NATURAL APPROACH-BASED ACTIVITIES FORRAISING STUDENTS' WRITING ACHIEVEMENT

AND THEIR MOTIVATION TOGETHER WITH THECORRELATION IN-BETWEEN

(A Thesis)

ByMuhammad Fadli

MASTER IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING STUDY PROGRAMLANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENTTEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY

LAMPUNG UNIVERSITYBANDAR LAMPUNG

2019

i

ABSTRACT

NATURAL APPROACH-BASED ACTIVITIES FOR RAISINGSTUDENTS' WRITING ACHIEVEMENT AND THEIR MOTIVATION

TOGETHER WITH THE CORRELATION IN-BETWEEN

By

Muhammad Fadli

Drawing upon multiple stands and outcomes of research into Natural Approach, writing,achievement, motivation and motivation types, this study set out to discover whether NaturalApproach-based activities can be of which students’ writing achievement and motivation increaseis the outgrowth. It is also the aim of this study to shine new light on writing achievement-motivation correlation and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation through the answers to whether thewriting achievement significantly correlates to motivation, whether intrinsically motivatedstudents are better than extrinsically motivated students in terms of writing achievementimprovement and whether the achievements of highly motivated students in both intrinsic andextrinsic groups respectively improve more than their antipodes after being taught throughNatural Approach-based activities. It is quasi-experimental quantitative research which appliedthe one-group pretest-posttest design. The population of this research was the fifth semesterstudents of the English Education Department of the University of Lampung and the sample wasthirty-five students of one class. The results demonstrate that there was a significant increase inthe students’ writing achievement and an insignificant one in their motivation after the treatment.As for the writing achievement-motivation correlation, it was found negative. Among the resultsis that the intrinsically motivated students’ achievement increased more than the extrinsicallymotivated students’. Contrary to expectations, both types of the low motivated students surpassedtheir antipodes as far as writing achievement improvement is concerned. With the first and secondfindings in mind, it is safe to say such activities are significantly positive for the writingachievement, but, when it comes to motivation, they are insignificantly positive. The third andfourth findings affirm that motivation and the writing achievement are inversely related and suchactivities are more beneficial for intrinsically motivated students in terms of writing achievementimprovement. The fifth finding establishes stronger proof that the lack of motivation does nothamper students’ writing progress at all. On the contrary, it implies that the higher achievement astudent reaches, the less motivation he or she has. The combination of the third and fifth findingsprovides considerable support for the conceptual premise that motivation inversely affects thewriting achievement. For these reasons, the teachers and learning designers should considerNatural Approach while they are formulating the learning, especially when the intention is toenhance the writing achievement and motivation. They should also realize the inverse relationshipbetween these two elements so that they will provide appreciable mitigation of this phenomenon,which might be attributed to the plateau effect. Nonetheless, it is important to bear in mind that,on account of the limitations of this research, further studies taking these variables into accountneed to be undertaken, especially the research concerning motivational factors, the long-termapplication of Natural Approach, other English macro skills, the potential learning drawbacksencountered by intrinsically and extrinsically motivated students, other levels of students, gender-related issues and the deep insight into the EFL plateau effect.

Keywords: Natural Approach, writing achievement, correlation, motivation, intrinsic, extrinsic.

NATURAL APPROACH-BASED ACTIVITIES FORRAISING STUDENTS' WRITING ACHIEVEMENT

AND THEIR MOTIVATION AND THE CORRELATION IN-BETWEEN

ByMuhammad Fadli

A Thesis

Submitted as a partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the Magister’s Degree

MASTER IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING STUDY PROGRAMLANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENTTEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY

LAMPUNG UNIVERSITYBANDAR LAMPUNG

2019

ii

CURRICULUM VITAE

Muhammad Fadli was born on March 30th, 1990 in Tebing Tinggi, Medan

Kota, North Sumatera. He started his formal education in 1996 at SDN 1 Bandar

Lampung and studied there for three years. He then moved to another primary

school, SDN 4 Bandar Lampung and studied there for another three years. After

the six-year study, he continued his education at SMPN 3 Bandar Lampung.

After graduating from the school in 2005, he furthered it at SMAN 2 Bandar

Lampung and graduated in 2008. In the same year, he started his college study in

STKIP-PGRI Bandar Lampung. He took the English education program and had

studied there for five years before getting his bachelor’s degree in 2013.

He officially started teaching at the English course by the name of

Standard Gandhi English Language Centre as a permanent teacher in 2008. He

became one of the coaches at the course in 2010. He is still working for the

course now. He has never taught or worked at a different place.

He has been married since December 25th, 2016, at the age of 26. He got

married to Dian Safitri. From the marriage, he has got one child, an eighth-

month-old baby son, whose name is Muhammad Aslam.

Bandar Lampung, April 15th, 2018

iv

DEDICATION

To my family and friendsTo my lecturers

To the world of educational knowledgeTo everyone interested in such knowledge

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I really realize that this thesis would not have been finished and published

without the permission of ALLAH for it is only He who decides what happens

every single grain of time. Humans plan, ALLAH decides. AlhamdulILLAH,

ALLAH has granted me such kindness as to let me finish and have this thesis

published. I must be grateful to Prophet Muhammad PBUH as well, for all the

teachings leading to the perfect way of life. He is the best of mankind and the

greatest example for all. I also feel the huge need to convey massive and heartfelt

gratitude to those by means of whose hands ALLAH smoothened the road to the

thesis completion.

First of all, my parents, Muhammad Ilyas and Raisun Nisa, who are like

two suns in my life. They always support me in every way possible, even before

ensuring that I really need it. Right after they sense I am in need of something,

they are there to provide me with the thing. It certainly goes to my beloved and

only wife as well, Dian Safitri, who always tries to console me with her cheesy-

sounding, simple but unwinding jokes when I am at my worst. I also have a son,

Muhammad Aslam, to thank. He is really a spirit-booster to me. My brother,

Muhammad Firdaus, deserves my gratitude too, despite his frequently becoming

a scumbag. Through all the bitter comments and criticism he often throws at me,

he changes me for the better. They are like the whips that keep me trying to move

to a higher point.

vi

I also credit this success to my other relatives, especially my beloved

uncles and aunts, Uncle Ayyub, Uncle Quddus and Aunt Khairun in particular,

for their endless financial support and priceless advice.

Among the components of paramount importance of the success are

surely the lecturers who never give up on me. They never refuse to guide me

through confusion about various subjects, above all Miss Flora who always keeps

me on fire and tries her best to drag me out of laziness and throw me into the

strong streams of struggle so that I will swim through them so as to achieve what

I dream of and Mr. Patuan Raja who is always inspiring and, in his unique way,

supplied me with the keys to the answers to my difficult thesis questions through

his special rare guidance. He is also the one that has rooted a profoundly essential

lesson on self-discipline and responsibility to my mind and heart.

