A Study of English Language Learning Strategies of Elementary School Pupils at SDN Bengkulu

A STUDY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PUPILS AT SDN 1 BENGKULU

THESIS

By YAIMIN A1B001038

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS FACULTY OF TEACHERS’ TRAINING AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITAS BENGKULU 2006

A STUDY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PUPILS AT SDN 1 BENGKULU

THESIS Presented as a Partial Requirements for “Sarjana Degree” In English Language Education

By YAIMIN A1B001038

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS FACULTY OF TEACHERS’ TRAINING AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITAS BENGKULU 2006

MOTTO AND DEDICATION









    



  

My beloved parents (Sumiran and Yomi), thanks for giving me pray  and all your support. My beloved wife (Septy Ferawaty), thanks for your motivation and    pray, keep your your love beside me. me. My lovely brave son (Arya Adha Pratama). My mother in law (Hawaliah), thanks for your big support. My beloved Uncle/aunt (Kasmo/Samilah), You teach me how life is. In every my step you show the best way for me. Withous you I’ll   never understanding the meaning of success and happiness. My Big family in Bengkulu (Topan, Elva, Aan, Mas Warno and   Mbak Susi, Etek Pantas, Cici Mega, Lek Kasio, Mas Muri, etc), thanks for your kindness. My close friends (Yulianto, Hamdan and Budiono), I miss you all. My Beloved friends (Edward and Fan), Thanks for your support.  All my friends in English Language Language Education Education Study Program Program at  “2001” Academic year and my Almamater.

5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Many People had been willingly shared their happy laughter and painful tears in completing this research. On this very special occasion, allow me to express my greatest gratitude to Mr. Bambang Suwarno and Mr. Arasuli for all their valuable comments, ideas, suggestions, and critics starting from the very early stage to the final settlement of this research. To my extent, the following individuals can be regarded as the “noble heroes” for had been giving me all their best efforts in helping me completing my research. Allow me to express my greatest gratitude to Mrs. Hilda Puspita, Mr. Mulyadi, Mr. Rudi Afriazi, Mr. Barnabas Sembiring, Mrs. Kasmaini, Mr. Suparman, Mr. Badeni, and all the lecturers English Study Program and all the staff of FKIP UNIB. I also owed my self a great debt to the following kindhearted individuals: Beloved brother Edward Ridwan, Fan Hera, Andesvan Gumay, Eki Saputra, Robert Manujung, and the “2001 Golden Generation” of English Language Education Study Program. Above all, this research is dedicated to all the teachers and the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu. Allow me also to deliver my greatest gratitude to Mr. Astan Pahlivi and all the crew of Rajawali Room of Rumah Sakit Jiwa Daerah Bengkulu. I also owe a great deal from my whole families and relatives: my close friends: Yulianto and Hamdan; my lovely cousin: Suwarno; my brothers and sister: Aan, Topan, and Elva; my mother in law: Hawaliah; my uncle and aunt: Kasmo and Samilah; my lovely brave son: Arya Adha Pratama; my beautiful wife: Septy Ferawaty, And last but not least, I must declare that this research can never be completed without full support from my father, Sumiran and my mother, Yomi.

6

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background ............................................... .................................................. 1.2 The formulation of Problem................................................................ Problem............. ................................................... ......... 1.3 The Research Objectives .................................................. ........................... 1.4 Significances of the Research ............................................. ........................ 1.5 The Limitation of the Research ............................................ ....................... 1.6 Operational Definition ....................................................... ................................................................................ .........................

1 4 4 4 4 4

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Learning .................................................. .................................................... 2.2 Learning Strategies ...................................................... ...................................................................................... ................................ Memory Strategy ................................................... ...................................... Cognitive Strategy .............................................. ......................................... Compensation Strategy ............................................... ................................ Metacognitive Strategy ........................................................ ....................... Affective Strategy ............................................. .......................................... Social Strategy ................................................ ............................................ 2.3 Related Studies ................................................. ...........................................

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design .................................................. ........................................ 3.2 Population and Sample ................................................. ............................... 3.2.1 Population ................................................ ......................................... 3.2.2 Sample ........................................................ ....................................... 3.3 The Data Collection .................................................. .................................. 3.3.1 The Research Instrument ............................................. ...................... 3.3.2 Construction of the Questionnaire .................................................... 3.3.3 Validity ...................................................... .............................................................................................. ........................................ 3.3.4 Reliability .................................................. ........................................ 3.4 Data Analysis Techniques .................................................... ........................................................................... .......................

15 15 15 16 16 16 17 17 18 19

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Result ............................................ .................................................... .............................................................. .......... 4.1.1 Cognitive Strategy ............................................. ................................ 4.1.2 Metacognitive Strategy ............................................ ......................... 4.1.3 Affective Strategy .................................................. ........................... 4.1.4 Memory Strategy ...................................................... ............................................................................... .........................

22 23 25 27 29

7

4.1.5 Social Strategy ................................................... ............................... 4.1.6 Compensation Strategy .................................................... ..................................................................... ................. 4.2 Discussions ................................................ ..................................................

31 33 35

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusions .................................................. ............................................... 5.2 Suggestions ........................................................ .........................................

38 39

References Appendices

8

List of Table

Table 1 The list of Related Studies ....................................................... ................................................................... ............ Table 2 The Data Base of Pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu ..................................... Table 3 The Likert Scale ....................................................... ................................................................................... ............................ Table 4 The Classifications of Language Learning Strategies .......................... Table 5 The Total Average of Cognitive Strategy ............................................ Table 6 The Total Average of Metacognitive Strategy ..................................... Table 7 The Total Average of Affective Strategy ............................................. Table 8 The Total Average of Memory Strategy ............................................. . Table 9 The Total Average of Social Strategy ................................................ .. Table 10 The Total Average of Compensation Strategy ....................................

9

14 15 17 21 23 25 27 29 32 33

List of Figure

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6

Diagram of the Memory Strategy ................................................ ....... Diagram of the Cognitive Strategy ................................................ ..... Diagram of the Compensation Strategy .............................................. Diagram of the Metacognitive Strategy ............................................. . Diagram of the Affective Strategy ................................................. ..... Diagram of the Social Strategy ................................................... ........

10

8 9 10 11 12 13

List of Chart

Chart 1 The General Profiles of Learning Strategies .......................................

11

22

ABSTRACT

Yaimin, 2006, A Study of Language Learning Strategies of Elementary School Pupils at SDN 1 Bengkulu

The objective of this research was to investigate the language learning strategies employed by the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu in learning English. The population of  this research was all the 238 pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu. The sample of this research was the 25% of the entire population, which were 72 pupils. This research used questionnaires as its instrument. The result of this research showed that, in general, the pupils employed cognitive in learning English with the highest total average of  3.50. The other strategies employed were the metacognitive strategy, affective strategy, the memory strategy, the social strategy, and the compensation strategy. There were, however, some interesting findings on each category: a) on cognitive strategy category, the majority of the respondents agreed that they learned English well by the two following methods: formally practicing with sounds and writing systems, analyzing expressions, and translating; b) on metacognitive strategy, most respondents agreed that they setting goals and objectives in learning English. As a result, they paid more attention during their English class. c) on affective strategy category, most respondents agreed that they liked English subject. This can perhaps  become a good starting point for teachers to give more motivation and be more sympathetic in teaching English; d) on memory strategy category, the respondents commonly admitted that they wrote down every single new vocabulary and did their  homework at home; e) on social strategy category, the respondents mostly did not hesitate to give questions on something they did not understand. The majority of the respondents agreed that they did not very much employed compensation strategy in learning English.

12

ABSTRAK

Yaimin, 2006, A Study of Language Learning Strategies of Elementary School Pupils at SDN 1 Bengkulu

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menyelidiki strategi belajar yang diterapkan oleh murid-murid SDN 1 Kota Bengkulu dalam mempelajari bahasa Inggris. Populasi dari penelitian ini adalah seluruh murid SDN 1 Bengkulu kelas 3, 4, dan 5 yang  berjumlah 238 murid. Sample penelitian ini adalah 25% dari seluruh populasi yang  berarti 72 murid. Penelitian ini mempergunakan angket sebagai instrumen  pengumpulan data. Hasil-hasil yang diperoleh dari kegiatan penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa, secara umum, strategi belajar yang paling banyak dipergunakan oleh responden penelitian adalah strategi kognitif. Baru kemudian disusul oleh strategi metakognitif, afektif, memori, sosial, and kompensasi. Beberapa poin penting yang patut dicatat dari penelitian ini dijabarkan sebagai berikut: a) pada kategori strategi kognitif, sebagian besar responden sepakat bahwa mereka banyak  mempergunakan dua metode berikut dalam mempelajari Bahasa Inggris: latihan mandiri dalam menghafal dan menulis, menganalisa mimik muka guru dalam menebak arti kosakata, dan menterjemahkan arti kosakata; b) pada kategori strategi metakognitif, banyak responden yang mengakui bahwa mereka menetapkan tujuan  pembelajaran dalam belajar Bahasa Inggris. Hasilnya, mereka ternyata lebih fokus dalam memperhatikan penjelasan guru Bahasa Inggris mereka; c) pada kategori strategi afektif, hamper keseluruhan responden menyetujui bahwa Bahasa Inggris adalah pelajaran kesukaan mereka. Hal ini tentu merupakan suatu modal awal yang sangat baik bagi para guru mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris untuk lebih memberi semangat dan dorongan kepada para siswa mereka; d) pada kategori strategi memori,  banyak responden yanf mengakui menga kui bahwa ba hwa mereka selalu menulis setiap kosakata baru yang diperkenalkan oleh guru mereka dan mereka juga selalu mengerjakan PR di rumah; e) pada kategori strategi sosial, responden terbukti tidak pernah ragu dalam mengajukan pertanyaan terhadap penjelasan guru yang mereka anggap kurang dapat dipahami. Dari hasil penelitian ini, mayoritas responden terbukti sangat kurang mempergunakan strategi kompensasi dalam mempelajari Bahasa Ingg ris.

