Wednesday, April 1, 2015

The Effectiveness of Talking Chips Technique on Students Speaking Skill Improvement of the Fourth Semester Students of English Education Study Program at Malang Islamic University

 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents (1) the background of the study, (2) research problem, (3) objective of the study, (4) research hypotheses, (5) assumptions, (6) significance of the study, (7) scope and limitations, (8) definition of key terms.
I.1 Background of Study
            English is now used in almost all countries all over the world. In other words, the researcher can say that English has been an International language. People and the learners all over the world communicate in this language in business, economic, education, and social side. Rahmah (2014) argued that English has become the most important and international language in the world. Almost all people communicate in English due to the importance of this language in any scope of their lives.
English speaking skill is the best one to be learned and mastered by the English learners. “Speaking is usually considered as the core skill in foreign language learning and it is what learners want to be able to do” (Broady, 2005, as cited in Rahmah, 2014). Learners are hoped to communicate this language accurately and fluently. Arbain (2014) stated that by communicating this language, all learners can share their ideas, opinions, and feeling to people all over the world. So that, speaking plays an important role in people’s live in the world.
Having good speaking skill in English has been used as the compulsory requirement to be accepted working in big companies. Employees have to be able to communicate in English well if they want to work in big companies. Murcia (2001, as cited by Arbain, 2014) stated that, “speaking is a second or foreign language has often been viewed as the most demanding of the four skills”. It means that English learners who can speak this language well can have great opportunity to gain a job in a big company or other places that requires English speaking ability and other advantages.
As a foreign language or second language, English learners usually have difficulties in mastering it especially in speaking. Almost all English learners have difficulty in communicating this language. There are some problems in speaking activities faced by the learners according to Ur (2003, as cited in Rohadi, 2013) that stated that, “there are four problems faced by the learners in speaking activities. The problems include inhibition, nothing to say, low or uneven participation, and mother-tongue use”. These four problems will cause the accuracy and fluency in speaking. Then Thornbury (2006, as cited in Arsyad, 2014) described that, “speaking is like another skill, such as driving or playing a musical instrument: the more practice you get, the more likely it is you will be able to speak”. Most English learners actually know that they have to always practice many times in their spare time to gain good speaking ability.
Based on the problems faced by the learners above, researcher attempts to use Talking Chips technique in teaching speaking in order the learners can speak fluently and accurately. Researcher believes that Talking Chips technique will make the learners interested and active in speaking activity in the class. In this technique, the leaners will be divided into some groups and each member in the group will have chance and role to speak. Therefore, this technique is hoped to improve students’ speaking ability fluently and accurately. Last but not least, the researcher is going to carry this study to the fourth semester students of English education study program at Malang Islamic University.
1.2 Research Problem
            Based on the background of the study above, the problem is formulated as follows: Will students who are taught by using Talking Chips technique have better speaking skill than students who are taught by using conventional way?
1.3 Objective of the Study
            The objective of this study is to describe how Talking Chips technique can improve the fourth semester students’ speaking skill of English education study program at Malang Islamic University.
1.4 Research Hypotheses
            Based on the research problem above, the researcher hypothesize that students who will be taught by using Talking Chips technique will have improvement towards students’ speaking skill comparing to the students who are taught by using conventional way.
1.5 Assumption of the Study
            Based on the background of the study above, the researcher assumes that by using Talking Chips technique, the students will be active in the classroom learning activity. All students will speak and give the idea, opinion, argumentation, or even question using English language in the class. Students will be interested to speak much by using this technique. When the students are active and interested to speak in the classroom learning activity, they will improve their speaking skill. In other words, by using this Talking Chips technique, the students’ speaking skill will be improved.
1.6 Significance of the Study
            The researcher hopes so much this study will yield beneficial results that can be contributed to the English teachers who teach English subject especially in Indonesia or even all over the world as their materials reference. The researcher hopes to help the English teachers with their problems in teaching speaking in the class. The researcher also do hopes that this study will help the English learners to master English language especially in speaking component and increase the students’ academic achievement.
1.7 Scope and Limitation                
            This study will just focus on using Talking Chips technique in the speaking classroom learning activity to improve the fourth semester students’ speaking skill of English education study program at Malang Islamic University. In other words, this study will just focus on improving one of four components in English language, that is speaking component by using Talking Chips technique.
1.8 Definition of Key Terms
            In order to avoid misunderstanding of the terms used in this study, the following definitions are given:
1.     Effectiveness
Effectiveness is the ability the method given to be effective in the classroom learning activity and help the students to achieve the better English speaking skill. 
2.     Talking Chips
Talking Chips technique is a strategy to make the speaking classroom activity active and the students are interested to learn by dividing the students in the class into some groups and each member in the group will have chance and role to speak.
3.     Speaking
Make the students in the classroom activity speak and express their idea in English.
4.     Skill
Skill is the ability the students have in communicating in English whether in their daily communications or in the classroom learning activity.
5.     Improvement
Improvement is the process had by the students to enlarge their knowledge and make the students acquire the skill to communicate in English.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter discusses about some theories related to the topic relevant to this study. It concerns to the definition of speaking, the importance of speaking English, problems on speaking English, Talking Chips technique, why Talking Chips technique is appropriate in teaching speaking, how to implement Talking Chips technique in teaching speaking, and previous studies.
2.1 Speaking
            Speaking is a main component in a language. Language has to be spoken. That’s why, in English language, learners should master this skill to master a language. Speaking will connect people all over the world. By speaking, people can give their information and ideas to other people. There are several experts who define speaking in different definitions. Broady (2015, as cited in Rahmah, 2014) stated that, “speaking is usually considered as the core skill in foreign language learning and it is what learners want to be able to do”. It means that speaking is the most important skill in a foreign language like English that learners have to master. “Speaking is the productive oral skill that consists of producing systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning” (Nunan, 20013, as cited in Novika, 2014). Therefore, through speaking, people will be able to transfer what they want to say and their mean to people they are communicating to.
            From the definitions coming from two experts above, the researcher can conclude that speaking is the main skill in a language and a way of people conveying the meaningful ideas and information to other people they are talking to.
 