My huge gratefulness also extends to my friends, particularly the

extraordinary friends of mine I consider my unrelated siblings; Reza Fandana

who is willing to spend massive amounts of time and energy standing by my side

when I have to deal with a multitude of problems, Habi Septiawan who often

mocks me for being a procrastinator in a super-annoying manner that somehow

pushes me forward, Lusi Elisa who showers me with her precious motherly

advice once she is in the mood for that and Kurnia Anggraini who is never tired

of proudly telling me that I have her long-distance support. There is still one

more unrelated sibling whose name I would like to mention here, Melina Sari. I

regard her as a queen of statistics for her expertise on statistics. She smeared the

third and fourth chapters of my thesis with her priceless statistical aid.

vii

Last but not least, I, as well, highly appreciate the cooperation of the

Class-A fifth-semester students of UNILA English Department as the sample of

my research, above all Hendi Nur who served as an outstandingly responsible and

helpful class-leader.

iii

QUOTATION

“Instead of seeking new landscapes, develop new eyes.”(Marcel Proust (1871-1922))

viii

LIST OF CONTENTS

PageABSTRACT iCURRICULUM VITAE iiQUOTATION iiiDEDICATION ivACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vLIST OF CONTENTS viiiLIST OF TABLES xiLIST OF DIAGRAMS xiiiLIST OF APPENDICES xiv

I. INTRODUCTION1.1 Problem Background 11.2 Problem Identification 71.3 Problem Limitation 71.4 Research Questions 81.5 Research Objectives 81.6 Research Uses 91.7 Research Scope 91.8 Definitions of Terms 11

II. LITERATURE REVIEW2.1 Writing 132.2 Kinds of Writing 142.3 Teaching Writing 162.4 Motivation 192.5 Types of Motivation 21

2.5.1 Intrinsic Motivation 212.5.2 Extrinsic Motivation 23

2.6 Motivation in EFL 252.7 Natural Approach 262.8 Natural Approach and Writing 322.9 Natural Approach and Motivation 352.10 Procedures of Natural Approach in Writing 372.11 Advantages and Disadvantages 38

2.12 Theoretical Assumption 392.13 Hypotheses 40

ix

III. METHOD3.1 Design 423.2 Source of Data 433.3 Population and Sample 443.4 Instruments 45

3.4.1 Writing Tests 453.4.2 Questionnaire 46

3.5 Validity and Reliability 483.5.1 Writing Test Validity 48

3.5.1.1 Content Validity 483.5.1.2 Construct Validity 49

3.5.2 Writing Test Reliability 493.5.3 Motivation Questionnaire Validity 50

3.5.3.1 Construct Validity 513.5.4 Motivation Questionnaire Reliability 51

3.6 Data Collection Technique 523.7 Procedure 52

3.7.1 Determining the Subject of the Research 523.7.2 Giving the Pre-Test Writing 533.7.3 Distributing the Pre-Treatment Questionnaire 533.7.4 Conducting the Treatment 533.7.5 Giving the Post-Test Writing 543.7.6 Distributing the Post-Treatment Questionnaire 543.7.7 Scoring the Writing Tests 553.7.8 Motivation Comparison 553.7.9 The Correlation between the Writing 55

Achievement and the Motivation3.7.10 The Motivation Division 55

3.8 Data Analysis 563.8.1 Writing Test Data 563.8.2 Motivation Questionnaire Data 57

3.9 Hypothesis Testing 58

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION4.1 The Implementation of the Treatment 614.2 The Results of the Data Analysis 64

4.2.1 The Students’ Writing Achievement 654.2.1.1 The Result of the Pre-Test 654.2.1.2 The Result of the Post-Test 684.2.1.3 The Comparison of Both Results 70

4.2.2 The Students’ Motivation 724.2.2.1 The Students’ Pre-Treatment 72

Motivation4.2.2.2 The Students’ Post-Treatment 74

Motivation4.2.2.3 The Comparison of Both Motivation 76

Types

x

4.2.3 The Correlation between Writing Achievement 78and Motivation

4.2.4 The Achievement Improvement Comparison 79between Intrinsically Motivated Students andExtrinsically Motivated Students

4.2.5 The Writing Achievement Improvement 83Comparisons between Highly MotivatedStudents in Both Groups and their RespectiveAntipodes

4.3 Discussion 934.3.1 Natural Approach-Based Activities and 93

Students’ Writing Achievement4.3.2 Natural Approach-Based Activities and 96

Students’ Motivation4.3.3 The Correlation between Students’ Writing 98

Achievement and their Motivation4.3.4 The Achievement Improvement Comparison 99

between Intrinsically Motivated Students andExtrinsically Motivated Students after theTreatment

4.3.5 The Achievement Improvement Comparisons 102between Highly Motivated Students in BothGroups and their Respective Antipodes afterthe Treatment

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS5.1 Conclusion 1045.2 Suggestions 105

REFERENCES 109APPENDICES

xi

LIST OF TABLES

PageTable 2.1 Components of Foreign Language Learning Motivation 20Table 2.2 The Internal Factors of Motivation in Language Learning 22Table 2.3 The External Factors of Motivation in Language Learning 24Table 2.4 The Natural Approach-Based Steps 38Table 3.1 The Specifications of Writing 45Table 3.2 The Specifications of the Motivation Questionnaire 47Table 3.3 The Pre-Test Writing Reliability 50Table 3.4 The Post-Test Writing Reliability 50Table 3.5 The Motivation Reliability 51Table 3.6 The Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Classifications 51Table 3.7 The Score Allocations for the Writing Aspects 57Table 3.8 The Point of Each Questionnaire Scale 58Table 4.1 The Statistics of the Pre-Test 66Table 4.2 The Distribution Frequency of the Students’ Pre-Test Scores 67Table 4.3 The Statistics of the Post-Test 68Table 4.4 The Distribution Frequency of the Students’ Post-Test Scores 69Table 4.5 The Comparison of the Pre-Test and Post-Test Writing Scores 70Table 4.6 The Hypothesis Testing of the Pre-Test and Post-Test Writing 71

ScoresTable 4.7 The Statistics of the Pre-Treatment Questionnaire 72Table 4.8 The Students’ Pre-Treatment Questionnaire Distribution 73

FrequencyTable 4.9 The Statistics of the Post-Treatment Questionnaire 74Table 4.10 The Students’ Post-Treatment Questionnaire Distribution 75

FrequencyTable 4.11 The Comparison of the Pre-Treatment and Post-Treatment 76

MotivationTable 4.12 The Hypothesis Testing of the Pre-Treatment and Post- 77

Treatment MotivationTable 4.13 The Writing Achievement-Motivation Correlation 78Table 4.14 The Correlation Criteria 78Table 4.15 The Statistics of the Intrinsically Motivated Students’ 79

Achievement ImprovementTable 4.16 The Intrinsically Motivated Students’ Distribution Frequency 80Table 4.17 The Statistics of the Extrinsically Motivated Students’ 81

Achievement ImprovementTable 4.18 The Extrinsically Motivated Students’ Distribution Frequency 81Table 4.19 The Table of Intrinsically-Extrinsically Motivated Students’ 82

Writing Achievement Comparison

xii

Table 4.20 The Statistical Table of the Highly-Intrinsically Motivated 84Students’ Achievement Improvement

Table 4.21 The Highly-Intrinsically Motivated Students’ Distribution 84Frequency

Table 4.22 The Statistical Table of the Low-Intrinsically Motivated 85Students’ Achievement Improvement

Table 4.23 The Low-Intrinsically Motivated Students’ Distribution 86Frequency

Table 4.24 The Statistical Table of the Highly-Extrinsically Motivated 87Students’ Achievement Improvement

Table 4.25 The Highly-Extrinsically Motivated Students’ Distribution 88Frequency

Table 4.26 The Statistics of the Low-Extrinsically Motivated Students’ 88Achievement Improvement

Table 4.27 The Low-Extrinsically Motivated Students’ Distribution 89Frequency

Table 4.28 The Comparative Statistical Tables between the Highly 90Motivated Students and their Respective Antipodes

xiii

LIST OF DIAGRAMS

PageDiagram 2.1 The Macro Stages in the Cognitive Development of Writing 18

SkillDiagram 4.1 The Pre-Test Writing Scores 68Diagram 4.2 The Post-Test Writing Scores 70Diagram 4.3 The Pre-Treatment Motivation Points 74Diagram 4.4 The Post-Treatment Motivation Points 76Diagram 4.5 The Histogram of the Intrinsically Motivated Students’ 80

ImprovementDiagram 4.6 The Histogram of the Extrinsically Motivated Students’ 82

ImprovementDiagram 4.7 The Histogram of the Highly-Intrinsically Motivated 85

Students’ Achievement ImprovementDiagram 4.8 The Histogram of the Low-Intrinsically Motivated 86

Students’ Achievement ImprovementDiagram 4.9 The Histogram of the Highly-Extrinsically Motivated 88

Students’ ImprovementDiagram 4.10 The Histogram of the Low-Extrinsically Motivated 90

Students’ Achievement Improvement

xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

PageLesson Plans iPre-/Post-Treatment Motivation Questionnaire xiiiPre-Test Directions xviPost-Test Directions xviiWriting Table of Specifications xviiiMotivation Table of Specifications xxiPre-Test Coefficient Correlation Source xxiiPost-Test Coefficient Correlation Source xxivRater 1 (Pre-Test) xviRater 2 (Pre-Test) xviiiRater 1 (Post-Test) xxxRater 2 (Post-Test) xxxiiPre-Test Sample xxxivPost-Test Sample xxxvPre-Treatment Questionnaire Sample xxxviPost-Treatment Questionnaire Sample xxxvii

1

I. INTRODUCTION

The problem background, identification, limitation, research questions,

objectives, uses, scope and variable term definitions are the focal points of this

chapter. It is expected to deliver a lucid overview of this research.