13

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1

Background

In order to improve its quality of education, the government of Bengkulu has officially launched the Bengkulu as the City of Learners Program since April 2004 (Ginting: 2004). It is expected that through this program, Bengkulu can be one of the most reputable provinces in term of education at least in Sumatra. One of the objectives of the program is to introduce English to children at the very early stage. In other words, English will be taught to elementary school pupils of grades 4, 5, and 6 in all parts of Bengkulu. There are two major reasons to this policy. The first reason greatly relates to the psycholinguistic point of view. The human brain is not fully developed at birth. Rather, it matures gradually over a period of several years, Locke (1983). There has  been some speculation that language and other cognitive skills must be acquired acqu ired prior  to the completion of this maturational process, also called called the critical period, which extends from age two to puberty, Lenneberg (1984). It is because during the critical  period children actively develop their brain. As a result, the brain can easily absorb any sort of cognitive information that may takes place during the teaching and learning activities. Thus, it is very important to introduce English to children as soon as possible regarding that they are in their most valuable critical period.

1

The second is that the aim of the teaching of English in the elementary school is merely to motivate the pupils in order that they will be ready and self-confident in learning English in higher levels. Unlike other subject, English will be taught as one of the local content subjects, Depdikbud (2004). It means that the students will not have the same burden in learning English as the other elementary compulsory subjects. The materials will be largely emphasized on vocabulary, speaking, and simple grammar. In other words, the main goal of the teaching of English in the elementary school is merely to introduce English as the first foreign language to the  pupils in order that they will be able to communicate in simple English. Thus, the government may expect that for the next 5 years there will be a significant achievement that can be accomplished by high school students on the subject of  English on their National Final Examination. However, it is a well known fact that English is a considerable unfamiliar  language for the majority of Indonesian pupils. Therefore, here, in the teaching and learning process, the pupils will be challenged to understand English subject. In order  to be able to do this, each pupil will employ his own strategies in learning English. There is an important question that may arise from this situation and would therefore be discussed in this study. For elementary school pupils who commonly learn English as a foreign language for the first time, what kind of strategies will be employed? It is important to find out the answer to this question. Many experts  believe that language learning strategies during the childhood period greatly influence one’s success in learning foreign language, Oxford (1989). In other words, one’s

2

success in learning a foreign language greatly depends on his or her language learning strategies during his or her childhood period. A number of previous researchers have conducted researches under the similar theme. However, it seems that the previous researchers quite satisfy by taking the junior and senior high school students as the subjects of their researches. It is noted that none of them ever try any attempts to take the elementary school students as the subject of their studies. studies. It was under this background that this study study was carried out by taking elementary school scho ol pupils as the subject of the research. This research was conducted in SDN 1 Bengkulu. There were two major  reasons to this choice. The first, as it can be observed from the result of National Final Examination from the previous five years, it has become an undeniable fact that, at present moment, SDN 1 Bengkulu can be regarded as one of the most qualified elementary school in Bengkulu. It means that, compared to other elementary schools, the students of SDN 1 Bengkulu are averagely more competence in learning. Secondly, SDN 1 Bengkulu is the only elementary school in Bengkulu which has developed bilingual class as one of the parameters to be certified as internationally standard elementary school. It means that the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu have more opportunity to deal with English than the pupils of other elementary schools. Hopefully this research can share a bit of contribution to improve the quality of  English teaching at the level of elementary school in Bengkulu.

3

1.2

The Formulation of Problem

This research would try to answer the following problem: “What are the English language learning strategies applied by elementary school pupils?”

1.3

The Research Objectives

This research was aimed to describe the English language learning strategies applied by pupils in SDN 1 Bengkulu.

1.4

Significances of the Research

The findings of this research may hopefully be useful as information input  particularly for teachers, students and any individuals who have great interest in developing basic education. In a smaller scope, it is expected that outcomes of this research may inspire other researchers to carry out further research in the similar area.

1.5

The Limitation of the Research

As can be seen from the slightly presented explanation above, the factors influencing the learning process constitute a wide topic. To limit the scope of the  problem, the writer will focus on the internal factors of the learner.

4

1.6

Operational Definitions

1. Strategy: A strategy in this research refers to what a pupil does cognitively, affectively, and psychomotorically during the language classroom. 2.  Language learning: language learning differs from language acquisition. Language learning in this study means teaching and learning activities that occur in the classroom in a formal setting like. 3.  Memory strategies: such as grouping or using imagery; have a highly specific function. One of them is to help students to store and retrieve new information. 4. Cognitive strategies: such as summarizing or reasoning deductively, would enable learners to understand and produce new language by many means. 5. Compensation strategies: like guessing or using synonyms, would allow learners to use the language despite of their often large gaps in knowledge. 6.  Affective strategies: are strategies applied by students to control their  emotions and attitudes about learning. 7. Social strategies: refers to social interactions which involve other people such as asking questions, asking for clarification and cooperating with  peers.

5

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1

Learning

Slamet in Mulyadi (2003) defines learning as a relatively permanent change in  behavior, which reflects in the form gaining knowledge, comprehension, or skills which are achieved through experience. In a similar view, Cronbach (1954) states that learning is characterized by change in behavior as a result of experience. Behavior involves responses to a situation. If a person makes different responses at present in compare to the past  period, it can be said that he has learned something. Furthermore, Gary and Kingsley in Snelbecker (1974) state that learning is the process by which behavior, in a broad sense, is originated or changed through practices or trainings. Therefore, here, the change caused by maturity or natural growth cannot be regarded as the result of  learning. From the previous definitions, it can be concluded that learning is a change which is due to an experiences or trainings and therefore not due to natural growth. Thus, the change in the learner can be planned. If a teacher wants his pupils to learn something, he has to facilitate them with the experience or training that support what he wishes his students want to learn.

6

2.2

Learning Strategies

According to Gagne in Brown (1980) a strategy may be defined as a particular  method of approaching a problem or task, a mode of operation for achieving a  particular end, or a planned design for controlling and manipulating certain information. A learning strategy is therefore a method of perceiving and storing  particular items for later recall. In a similar thought, Oxford (1989) defines learning strategy as specific actions taken by a learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more selfdirected, more effective, and more transferable to new situation. For the further  discussion of learning strategy, this study shall applied Oxford (1989) for the references of the discussion. Oxford divides strategies into two major classes: direct and indirect. Direct strategies deals with the new language, which consists of three classes: memory, cognitive and compensation strategies. Indirect strategies are strategies that support and manage language learning without directly involving the target language. Indirect strategies are divided into metacognitive, affective, and social strategies. Memory strategies, such as, grouping or using imagery, have a specific function: helping students store and retrieve new information. Memory strategies fall into four sets: a.

Creating mental linkages: grouping, associating/elaborating, and placing new words into a context.

 b. Appling images and sounds: using imagery, semantic mapping, using keyword and representing sounds in memory. 7

c.

Reviewing well: structured reviewing.

d. Employing action: using physical response or sensation, and using mechanical technical techniques. Figure 1 Diagram of the Memory Strategies 1. Grouping A. Creating mental linkages

2. Associating / elaborating 3. Placing new words into a context 1. Using Imagery

B. Applying images images and sounds I. Memory Strategies

2. Semantic mapping 3. Using keywords 4. Representing sounds sounds in memory memory

C. Reviewing well

1. Structured reviewing

1. Using physical physical response or  sensation D. Employing action 2. Using mechanical mechanical techniques techniques

Cognitive strategies, such as summarizing or reasoning deductively, would enable learners to understand and produce the target language by many different means. Cognitive strategies have four sets: a.

