The Relationship Between Learning Styles and Vocabulary Mastery of The Second Grade Students at SMAN 14 Samarinda
The Relationship Between Learning Styles and Vocabulary Mastery of The Second Grade Students at SMAN 14 Samarinda
The Relationship Between Learning Styles and Vocabulary Mastery of The Second Grade Students at SMAN 14 Samarinda
Abstract
This research was aimed to find out the students’ learning styles, the vocabulary
mastery, and correlation between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary
masteries of the second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda in academic year
2017/2018. The design of this study was mixed method with correlational design. The
sample of this study was the second grade students of SMAN 14 Samarinda in
academic year 2017/2018. The instruments of this study were questionnaire of
students’ learning styles, vocabulary test, and interview. In analyzing the data, the
researcher first analyzed students’ learning style questionnaire, scoring the
vocabulary test, correlated the score of students’ learning styles and their vocabulary
masteries using Product Moment Formula. The findings of this study showed that
there were 49 students (66%) preferred visual learning style, 16 students (22%)
preferred auditory learning style, and 9 students (12%) preferred kinesthetic learning
style. The mean score of students’ vocabulary mastery was 57.35. It showed that the
students’ vocabulary mastery was poor. The students’ vocabulary mastery scores can
be classified into five criteria, in which excellent 3 students (4%), good 19 students
(26%), fair 12 students (16%), poor 17 students (23%), and failure 23 students
(31%). Based on the calculation of the correlation between students’ learning styles
and vocabulary mastery showed that significance value was higher than 0.05 (0.200
> 0.05). It means that H0 was accepted and Ha was rejected. There was no significant
correlation between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary masteries of the
second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda in academic years 2017/2018.
role for students in language learning. They have to master large storage of
vocabularies so that they will not have difficulty to read the text because of
the limited words they acquire, as Wilkins (1972: 111-112) explained that “...
However, some students may also still have lack vocabulary and have
problems in acquiring English vocabulary. They may still have the difficulty
in memorizing the words and making sentence, in which the words used are
too general and have no variation. They also still do not know the meaning of
some certain words so that they still have the difficulty in comprehending the
text. If they did not know how to increase their vocabulary, they will
increasingly lose interest in learning. One of the causes is that they learn
about the relationship between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary
masteries by conducting this study. This research was conducted to find the
the learning style of the second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda, and
to know the students whose adequate storage of vocabulary, and the students
1. What are students’ learning styles of the second grade students at SMAN
14 Samarinda ?
SMAN 14 Samarinda ?
literature which is underlying and assisting the title of the thesis. Some
theories are given by the researcher that support the study as follows:
easy. Their learning styles are influenced by subject matter, context, age,
Dunn (1990: 2) who say that learning styles often alter with age, culture, and
gender. They also defined learning style as “the way in which each learner
begins to concentrate on, process, and retain new and difficult information.”.
According to Jensen & Nickelsen (2011: 35), there are three types of
learning style that can be used by students to learn and improve their
vocabulary skill, such as visual style, auditory style, and kinesthetic style. By
using visual style, the students can learn vocabulary by turning the words into
cartoons and memes, and so on, so that they have a great visual memory.
According to Reid (1998: 162), students with visual learning style tends to
learn by seeing and observing things. They tend to see and observe pictures,
& Hernacki (1999: 116) argue that visual learners are also neat and
disciplinary. De Porter & Hernacki (1999: 116) also contend that visual
forget to deliver verbal message and also have problem in selecting words
when they want to tell something, so that they prefer to demonstrate
identifying the words through sounds of voice, its tone and timbre. Fleming
(2014) adds that students with this types like oral reports. They like to speak,
discuss, and explain things with others. Oral test or task are preferred to them
than written test or task. They tend to be speaker in discussing activity and
118) say that auditory learners have difficulty with visual works. They have
problem in reading small fonts and easily tired to read, so that they often
wrong to read.
While for the students who use kinesthetic style, they can acquire
instincts, contacts, in which their muscles play a big role in learning. Reid
(2005: 121) says that kinesthetic learners are courageous to take a risk. They
prefer to answer question than to read the instruction first. DePorter &
physical attention and touch and stand close to people who talk to them to get
their attention
2.2. Concept of Vocabulary Mastery
Dictionary (1995) as “the words that are typically used when talking about a
meanings”.
comprehend and learn something. In school, students try to learn and practice
English to improve their vocabulary skill so that they are able to communicate
students are motivated to learn the basic words. Lewis & Hill (1990: 12)
explained that vocabulary mastery which is more useful for communication
stage when they are motivated to learn the basic words. Bachman (1990: 84)
stated that vocabulary ability involves both knowledge of language and the
vocabulary.
that students can improve their learning outcomes if they apply an appropriate
such as learning method and instruments which are interesting and innovative
in learning process.
3. Methodology
method through interview. According to Creswell & Plano Clark (2007: 5),
both quantitative and qualitative data in one study or series of studies with the
styles and their vocabulary masteries and to support the result of this study.
Based on the research question, this study deals with one relationship, which
variable (Y variable). The X variable is the students’ learning style, and the Y
3.2.1. Population
Krysik & Finn (2007: 108) define population as the amount of people,
The population of this research was the second grade students of SMA Negeri
3.2.2. Sample
The researcher took 104 students as the sample using simple random
104) as the process of selecting a sample in such a way that all individuals in
selected for the sample. The sample consists of 74 students were chosen as
sample of real test, and the other 30 students were chosen as the participant of
try out. It was done in order to make the significant result for this study.