1.1 Problem Background

Writing is one of the fundamental skills of English (Javed, Juan and

Nazli, 2013; Al-Mansour and Al-Shorman, 2014; Huy, 2015; Keskin, 2015). It is

generally considered one complex skill for language students (Kellogg, 2008;

Puengpipattrakul, 2009; Javed, Juan and Nazli, 2013; Huy, 2015; Ruiz-Funes,

2015). The four main skills of the English language are reading, listening,

speaking, and writing and one needs the mastery of various elements to properly

use the language to convey wishes, thoughts, intentions, feeling and information

in writing (Pamela as cited in Juan and Nazli, 2013). Writing skills typically

develop over a course of more than two decades as a child matures and learns the

craft of composition through late adolescence and into early adulthood (Kellogg,

2008). Kellogg (2008) also adds that learning how to write a coherent, effective

text is a difficult and protracted achievement of cognitive development that

contrasts sharply with the acquisition of speech and advanced writing skills

require systematic training as well as instruction so that executive attention can

successfully coordinate multiple writing processes and representations, while

2

fluency is associated with the language proficiency level that has a lot to do with

L2/FL writing (Ruiz-Funes, 2015). Being someone with good comprehension

requires the perception that he is the one who is successful in writing (Keskin,

2015).

Writing has a direct relationship with motivation (Amirkhanova, Ageeva

and Fakhretdinov, 2016). Dornyei (1998) depicts motivation as an element that

provides the primary impetus to initiate learning the L2 and later the driving force

to sustain the long and often tedious learning process; indeed, all the other factors

involved in L2 acquisition presuppose motivation to some extent. Dornyei (1998)

emphasizes that without sufficient motivation, even individuals with the most

remarkable abilities cannot accomplish long-term goals, and neither are

appropriate curricula and good teaching enough on their own to ensure student

achievement. Motivation is also considered to be an essential part in the

achievement of any goal and it plays an important role that has a positive

influence on any educational process, most of all in learning a second language

(Rehman et al., 2014). There are a lot of ways of motivating students, those

which have them participate in lessons (Syomwene, 2016). Syomwene’s (2016)

other implication is that there are also ways demotivating students which must be

avoided by teachers. Motivation serves as a great element in learning (Ahmed,

Aftab and Yaqoob, 2015).

There are two main types of motivation, i.e. Intrinsic and extrinsic. There

have been several recent studies mainly talking about these types (Singh, 2011;

Kreishan and Al-Dhaimat, 2013; Stirling, 2014; Ahmed, Aftab and Yaqoob,

2015; Amirkhanova, Ageeva and Fakhretdinov, 2016, Vibulphol, 2016; Zhao,

3

2016). The definitions deriving from those studies lead to the inference that

intrinsic motivation is the type of motivation whose factors are from the person

himself. This type of motivation depends on one’s own interests and desires,

while extrinsic motivation is the type of motivation which is affected by external

factors, not those lying in the person, but those surrounding him. It depends on

the things one deals with. The difference of the two types is often regarded as a

continuum, not a dichotomy (Ryan and Connel, 1989; Ryan and Deci, 2000,

2002).

Syomwene (2016) implies that correct ways of motivating learners can

determine how much students take part in lessons and it is important to know

about students’ motivation in their study. One way of enhancing students’

motivation and engagement to write is to provide opportunities for them to

engage at a more meaningful level with the language through refocusing their

writing classes to make them relevant to their social and cultural context (Lo and

Hyland, 2007) because the shortage of materials, the traditional teaching method

leading to boring and colorless lessons, the lack of comprehension as well as

expository teaching are the causes of students’ motivation degradation (Dislen,

2013) and motivation is an important drive pushing learners to achieve the goals,

so there needs to be room for it in writing courses (Buyukyavuz and Cakir, 2014).

Krashen (1983:126) encourages asking to what extent an approach

satisfies the requirements for optimal input and puts learning in its appropriate

position. It implies that it is of utmost importance to consider how well an

approach supports students’ learning before deciding to apply it. One of the

approaches is Natural Approach (NA). NA which was developed by Tracy

4

Terrell and Stephen Krashen with Krashen’s five hypotheses as the roots of its

tenets (Terrell, 1977, 1986; Krashen, 1983:138-139; Krashen and Terrell,

1983:59) is a language teaching approach whose focus is chiefly on the

acquisition of the ability to communicate in the target language (Krashen and

Terrell, 1983:58).

NA suggests the incorporation of two sources of knowledge, i.e. of the

source language and of the target language, be involved in teaching learning

activities (Krashen, 1983:138; Krashen and Terrell, 1983:60; Terrell, 1986). The

ability to understand utterances in the input as a whole can be examined by

looking at two elements, i.e. the use of context-dependent strategies to determine

meaning of unknown forms in the input and the association of meaning with

these new forms. These component skills interact and depend on each other as the

ability to comprehend grows (Terrell, 1986).

Nowadays, it is widely accepted by teachers and writers that learning has

been more effective and meaningful when it takes place within an appropriate

context that reflects real-world attributes (Westera, 2011). Krashen (1983:167)

instills that subject matter teaching will be useful for acquisition only when it is

comprehensible. According to this, it is not necessary to "program" specific

grammar points in a lesson since, if the acquirer receives enough comprehensible

input at the appropriate level, the grammatical structures and forms will be

acquired in a "natural" order (Terrell, 1986). The principles and the activities

involved in NA are considered to contribute to second/foreign language learning

to a certain degree (Abukhattala, 2013; Aksu and Gonul, 2014). To summarize,

NA is an approach holding the view that the nature of acquiring a first language

5

is applicable, to some extent, to the second language acquisition (SLA) process

involving contextual learning so as to achieve the goal of communication in the

second or foreign target language.

NA is an option to choose in order to enable the writing teaching

facilitating learners with topic freedom (Krashen, 1983:138). This topic freedom

is an essential constituent since writing is able to boost students’ motivation on

condition that the topics they write are the ones they want to write (Buyukyavuz

and Cakir, 2014; Darwish and Sadeqi, 2016). Moreover, in reference to the

concept of NA (Terrell, 1977, 1986; Krashen, 1983:137; Krashen and Terrell,

1983:57-61), NA is a learner-centered approach and a learner-centered approach

helps to increase students’ skill and motivation in a linear fashion (Lin, 2015).

NA theories have actually had a wide impact and the issues NA addresses keep

on being the core of teaching method debates, nevertheless NA is still in need of

further proof (Mani, 2016) despite that substantiating the learning through NA

significantly improves the whole skills (Parham et al., 2013).

Taking all that into consideration, the writer conducted some research on

NA-based activities and the writing achievement because, in spite of the benefits

NA offers and the importance of writing, there had not been a single study that

specifically related NA-based activities to the writing achievement. Additionally,

in consideration of the fact that the findings of several studies (Nugent, 2009;

Kreishan and Al-Dhaimat, 2013; Awada and Ghaith, 2014; Olmez, 2015) are

contradictory to two others (Nasihah and Cahyono, 2017; Ningrum and

Matondang, 2017), the writer also conducted some research on the correlation

between the achievement and motivation.

