking for
opportunities, it shows that only half of the office workers apply this strategy (MET36).
In setting goals, only 50% of them think about their progress (MET38).
Table 4.27 Most frequently metacognitive strategies used by the office workers
%
1
2 4 20 % 2 10 %
3 5 25 % 4 20 % 2 10 %
4 3 15 % 9 45 % 6 30 %
5 8 40 % 5 25 % 12 60 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

73
1 2 10 %
2 1 5 % 4 20 %
3 4 20 % 5 25 % 4 20 %
4 6 30 % 7 35 % 6 30 %
5 10 50 % 5 25 % 6 30 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %
4.2.2.5. The result of affective strategies used by each group of learners
Of all the language learning strategies, affective strategies are the least-frequently used
strategies with the mean score of 3.12. However, for the individual strategy itself, the
result shows that encourage oneself to speak English (AFF40) is the most-frequently
used strategies by all learners. This provides us with a clue that most learners lack
confidence in speaking English. Furthermore, the strategy trying to relax helps them
overcome their problems. This strategy is also used most frequently by all learners.

74
Table 4.28: Results of affective strategies used among the group learners
College
Students
English
Teachers
Office
Workers
Category Affective Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
AFF39 try to relax 3.8 0.94 3.3 0.94 3.4 1.09
AFF40 Encourage oneself to
speak English
4.05 0.99 3.75 0.96 4.3 0.80
AFF41 Give oneself a reward 2.8 1.44 2.9 1.33 3.1 1.19
AFF42 Put a notice when they
feel tense or nervous
3.2 1.31 3.05 1.09 3 1.25
AFF43 Write down their feelings
in a language learning
diary
2.4 1.60 2.4 1.43 2.4 1.43
AFF44 Communicate the feeling
about learning English to
someone
2.5 1.12 2.7 1.20 2.8 1.36

75
Figure 4.7 Overall results of affective strategies
Based on the six types of affective strategies, almost all the respondents choose the
same individual strategies. Lowering anxiety is the strategy that is most-frequently used
both by the English teachers and college students. The college students result shows that
trying to relax (AFF39) is chosen by 60% of the college students and by 75% by the
English teachers. While for the office workers, they only apply one type of affective
strategies, i.e., 75% of them choose encourage oneself to speak English. The results of
the affective strategies are listed in the table 4.29 up to 4.31.

76
Table 4.29 Most frequently affective strategies used by the college students
Answers AFF39 % AFF40 %
1
2 3 15 % 3 15 %
3 5 25 % 7 35 %
4 9 45 % 6 30 %
5 3 15 % 4 20 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 %
Table 4.30 Most frequently affective strategies used by the English teachers
Answers AFF39 %
1
2 2 10.0%
3 3 15.0%
4 9 45.0%
5 6 30.0%
Total 20 100.0%
Table 4.31 Most frequently affective strategies used by the office workers
Answers AFF40 %
2
3 5 25.0%
4 8 40.0%
5 7 35.0%
Total 20 100.0%

77
4.2.2.6. The result of social strategies used by each group of learners
Social strategies stand as the moderate frequently used strategies furthermore among the
three. College students were found to be the least users of these strategies (3.24) and
English teachers were found to be the highest users (3.62). Interestingly, the overall
result of the individual strategies shows that all the three groups chose SOC45 asking
for questions, especially in clarification, whenever they feel unsure about the new
information. However, since the opportunity to exposure the language is limited only in
the classroom setting, it may explain why the social strategies were only used once in a
while. If we examine the previous findings in MET32, it shows that learners have the
tendency to focus on other speakers when they speak English but when it comes to
exposure to the language, the result shows that they have less interest in that area such
as in SOC 46, SOC47, SOC,48, SOC49. This could be occurred because they do not
feel confident enough to speak the language with others or probably they are afraid of
making mistakes.
Table 4.32 Results of social strategies used among the group learners
College
Students
English
Teachers
Office
Workers
Category Social Strategies Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
SOC 45 ask the other person to slow
down or say it again
4.1 0.87 4.4 0.85 4.6 0.74
SOC46 Ask the English speakers to
correct them when they talk
3.2 1.31 3.5 1.31 3.3 1.48

78
Figure 4.8 Overall results of social strategies
The result in social strategies for the college students, table 4.33 shows that 80% of
them ask for clarification or verification whether with peers or with the other users of
the target language. This strategy is the only one strategy that is used most frequently by
the college students.
SOC47 Practice English with other
students
3.3 1.20 3.8 1.20 3.9 1.08
SOC48 Ask for help from English
speakers
3.1 1.28 3.3 1.03 2.8 1.49
SOC49 Ask questions in English 3.1 0.89 3.5 0.88 3.1 1.23
SOC50 Try to learn about the
culture of English speakers
2.6 1.38 3.1 1.19 3.2 1.28

79
Table 4.33 Most frequently social strategies used by the college students
For the English teachers, the result in table 4.34 shows 85% of them also use the
strategy in asking for clarification and 75% ask questions in English. Besides asking
questions, more than 50% of the English teachers seem to develop their empathy to the
target culture by developing their cultural understanding (SOC50).
Table 4.34 Most frequently social strategies used by the English teachers
SOC45 % SOC49 % SOC50 %
1 2 10.0%
2 1 5.0% 1 5.0% 1 5.0%
3 2 10.0% 4 20.0% 6 30.0%
4 8 40.0% 9 45.0% 8 40.0%
5 9 45.0% 6 30.0% 3 15.0%
Total 20 100.0% 20 100.0% 20 100.0%
Social strategies are used most frequently by the office workers and the result shows
that almost more than 50% of them apply this strategy. It indicates that 95% of them
always ask for clarification every time they do not understand the given information.
Answers SOC45 %
2 1 5.0%
3 3 15.0%
4 8 40.0%
5 8 40.0%
Total 20 100.0%

80
Table 4.35 Most frequently social strategies used by the office workers
SOC45 % SOC46 % SOC47 %
1 2 10 %
2 1 5 % 3 15 % 4 20 %
3 3 15 % 4 20 %
4 4 20 % 2 10 % 7 35 %
5 15 75 % 10 50 % 5 25 %
Total 20 100 % 20 100 % 20 100 %

81
Chapter 5
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this study provide a better understanding of the ways ESL learners
approach learning. It reveals differences between the three groups of learners: college
students, English teachers, and office-workers. A comparison among these groups is
expected to promote effective teaching in learning strategies and prevent any obstacles
that could impede the progress during the learning process.
All language learning strategies covered in the Strategy Inventory for Language
Learning (SILL) were employed by all the group of learners at formal institutions.
Some strategies were used at a high level of use, while some others at a medium level of
use, and the others at a low level of use. Based on the mean scores of the strategy used
either in overall strategy or categories of strategies or individual strategies, it can be
concluded that the use of language learning strategies on the SILL can be categorized
into a moderate level.
The individual learning strategy-used, “paying attention when someone uses
English” is the most employed strategy by all the respondents. This is probably because
of the influence of their learning experiences in English when they were in school.
Therefore, almost more than half of the total numbers of the respondents are not only
paying attention moreover they tend to imitate the way their English teachers use the
language.

An Analysis Of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)

An Analysis Of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to An Analysis Of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)

Similar to An Analysis Of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis) (20)

More from Michele Thomas

More from Michele Thomas (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

An Analysis Of Language Learning Strategies (Thesis)