Practicing: repeating; formally practicing with sounds and writing system, recognizing and using formulas and patterns, recombining, and practicing.

 b. Receiving and sending messages: getting the idea quickly, using resources for  receiving and sending messages.

8

c.

Analyzing and reasoning: reasoning deductively, analyzing expressions, analyzing contrastively, translating, and transferring.

d. Creating structure for input and output: taking notes, summarizing, and highlighting. Figure 2 Diagram of the Cognitive Strategies 1. Repeating 2. Formally practicing practicing with with sounds and writing system 3. Recognizing and using formulas formulas and patterns

A. Practicing

4. Recombining 5. Practicing naturalistically naturalistically

B. Receiving and sending sending messages

1. Getting the idea quickly 2. Using resources resources for receiving receiving and sending messages 1. Reasoning deductively

II. Cognitive Strategies

2. Analyzing expressions C. Analyzing and reasoning

3. Analyzing contrastively contrastively (across languages) 4. Translating 5. Transferring

1. Taking notes D. Creating structure structure for  for  input and output

2. Summarizing 3. Highlighting

Compensation strategies, like guessing or using synonyms, allow learners to use the language despite their often large gaps in knowledge. Compensation strategies consist of: 9

a.

Guessing intelligently: using linguistic clues, and using other clues.

 b. Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing: switching to the mother tongue, getting help, using mime or gesture, avoiding communication partially or totally, selecting the topic, adjusting or totally, selecting the topic, adjusting or  approximating the message, coining words, and using a circumlocution or  synonym. Figure 3 Diagram of the Compensation Strategies 1. Using linguistics clues A. Guessing Intelligently 2. Using other clues 1. Switching to the mother  tongue 2. Getting help

III. Compensation Strategies

3. Using mime mime and gesture B. Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing

4. Avoiding communication  partially or totally totally 5. Selecting the topic topic 6. Adjusting or  approximating the message 7. Coining words 8. Using a circumlocution or  synonym

Metacognitive strategies allow learners to control their own cognition, which is to coordinate the learning process by using functions such as centering, arranging,  planning, and evaluating. Metacognitive strategies consist of: a.

Centering learning: to overview and linking with already known material, paying attention, delaying speech production to focus on listening.

10

 b. Arranging and planning learning: finding out about language learning, organizing, setting goals and objectives, planning for a language task, seeking  practice opportunities. c.

Evaluating learning: self-monitoring, self-evaluating.

Figure 4 Diagram of the Metacognitive Strategies 1. Overviewing and linking linking with already known material A. Centering learning

2. Paying attention 3. Delaying speech production to focus on listening 1. Finding out about language learning 2. Organizing 3. Setting goals goals and objectives

IV. Metacognitive Strategies

B.. Arranging and  planning learning

4. Identifying the purpose of a language task (purposeful listening/ reading/ speaking/ writing 5. Planning for a language task  task  6. Seeking practice practice opportunities opportunities

1. Self-monitoring

C. Evaluating learning

2. Self-evaluating

Affective strategies help to regulate emotions, motivations, and attitudes. Affective strategies fall into three sets: a.

Lowering anxiety: using progressive relaxation, deep breathing or meditation, using music, and using jokes.

 b. Self encouraging: giving positive statements, taking risks wisely, giving reward to students.

11

c.

Taking emotional temperature: paying attention to responses, using a checklist, writing a language learning diary, discussing feelings with peers.

Figure 5 Diagram of the Affective Strategies 1. Using progressive progressive relaxation, relaxation, deep  breathing, or meditation meditation A. Lowering anxiety

2. Using music 3. Using laughter 

1. Making positive positive statements statements V. Affective Strategies

B. Encouraging self

2. Taking risks wisely 3. Rewarding self 

1. Listening to body 2. Using a checklist checklist

C. Taking emotional temperature

3. Writing a language learning learning diary 4. Discussing feelings feelings with someone else

Social strategies help students learn through interaction with others. Social strategies fall into three sets: a.

Giving questions: asking for clarification or verification, asking for correction.

 b. Cooperating with others: with peers, with proficient users of the new language. c.

Empathizing with others: developing cultural understanding, becoming aware of  other’s thoughts and feelings.

12

Figure 6 Diagram of the Social Strategies 1. Asking for clarification clarification or verification verification A. Asking questions 2. Asking for correction correction

VI. Social Strategies

1. Cooperating with peers B. Cooperating with others

2. Cooperating with with proficient users users of the new language 1. Developing cultural understanding understanding

C. Empathizing with others

2. Becoming aware aware of others’ others’ thoughts and feelings

Basically, learning strategies are steps taken by students to enhance their own learning. Strategies are especially important for language learning because they are tools for active, self-directed involvement, which is essential for developing communicative competence. Appropriate language learning strategies result in improved proficiency and greater self-confidence. How language learning strategies stimulate the growth of communicative competence in general can be seen as follows: metacognitive strategies help learners regulate their own cognition to focus, plan and evaluate their progress as they move toward communicative competence. Affective strategies develop the self-confidence and perseverance needed for learners to involve themselves actively in language learning. Social strategies provide increased interaction and more emphatic comprehension toward the lesson.

13

2.3

Related Studies

Table 1 The List of Related Studies  No. Researcher Title 1. Titin Yusnita The English Learning (2002) Strategies Used by The Students of Islamic Education Study Program at STAIN Bengkulu. 2. Renita Utama English Learning (2003) Strategies Among the Second Year Students of  the SMUN 3 Bengkulu. 3.

Nopriansah (2004)

The Differences of  Individual Learners in Using Learning Strategies to Learn English Structure.

4.

Khalid (2005)

English Learning Strategies Used By The Diploma Three (DIII) English Department Students of Universitas Bengkulu Academic Year  2005-2006.

14

Result The study showed that most students used overall strategies in learning English

The study showed that most students applied metacognitive strategies, while the least used was the memory and social group. The majority of the students applied memory strategies. Very few of them applied other strategies such as: cognitive strategies, compensation and metacognitive strategies. Most students in this research applied metacognitive strategies and the rest  preferred overall strategies.

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1

Research Design

The research was a descriptive quantitative, which emphasized to describe the English language learning strategies applied by pupils in SDN 1 Bengkulu. As a descriptive study, the researcher did not set out the test hypothesis, but rather served the result of his result. The data served are consequently free to vary during the course of the observation (Larsen-Freeman and Long, 1991).

3.2

Population and Sample

3.2.1. Population

The populations of the research were the pupils of SD Negeri 1 Bengkulu (grades 4, 5, and 6). The detail of the population can be seen on the following table.

Table 2. The Data Base of Pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu Class Male Female IVA 19 18 IVB 23 16 VA 22 16 VB 30 13 VIA 24 20 VIB 18 19 136 102 TOTAL Source: Data Siswa SDN 1 Kota Bengkulu

15

Total 37 39 38 43 44 37 238

3.2.2

Sample

Arikunto, (1989) states that if the population of a research is below 100, the researcher has to take all of them as a sample. But if the population is over 100, the researcher can take only 20%-25% of them. Since the number of students in this research reached 238, the sample of this research was therefore 25% of the entire  populations which means 60 pupils. It is noted that the sample of this research was managed by having two different classes as there are a number of factors which make it impossible to apply the whole classes as the sample of this research.

3.3.

The Data Collection

The data collection was carried out by distributing questionnaires among all the samples which consists of two stages: 1) the try out stage which was carried out at th

st

May 12 2006, and 2) the data collection stage which was carried out at May 21

2006. It is noted that during those two stages, the sample pupils were assisted by the researcher along with their teachers so that they can easily get explanation whenever  they got troubles in understanding the items of the questionnaire. This is very important in order to guarantee the validity and reliability of the questionnaire’s results.

3.3.1

The Research Instrument

The data of this research was collected by distributing questionnaire based on the model of Likert Scale in which each item will have five possible answers: strongly agree (SA), agree (A), Undecided (U), disagree (D), and strongly disagree (SD). Each respond was then associated with a particular point and every 16

respondent’s scores was then determined by summing up the points of each statement. Table 3 The Likert Scale Statement Positive  Negative

3.3.2

SD 1 5

D 2 4

U 3 3

A 4 2

SA 5 1

Construction of the Questionnaire

The questionnaire consisted of 46 items which are grouped into six aspects: 1. Memory strategies, items number: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 2. Compensation strategies, items number: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 3. Metacognitive strategies, items items number: 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 4. Affective strategies, items number: 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 5. Social strategies, items number: 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 6. Cognitive strategies 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46. th

The try out of the questionnaire was carried out at May 12 2006 at SDN 18 Bengkulu which included 38 pupils.