6

The writer also ramified the motivation types into four, i.e. high intrinsic,

low intrinsic, high extrinsic and low extrinsic, and compared the writing

achievement of intrinsically motivated students to that of extrinsically motivated

students and of highly motivated students to those of low motivated students in

both intrinsic and extrinsic groups respectively to see whether both types of

highly motivated students’ achievements improve more than their antipodes after

the teaching because, in spite of the ample number of recent studies indicating

these four types of motivation are still worth attending to (Kang and Tan, 2014;

Lemos and Verissimo, 2014; Maric and Sakac, 2014; Stirling, 2014; Ahmed,

Aftab and Yaqoob, 2015; Houghton, 2015; Yusuf, Inayah and Maulida, 2015;

Amirkhanova, Ageeva and Fakhretdinov, 2016; Javidkar and Soleimani, 2016;

Schaffner and Schiefele, 2016; Vibulphol, 2016; Zhao, 2016), none covers this

specific area of research. In other words, this research, seen from this point, is

also unprecedented.

To sum up, the central issues addressed by this research are NA-based

activities, motivation and the writing achievement. It aims at shedding light on

the use of the activities NA underlies and widening the horizon of insight in

connection with NA-based teaching by applying NA-based activities to figure out

whether they can raise students’ writing achievement and motivation and by

correlating the writing achievement to the motivation after the teaching to see

whether the two variables significantly correlate. Some comparisons on the

grounds of the four motivation types were also carried out for the sake of the

answers to whether intrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement

improves more than extrinsically motivated students’ and whether both

7

intrinsically and extrinsically-highly motivated students are respectively better

than their antipodes in terms of the writing achievement improvement.

1.2 Problem Identification

In view of the background, the problems of this research are:

1. Students’ writing achievement after being taught through Natural Approach-

based activities.

2. Students’ motivation after being taught through Natural Approach-based

activities.

3. The correlation between students’ writing achievement and their motivation

after the treatment.

4. The writing achievement improvement comparison between intrinsically

motivated students and extrinsically motivated students.

5. The writing achievement improvement comparisons between both intrinsically

and extrinsically-highly motivated students and their respective antipodes.

1.3 Problem Limitation

The limitation of the problem was formulated based on the identification

of the problems. Natural Approach (NA) was the approach applied to the

teaching and the targets to improve were the writing achievement and motivation.

The research figured out the correlation between the writing achievement and

motivation after the treatment as well.

The students were also ramified on the basis of their motivation into four

types, i.e. high intrinsic, low intrinsic, high extrinsic and low extrinsic. It was

done for the sake of the achievement improvement comparisons between the

8

intrinsically motivated students and extrinsically motivated ones and between the

highly motivated students and the low motivated ones in either the intrinsic or

extrinsic group respectively.

1.4 Research Questions

The writer formulated the following research questions:

1. Are Natural Approach-based activities able to raise students’ writing

achievement?

2. Are Natural Approach-based activities able to raise students’ motivation?

3. Is there significant correlation between students’ writing achievement and their

motivation after the treatment?

4. Does intrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement improve more than

extrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement?

5. Do the achievements of highly motivated students in both the intrinsic and

extrinsic groups respectively improve more than their antipodes?

1.5 Research Objectives

Here are the five research objectives derived from the research questions:

1. To see whether Natural Approach-based activities are able to raise students’

writing achievement.

2. To see whether Natural Approach-based activities are able to raise students’

motivation.

3. To see whether there is significant correlation between students’ writing

achievement and their motivation after the treatment.

9

4. To see whether intrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement improves

more than extrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement.

5. To see whether the achievements of highly motivated students in both the

intrinsic and extrinsic groups respectively improve more than their antipodes.

1.6 Research Uses

The uses of this research are:

1. Practically

This research can be referred to by the components that are involved in

English learning and teaching (ELT), for instance, in ameliorating the handicaps

turning up when they apply their teaching approaches, methods and techniques

and in designing the curriculum.

2. Theoretically

This research contributes to encouraging other writers to undertake the

follow-ups of this study, which in turn will add more theories and findings on the

corresponding variables. This research also contributes to the addition of the

existing theories about the variables.

1.7 Research Scope

The study was conducted at the University of Lampung. The sample units

were chosen randomly and the study involved one class only. There was no

control group. The students were in the fifth semester of the academic year

2017/2018. There were 35 students taken as the sample.

In the process, the students were asked to write one time about anything

they desired before and after the treatment. After that, both types of the students’

10

work were corrected. The two types of scores were then calculated to know

whether the treatment raised their writing achievement. As for the treatment

itself, the writer applied NA-based activities to the class.

As for the motivation area, one questionnaire containing intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation items was distributed to them prior and subsequent to the

treatment to know whether the treatment raised their motivation. The

achievement and the motivation after the treatment were then correlated in order

to see whether there was significant correlation between them.

The two types of responses to the questionnaire were also calculated to

decide which students belonged to the intrinsic group and which ones belonged to

the extrinsic group. The two groups of students were then respectively broken

down into two smaller groups, i.e. high and low, in reference to the points of their

responses.

. The achievement improvements of the two opposite groups of students,

i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic, after the treatment were compared in order to know

whether intrinsically motivated students improved more than extrinsically

motivated students in the writing achievement. The achievement improvements

of the highly motivated students in both groups were also compared to those of

the low motivated students in their respective groups to know whether they were

higher than their antipodes after such a treatment.

11

1.8 Definitions of Terms

Here are the definitions of the terms:

Natural Approach is an approach believing that the L2 acquisition should be

based on the L1 acquisition. It should be naturally acquired through the exposure

of the language, which is contextual and relevant to real life.

Natural Approach-based activities are the learning activities that are based on

Natural Approach principles. Such activities are mainly about putting learners

into the situation in which they learn and acquire things naturally under these

tenets.

Writing is the process of expressing ideas into written form. It also refers to the

result of this process. It is also one of the basic skills of the English language.

Everything expressed in written form is called writing, either the process or its

result.

Motivation is a kind of drive that pushes students to do something. This push

creates goals and enables students’ attempt to achieve them. The higher their

motivation is, the harder they try to achieve the goals because the bigger the drive

that pushes them to achieve the goals is.

Intrinsic motivation is the motivation whose factors originate from one oneself.

This sort of motivation lies within one’s own interests and desires. It is not about

the external situation or elements surrounding one.

Extrinsic motivation is the motivation affected by external factors. They are not

the factors originating from one oneself. They are the ones affected by the

elements surrounding one. In other words, it depends on how one perceives those

elements.

12

Achievement is the result of a set of activities, which describes how well one has

got through the activities. It is the quality reflection of how one has dealt with the

process.

This chapter has demystified the problem background, identification,

limitation, research questions, objectives, uses, scope and variable term

definitions.

13

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter contains the concept and kinds of writing as well as the

teaching, the concept and the types of motivation, motivation in EFL, the concept

of Natural Approach, the relationship between Natural Approach and writing

along with that between Natural Approach and motivation, the procedures of

Natural Approach in writing, the advantages and disadvantages of Natural

Approach, the theoretical assumption and the hypotheses.

2.1 Writing

The four Basic English language skills are divided into two categories

such as receptive skills and productive skills (Javed, Juan and Nazli, 2013). They

also instill that reading and listening are considered receptive skills, while

speaking and writing are regarded as productive skills. So, writing is one of the

four basic skills. Javed, Juan and Nazli (2013) add that students begin learning to

communicate through written form as they start interacting with others at school

and the writing skill is so more complicated than that of the other language skills

that, at times, even an English native speaker experiences complicated tricky

situation. Basically, the writing skill demands a well-structured way of thought

presentation in an organized and planned fashion (Braine and Yorozu, 1998).