2.2 The Importance of Speaking English
            English has become the international language in this globalization era. Almost all countries all over the world make this language as their second language in their daily activities. They use this language in economic, politic, and education sides. All learners and people will become competitive people by being able to speak this language fluently and accurately. Let’s see, almost all companies all over the world require English mastery especially in speaking skill to hire and accept employee. It means that, mastering speaking skill in English will help much for the learners and people who master it to easily get job, be politician, and develop the education side in their countries. As Murcia (2001, as cited by Arbain, 2014) stated that, “speaking is a second or foreign language has often been viewed as the most demanding of the four skills”. This definition gives us meaning that learners who can master speaking skill in English will have a great opportunity to gain things through this skill.
2.3 Problems on Speaking English
            As Indonesian people, English is not our first language. English is our second language or even our foreign language. Students who have learned this language from elementary school till senior high school: they still can’t communicate in this language fluently. Knowing this fact, the researcher can say that communicating or speaking English is not easy because of the problems the learners face. Based on the researcher’s experience in learning to speak English fluently, there are several problems the researcher has. They are less of vocabulary and grammar mastery. Relating to the learners’ problems around, they also have such problems. They have no enough English vocabulary to help them to speak English fluently without thinking the words and meaning to be spoken. They also think much of the structure whether or not the structure use is right in their speaking. It also affects the learners’ fluency in speaking if they think much of the English structure, they will not speak because of afraid of creating mistake. Ur (2003, as cited in Rohadi, 2013) stated that, “there are four problems faced by the learners in speaking activities. The problems include inhibition, nothing to say, low or uneven participation, and mother-tongue use”. These four problems will cause the accuracy and fluency in speaking. Learners should be able to solve these four problems to speak English fluently.
2.4 Talking Chips Technique
Kagan (2010, as cited in Syafryadin, 2013) explained that talking chips technique is a technique that is used in teaching speaking to make the students active in the class. In implementing this technique in the class, the students are divided into several groups and all members in each group are given chips. These chips are given to the students to be used every the student wants to speak. Every the student who has spoken, he/she has to put the chips in the middle of the table. If the chips are over, he/she is not allowed to speak until all members’ chips are also over. The students will be given the chips again if the discussion in the class is not finished yet.
In addition, the definition of talking chips technique above, the researcher tries to include more definition according to the other experts on this article. According to Gray, inspired by Reeves’s (2010, as cited in Herianto, 2013) explained that talking chips technique is a technique to make the students have opportunity to speak. More definition stated by Hilson (2010, as cited in Herianto, 2013) that elaborated that, “talking chips is the strategies guarantees equal participation in discussion groups. Each group member receives the same member of poker chips (or any other markers, such as index cards”. Talking chips technique definition is also defined by Turville (2008, as cited in Herianto, 2013) that stated that talking chips is a way to make the students’ participation equal in the class by using chips on each group discussion.
From the definition presented by several experts above, the researcher comes to a conclusion that talking chips technique is a technique which is applied by the teacher in teaching speaking. This technique is very effective to be used by the teacher in the class because this technique can make all students taught in the class active in speaking activity. On the other words, this technique tries not to make the speaking activity in the class dominated by a student only.
2.5 Why Talking Chips technique is appropriate in teaching speaking
            In teaching activity, the teacher will gain successfulness towards the students when the teachers can know what technique can be appropriate and helpful for the students in the class. Students will never get improvement, and they will not pay more attention to the teacher and lesson when the teacher cannot decide and use the best and suitable technique to be used in the class. Especially in speaking ability, speaking ability is one of difficult skills in English that the students’ feel difficult to gain improvement. Knowing this problem, the teacher should be sensitive to decide and use the appropriate technique in the teaching activity.