3.3.3

Validity

In order to find out the validity level of the questionnaire, the researcher the ttest formula was employed. The formula is as follows:

t  =

 x S 2 gab

−

 x

1−

(

−

1 n

2

+

1 n

)

17

2

2

S gab = (n1 – 1) s1 + (n2 – 1) s2

2

n1+ n2 - 2 Where: t = the value of the statistical significance of the mean difference X1 = group of high score X2 = group of low score S gab = variance of item n1 = the high respondent number  n2 = the low respondent number  After the calculation employed, there were 46 items which were considered valid. This was because their t-value were higher than the criteria value of t listed in the table which was 1.73 at the 5 percent significant level for N=38. The other five items had to be left out because the validity score were less than 1.73. The five items dropped out were as follows: 1. Item 17 and 18 which belonged to the compensation strategy 2. Item 23 which belonged to the metacognitive strategy 3. Item 36 and 37 which belonged to the affective strategy.

3.3.4

Reliability

The researcher also found out the reliability after the validity of instrument obtained. The reliability was obtained by using the Cronbach Alpha formula since the instruments rating scale is from 1 to 5. Arikunto states that the formula is applicable in finding out the reliability of instrument with scale Likert 1-5.

⎡ K  ⎤ ⎡ ΣS 2 i ⎤  x ⎢1 − ∝= ⎢ ⎥ 2 ⎥ K   I  − ⎣ ⎦ ⎢⎣ ΣS t  ⎥⎦

18

Where: α 

k 2 S1 2 St

= the instrument reliability = the number of items = the variant of total scores = the variant of respondents for item to t After the calculation employed, all the 46 valid items were considered reliable

since their reliability value reached 1.019 which was higher than 0.80 as the standard of reliability.

3.4

Data Analysis Techniques

The data of this research was analyzed based on the previous study by Arasuli and Suwarno (2004), which applies the following statistics formulas: 1.

Weighted Mean The weighted mean of every ev ery statement was found out as follows:

M=

Σ f  x w Σ f 

Where: M : The weighted mean score of each statement f : The frequency of respondents who choose an alternative answer  ∑ f : The frequency frequency of respondents in all choices w : Weight/the score of an alternative answer  ∑ f x w : Number of the frequency multiplied multiplied to the the score of each alternative answer  The mean for the entire items for a group was found out by applying the following formula:

Mg =

Σ M ⋅ N Σ N

19

Where: Mg : The mean of the the whole statements for a group (group average) M : The mean of each statement  N : Number of respondent answering each statement for the whole statement (for a group) ∑ N : Number of all respondents for 2.

Proportion (Percentage) The percentage of the answer was found out by using this formula: P =

f 

Σ f 

x 100 %

Where: f : Frequency of responses responses for for each category for a statement statement ∑ f : Number of responses in the whole, for a statement 3.

Interpretation of Mean The following procedure was applied in interpretation of means: a. Dividing the means into five categories: very high, high, moderate, low, and very low.  b. Determining the range of score (r), i.e. the ratio of the highest and lowest score, in this case it is 5 –1 = 4 c. Determining the length of each category (P) by dividing the range with the number of classes, in this case it is P = 4/5 = 0.8 d. Determining the lowest scores of classes. e. Determining the highest score of the first class by dividing the lowest score of  the first class with p minus 1.1, in this case it is 1.1+1.8–1.1=1.8 The highest score of other classes are found out by using the same method.

20

f. Table of categories Table 4 The Classifications of Language Learning Strategies Class Category/Predicate 4.30-5.0 Very High 3.50-4.20 High 2.70-3.40 Moderate 1.90-2.60 Low 1.00-1.80 Very Low

21

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1

Results

The following table shows the learning strategies of the pupils of SDN 1 Bengkulu by total average.

Chart 1 The General Profile of Learning Strategies

LEARNING STRATEGIES

Compensation (2.74) 15%

Cognitive (3.50) 19%

Social (2.83) 16% Metacognitive (3.27) 18% Memory (2.84) 16% Affective (2.94) 16%

From the data above, it is clear that the most respondents preferred using the cognitive strategy in learning English with total average of 3.50. It is followed by the metacognitive strategy with total average of 3.27. The third was the affective strategy with total average of 2.94. The memory strategy and the social strategy came as the

22

third and the fourth with total averages of 2.84 and 2.83. The least one was the compensation strategy with total average of 2.74. 4.1.1

Cognitive Strategy

Table 5 The Total Average of Cognitive Strategy Frequency

Weight

No. of  Item

SD

D

U

A

SA

SD

D

U

A

SA

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

40

3

10

11

28

20

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

Weighted Average

N

Sum

5

72

268

3.72

High

4

5

72

254

3.53

High

3

4

5

72

251

3.49

Moderate

2

3

4

5

72

248

3.44

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

267

3.71

High

1

2

3

4

5

72

238

3.31

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

240

3.33

Moderate

Predicate

(4 %) (14 %) (15 %) (39 %) (28 %) 41

7

12

10

22

21

(10 %) (17 %) (14 %) ( 31 31 %) (29 %) 42

9

10

12

19

22

(13 %) (14 %) (17 %) ( 26 26 %) (31 %) 43

9

12

10

20

21

(13 %) (17 %) (14 %) ( 28 28 %) (29 %) 44

6

8

11

23

24

(8 %) (11 %) (15 %) ( 32%) (33 %) 45

8

13

16

32

33

(11 %) (18 %) (22 %) ( 26 26 %) (22 %) 46

5

14

17

24

12

(7 %) (19 %) (24 %) ( 33 %) (17 %) 504

SUM

24.53

24.53 x 72

1766.16

=

Total Average

504

504

High

= 3.504 = 3.5

SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

With three items considered to have high predicate and none of them considered to have low predicate, it is clear that cognitive strategy was the most  preferred learning strategy by elementary school pupils. There were two interesting findings of this category. The first was showed on item forty with the highest total average of 3.72 that most respondents admitted that they very often memorizing vocabularies and practicing to write them down in order to be easily learned. This

23

indicated that the respondents learn English very well through formally practicing with sounds and writing systems. While the second one was item forty four where most respondents agreed that they learned quite a few vocabularies from their  dictionaries. This proved that the respondents preferred translation method in learning English as previously described in the literature review. From this point, it can be concluded that the two aforementioned methods are applicable for English teachers to  be further developed in their pupils’ cognitive strategy. The third item achieved the highest total average was item forty one where most respondents agreed when they were asked if they can guess the meanings of certain vocabularies by analyzing their  teachers’ expressions. Even though other items considered as moderate, it is important, however, to conduct further analysis on them. On Item forty two the respondents were asked if  they self-learned the grammatical patterns in learning English. The result showed that most respondents hardly recognizing and using grammatical patterns in learning English. The respondents very often found out the main core of their English lesson. This conclusion derived from item forty three which only gained total average of 3.44 and be therefore considered as moderate. Perhaps, there is one point that should be given more attention for English Eng lish teachers. It is the pupils’ reluctances in writing down all the words or even vocabularies wrote down on the blackboard. This conclusion resulted from item forty six which only gained the total average of 3.33. From this  point, it can be inferred that it would be better for teachers not n ot to write down all their  teaching materials on the blackboard. The last item of this category which gained the total average of 3.31 is item forty five where the respondents were asked if they very 24

often compare two antonyms so that they can learn those two words easily. This indicated that respondents mostly hardly open their vocabulary. In other words, the respondents mainly acquired their vocabularies from their English teachers during their lessons at school.

4.1.2

Metacognitive Strategy

Table 6 The Total Average of Metacognitive Strategy Frequency

Weight

No. of  Item

SD

D

U

A

SA

SD

D

U

A

SA

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

20

16

20

19

14

3

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

Weighted Average

N

Sum

5

72

184

2.56

Low

4

5

72

296

4.11

High

3

4

5

72

244

3.39

Moderate

2

3

4

5

72

251

3.49

High

1

2

3

4

5

72

207

2.88

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

222

3.08

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

244

3.39

Moderate

Predicate

(22 %) (28 %) (26 %) (19 %) (4 %) 21

22

3

4

(4 %)

(6 %)

1

13

8

24

23

(11%) ( 33 %) (46 %) 26

21

11

(1 %) (18 %) (36 %) ( 29 %) (15 %) 23

2

12

20

13

10

(3 %) (17 %) (28 %) ( 35 %) (18 %) 24

13

16

20

25

13

(18 %) (22 %) (28 %) ( 18 18 %) (14 %) 25

22

10

3

14

23

(31 %) (14 %) (4 %) ( 19 %) (32 %) 26

5

15

10

31

11

(7 %) (21 %) (14 %) ( 43 %) (15 %) 504

SUM

22.89

22.89 x 72

1648.08

=

Total Average

504

504

Moderate

= 3.27

SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

In this category, there are two items which acquired the highest total average. The first is item twenty one with the total average of 4.11, where the respondents were asked if they had strong motivation in mastering fluent English. The second