Key, Shanahan, Sperling and Freedman (as cited in Huy, 2015) opine that

writing plays two distinct but complementary roles in the school setting. First, it

14

is a skill draws on the use of strategies (such as planning, evaluating, and revising

text) to accomplish a variety of goal, such as writing a report or expressing an

opinion with the support of evidence. Second, writing is a mean of extending and

deepening student’s knowledge; it acts as a tool for learning subject matter.

Writing is one of the ways to transmit thoughts or ideas to the other people (Huy,

2015). Writing is also “the important skill in studying English, which need great

investment from the students” (Huy, 2015).

It is understood that writing is so fundamental and being good at it

requires students to prioritize it and always try their best to write well. The idea

that writing is so essential a skill underlay why the writer picked it out as one of

the variables.

2.2 Kinds of Writing

According to Huy (2015), there are four kinds of writing that the writer

thinks are the common ones, namely:

Exposition

Exposition is one of four types of writing, along with argumentation,

description and narration. However, certain speeches also use this type of

delivery. The goal of exposition is to inform about the background, plot,

character, setting and theme of the essay, story or film (Huy, 2015).

Argumentation

Huy (2015) states that argumentation theory, or argumentation, also called

persuasion, is the interdisciplinary study of how humans should, can and do reach

conclusions through logical reasoning that is claimed to be based on premises. It

15

includes the arts and sciences of civil debates, dialogues, conversations and

persuasion. It deals with rules of inference, logic and procedural rules in both

artificial and real-world setting.

“Argumentation includes debate and negotiation, which are concerned

with reaching mutually acceptable conclusion. It is used in law, for example in

trial, in preparing an argument to be presented to court, and in testing the validity

of certain kind of evidence” (Huy, 2015).

Description

Huy (2015) states, “Description is one of four rhetorical modes (also

known as modes of discourse). It is also the fiction – writing mode for

transmitting a mental image or the particulars of a story.” He divides the

descriptive writing into two, namely:

Description as a rhetorical mode

Huy (2015) also states the purposes of description are to re-create or

visually present a person, place, event or action so that the reader may picture

what is being described. Descriptive writing may be found in the other rhetorical

modes.

Description as a fiction - writing mode

Fiction is a form of narrative. Fictional writing also has different types of

expression or modes, each with its own goals and rules. Morrell (as cited in Huy,

2015) infers the following six are the delivery modes for fictional writing: action,

exposition, description, dialogues, summary and transition. “Together with

dialogue, narration, and exposition, and summarization, description is one of the

most widely recognized of the fiction – writing modes” (Huy, 2015).

16

Narration

“Narration is some kind of retelling, often in words (though it is possible

to mime a story), of something that happened (a story). Narration recounts events,

perhaps leaving some occurrences out because they are from some perspective

insignificant, and perhaps emphasizing others. Narration thus shapes history (the

scene of events, the story of what happened)” (Huy, 2015).

According to Walker et al. (as cited in Huy, 2015), the other kinds of

writing are narratives, expository passages, essays, directions, summaries,

critiques and letter writing.

It is implied that there are many writing types which leads to many ways

of writing. It is indispensable to understand these types as well as the ways of

writing them well.

2.3 Teaching Writing

Graham (2008:2) recommends the following seven points for teaching

writing:

1. Dedicate time to writing, with writing occurring across the curriculum,

and involve students in various forms of writing over time.

2. Increase students’ knowledge about writing.

3. Foster students’ interest, enjoyment and motivation to write.

4. Help students become strategic writers.

5. Teach basic writing skills to mastery.

6. Take advantage of technological writing tools.

7. Use assessment to gauge students’ progress and needs.

17

Graham and Perin (as cited in Graham, 2008:3) infer that there are eight

purposes of students learning to write, namely:

1. Communicating with others (e.g., personal letters, business letters,

notes, cards, email).

2. Informing others (e.g., writing reports; explaining how to do

something; describing an event, object or place).

3. Persuading others (e.g., expressing an opinion about a controversial

topic).

4. Learning content material (e.g., summarizing, learning logs and journal

entries).

5. Entertaining others (e.g., writing stories, plays and poems).

6. Reflecting about self (e.g., writing about personal events, auto-

biography)

7. Responding to literature (e.g., book evaluations, analyzing authors’

intentions).

8. Demonstrating knowledge (e.g., traditional classroom tests, high-stakes

tests involving writing).

Writing skill in the target language is usually considered to be the

development or practice of the syntactic or lexical aspects of the language that

have already been presented in the class (Buyukyavuz and Cakir, 2015).

Zimmerman and Kitsantas (as cited in Kellogg, 2008) found that social feedback

on writing processes (i.e. feedback given to a learner by others about his/her

writing performance) promotes both learning and motivation.

18

Kellog (2008) put on the following diagram in order to describe the macro

stages in the cognitive development of writing skill.

Diagram 2.1 The Macro Stages in the Cognitive Development of Writing Skill

Referring to the diagram above, writing teaching should be adjusted to

how long they have learnt to write because it also determines their writing skill.

Normally, the process runs in the same fashion as what is demonstrated by the

diagram above.

Barkaoi (2007) proposes taking these elements into consideration while

teaching writing for, he believes, they are the important ones for good writing

teaching. They are as follows:

Process Writing

Text Modeling

19

Audience Awareness

Feedback

Frequent Practice

Motivating Students

Teacher Attitudes and Expectations

Learner Autonomy and Self-Assessment

In relation to the things above, the writer assumed that the activities

containing a communicative process based on real-life situation and running in a

natural manner with interesting topics of students’ choice would be those which

students need and that such activities would be applicable to the good teaching

writing elements proposed by Barkaoi (2007), so students would grow better at

writing English.

2.4 Motivation

Williams and Burden (as cited in Dornyei, 1998) characterize motivation

in general as follows: Motivation is a state of cognitive and emotional arousal.

Motivation leads to conscious decision to act.

Motivation gives rise to a period of sustained intellectual

and/or physical effort.

Motivation acts as the element attaining previously set

goal/goals.

Fernandez and Canado (2001) state, “The term motivation is usually

defined by psychologists as the set of processes which involve the arousal,

direction and sustaining of behaviour (conduct). It is employed to indicate, for

20

instance, a subject’s persistence and his/her pervasive work on certain tasks and

not on other activities.” In the field of second language acquisition (SLA), there

have been various efforts to define second language acquisition motivation and

figure out to what extent motivation and English achievement relate. Motivation

can be considered a process that influences the success of L2 learning (Rehman

et al., 2014).

Buyukyavuz and Cakir (2014) state that motivation is a key element

which needs to be placed among the first items of teachers’ ‘to achieve list’. They

also affirm that only a teacher knowledgeable about the ways his students are

motivated can design effective lessons. “Instrumental, integrative and personal

reasons will be considered as far as the students’ motivation is concerned” (Al-

Tamimi and Shuib, 2009).

Dornyei (1998) describes foreign language learning motivation with the

following table adopting the components proposed by Dornyei (1994):

Table 2.1 Components of Foreign Language Learning Motivation

21

On logical grounds, it was assumed that motivation is also a fundamental

factor of students’ achievement. Motivation is divided into two kinds, i.e.

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. It is the source of push for driving students to

achieve their goals.

2.5 Types of Motivation

There are two types of motivation, i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic. These two

are the subjects or among the subjects of many prior studies (Amabile, 1985;

Dornyei, 1998; Fernandez and Canado, 2001; Lo and Hyland, 2007; Wang, 2008;

Mohammad and Hussein, 2013; Rehman et al., 2014; Stirling, 2014).

2.5.1 Intrinsic Motivation

According to Dornyei (1998), intrinsic motivation is the one which deals

with behaviour performed for its own sake, in order to experience pleasure and

satisfaction such as the joy of doing a particular activity or satisfying one's

curiosity. Ryan and Deci (2000) define intrinsic motivation as “doing something

because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable”. This definition is referred to in

other studies (Wang, 2008; Singh, 2011; Amirkhanova, Ageeva and

Fakhretdinov, 2016). It is also in line with Challak and Kassaian (2010) who

regard intrinsic motivation as “the motivation which is originated inside a

person”.