In this article, the researcher tries to take up talking chips technique to improve students’ speaking ability. The use and applying talking chips technique will be very helpful to improve students’ speaking ability because talking chips technique is one of teaching techniques that can make the students’ speaking skill improve. It can improve students’ speaking ability because when the teachers apply this technique in the class, the students’ are monitored to be active in the class, not only a student that dominates the speaking activity in the class. In addition, this technique forces the students to be active in the speaking activity in the class.
The main point of this technique usage is the teacher should know first how to apply this technique in the class because this technique has several procedures. The procedures that are on this technique will really help the students’ active to speak in the class activity. On the other words, the teacher’s role in implementing this technique is very important to gain successfulness whether to make the students monitored as long as the teaching activity or to gain good result in improving students’ speaking ability in the end of implementing the technique.
2.6 How to implement Talking Chips technique in teaching speaking
            In applying talking chips technique, teachers should know the steps and procedures to apply this technique in the teaching speaking. According to Kagan (1992, as cited in Herianto, 2013) that clarified that first, each person is given a number of markers. Second, each time a person wants to talk, a chip is placed in the center of the table. Third, when an individual’s chips are all in the center of the table, she/ he cannot talk again until everyone’s chips are all in the center. Last, the chips are then retrieved and tribute to begin again.
            Kagan (2010, as cited in Syafryadin, 2013) also clarified that first, the teacher gives a topic for the discussion. Second, student who wants to start the discussion, he/she should put the chip on the center of the group table. Third, when a member of the group has already used all chips, the other members on the group continues the discussion. Fourth, as long as the discussion is going on, accuracy and fluency of the students will be viewed. Besides, in evaluation, all students will also be assessed about the accuracy and the fluency.
            Knowing the steps and procedures of implementing talking chips technique, teachers do need to know all the steps in implementing this technique in the teaching speaking to gain successfulness. Students will really be helped to improve their speaking ability by using this technique.
2.7 Previous Studies
            This study proposal will be much better if the researcher includes and states the previous studies related to the talking chips technique used in teaching speaking.
First study conducted by Syafryadin whose study entitled “The Use of Talking Chips Technique in Improving Students’ Speaking Achievement”. He implemented talking chips technique to the grade X in one of senior high schools in Bandung in year 2013. On the implementation of this technique, the researcher conducted three cycles in the class, and each cycle really gained good improvement towards students’ speaking ability. Before the researcher applied this technique to the students, the researcher first reviewed about present tense. Then researcher started applying this technique in the class. In every cycle, the students’ got improvement even though they still had problems on the speaking. The problems can be lessened from the first cycle to the third cycle. To show the last result of the researcher after implementing this technique, the researcher wants to include the result in score on every cycle done in the class. In cycle one, the mean score of fluency was 61.1 and 62.81 for accuracy. In cycle 2, the mean score of students in fluency was 67.207 and accuracy was 68.05. In cycle 3, the mean score of fluency was 71.451 and accuracy was 74.69.
Second previous study conducted by Hardiyanti, Rochsantiningsih, and Setyaningsih whose study under title Using Talking Chips to Improve Students’ Participation in EFL Classroom. They implemented this technique in State Senior High School 5 Surakarta at class X-5 in the academic year of 2012/2013. The researchers implemented and finished the teaching activity in five (5) meetings. The researchers also included game activity in the class to make the students active and participate in the teaching speaking. To know the result of the implementation done by them, the researcher tries to include the improvement gained by the students by comparing the pre-observation and post-observation on the fifth meeting toward the implementing talking chips technique. Natural desire to participate, this aspect improves from 54.2% to 83.3% on the post-observation. Confidence, this aspect improves from 63.3% to 88.3% on the post observation. Enjoying discussion, it improves from 68.3% to 90.8% on the post-observation. Spontaneity, it improves from 38.3% to 53.3% on the post-observation. Focus, it achieves from 68.3% to 82.5% on the post-observation. This result can be concluded that talking chips technique really helps the improvement of students’ speaking ability.