25

item is item twenty three with the total average of 3.49, where the respondents were asked if they pay much attention during their English class. There is a strong relationship between these two items. It is that the students’ strong motivation in learning English, as described on item twenty one, which made them took an active  part in every teaching and learning activities. There are four items on this category which considered as moderate. It is interesting to find out that there are two items, which were twenty two and item twenty six, which gained the same total average. The former item asked the respondents if they found opportunities in improving their English. While the latter  asked the respondents if they often re-checked their homework before they submit it to their teachers. There is, however, a slight difference between the two items. The  percentage of respondents who agreed on the statement on item twenty six was higher  than the percentage of the same category on item twenty two. It indicated that perhaps teachers should give more encouragement for students who seek opportunities to improve their English outside the classrooms. Another moderate item is item twenty five where the respondents were asked if they joined English course as extra curricular activity. With the total average of  3.08, this item indicated that most respondents still reluctant to join English course which may be beneficial for their English skills’ improvement. It may be inferred, however, that it is suggested for English teachers to describe the benefits of having English course to the pupils. Item twenty four asked the respondents if they had any strict schedules in learning English. As obtained the total average of 2.88, this item proved that most 26

respondents never had any strict schedules in learning English. Perhaps, they did have learning schedules but it is not dedicated to one particular subject, such as English. The last item which acquired the lowest total average is item twenty where the respondents were asked if they normally related the contents of reading or listening materials with their personal experience. With the total average of 2.56, this item showed that the ability to connect the lessons materials with one’s personal experience is perhaps still considerable too difficult to master particularly for  elementary school pupils.

4.1.3

Affective Strategy

Table 7 The Total Average of Affective Strategy Frequency

Weight

No. of  Item

SD

D

U

A

SA

SD

D

U

A

SA

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

27

5

22

26

10

9

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

N

Sum

Weighted Average

5

72

212

2.94

Moderate

4

5

72

212

2.94

Moderate

3

4

5

72

240

3.33

Moderate

2

3

4

5

72

201

2.79

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

278

3.86

High

1

2

3

4

5

72

129

1.79

Very Low

Predicate

(7 %) (31 %) (36 %) (14 %) (13 %) 28

5

22

21

20

4

(7 %) (31 %) (29 %) ( 28 %) (6 %) 29

5

11

22

23

11

(7 %) (15 %) (31 %) ( 32 %) (15 %) 30

19

14

13

15

11

(26 %) (19 %) (18 %) ( 21 21 %) (15 %) 31

1

11

22

31

35

(8 %) (11 %) (15 %) ( 32%) (33 %) 32

37

18

13

3

1

(11 %) (18 %) (22 %) ( 26 26 %) (22 %) 432

SUM

17.67

17.67 x 72

1272.24

=

Total Average

432 = 2.94

SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

27

432

Moderate

There is only one item on this category which obtained the highest total average. It is item thirty where the respondents were asked if they liked English subject. With the total average of 3.86, this item indicated that there is enough motivation of the students as a good starting point for their English teachers. Unfortunately, there is also one item which is considered as the very low predicate. It is item thirty two where the pupils showed that they reluctant to write down all their   personal daily experiences on their diary. With the total average of 1.79, this item showed that writing skill is not very common on elementary school pupils. There are four moderate items on this category. The highest one is item twenty nine with the total average of 3.33. It is interesting to find out most respondents did not hesitate in expressing their thoughts feelings in English regardless their limited skill in English. Another interesting point can be observed as we see item twenty seven and item twenty eight which had similar total average of  2.94. However, item there were more respondents who strongly agreed on item twenty seven than in item twenty eight. As item twenty seven asked the respondents if they were calm whenever they have to speak up in English, and item twenty eight asked them if they were more confident in doing the similar activity, the result indicated that the majority of the respondents preferred calmness than confidence whenever they were asked to speak up in English. Item thirty of this category gained the least total average in which the respondents were asked if they quite often heard English songs whenever they studied English at home. With the total average of 3.86, the item showed that most respondents found that listening to English songs while studying English would be 28

annoying. This result, however, did not match with what many experts believe that music can be used to reduce the children’s anxiety. 4.1.4

Memory Strategy

Table 8 The Total Average of Memory Strategy Frequency

Weight

No. of  Item

SD

D

U

A

SA

SD

D

U

A

SA

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

1

5

17

37

13

0

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

N

Sum

Weighted Average

5

72

202

2.81

Moderate

4

5

72

175

2.43

Low

3

4

5

72

206

2.86

Moderate

2

3

4

5

72

215

2.99 2.99

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

156

2.17

Low

1

2

3

4

5

72

172

2.39

Low

1

2

3

4

5

72

191

2.65 2.65

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

162

2.25

Low

1

2

3

4

5

72

228

3.17

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

256

3.56

High

1

2

3

4

5

72

311

4.32

High

1

2

3

4

5

72

175

2.43

Low

1

2

3

4

5

72

212

2.94

Moderate

Predicate

(7 %) (24 %) (51 %) (18 %) (0 %) 2

15

23

25

6

(21 %) (32 %) (35 %) ( 8 %) 3

8

20

20

22

3 (4 %) 2

(11 %) (28 %) (28 %) (31 %) (3 %) 4

11

12

22

21

6

(15 %) (17 %) (31 %) (29 %) (8 %) 5

24

24

15

6

(33 %) (33 %) (21 %) ( 8 %) 6

24

15

18

11

3 (4 %) 4

(33 %) (21 %) (25 %) ( 15 %) (6 %) 7

15

20

19

11

7

(21 %) (28 %) (26 %) ( 15 15 %) (10 %) 8

23

23

14

9

3

(32 %) (32 %) (19 %) ( 13 %) (4 %) 9

5

16

20

24

7

(7 %) (22 %) (28 %) (33 %) (10 %) 10

1

11

18

31

11

(1 %) (15 %) (25 %) ( 43 %) (15 %) 11

12

0

5

(0 %)

(7%)

15

25

4

26

37

(6 %) ( 36 %) (51 %) 19

12

1

(21 %) (35 %) (26 %) ( 17%) (1 %) 13

11

14

21

20

6

(15 %) (19 %) (29 %) ( 28 %) (8 %) 936

SUM

36.96

36.96 x 72

2661.12

=

Total Average

936 = 2.84

SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

29

936

Moderate

There are two items which managed to gain the highest total averages on this category. The first is item eleven where the pupils confirmed that they did all the homework given by their English teachers. This proved that homework still become the most reliable device in having the students re-learning the given lessons materials at home. The second highest item is item ten where the respondents were asked if  they wrote down all new vocabularies. Up to this point, it is clear that teachers should  be more aware in giving their pupils vocabularies. It is because the pupils would be very reluctant to write down every single word on the blackboard as previously described on the last item of the cognitive c ognitive strategy category. There are, however, five other items which gained the low predicate. The first is item five which indicated that most the respondents hardly ever practicing to write letters or anything in English. The second lowest item was item eight where most respondents stated that they spoke in English outside the classroom, with their  friends, families, or their English teachers. It is clear that on this point, teachers should encourage the students to be more confident in practicing their spoken English outside the classrooms. Another low predicated item is item six where the most respondents clarified that they did not enjoy reading text in English. It is an interesting finding that there were two items which shared the same total average of  2.43. The first was item two where the majority of the respondents ignored Englishspeaking television programs. The second was item twelve where most respondents learned new vocabularies through pictures. The other item achieved moderate predicates. The first is item nine where the respondents were asked if they did memorize every new vocabulary given by their  30

teachers at school. As this item was the highest one among the other moderate items, it can be inferred that the respondents need more innovative methods so that they would be motivated in memorizing new vocabularies given during the school lessons. The second is item four where most respondents confirmed they quite uninterested in singing English songs. The result of this item greatly relates with the result of the last item of this category where the respondents denied that they liked to memorize English songs. The respondents agreed that they did not learned well by making up one’s grammatical patterns from their teachers’ sentences. This can be clearly observed on item three which had the total average of 2.86. The majority of  respondents also found out that it did not help them learning English well by imitating the role models on television. This is the result of item seven which gained the least total average of 2.65.

4.1.5

Social Strategy

The only item which managed to gain the high predicate is the first item of  this where the respondents were asked if they did ask questions to some one else about anything they did not know in English subject. This indicated teachers should  behave in a more sympathetic manner in answering their students’ questions. There are three items in which most respondents put low categories on them. The first is item thirty seven where most respondents ever spoke with their friends in English outside the classroom. The second is item thirty six where the majority of the respondents denied that they had a special study group for English subject. While the third one is item thirty five in which most respondents clearly stated that they hardly 31

greeted their teachers outside the classrooms by using English utterances. All these three items deal with the respondents’ willingness to practice their spoken English outside the classroom. From this point, it can be concluded that it would take more serious effort for English teachers to motivate their pupils not to reluctant or even hesitate to practice their spoken English in their daily activities.