Vallerand (1997) includes the following three sub-categories into intrinsic

motivation: (a) to learn (the engagement in an activity for the pleasure and

satisfaction of grasping something new, quenching the curiosity and exploring the

world) (b) towards achievement (the engagement in an activity for the

22

satisfaction of excelling oneself, dealing with challenges and finishing or creating

something successfully) (c) to experience stimulation (the engagement in an

activity for experiencing pleasurable sensations). Fernandez and Canado (2001)

state, “Learning and teaching activities are related to the student’s intrinsic

motivation. Intrinsic motivation originates from within the individual and results

in enjoyment in the process of increasing one’s competency in regard to

particular academic tasks (Wang, 2008).

Dornyei (1998) summarizes William and Burden’s (as cited in Dornyei,

1998) framework of intrinsic motivation in language learning with the following

table:

Table 2.2 The Internal Factors of Motivation in Language Learning

23

2.5.2 Extrinsic Motivation

Contrasted with intrinsically motivated students, who work for the feeling

of satisfaction or accomplishment, extrinsically motivated students will perform

mainly for the attainment of a desired external reward or to avoid external

punishment (Wang, 2008). Ryan and Deci (2000) point out that extrinsic

motivation refers to doing something because of the separable result it leads to.

Wang (2008), taking Ryan and Deci’s (2000) definition as a reference, states

“Extrinsic motivation is motivation induced by rewards or punishment dependent

upon success or failure in the task.” This definition is in accordance with the ones

in some other studies (Singh, 2011; Amirkhanova, Ageeva and Fakhretdinov,

2016). Stirling (2014) indicates that extrinsic motivation is the one offering a

reward for engaging in action that is neither inherently pleasing nor engaging, but

facilitates advantageous possibilities out of possible outcomes. Ahmed, Aftab and

Yaqoob (2015) simply put the label “external or outside of yourself” on extrinsic

motivation.

Extrinsic motivation, in contrast, provides incentive for engaging in action

which may not be inherently pleasing or engaging, but may offer benefits in

terms of perceived potential outcomes (Stirling, 2014). Stirling also adds that it is

made more complicated by questions about the role of motivation whose type one

is not consciously aware of (is it intrinsic, even when prompted by a desire for

fame or wealth?) and the processes by which intrinsic motivation may become

extrinsic (and, according to some studies, extinguished) or extrinsic motivation

may be internalized.

24

Dornyei (1998) also boils down William and Burden’s (as cited in

Dornyei, 1998) framework of extrinsic motivation in language learning using the

following table:

Table 2.3 The External Factors of Motivation in Language Learning

So, it is implied that motivation has two categories, i.e. intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation, viewed from the aspects they are bound to. Intrinsic

motivation aspects are those emerging from the inside of a person, while extrinsic

motivation aspects cover those from the outside of him or, in other words, the

aspects which do not come from within him by themselves, but influenced by

others.

25

2.6 Motivation in EFL

In the field of foreign/second language (L2) learning, motivation has long

been recognized as one of the key factors that determine L2 achievement and

attainment. Motivation serves as the initial engine to generate learning and later

functions as an ongoing driving force that helps to sustain the long and usually

laborious journey of acquiring a foreign language (Cheng and Dornyei, 2007).

Bahous et al. (2011) divide motivation in classrooms into ten categories. They

are as follows: Clarity of purpose and motivation

Content, teaching methods and motivation

Positive learning experiences and motivation

Attitude, anxiety and motivation

Interactive communicative methods and motivation

Impact of teaching strategies on motivation

Acknowledging learning styles and motivation

Impact of writing instruction and feedback on motivation

Using technology and motivation

Impact of rewards on motivation

Lasagabaster (2011) states, “The language-learning process has both

linguistic and non-linguistic outcomes, the former being related to knowledge and

competence in the language and the latter to individual variables such as attitudes

and motivation. As students progress in their learning, changes can be expected

in their motivation and this leads to individual variations over time. This is one of

the reasons why the concept of motivation is difficult to grasp.” The quality of

learning engagement in the classroom does not depend on students' cognitive

26

abilities alone, but is also influenced by complex motivational and affective

factors (Kubanyiofa, 2006). Mali (2015), in his study involving Indonesian

students as the sample, found out that the following are the highest four factors

influencing students’ motivation: 1) Positive Teacher’s Performance

2) Nice and Inspiring Classmates

3) Parents as a Source of Motivation

4) Positive Classroom Atmosphere

The theories above emphasize that there is a strong relationship between

learning engagement and motivation. The engagement does not merely lean on

students’ cognitive abilities. Engagement also influences achievement. This

strengthened the writer’s assumption of the correlation between the achievement

and motivation.

2.7 Natural Approach

The basic premise of contextual learning (or context-based learning) is

that learning cannot take place in a vacuum, but should somehow be connected

with real world attributes to make sense to learners. Such practical context allows

learners to relate symbolic learning content like concepts and principles to their

real world referents (Westera, 2011). There is ample evidence that many teachers,

but not native speakers or language learners, define effective communication as

near perfection in structure and phonology, and thus doom the students to

ultimate failure (Terrell, 1977). Schank and Cleary (as cited in Westera, 2011)

and Resnick (1987) argue the school system having emerged over the last

27

centuries produces unfavorable effects on learning due to the absence of real-life

context.

Natural Approach was originally proposed by Terrell (1977) positing, at

the beginning, that the following three were the guidelines of Natural Approach:

(1) Students should be allowed to use L1 along with L2 in the initial stages of

learning to comprehend the L2. (2) Students' errors while speaking should not be

corrected. (3) Class time should be devoted wholly to a communicative process,

relegating learning activities outside the classroom. Krashen and Terrell

(1983:57-58) then crystallize the concept of Natural Approach underlain by

Krashen’s (1983:10-30) five hypotheses which are as follows:

1. The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis

The combination of acquisition and learning by means of which

learners immerse themselves in communicative activities in form of

natural communication through meaningful interaction while paying

attention to the language features and are also equipped with formal

instructions serving as the learning element in the learning process. The

element is less important compared to the acquisition.

2. The Monitor Hypothesis

The monitoring device, according to this theory, is the knowledge

from what has been learnt. The role of the monitor should be minor

because if it takes too big a role, then it will lower the frequency of the

language use since it will result in the lack of self-confidence since they

will feel too afraid of making mistakes from the viewpoint of what they

have learnt.

28

3. The Input Hypothesis

It is just about acquisition. Learners acquire something if the input

is comprehensible and it is comprehensible if it is one level above the

learners’ stage. It is also known as “i+1”. So, it should still be

understood though they are not at the level yet.

4. The Natural Order Hypothesis

There should be an order of given materials in learning, from the

simplest to the most complex, like in grammatical lessons, though this

does not apply when acquisition is a sole goal.

5. The Affective Filter Hypothesis

It deals with motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. People with

high motivation and self-confidence and low anxiety will find it easier

to be successful than those of the contrary. The higher the affective

filter, the thicker the mental block. To put it another way, higher

affective filter impedes the progress of learning.

To encapsulate, Natural Approach is an approach that combines

contextual learning with L1-based acquisition as the system under which learners

acquire L2 whose application should be grounded on the five principles which

are rooted to the aforementioned hypotheses. In reference to Krashen and Terrell

(1983:58) and Terrell (1977), the five principles of Natural Approach are as

follows:

1. Comprehension First, Production Later

According to Krashen and Terrell (1983:58), comprehension

should come first. This means that students have production ability after

29

they have comprehension ability. Such comprehension ability as

understanding messages can be called prerequisite to acquisition. The

basis of production ability is the acquisition itself.

It implies that the teacher needs to bring this principle to the

writing teaching context by ensuring students’ good comprehension of

the topic and how to write it after listening to the teacher’s

explanation before and by having them find information about what

they are going to write all by themselves as well as by reviewing their

work or having them review each other’s work.