 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter consists of the research design, Population and Sample, Research Instruments, Procedure of Data Collection, and Data Analysis.
3.1 Research Design
            The research design of this study will be Experimental Design. The researcher will apply Two Groups, Randomized Subjects, Posttest Only Design. Ary, Jacobs, and Razavied (1979, p. 225) stated that, “the experiment is generally regarded as the most sophisticated research method for testing hypotheses.” According to Hadi (1988, 65, as cited in Aksani, 2013) that stated that, “an experimental design is one of the precise methods to examine the cause and effect because of the fact, instruction toward a group and experimental sample.” The instructional activity will be designed only to teach students about speaking by using Talking Chips technique toward the experimental group, the group of sample will have interview to measure the effect that students get after the treatment. The researcher hopes that by using Experimental Design, exactly Two Groups, Randomized Subjects, Posttest Only Design on this study, this study will gain strong result that will be stated in the conclusion chapter. The researcher also hopes that the hypotheses the researcher has made will be correct after implementing this proposal study.
            The researcher will have two groups as the subjects on the study. These are control group and experimental group. The control group will be using conventional teaching way and the special treatment will be using Experimental Design. This study is adopted from Ary, Jacobs, and Razavied (1979, p. 250).

Table 3.1 Two Groups, Randomized Subjects, Posttest- Only Design

Group
Independent variable
Posttest
(R)
(R)
E
C
X
-
Y2
Y2
Notes :
R    = Randomized
E     = experimental group
C     = control group
X     = treatment on the experiment group
Y2  = posttest
            After being implemented the independent variables in both groups, experimental and control group. Measurement on the dependent variable for both groups will be done at the same time with the same test called posttest.
3.2 Population and Sample
3.2.1 Population
       According to Sudjana ( 2005, p. 74, as cited in Aksani, 2013) population is totality of all value which possible, result of counting/calculating or measurement, quantitative and also qualitative hit the certain characteristic from all clear and complete corps member is which wish learned by the nature. The population of this study will be all fourth students semester of English education study program at Malang Islamic University. The students are 125 students. The students are divided into five classes, so each class consists of 25 students.
3.2.2 Sample
            “Sample is shares or proxy from accurate population”, ( Arikunto, 2006 , p. 87, as cited Aksani, 2013). From 125 students as the population, the researcher will take 50 students as the sample of this study by using Cluster sampling. Twenty students (25) join the Experimental group, and twenty five (25) others will join control group.
3.3 Research Instrument
            Research instrument is absolutely important in any scientific research for collecting the data. To know the right and accuracy result, the researcher has to prepare the research instrument well before carrying out the study.
            The researcher will use interview that will be applied in form of unstructured interviews as the instrument. The researcher will provide 10 questions for each student. These 10 questions will be given after the study is implemented in both groups, experimental and control group. In other words, these are the students’ posttest that they will get. The 10 items will be taken from the students’ textbook used in the classroom learning activity.
3.4 Procedure of Data Collection
            The researcher will prepare the interview questions as the procedure for collecting the data. The interview will be applied in form of unstructured interviews. Each question will be given score ranking from 0-100. The high and low point will be based on the students’ answer looking at the accuracy, fluency, and the structures mastery. After the students of experimental and the control group answer the questions, then the researcher will calculate both scores of experimental and control group students. After all, the researcher will compare the final score. If the experimental group’s score is higher than the control group score, it means that the hypotheses made by the researcher is right or proved.
3.5 Data Analysis
            The data analysis on this study will be done by using computer program called SPSS.

Reference
Aksani, A. N. (2013). The effect of think aloud strategy toward students reading skill: Study at 9th grade SMP Negeri 19 Mataram in academic year 2013/2014 (Unpublished thesis). Universitas Ahmad Dahlan Yogyakarta, Indonesia
 Arbain, M. (2014). A descriptive study on the teaching of speaking skill at the eleventh grade of SMAN 4 Banjarmasin. Language-Edu Journal of English Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 59-67.
 Arsyad, M. (2014). Problems and solutions in developing speaking skill by the students of midwifery academic study of Banua Bina Husada Banjarbaru. Language-Edu Journal of English Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 67-73.
 Herdiyanti, F., Rochsantiningsih, D., & Setyaningsih, E. (2013). Using Talking Chips to improve students’ participant in EFL classroom (Unpublished Thesis). Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia.
 Maulida, R. (2014). The effectiveness of unscripted role play on teaching speaking skill at English intensive class in State Islamic University of Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang. Language-Edu Journal of English Teaching and Learning, 3(3), 222-227.
 Novika, H. (2014). The effectiveness of using group work to improve the fourth semester students’ speaking skill at English department of Uniska Muhammad Arsyad Al-Banjary Banjarmasin. Language-Edu Journal of English Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 43-49.
 Rohadi, I. (2013). The effectiveness of role play on speaking ability of the seventh grade students of MTsN Kediri II Kediri. Language-Edu Journal of English Teaching and Learning, 2(3), 451-458.
Syafryadin. (2013). The use of talking chips technique in improving students’ Speaking achievement (Unpublished thesis). Indonesia University of Education, Indonesia.