Table 9 The Total Average of Social Strategy Frequency

Weight

No. of  Item

SD

D

U

A

SA

SD

D

U

A

SA

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

33

3

16

11

28

14

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

Weighted Average

N

Sum

5

72

250

3.47

High

4

5

72

208

2.89

Moderate

3

4

5

72

184

2.56

Low

2

3

4

5

72

171

2.38

Low

1

2

3

4

5

72

148

2.06

Low

1

2

3

4

5

72

225

3.13

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

240

3.33

Moderate

Predicate

(4 %) (22 %) (15 %) (39 %) (19 %) 34

10

23

13

17

9

(14 %) (32 %) (18%) ( 24 24 %) (13 %) 35

16

23

17

9

7

(1 %) (18 %) (36 %) ( 29 %) (15 %) 36

22

20

17

7

6

(31 %) (28 %) (24 %) 105 %) (8 %) 37

26

23

18

3

(36 %) (32 %) (25 %) ( 4 %) 38

8

16

18

19

2 (3 %) 11

(11 %) (22 %) (25 %) (26 %) (15 %) 39

5

14

17

24

12

(7 %) (19 %) (24 %) ( 33 %) (17 %) 504

SUM

19.81

19.81 x 72

1426.32

=

Total Average

504

504

Moderate

= 2.83

SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

The rest items were considerable moderate. On item thirty nine, most respondents asked for repetition whenever they did not clearly heard the lines addressed to them. Perhaps, the worst category which requires further improvement is the social strategy where there are three items, out of seven items, which acquired 32

low scores. Those three lowest score items deal with the respondents’ inner  motivation in expressing their English to other people which is very significant in developing one’s language skill. There is no doubt that teachers should work harder  to improve their pupils’ motivation in applying this strategy. The majority of the respondents also watched English-speaking movies to acquire its culture. This can be seen based on the result of item thirty eight with the total average of 3.13. The last moderate item of this category is item thirty four where the respondents asked for   peer corrections when they made mistakes in their spoken English. All these three moderate-predicated items need further improvement to make it can be classified as the high predicated-items.

4.1.6

Compensation Strategy

Table 10 The Total Average of Compensation Strategy Frequency

Weight

No. of  Item

SD

D

U

A

SA

SD

D

U

A

SA

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

14

10

22

15

21

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

N

Sum

Weighted Average

5

72

203

2.82

Moderate

4

5

72

228

3.17

Moderate

3

4

5

72

139

1.93

Low

2

3

4

5

72

207

2.88

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

221

3.07

Moderate

1

2

3

4

5

72

186

2.58

Low

Predicate

(14 %) (31 %) (21 %) (29 %) (6 %) 15

3

22

15

24

8

(4 %) (31 %) (21 %) ( 33 %) (11 %) 16

23

37

8

2

(32 %) (51 %) (11 %) (3 %) 17

10

21

16

18

2 (3 %) 7

(14 %) (29 %) (22 %) ( 25 25 %) (10 %) 18

8

16

20

19

9

(11%) (22 %) (28 %) (26%) (13 %) 19

17

17

20

15

3

(24 %) (24 %) (28 %) ( 21 %) (4 %) 432

SUM

16.44

16.44 x 72

1184.68

=

Total Average

432 = 2.74

SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, U: Undecided, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree

33

432

Moderate

It is not a considerable disgraceful fact to find out that none of the items in the compensation strategy managed to acquire high point from the respondents. Indeed, there were two out of its six items which acquired low predicates. The first is item sixteen where most respondents showed that they used gestures whenever they get into troubles in explaining their thoughts or ideas. The second is the last item of this category where the majority of the respondents would make up new words of their  own if they did not the exact words to express their thoughts and feelings. However, these to low-predicated items do not necessarily mean that the pupils had considerable retarded skill in English. It is because the two skills merely applicable for students with limited English skill. Therefore, it can be concluded that for two skills, the lower the predicate, the better the pupils will be. The other items considered moderate predicates. The first is item fifteen where most respondents admitted that they guess the meanings of certain words from the pictures provided. The majority of the respondents also admitted that they would find similar words or phrases if they did not know the most suitable words whenever  they speak up in English. This was the result of item eighteen with the total average of 3.07. Most respondents stated that they only speak up in English if the topics fit their wants. This was the result of item seventeen with the total average of 3.07. Perhaps the most interesting point of this category is that the respondents denied that they found out the meanings of certain words simply by guessing from the sounds of  the words as described on fourteen. The result of this item seems not to correspond with the theory previously described on the literature review. Perhaps this can be an interesting topic for other researchers. 34

4.2

Discussions

There are three points which will be discussed on the section. The first is the general analysis of the results of the research. It is interesting to find out that there were two strategies commonly applied by the majority of the respondents. They are the cognitive strategy and metacognitive strategy. This finding is considerable interesting considering that the cognitive strategy represents direct strategies while the metacognitive represents the indirect strategies. This indicated that most respondents did not rely on one main strategy in learning foreign language. Another point which will be discussed on this research is the detail analysis on each category of the learning strategies. There were three items on the cognitive strategy in which teachers can conduct further improvement. It is because the majority of the respondents agreed to the statements of the three items which can be a good starting point for teachers. The first is that most respondents stated that they did memorizing vocabularies and keep practicing in writing them down so that those vocabularies can be easier to be acquired. The second is that the majority of the respondents clarified that they used dictionaries in acquiring new vocabularies. The third is that the respondents commonly agreed that they acquired new vocabularies by analyzing their teachers’ expressions. From this point, it can be concluded that teachers need to improve their skill in motivating their students on these three items. Representing the indirect strategies, there are two items on metacognitive strategy in which most respondents agreed on the statements of the two items. The first is item twenty one where the respondents commonly agreed that they had strong motivation to learn English. The second one described on item twenty there where the 35

majority of the respondents admitted that they paid a lot of attention when someone is speaking in English with them. From this point, there are at least two conclusions which can be inferred. The first is that teachers should emphasize more on speaking activities as it is the most preferred language as proven from the result of this research. And last but not least, it is important for English teachers to be more sympathetic in teaching English. It is because most respondents admitted that they valued English as one of the most important subject. The last point to be discussed on this section is about items in which the majority of the respondents gave low predicate. There are eleven items which considered being low predicate plus one item in which most respondents put very low  predicate on it. Five of them can be found on the memory strategy category. All the five items on this category greatly related with self-learning-activities at home. It is  perhaps would be very beneficial for teachers to motivate their students to be more excited in doing their self-learning activities at home. Teachers can also build a mutual relationship with parents on this matter. The two other low predicate items were on the compensation strategy category. Both of which related with the respondents strategies in dealing with difficulties when they happen to speak up in English. However, the low predicate on these tow items did not necessarily means that there should be some improvement for  the students. It is because the items offered a method of compensation which did not measure the students’ real proficiency. There is only one strategy on metacognitive strategy category which had low  predicate. It is item twenty which indicated that most respondents did not normally 36

related their personal experience with their reading text or listening materials. Compared with another research on similar theme (Khalid, 2005) the researcher  found out that the result on this item is considerable interesting. Using another  version of the same instrument, SILL (Strategy Inventory for Language Learning), he suggested his findings as follows: the metacognitive strategy gained the highest frequency with no singular item considered as the low predicate item, followed by the other learning strategies. This slight differences, however, could possibly be resulted form the differences of population and sample as he employed university students as the population and sample of his research. The three other low predicate items can be found on the social strategy category which related to the respondents’ motivation in improving their speaking skill. Up to this point, it is necessary for teachers to motivate their students to practice their spoken English outside the classroom activities. There is one item, however, which acquired the very low predicate. It is the last item of the affective strategy category which related to the pupils’ motivation in improving their writing skill by writing daily diary. The result on this item, however, did not correspond with what many experts have believed as previously described on the literature review: that  practicing writing can catalyze one’s integrated language skill.

37

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the previously described result of this research, it can be concluded that: 1. In general, the pupils employed the cognitive strategy in learning English. 2. The other strategies employed were the metacognitive strategy, affective strategy, the memory strategy, the social strategy, and the compensation strategy. 3. There were, however, some interesting findings on each category: a. On cognitive strategy category, the majority of the respondents agreed that they learned English well by the two following methods: formally  practicing with sounds and writing systems, analyzing expressions, and translating.  b. On metacognitive strategy, most respondents agreed that they setting goals and objectives in learning English. As a result, they paid more attention during their English class. c. On affective strategy category, most respondents agreed that they liked English subject. This can perhaps become a good starting point for  teachers to give more motivation and be more sympathetic in teaching English.

38

d. On memory strategy category, the respondents commonly admitted that they wrote down every single new vocabulary and did their homework at home. e. On social strategy category, the respondents mostly did not hesitate to give questions on something they did not understand. 4. The majority of the respondents agreed that they did not very much employed compensation strategy in learning English.