2. Stage-Emerging Production

In reference to Krashen and Terrell (1983:58), the following

stages develop from the first language acquisition: 1) Learners’ respond

with nonverbal communication like nodding, pointing etc. 2) Single

word response like saying ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘now’ etc. 3) The combination of

more words, such two or three words as ‘go now’, ‘not want eat’ etc.

4) Using a phrase that is seldom grammatically correct, like ‘He is do’,

‘where you going’, etc. Learners also mix their L1 with L2 when they

communicate.

In connection with this principle, students revise their work

and this revision step is part of their stage-emerging process because

this revision should have them learn from the mistakes they have made

in the writing and they will make better writing for the revision. They

may also write several times with the same process of learning. It is

expected that they will improve their writing in stages this way.

30

3. Communicative Activities in the Process

This principle is about communicative goals. Krashen & Terrell

(1983:58) affirm that the syllabus should be based on the topics, not

grammatical items. This can make learners acquire the language

including the knowledge about grammar more effectively than when

they learn the grammar as the goal. So, it is emphasized at the

beginning that the goal of the learning is the communicative ability, not

the grammatical accuracy.

It means that the teacher should put in communicative activities to

the process. The activities may include the question-and-answer session

about students’ writing and they will also be asked for their opinion

about the work they have done.

4. Interesting and Relevant Topics

In accordance with Krashen and Terrell (1983:58) who instill the

idea that the activities in the classroom for the sake of acquisition

should foster a lowering of students’ affective filter, students should be

given the freedom of expressing their emotions, feelings and ideas

in order to create such a conducive environment to acquisition

(Setiyadi, 2006:164a). The teacher along with learners should

have “good rapport among them in order for the learners to have low

anxiety” (Setiyadi, 2006:164a). For this purpose, Setiyadi (2006:165a)

emphasizes the topics must be interesting and relevant. The teacher

should get the topics from students and the topics should be the ones

that they think are interesting. If the teacher forces the topics on them,

31

it will be harder for them to acquire the language because they will

feel that they have no chance to express their ideas, emotions and

feelings freely. The topics should also be relevant to the fact and the

environment in which they live in order for them to feel that what

they learn relates to what they see or experience in real life.

So, it is inferred that a student should choose a topic based on his

real life and it should also be interesting to him in order that he will find

it enjoyable to write, not boring. In this way, students will not feel that

they are forced to write since they enjoy the process.

5. Focus-on-Form Written Assignment Error-Correction, not OralCommunication-Correction

This principle is the last that constitutes Natural Approach.

Terrell (1977) strongly recommends that the correction should be

in written form, not verbal, and only be on students’ writing

assignments, never on their oral communication. It should also focus

on form. To put it another way, the correction is never in verbal form

and always on students’ writing assignments because being corrected

before their peers will make students “uncomfortable and

embarrassed” (Setiyadi, 2006:165a) and it is believed “the correction

of speech errors is negative in terms of motivation and attitude towards

the target language” (Setiyadi, 2006:165a).

So, the teacher does not correct students’ work orally because it

will put embarrassment on them since they are corrected directly

before their peers. The teacher corrects their work in writing and will

not tell who made what mistakes to the class in order to avoid such

32

embarrassment. The teacher can also ask their peers to correct their

work as long as the peers will not humiliate them by telling what the

mistakes are to the class.

The approach have the following three genetic phases: (1) Preproduction;

developing listening skills (2) Early Production; learners struggle with the

language and make many errors which are corrected based on content and not

structure (3) Extending Production; improving fluency by means of a variety of

the activities with more difficulty (Aksu and Gonul, 2014). Writing is associated

with the second one.

Therefore, the writer assumed that the teaching rooted to Natural

Approach would successfully improve the writing achievement and motivation

whereas such NA fundamental principles as a communicative process, relevantly

interesting topics and students’ being corrected have been proven to be able to

solve students’ writing problems and maintain students’ interest (Huy, 2015;

Muriungi and Mbui, 2015; Darwish and Sadeqi, 2016; Alwazir and Shukri, 2017)

which would probably lead to the improvement of motivation and the writing

achievement since motivation has a significant relationship with achievement

(Amrai et al., 2011; Nasihah and Cahyono, 2017; Ningrum and Matondang,

2017).

2.8 Natural Approach and Writing

Learning to write in English as a foreign language has been an essential

professional educational issue that serves various educational purposes and meets

certain learning needs upon which the foreign language learners' progress

33

depends and writing itself is a powerful means of communication by which

students learn better to express themselves (Al-Mansour and Al-Shorman, 2014),

while Natural Approach offers the learning underlain by the five principles that

facilitate natural learning (Krashen and Terrell, 1983:58). In other words, Natural

Approach is constituted by the learning having to do with real life and packed

with communicative activities along with the topics that are up to students and

relevant to where they are. It is also constituted by the focus-on-form correction

that is only in writing and on written assignments. It is accepted that learning is

proven to be more effective and meaningful when it is in an appropriate context

which has connection with or reflects real life (Westera, 2011) and writing

classes relevant to students’ society and culture enhance their engagement in

writing (Lo and Hyland, 2007). The learning involving communicative activities

is better for them (Ahmad and Rao, 2012). Students’ freedom of topics is able to

improve their motivation because they have the chance to write about what they

desire to (Darwish and Sadeqi, 2016) and motivation determines how much they

participate in lessons (Syomwene, 2016). Motivation needs to be paid attention to

because it is an essential element to push students to achieve their objectives

(Buyukyavuz and Cakir, 2014). Written correction focusing on form on written

assignments is highly advisable because students will be embarrassed when they

are verbally corrected before their peers and such correction is negative for their

motivation (Setiyadi, 2006:165a). The correction that does not focus on form like

the correction on students’ oral communication is not advisable because they tend

to produce errors when they say new and interesting things using the knowledge

34

of the target language they have and such correction will make them feel

uncomfortable (Setiyadi, 2006:165a).

According to Huy (2015), the following are among the main problems of

students in writing English:

(1) Lack of vocabulary

(2) Difficult writing lesson topics of the textbook

(3) No proper correction on students’ writing work

(4) Not enough writing skill-improving materials

(5) Not enough time for writing skill learning.

(6) No effective ways to study vocabulary and grammar.

(7) Inappropriately designed materials

(8) Too little time for correction

The vocabulary and grammar problems in writing are supported by Javed,

Juan and Nazli (2013) who reveal that students’ comprehension is better

compared to such other sub-skills as word completion, sentence making/syntax,

tenses/grammar and handwriting. Al-Meni (as cited in Al-Mansour and Al-

Shoorman, 2014) also infers students often struggle with fluent written

expressions owing to their shortage of vocabulary and grammar knowledge.

Natural Approach is proven to successfully improve the whole skills of students,

including their writing skill (Parham et al., 2013). Nevertheless, Parham et al.

(2013) did not conduct the research specifically on the students’ writing, so it is

still unclear whether the improvement of the other skills or the Natural Approach

caused the improvement of the writing skill. In consideration of the previous

studies, the writer assumed the activities on the basis of the principles would be

35

able to raise today’s students’ writing achievement. For that reason, the writer

would like to relate Natural Approach to students’ writing achievement.

The library study by Matamoros-Gonzales et al. (2017) came with the

conjectural statement that the characteristics of an approach are determined for

the epoch in which the approach is proposed and promoted. It is safe to say that

this study has an indirect connection with the statement in regard to the epoch of

Natural Approach. After the superficial form of the approach was proposed by

Terrell (1977) and shaped much more by Krashen (1983:137-140), Krashen and

Terrell (1983) came up as a team with the study supplying the ultimate major

additional explanation of the Natural Approach concept to finalize and provide

better understanding of it with more concrete form of the integral principles.

Terrell (1986) got back to the field with more theory. Notwithstanding the

crystallization taking place a long time ago, there are still numerous recent

studies wholly or partially dealing with Natural Approach (Zafar, 2009; Westera,

2011; Abukhattala, 2013; Parham et al., 2013; Aksu and Gonul, 2014; Moreen

and Soneni, 2015; Mani, 2016; Mendoza, 2016; Matamoros-Gonzales, 2017).