A Study of Correlation between Learners’ Beliefs and Language Proficiency

By Sudar Indrawati


Abstract
Learners have different beliefs about language learning. Some of them perhaps think that English is easy, learning grammar is more important than vocabulary, we do not need language aptitude to learn the target language during we strive for, et cetera. These beliefs will influence their attitude and experience as language learners in language learning. Moreover, learners’ beliefs could be either facilitate or obstruct, and it can influence their language proficiency. The study focused on the role of learners beliefs in predicting language proficiency.  A Horwitz’s BALLI questionnaire and TOEFL preparation test were administered to 81 English learners of the fourth semester of UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang. The results showed that the linear combination of the five aspects of learner beliefs do not significantly affect proficiency attainment, as measured by TOEFL. In order word, learner beliefs do not contribute to learner English proficiency.
Keywords: learner beliefs, language proficiency
The linguists say that learning a foreign and/or second language is not an easy thing. It needs hard efforts. We have to provide our time, energy, mind, and even money to learn it. Without a sacrifice, it is impossible for us to master it well.
            However, each learner has different characteristics. Individual differences affect second language attainment success. Individual differences (IDs) are characteristics or traits in respect of which individuals may be shown to differ from each other (Dornyei, 2005, p. 1)
            And we know that English in Indonesia is a foreign language. As a foreign language, we do not use it in our daily activities. Commonly, we just find it in the class where it is being taught. So, some of us get harder to learn English than other.   
            Why do individuals differ so much in foreign and/or second language attainment success? There are many factors influence success of learners to learn English. One of them is learner beliefs. It is regarded main variable contributing to individual learner differences in foreign and/or second language learning besides language aptitude and motivation.
Teachers have come to view language learners as individuals approaching language learning in their own unique way. As this issue reflects, one of the important areas of current interest about language learners is their beliefs about language learning. Learner beliefs have the potential to influence both their experiences and actions as language learners (Horwitz, 1999).
 Clearly ‘beliefs’ constitute an individual difference variable notably different from the other individual difference factors such as language aptitude or motivation but, like these variables, beliefs influence both the process and product of learning. Also, like a number of other individual difference variables, they are dynamic and situated (Ellis, 2008). Educational psychology supports the proposition of the importance of beliefs that learners hold as a defining factor of their learning behavior (Nikitina and Furuoka, 2006).
Learners have different beliefs about language learning. Some of them perhaps think that English is easy, learning grammar is more important than vocabulary, we do not need language aptitude to learn the target language during we strive for, et cetera. These beliefs will influence their attitude in language learning. Moreover, learners’ beliefs could be either facilitate or obstruct, and it can influence their language proficiency. 
However, as learners want to be successful in learning English, they must possess high-sense of self belief. Without confidence about their ability, it is impossible for them to learn English easily and effectively. As stated above that learners’ beliefs influence learners’ behaviors, in particular, choice of learning strategies, and their affective states such as confidence and anxiety, and thereby affect both linguistic outcomes (i.e., changes in competence, knowledge, and skills in some aspect of the target language) and nonlinguistic outcomes (i.e., changes in reactions to the target language, the situation, and/or factors associated with the target language) (Tanaka and Ellis, 2003).
Some researchers have been interesting to investigate between learner beliefs and language proficiency. However, it has been done in different perspectives. Tanaka and Ellis (2003) examined the effect of study-abroad in learner beliefs and language proficiency, the role of leaner beliefs in language proficiency all at once. They divided learner beliefs into three aspects, namely analytic learning, experiential learning and self-efficacy and confidence. They found that the mean total TOEFL score for the 166 students improved 18.55 points from 426.73 to 445.28 before and after studying abroad. In other words, it reflected an improvement of only 4.35%. And the three belief aspects of learners had changed at before and after studying abroad. If before studying abroad analytic Learning, experiential learning and self-efficacy and confidence ranked 2, 1,3 respectively while after studying abroad they ranked 3, 1, 2.It showed that the greatest changes concerned Self-Efficacy and Confidence.
Loewen et al (2009) focused their study on learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. They used six factors to investigate it. They are efficacy of grammar, negative attitude toward error correction, priority of communication, importance of grammar, importance of grammatical accuracy, negative attitudes toward grammar instruction. They found that learners had a general view of the efficacy or usefulness of grammar instruction. However, some learners held negative views of grammar instruction and still others prioritized communication over grammar.
Jafari and Shokrpour (2012) investigated 80 (40 female and 40 male students) Iranian ESP learners' beliefs about language learning. It also aimed at finding the effect of gender on learners' beliefs about language learning. The findings revealed that the highest mean average among the five components of beliefs about language learning is belief of motivations and expectations (M=3.1208), followed by belief of learning and communication strategies (M=3.0150), and belief of difficulty of language learning (M=2.5828). The two components with the lowest scores were belief of the nature of language (M=2.3479) and belief of foreign language aptitude (M=2.1917). Moreover, there was a significant difference between learners’ beliefs and gender. It proved by
 t=-9.111,p<.05.
  So, based on above statements, the researcher was interested in studying learner beliefs and language proficiency. The researcher validated Horwitz’s theory. She says that learner beliefs influence learning successful. Is there correlation between learner beliefs and language proficiency?

Method
Design
The study used a correlation design. It measures the relationship between two variables learners’ beliefs about language learning and language proficiency were examined at learners of UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang. Learners’ beliefs were predictor, while language proficiency was criterion. Learners’ beliefs consist of five themes, namely foreign language aptitude, the difficulty of language learning, the nature of language learning, learning and communication strategies, and motivation and expectations.

Participants
The participants were 81 learners of the fourth semester of English Department of UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang. Based on the information given by the teacher, their age was around 19 year olds and their English proficiency level was intermediate one. The teacher chooses those two classes for the researcher.
Instrument
The researcher used the instruments to complete her data were a modified Indonesian version of Horwitz’s BALLI questionnaire and a paper-based version of TOEFL (preparation) test.
            To determine the construct validity of the questionnaire, the BALLI was translated into Indonesian by the researcher, and then it was checked by the researcher’s advisor. It was done to find out the suitable translation of each item.
            The items were further tested for reliability using SPSS, version 15.0. To examine the internal reliability of the questionnaire, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated on the items relating to each of the five themes of The BALLI. And the alpha was α = .795.