5.2 Suggestions

The results of this research showed that the majority of the respondents  preferred cognitive strategy along with metacognitive strategy as their learning strategies. However, the following suggestions are hopefully applicable in order to improve the quality of English teaching and learning activities. It is suggested that: 1. The pupils should be encouraged to read more English based-reading-text. 2. It is important for teachers to give responds to their students’ questions in a sympathetic manner. 3. It would be better for teachers not to write down all unnecessary words on the  black board boa rd as the majority of o f the respondents felt that as annoying. Teachers should merely therefore write down new vocabularies on the blackboard. 4. It is necessary for teachers to motivate their students to practice their spoken English outside the classroom activities. Pupils should also be encouraged to develop their own study group in order to improve their English.

39

5. It is important for teachers to build a mutual relationship with their pupils’  parents in order to motivate the pupils to conduct more self-learning activities at home. 6. The outcomes of this study can hopefully become one of references for other  researchers to conduct researches upon the similar theme. It is suggested, however, that for other researchers who have any interest to conduct researches upon the similar theme to employ other kinds of instrument to  provide more useful outcome upon this theme.

40

REFERENCES

Arikunto, Suharsini. 1998. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: Rineka. Brown, H.D. (1980). Principles of Language Learning & Teaching (First Edition). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc. Cronbach, J. (1954). Educational Psychology. New York: Harcourt-Brace & Co. Depdikbud. (2004). Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi untuk Pendidikan Dasar dan  Menengah: Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Inggr is. Bengkulu: Depdikbud.

Ebel, R.L. (1969).  Encyclopedia of Educational Ed ucational Research (Fourth Edition). London: The Macmillan Company, Collier-Macmillan Limited. Ellis, R. (1987). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ginting, Jeffri. (2004). Pemprov Canangkan Bengkulu Kota Pelajar . Bengkulu: Harian Rakyat Bengkulu. Hornby, A.S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford: University Press. Lenneberg, J. (1984).  Language Development: An Introduction. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merill Locke, Jonathan. (1983). Phonological Acquisition and Change. New York: Academic Press. Mulyadi, & Puspita, Hilda. (2003). Kiat Belajar Sukses di Perguruan Tinggi. Jakarta: Audi Grafika. Oxford, R.L. (1989).  Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should  Know. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

Sirkin, M.N. 1999. Statistics for the Social Sciences 2. California: Sage Publications. Snelbecker,

G.L.

(1974).  Learning

Theories,

Instructional

Psychoeducational Design. New York: McGraw Hill.

41

Theory

and 

Appendices

42

ANGKET TRY OUT

Adik-adik yang manis, mohon diisi daftar pertanyaan berikut ini dengan jujur. Sebelum mengisi, bacalah dengan baik setiap pernyataan di dalam tabel. Apabila ada pernyataan yang kurang jelas, tanyakan terlebih dahulu dengan Bapak atau Ibu guru, baru kemudian diisi. Jawaban yang adik-adik berikan tidak akan berpengaruh terhadap nilai rapor adik-adik. Berikan jawaban dengan memberikan tanda silang pada kolom yang paling sesuai dengan cara  belajar adik-adik selama ini.

 Nama : ………………………………………………… ………………………………………………… Kelas : ………………………… ………………………………………………… ……………………… Jenis Kelamin : Laki-laki / Perempuan (Coret yang tidak perlu) KETERANGAN: SJ : Sangat Jarang : Jarang J KK : Kadang-kadang : Sering S SS : Sangat Sering

No. 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Pernyataan Memory Strategies Saya mengulangi pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di rumah setiap hari. Saya menonton acara TV yang menggunakan Bahasa Inggris. Saya mencari rumus dalam membuat kalimat Bahasa Inggris dengan cara memperhatikan  pola-pola kalimat yang diberikan guru di kelas. Saya menyanyikan lagu-lagu berbahasa Inggris. Saya menulis surat/karangan dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya membaca cerita, buku, atau komik  Bahasa Inggris. Saya meniru gaya dan cara berbicara orang Inggris yang saya tonton di TV. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan keluarga, teman-teman, atau guru. Saya menghafalkan setiap kata baru dalam Bahasa Inggris yang diberikan guru saya. Saya mencatat kata-kata baru Bahasa Inggris yang saya dapatkan dari pelajaran di kelas.

43

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

No. Pernyataan 11. Saya membuat PR Bahasa Inggris di rumah. 12.

13. 14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23. 24. 25.

Saya menghubungkan arti kata-kata baru dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan gambar agar kata-kata  baru tersebut lebih mudah dihafal. Saya menghafal lagu-lagu Bahasa Inggris. Compensation Strategies Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata Bahasa Inggris yang belum saya pahami dengan memperhatikan bunyinya. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata baru dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan memperhatikan gambar  yang menyertai kata-kata tersebut. Saya menggunakan bahasa isyarat dengan mempergunakan gerakan tangan dan mimik  muka ketika saya mengalami kesulitan ketika  berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya menggunakan kata-kata Bahasa Indonesia  jika saya tidak mengetahui suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya meminta bantuan orang lain apabila saya tidak mengetahui suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya berusaha untuk berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris apabila yang ditawarkan adalah topik  kesukaan saya. Saya menggunakan kata yang hampir sama artinya jika saya tidak tahu arti suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya membuat kata baru jika saya tidak tahu suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris baik dalam  berbicara maupun dalam menulis. Metacognitive Strategies Saya menghubungkan isi suatu  pembicaraan/bacaan dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan pengalaman saya sendiri. Saya membutuhkan banyak waktu untuk   berpikir ketika berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya ingin lancar berkomunikasi dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya mencari-cari kesempatan untuk dapat melatih kemampuan Bahasa Inggris saya.

44

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

No. Pernyataan 26. Saya memperhatikan dengan baik ketika seseorang berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. 27. Saya memiliki jadual belajar untuk belajar  Bahasa Inggris. 28.

Saya mengikuti kursus Bahasa Inggris di sekolah ataupun di luar sekolah.

29.

Saya memeriksa ulang PR Bahasa Inggris saya sebelum PR itu dikumpulkan. Affective Strategies Saya bersikap tenang ketika berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya yakin dan percaya diri ketika berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya berani berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris walaupun kerapkali salah. Saya mendengarkan lagu-lagu berbahasa Inggris ketika saya belajar Bahasa Inggris di rumah. Saya menyukai pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Saya mengungkapkan rasa senang saya dengan anggota tubuh saya apabila saya benar dalam menjawab soal latihan/ulangan Bahasa Inggris. Saya memuji diri saya sendiri apabila saya  benar dalam menjawab soal latihan Bahasa Inggris. Saya menulis cerita/pengalaman saya di buku harian dalam Bahasa Inggris. Social Strategies Saya bertanya kepada teman atau kepada guru Bahasa Ingris saya apabila ada yang kurang saya pahami. Saya meminta bantuan teman atau guru Bahasa Inggris saya untuk mengkoreksi ucapan saya yang salah. Saya menyapa guru Bahasa Inggris saya dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya memiliki kelompok belajar khusus untuk  mata palajaran Bahasa inggris. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan teman-teman saya di dalam dan di luar kelas.

30. 31. 32. 33.

34. 35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40. 41. 42.

45

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

No. Pernyataan 43. Saya menonton film berbahasa Inggris untuk  mempelajari budaya orang Inggris. 44. Saya meminta seseorang untuk berbicara pelan atau mengulanginya lagi jika saya tidak  mengerti suatu kata dalam bahasa Inggris. Cognitive Strategies 45. Saya menghafal kosakata dan berlatih menuliskannya agar mudah dihafal. No. Pernyataan 46. Saya mempelajari arti suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan mengenali mimi muka guru saya ketika ia sedang menerangkan di kelas. 47. Saya mempelajari rumus tatabahasa agar saya dapat dengan mudah membuat suatu kalimat dalam Bahasa Inggris. 48. Saya mencari tahu inti dari apa yang diajarkan guru Bahasa Inggris saya. 49. Saya menghafal banyak kosakata dengan  bantuan kamus untuk mencari kosakata yang ingin saya ketahui artinya. 50. Saya membandingkan arti dua kata yang  berlawanan agar saya dapat dengan mudah menghafap suatu kosakata dalam Bahasa Inggris. 51. Saya mencatat setiap kata yang dituliskan guru saya di papan tulis. Terima Kasih

46

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

The Result of the Try Out

Validity t-test (ex. Items no. 1) n1 ΣX1 ΣX12 2 (ΣX1) Rerata

= 10 = 33 =113 = 1089 =3.3

n2 ΣX2 ΣX22 2 (ΣX2) Rerata

2 2 ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ (  X  ) (  X  ) ∑ ∑ 1 2 2 2 ⎢∑ X 1 − ⎥ + ⎢∑ X 2 − ⎥ n1 n2 ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦ ⎛  1 1  ⎞ ⎟⎟  x⎜⎜ + n1 + n2 − 2 n n 2  ⎠ ⎝  1