3.3. Research Instruments
3.3.1. Questionnaire
The researcher used the the questionnaire which was adapted from
Perceptual Learning Style Preference Survey by Reid (1998). The items on the
The indicators of students’ learning style were adopted from the research
study by Faridah (2014: 21) which are based on the characteristics of each
learning style (visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles). The purpose
of questionnaire is to find out in which type of learning styles the students are.
The items were divided into two forms such as positive and negative items, in
which each item has five options which represented each type of learning
styles. The indicators of students’ learning style can be seen in Table 3.1.
(+) (-)
gesture
Total 21 12
Total Item 33
Note: The above total items in the questionnaire were before validity and
reliability test of instrument. After the test of instrument, there were only 15
vocabulary mastery. The researcher used some items based on the syllabus for
second graders of senior high school used by SMAN 14 Samarinda. This test
number 1 to 20, nouns 20 items number 21 to 40, and verbs 20 items number
41 to 60. After conducting try out, there were only 24 items, in which
adjectives 11 items number 1 to 11, nouns 8 items number 12 to 19, and verbs
and their vocabulary masteries and to support the result of this study, the
researcher did interview in this research study. The researcher used semi-
(Zorn, 2010: 1). The research asked five questions to the respondents which
consists of three students, in which the researcher took one student from each
group after classifying their learning styles such as visual, auditory, and
kinesthetic style, so that. The questions are about students’ way to learn
conducted try out for the second grade students of SMAN 14 Samarinda
before the final forms are prepared and distributed. The researcher analyzed
the learning style questionnaire and vocabulary test items in the try out to
measure the effectiveness of each item used. The items were analyzed whether
it can be used for real test or required to be revised, such as revising certain
question and adding other items. In this study, the researcher took 30 students
which consists of difficulty index. Difficulty index was used to measure how
good or bad the item is. A good items means that the items are not too easy or
too difficult. (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997: 173) The researcher used the
P=B
JS
JS = Number of Students
An item was determined by standard of difficulty index by Arikunto
The researcher used SPSS 16.0 to find out the validity of the
measures the real aptitude in the skill being tested and the extent to which the
analyses of the results of a test are acceptable, which depends on the particular
use the test is intended to serve (Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008: 2278). A
low validity of data. The judgment criteria whether the item is valid or invalid
smaller than r table score (< 0.361) with the level of significance is 5 %,
which is r table score is the total respondents of try out test (N), is 30 students,
the item is invalid (dropped). On the contrary, if the score is higher than r
The same as the validity, SPSS 16.0 was also used to find out the
0.71–0.90 Reliable
The indicators of learning style used to determine the students’ learning style
(+) (-)
error activity 9 8
moving
Total 6 3
Total Item 9
(1948). According to Kurtz & Mayo (1979: 193), the Pearson product moment
+1.00 and -1.00 which conveys the degree of correlation between two
variables.
style (X), the researcher calculated score for each type of learning style. The
highest students’ score determined what type they were. The following table
learning styles:
learning style was visual (49 students), followed by auditory (16 students),
and the last was kinesthetic (9 students). The ratio of the student total of each
12%
22%
66%
which the items are included as content words, such as 11 adjective items, 8
noun items, and 5 verb items. The total score of students’ vocabulary mastery
(Y) was 4244.4 from 74 students. The following table shows the frequency
F
35%
r
30%
o 25%
20%
m
15%
10%
5%
t
0%
100%
h
Excellent Good Fair Poor Failure
e
Table 4.2, it could be seen that the highest score was 96 and the lowest score
was 21. Based on the data, the range score was 75 (96 - 21), the mean score
was 57.35, and the standard deviation score was 16.95. It could be concluded
Vocabulary Masteries
The distribution of the students’ learning style and their listening skill
From the Table 4.3, it could be seen that there was no significant
learning style. The mean score of the students with visual learning style was
60, the mean score of the students with auditory learning style was 51.4, and
the mean score of the students’ with kinesthetic learning style was 54.7.
Furthermore, the mean score of all students’ was 57.3. It means that the
students’ with auditory learning style had the lowest mean score, the students’
with kinesthetic learning style had the average mean score, and the students’
with visual learning style had the highest mean score. Those students’
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic
find out the relationship between both of them by using Pearson Product
Students' Students'
Learning Vocabulary
Styles Mastery
1 -.151
Students' Learning Pearson
Styles Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .200
N 74 74
Pearson
Students' Vocabulary Correlation -.151 1
Mastery
Sig. (2-tailed) .200
N 74 74
Product Moment Correlation on SPSS 19. The result indicated that the
vocabulaey mastery test (Y). On the contrary, when the correlation coefficient
close to -1.00, it means that there is negative correlation between these two
Rumsey (2003).
Table 4.5. R Value Interpretation
R Value Interpretation
0 No linear relationship
styles and their vocabulary masteries was -0.151, it means that the relationship
From the analyzed data about the relationship between learning styles
students’ learning styles and their vocabulary masteries of the second grade
that that the students’ vocabulary mastery was poor. The students’
value was higher than 0.05 (0.200 > 0.05), so that it could be concluded