Data Collection Procedures
In collecting the data, the researcher applied the following ways:
            First, the researcher examined learners’ English proficiency by TOEFL (preparation) test. Before the learners did the test, the researcher explained the instruction of what the learners should do in TOEFL (preparation) test. 
Second, after participants finished TOEFL (preparation) test, the researcher distributed questionnaire to get data. To complete the questionnaire, 30 minutes was allotted. Before filling the questionnaire, the researcher gave an instruction to the participants, making sure questionnaire filled completely. As the participants submitted questionnaire, once again the researcher checked learners’ responses of belief about language learning. If there were missing responses, the researcher would ask the participants to complete it. So, there were no missing data.
After, the researcher was sure that the data were complete. She labeled the data one by one by giving number. It starts from 1 to 81.
After labeling the learners’ answer sheet of TOEFL (preparation) test and BALLI questionnaire, the researcher checked the learners’ work and counted the number of correct answer in each section separately. Then, the researcher determined the converted score that corresponds to the number of correct answers for each section. The last was figuring out the total score by adding the three converted scores from listening comprehension, structure and written expression, and vocabulary and reading comprehension, dividing the product by 3, and multiplying the sum by 10.
Meanwhile, on the BALLI, the researcher checked and counted the mean of students’ responses based on five themes separately.


Techniques of Data Analysis
To analyze the data, the researcher used SPSS, version 15.0. After collecting and studying data that were taken from samples. In order to explore the results of this study fully, TOEFL (preparation) test score and BALLI were calculated by multiple regression analysis and multiple correlation. Multiple regression analysis allows the researcher to predict the score of dependent variable (criterion) from two or more independent variable (predictors). The researcher started analyzing data in the following steps:
  1. The researcher scored learners’ TOEFL (preparation) test to measure English proficiency.
  2. Then, the researcher counted the mean score of learners’ responses questionnaire of each aspect of learners’ beliefs.
  3. All scores both learners’ TOEFL(preparation) test and each aspect of learner beliefs entered into SPSS version 15.0 used multiple regression analysis and multiple correlation.
  4. The researcher made conclusion based on results of SPSS to answer the research problem.

Results and Discussion
The Results of Data Analysis
According to result of SPSS version 15.0, exactly regression analysis, the researcher got the descriptive statistics as below:
      Table.1Descriptive Statistics

Mean
Std. Deviation
N
Language proficiency
487.79
38.686
81
Foreign language aptitude
2.534979
.4079121
81
The difficulty of language learning
2.561728
.3296088
81
The nature of language learning
2.296296
.5257270
81
Learning and communication strategies
2.526235
.3921675
81
Motivation and expectations
2.108642
.5891090
81

                  
           
            According to table of descriptive statistics, the researcher got mean of language proficiency was 487.79. It indicates that the samples were intermediate level while mean of each theme of the BALLI was around 2.10 – 2.56. Regarding the five aspects of beliefs about language learning, the results revealed that learners have the strongest belief in difficulty of language learning (M=2.56), followed by belief of foreign language aptitude (M=2.53) and belief of learning and communication strategies (2.52). The two aspects with the lowest scores are belief of the nature of language learning (M=2.29) and belief of motivation and expectations (M=2.10).
            This finding is different with outcome reported by Tanaka and Ellis (2003). On their study beliefs of experiential learning (learning and communication strategies, borrowing horwitz’s term) ranked 1 while in the present study it ranked 3. Refer to Bandura statements (as cited in Alderman, 2004, pp. 71-72) about the source of self-efficacy beliefs, physiological states is the least powerful. The timid feeling as speaking English with other people (item no. 21 of learning and communication strategies aspect of learner belief) will influence their beliefs about language learning. They do not have confidence or self-efficacy beliefs. So, they will tend to avoid speaking English with other ones.
            However, it is consistent with outcome reported by Jafari and Shokrpour (2012). They reported that gender affect beliefs about language learning. The female learners had more overall optimistic beliefs and they agree that certain approaches were important in language learning. One of foreign language aptitude items on Horwitz’s BALLI is “women are better than men at learning foreign language”. The present study revealed that foreign language aptitude rank 2.
            Beliefs about ability (aptitude) are closely related to the expectancies students have for success on an upcoming task and the values they hold for the task (Bandura, 1986; Meece, Eccles, & Wigfield, 1990 as cited in Alderman, 2004, p. 67). When students believe they can succeed in a task or subject, they are more likely to undertake it and their value for it increases (Bandura, 1986; Mac Iver, Stipek, & Daniels, 1991 as cited in Alderman, 2004, p. 67). It makes the strength of foreign language aptitude was stronger than the other aspects of leaner belief such as learning and communication strategies, the nature of language learning, and motivation and expectations.
            But, beliefs in motivation and expectations were different in the result. According to Jafari and Shokrpour (2012) motivation and expectations had the highest mean score compared with other aspects of beliefs while in this study it had the lowest mean score.
This study also revealed that the nature of language learning had low mean score, it is same with Loewen et al (2009) finding. One item of the nature of language learning is “the most important part of learning a foreign language is learning the grammar”. They stated that some learners held negative views of grammar instruction and still others prioritized communication over grammar.
            Besides that, from results of multiple correlation, the researcher found some points as stated below:
  1. Relationship between Learners’ Beliefs and Language Proficiency
   Table.2 The Correlations between Learners’ Beliefs and Language Proficiency