S diff  =

1089 ⎤ ⎡ 441⎤ ⎡ − + − 113 51 ⎢⎣ 1  ⎞ 10 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ 10 ⎥⎦ ⎛  1  x⎜ + ⎟ 10 + 10 − 2 ⎝ 10 10 ⎠

S diff  =

⎛ 4.1 + 6.9 ⎞ 2 = ⎜ ⎟ x ⎝  18  ⎠ 10 =

11 2  x 18 10

= 0611 x0.2 = 0.122 S diff  = 0.349 t  =

t  =

t  =

= 10 = 21 =51 = 441 =2.1

 X 1 − X 2 S diff 

3.3 − 2.1 0.349 1.2 0.349

t  = 3.43

47

ANGKET PENELITIAN

Adik-adik yang manis, mohon diisi daftar pertanyaan berikut ini dengan jujur. Sebelum mengisi, bacalah dengan baik setiap pernyataan di dalam tabel. Apabila ada pernyataan yang kurang jelas, tanyakan terlebih dahulu dengan Bapak atau Ibu guru, baru kemudian diisi. Jawaban yang adik-adik berikan tidak akan berpengaruh terhadap nilai rapor adik-adik. Berikan jawaban dengan memberikan tanda silang pada kolom yang paling sesuai dengan cara  belajar adik-adik selama ini.

 Nama : ………………………………………………… ………………………………………………… Kelas : ………………………… ………………………………………………… ……………………… Jenis Kelamin : Laki-laki / Perempuan (Coret yang tidak perlu) KETERANGAN: SJ : Sangat Jarang : Jarang J KK : Kadang-kadang : Sering S SS : Sangat Sering

No. 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Pernyataan Memory Strategies Saya mengulangi pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di rumah setiap hari. Saya menonton acara TV yang menggunakan Bahasa Inggris. Saya mencari rumus dalam membuat kalimat Bahasa Inggris dengan cara memperhatikan pola pola kalimat yang diberikan guru di kelas. Saya menyanyikan lagu-lagu berbahasa Inggris. Saya menulis surat/karangan dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya membaca cerita, buku, atau komik Bahasa Inggris. Saya meniru gaya dan cara berbicara orang Inggris yang saya tonton di TV. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan keluarga, teman-teman, atau guru. Saya menghafalkan setiap kata baru dalam Bahasa Inggris yang diberikan guru saya. Saya mencatat kata-kata baru Bahasa Inggris yang saya dapatkan dari pelajaran di kelas.

48

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

No. Pernyataan 11. Saya membuat PR Bahasa Inggris di rumah. 12. Saya menghubungkan arti kata-kata baru dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan gambar agar kata-kata  baru tersebut lebih mudah dihafal. 13. Saya menghafal lagu-lagu Bahasa Inggris. Compensation Strategies 14. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata Bahasa Inggris yang belum saya pahami dengan memperhatikan  bunyinya. 15. Saya menebak arti dari kata-kata baru dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan memperhatikan gambar  yang menyertai kata-kata tersebut. 16. Saya menggunakan bahasa isyarat dengan mempergunakan gerakan tangan dan mimik  muka ketika saya mengalami kesulitan ketika  berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. 17. Saya berusaha untuk berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris apabila yang ditawarkan adalah topik  kesukaan saya. 18. Saya menggunakan kata yang hampir sama artinya jika saya tidak tahu arti suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris. 19. Saya membuat kata baru jika saya tidak tahu suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris baik dalam  berbicara maupun dalam menulis. Metacognitive Strategies 20. Saya menghubungkan isi suatu  pembicaraan/bacaan dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan pengalaman saya sendiri. 21. Saya ingin lancar berkomunikasi dalam Bahasa Inggris. 22. Saya mencari-cari kesempatan untuk dapat melatih kemampuan Bahasa Inggris saya. 23. Saya memperhatikan dengan baik ketika seseorang berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. 24. Saya memiliki jadual belajar untuk belajar  Bahasa Inggris. 25. Saya mengikuti kursus Bahasa Inggris di sekolah ataupun di luar sekolah. 26. Saya memeriksa ulang PR Bahasa Inggris saya sebelum PR itu dikumpulkan.

49

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

No. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32.

33.

34.

35. 36. 37. 38. 39.

40. 41.

42.

43.

Pernyataan Affective Strategies Saya bersikap tenang ketika berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya yakin dan percaya diri ketika berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya berani berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris walaupun kerapkali salah. Saya mendengarkan lagu-lagu berbahasa Inggris ketika saya belajar Bahasa Inggris di rumah. Saya menyukai pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Saya menulis cerita/pengalaman saya di buku harian dalam Bahasa Inggris. Social Strategies Saya bertanya kepada teman atau kepada guru Bahasa Ingris saya apabila ada yang kurang saya  pahami. Saya meminta bantuan teman atau guru Bahasa Inggris saya untuk mengkoreksi ucapan saya yang salah. Saya menyapa guru Bahasa Inggris saya dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya memiliki kelompok belajar khusus untuk  mata palajaran Bahasa inggris. Saya berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan teman-teman saya di dalam dan di luar kelas. Saya menonton film berbahasa Inggris untuk  mempelajari budaya orang Inggris. Saya meminta seseorang untuk berbicara pelan atau mengulanginya lagi jika saya tidak mengerti suatu kata dalam bahasa Inggris. Cognitive Strategies Saya menghafal kosakata dan berlatih menuliskannya agar mudah dihafal. Saya mempelajari arti suatu kata dalam Bahasa Inggris dengan mengenali mimi muka guru saya ketika ia sedang menerangkan di kelas. Saya mempelajari rumus tatabahasa agar saya dapat dengan mudah membuat suatu kalimat dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya mencari tahu inti dari apa yang diajarkan guru Bahasa Inggris saya.

50

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

No. Pernyataan 44. Saya menghafal banyak kosakata dengan  bantuan kamus untuk mencari kosakata yang ingin saya ketahui artinya. 45. Saya membandingkan arti dua kata yang  berlawanan agar saya dapat dengan mudah menghafap suatu kosakata dalam Bahasa Inggris. 46. Saya mencatat setiap kata yang dituliskan guru saya di papan tulis. Terima Kasih

51

SJ

J

KK

S

SS

SURAT PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN SKRIPSI

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:  Nama

: YAIMIN

 NPM

: A1B001038

Program Studi

: Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

dengan ini menyatakan bahwa skripsi saya yang berjudul “A Study of English Language Learning Strategies of Elementary School Pupils at SDN 1 Bengkulu”, adalah benar karya

asli saya dan bebas dari segala bentuk pelanggaran akademik berupa: 1. menjiplak/memplagiat sebagian/seluruh karya orang lain, 2. mengupahkan pembuatan skripsi pada orang lain. Demikianlah Surat Pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenar-benarnya. Jika dikemudian hari  pernyataan saya ini ternyata tidak benar, maka segala sanksi akibat yang ditimbulkan berupa  pembatalan skripsi ini dan lain-lain adalah sepenuhnya tanggung jawab saya sendiri.

Bengkulu, 20 Juni 2006

YAIMIN

52

BIODATA MAHASISWA ANGKATAN TAHUN 2001

1.  Nama 2. Alamat

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Asal Sekolah Jumlah Nilai Ebtanas Tempat/Tanggal Lahir Jenis Kelamin Golongan Darah Agama Dosen Pembimbing Akademik Alamat a. Di Bengkulu

 b. Asal 11. Orang Tua a.  Nama Ayah Ayah  Pekerjaan  Umur  Agama  Jumlah Penghasilan  Alamat

 b.  Nama Ibu  Pekerjaan  Umur  Agama  Jumlah Penghasilan  Alamat

: YAIMIN YAIMIN : Jl. Flamboyan 1 Gg. Palem V No. 49 RT 10 Kel. Kebun Kenanga Kota Bengkulu 38223 Telp. (0736) 341979 / 081539222221 : SPK Depkes Tuban : 32 : Bojonegoro, 25 Nopember 1979 : Laki-laki :B : Islam : Kasmaini, SS. :

: Sumiran Sumiran : Tani : 45 tahun : Islam : : Dsn. Balong RT 20 No 396 Desa Sidodadi Kec. Sukosewo Kab. Bojonegoro Jawa Timur - 62181 : Yomi : Tani : 40 tahun : Islam : : Dsn. Balong RT 20 No 396 Desa Sidodadi Kec. Sukosewo Kab. Bojonegoro Jawa Timur 62181

Bengkulu, 20 Juni 2006 Yang bersangkutan,

YAIMIN  NPM A1B001038 A1B001038

53