Language proficiency
Pearson Correlation
Foreign language aptitude
.058

The difficulty of language learning
.047

The nature of language learning
.169

Learning and communication strategies
-.024

Motivation and expectations
.159

To examine the relationship between learners’ beliefs and language proficiency, Pearson Correlation Coefficients were computed between learners’ mean score for the five themes measured by the learner beliefs questionnaire and their TOEFL preparation score. And the researcher got the result as stated above table. It shows that correlations among five aspects of learner beliefs and language proficiency were weak. And even there was negative low correlation, exactly on learning and communication strategies.
Table.3 Model Summary of  Learners’ Beliefs and Language Proficiency
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.230
.053
-.010
38.880

Table.4 Anova of  Learners’ Beliefs and Language Proficiency

Model

Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.

1

Regression

6356.884

5

1271.377

.841

.525
 

Residual
113374.549
75
1511.661


 

Total
119731.432
80



Based on results of SPSS, exactly regression analysis, the researcher found that there is no correlation between learner beliefs and language proficiency. The Multiple Correlation coefficient (R) is .230 and the square of the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R2) is .053 indicating that the total variance of English proficiency, as measured by TOEFL which is attributable to five aspects of learner beliefs is 5.3%. Moreover, the analysis of variance obtained an F-VALUE .841(p< .525) suggesting that the research hypothesis is rejected the null hypotheses is accepted. It means that the linear combination of the five aspects of learner beliefs does not significantly affect proficiency attainment, as measured by TOEFL. In order word, learners’ beliefs do not contribute to learner English proficiency. So, Learner beliefs are not the significant predictor of language proficiency.
This finding was same as Tanaka and Ellis stated on their study. Tanaka and Ellis (2003) reported a study of a 15-week study-abroad programme [aic] for Japanese university students, examining changes in the students’ beliefs about language learning (measured by means of a questionnaire) and in their English proficiency (measured by means of the TOEFL). The results showed statistically significant changes in the students’ beliefs relating to analytic language learning, experiential language learning and especially self-efficacy/confidence during the study-abroad period. Statistically significant gains in proficiency were also reported. However, Pearson Product Moment correlations between the students’ responses to the Belief Questionnaire and their TOEFL scores both before and after the study abroad period were weak and generally statistically non-significant. There was also no relationship between changes in beliefs after a three-month period of study abroad and gains in proficiency.
Overall these studies do not show a strong relationship between beliefs and learning/proficiency. However, it is perhaps not surprising that the relationship between beliefs and proficiency is weak, as the fact that learners hold a particular belief is no guarantee they will act on it; conflicts with other strongly held beliefs, situational constraints, or personal reasons may prevent them. If beliefs do impact on learning it is likely that they do so indirectly by influencing the kinds of learning strategies learners employ (Tanaka and Ellis, 2003).

  1. Relationship between Learners’ Beliefs and Listening Comprehension.
Table.5 The Correlations between Learners’ Beliefs and Listening Comprehension


Listening comprehension
Pearson correlation
Foreign language aptitude
.039

The difficulty of language learning
.020

The nature of language learning
.145

Learning and communication strategies
-.056

Motivation and expectations
-.016

To examine the relationship between learners’ beliefs and listening comprehension, Pearson Correlation Coefficients were computed between learners’ mean score for the five themes measured by the learners’ beliefs questionnaire and their listening comprehension score. The researcher got scores were .039, .020, .145, -.056, and -.016 respectively. It means that correlations among each aspect of learners’ beliefs on listening comprehension were weak. Even, there were two negative low correlations.
Table.6 Model Summary of Learners’ Beliefs and Listening Comprehension
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.228
.052
-.011
4.870

   Table.7 Anova of  Learners’ Beliefs and Listening Comprehension
Model

Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
97.539
5
19.508
.823
.537
 
Residual
1778.634
75
23.715


 
Total
1876.173
80




The Multiple Correlation coefficient (R) is .228 and the square of the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R2) is .052 indicating that the total variance of listening comprehension, as measured by TOEFL which is attributable to learners’ beliefs was 5.2%. Moreover, the analysis of variance obtained an F-VALUE .823(p<.537). It means that the linear combination of the five aspects of learner beliefs does not significantly affect listening comprehension, as measured by TOEFL. In other words, learners’ beliefs do not contribute to listening comprehension


  1. Relationship between Learners’ Beliefs and Structure
 
 Table.8 The Correlations between Learners’ Beliefs and Structure


Structure
Pearson correlation
Foreign language aptitude
.042

The difficulty of language learning
.001

The nature of language learning
.137

Learning and communication strategies
.003

Motivation and expectations
.145

To examine the relationship between learners’ beliefs and structure, Pearson Correlation Coefficients were computed between learners’ mean score for the five themes measured by the learners’ beliefs questionnaire and their structure score. The researcher got scores as stated above. It indicates that the correlations among five aspects of beliefs and structure were low one.

   Table.9 Model Summary of Learners’ Beliefs and Structure
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.203
.041
-.023
5.521

   Table 10.Anova of learners’ beliefs and structure
Model

Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
98.301
5
19.660
.645
.666
 
Residual
2285.699
75
30.476



Total
2384.000
80




            And the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R) is .203 and the square of the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R2) is .041 indicating that the total variance of structure as measured by TOEFL which is attributable to learners’ beliefs is 4.1%. The analysis of variance obtained an F-VALUE .645(p<.666). It means that the linear combination of the five aspects of learner beliefs does not significantly affect structure, as measured by TOEFL. In other word, learners’ beliefs do not contribute to structure.

  1. Relationship between Learners’ Beliefs and Reading Comprehension 
   Table.11.The Correlations between Learners’ Beliefs and  Reading Comprehension


Reading comprehension
Pearson correlation
Foreign language aptitude
.125

The difficulty of language learning
.148

The nature of language learning
.153

Learning and communication strategies
.069

Motivation and expectations
.266(*)
*correlation is significant at the 0.01 level
To examine the relationship between learners’ beliefs and reading comprehension, Pearson Correlation Coefficients were computed between learners’ mean score for the five themes measured by the learners’ beliefs questionnaire and their reading comprehension score. The researcher got scores were .125, .148, .153, .069, and .266(*) respectively. It means that correlations among each aspect of learner beliefs on reading comprehension were weak, except motivation and expectations. It had the significance correlation at the 0.01 level.
    Table.12.Model Summary of Learners’ Beliefs and Reading Comprehension
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.269
.072
.011
4.496

   Table.13 Anova of  Learners’ Beliefs and Reading Comprehension
Model

Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
118.254
5
23.651
1.170
.332
 
Residual
1515.746
75
20.210



Total
1634.000
80




The Multiple Correlation coefficient (R) is .269 and the square of the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R2) is .072 indicating that the total variance of reading comprehension, as measured by TOEFL which is attributable to learner beliefs was 7.2%. Moreover, the analysis of variance obtained an F-VALUE 1.170 (p<.332). It means that the linear combination of the five aspects of learner beliefs does not significantly affect reading comprehension, as measured by TOEFL, except motivation and expectations.

Conclusions

Conclusion
After calculating all data both learners’ mean score for the five themes measured by the learners’ beliefs questionnaire and language proficiency measured by TOEFL (preparation) test, the researcher inferred that:
1.     Learners’ beliefs are not the significant predictor of language proficiency.
Based on the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R) was .230 and the square of the Multiple Correlation coefficient (R2) was .053 indicating that the total variance of English proficiency, as measured by TOEFL which is attributable to BALLI was 5.3%. Moreover, the analysis of variance obtained an F-VALUE .841(p<.525) suggesting that the research hypothesis was rejected the null hypotheses was accepted. It means that the linear combination of the five aspects of learner beliefs did not significantly affect proficiency attainment, as measured by TOEFL. In order word, learner beliefs did not contribute to learner English proficiency. So, Learner beliefs are not the significant predictor of language proficiency.
2.     The relationship between learners’ beliefs and language proficiency.
There was no correlation between learners’ beliefs and language proficiency. It proved by F-VALUE .841(p<.525).
3.     The relationship between learners’ beliefs and listening comprehension
There was no correlation between learners’ beliefs and listening comprehension. It proved by F-VALUE .823(p<.537).
4.      The relationship between learners’ beliefs and structure
There was no correlation between  learners’ beliefs and structure. It proved by F-VALUE .645(p<.666).
5.     The relationship between learners’ beliefs and reading comprehension
There was no correlation between learners’ beliefs and reading comprehension. It proved by F-VALUE 1.170(p<.332).

Suggestions
  • For teachers, teachers can improve their learners’ language proficiency by understanding learners’ beliefs. If teachers understand how these opinions (learners’ beliefs) may influence how learners approach and feel about their language classes.
  • For future researcher, the researcher suggests that to investigate about learners’ beliefs and language proficiency more detail, the other researcher should use qualitative methods, for example case study method, rather than the quantitative method employed in the study reported here.



References
Alderman, M. K. (2004). Motivation for achievement: Possibilities for teaching  and learning (2nd Ed). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Publisher.
Ellis, R. (2008). Learner belief and language learning. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 10:7-25.
Horwitz, E. K. (1999). Cultural and situational influences on foreign language learners'  beliefs about language learning: A review of BALLI studies. System, 27: 557-576.
Jafari, M & Shokrpour, N. (2012). The beliefs of iranian esp students about language learning. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 2 (3):157-163.
Loewen, S. et al. (2009). Second language learner’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal, 93, i, (2009).
Nikitina,L & Furuoka, F. (2006). Re-examining Horwitz’s beliefs about language learning inventory (Balli) in the Malaysian context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 3:209-219
Tanaka, K & Ellis, R. (2003). Study-abroad, language proficiency, and learner beliefs about language learning. Japan Association for Language Teaching, 25:63-5.