This indicates that today is still part of the Natural Approach epoch since it is not

considered old-fashioned yet considering those umpteen studies.

2.9 Natural Approach and Motivation

Motivation is also a factor that influences how successfully students learn

English (Rehman et al., 2014). Syomwene (2016) states, “there are many ways

through which teachers can motivate learners in English language learning. One

way is by the teacher making his/her learning more meaningful and effective by

36

using teaching techniques which involve the learner in communicative tasks,

problems solving and information seeking.” Syomwene (2016) also adds that

English should be used in teaching the lesson, giving examples, asking questions,

conveying the meaning of new language items, checking attendance, telling

students where to sit, controlling the class, chatting to students and all other class

activities in order to motivate students.

The finding of Ahmed, Aftab and Yaqoob (2015) affirms that

motivational factors have a great role in learning the English language. The

finding originated from the study of Muriungi and Mbui (2015) supports this

agreement. Motivation can also be influenced by the ways a teacher provides

lessons. There have been several recent studies implying that the teacher’s ways

of teaching also influence students’ motivation (Zhao, 2016; Hayikaleng, Nair

and Krishnasamy, 2016; Javidkar and Soleimani, 2016).

According to Zhao (2016), the more important thing that teachers should

concentrate on is trying to strengthen students’ motivation by doing the following

things:

a) To educate purposefully.

b) To summarize important points before the class is over and to review

regularly.

c) Frequent encouragement.

d) To maintain content adequacy among classes, groups and individuals

respectively.

e) To teach inspirational and interesting materials of various kinds

involving games and modern multimedia equipment.

37

f) To have students engage themselves in medium quantity and difficulty

of homework.

g) Suitable seats and scoring standards.

h) To involve more activities outside of class.

i) To use the target language for communication with each other during

the activities.

j) To know the cultures of the target-language-speaking countries.

Given the fact that motivation is so important and influential to students,

the writer would like to apply Natural Approach in the teaching learning

activities because there are several advantages of Natural Approach principles

that, the writer assumed, would raise students’ motivation, as indicated by the

several previous studies (Abukhattala, 2013; Aksu and Gonul, 2013; Mani,

2016). On the basis of the related studies proving communicative activities,

freedom of topics and such real-life connection enhance students’ motivation, the

NA-based activities in the learning were presumed to raise students’ motivation.

2.10 Procedures of Natural Approach in Writing

The writer would like to adapt the five principles of Natural approach

proposed by Terrell (1977) and Krashen and Terrell (1983:58), i.e.

1) Comprehension First, Production Later 2) Stage-Emerging Production

3) Communicative Activities in the Process 4) Interesting and Relevant Topics

5) Focus-on-Form Written Assignment Error-Correction, not Oral

Communication-Correction, to the writing procedure of the NA-based activities

and the writer would also like to merge these principles to the good writing

38

teaching suggested by Barkaoi (2007). After having students participate in such

activities, the writer would see whether the activities raised the writing

achievement and motivation. The steps below are the ones based on the principles

of Natural Approach. They are divided into two columns. The left one contains

the principles which base the activities in the column on the right. Here are the

steps that the teacher and students need to do:

Table 2.4 The Natural Approach-Based Steps

2.11 Advantages and disadvantages

The advantages of adopting Natural Approach in teaching are as follows:

1. Natural Approach is not too complicated to apply.

Natural Approach Principle Activity

Comprehension First, Production LaterThe teacher describes the theme with which students’ topicsshould be in line.The teacher gives an example of the text whose topic is inaccordance with the theme.

Communicative Activities in the Process

The teacher discusses the text and asks several questionsabout it.The teacher makes sure students pay attention to thediscussion.

Interesting and Relevant TopicStudents choose their own interesting topics which arerelevant to real life and are in accordance with the theme.

Comprehension First, Production LaterBefore writing, students search for information about whatthey are going to write in order to comprehend their topicsfirst.

Stage-Emerging ProductionStudents write the work.Students submit the work.

Communicative Activities in the ProcessThe teacher asks students several questions about what theyhave written.The teacher asks about students’ difficulty in writing the texts.

Assignment Written Error-Correction(Focus on Form and not Oral Correction)

Students review their friends’ work in writing.Students return the work to the owners.

Stage-Emerging Production

Students revise their work in line with the review of theirfriends.Students have self-evaluation in reference to the mistakes theymade and the friends’ review.

Stage-Emerging Production Students re-submit the work.

Communicative Activities in the Process

Throughout the process, the teacher always tries to comfortstudents with his/her attitude. Students ought to feel relaxedand not to be under pressure while communicating with theother fellow students and the teacher.

39

2. Students learn everything in a natural way that will cause them to learn in a

more relaxing manner.

3. It avoids risk-taking activities that can cause students to lose face.

The disadvantages of adopting Natural Approach in teaching are as

follows:

1. It tends to take a long time in the teaching and learning process.

2. It does not take correctness as seriously as an approach normally does in the

process.

3. There is no grammatical instruction, so students tend to be totally blind to or

not adequately aware of most, if not all, explicit grammatical rules.

2.12 Theoretical Assumption

Since Natural Approach is an approach that helps students to acquire L2

naturally, just like the way they acquire their L1. Students communicate in L2

and while they are communicating, the total exposure to the L2 is in play and this

process makes them acquire the L2 the same way as the one they acquire their L1

since they acquire the L2 through their communication in contextual learning, not

isolated learning. The activities along with the elements are not contradictory or

contrastive to real life and the five tenets of this approach which focus on natural

learning that is not disconnected from real life.

It was believed that this approach could also be the base of EFL activities

because it adopts the way people acquire their L1, in other words, the natural way

is applied to the process of their L2 acquisition. Natural Approach-based

activities enable the learning in which students immerse themselves in a natural

40

communicative way. The activities which are based on Natural Approach are

supposed to reflect students’ real life and, therefore, make them feel that what

they learn has some connection with what they experience in real life.

It was plausible for the writer to conjecture that basing teaching learning

activities on Natural Approach would result in the rise of students’ writing

achievement and motivation as the principles of Natural Approach were expected

to be able to accommodate those two variables so well that they would grow

better. Besides, they were applicable to writing teaching. The writer also assumed

that intrinsically motivated students’ achievement would improve more than the

other. Withal, the writer surmised that the writing achievements of the students

belonging to the high motivation classifications of the two types would

respectively improve more than the counterparts of the antipodal motivation

classifications.

2.13 Hypotheses

Based on the theoretical assumption above, the writer hypothesized that:

Natural Approach-based activities are able to raise students’ writing

achievement.

Natural Approach-based activities are able to raise students’ motivation.

There is significant correlation between students’ writing achievement and

their motivation.

Intrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement improves more than

extrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement.

41

Highly motivated students’ writing achievements in both the intrinsic and

extrinsic groups respectively improve more than their antipodes.

That is all about the chapter. The writer has explicated the concept and

kinds of writing along with the teaching, the concept and types of motivation,

motivation in EFL, the concept of Natural Approach, the relationship between

Natural Approach and writing along with that between Natural Approach and

motivation, the procedures of Natural Approach in writing, advantages and

disadvantages of Natural Approach, the theoretical assumption and hypotheses.

42

III. METHOD

This chapter elaborates on the method used in this research with the

information of the design, the source of data, population and sample, data

collection technique, procedure, data analysis, instrument, validity and reliability

and hypothesis testing.

3.1 Design

This is quasi-experimental quantitative research since it did not use a

control class, had an experimental class only and compared the scores for the pre-

test and the post-test along with the responses to a questionnaire which was a

closed-ended one, before and after the treatment. It used the one-group pretest-

posttest design. According to Hatch and Farhadi (1982:22), a quasi-experimental

design is in agreement with the true experiment of the nature of human language

behavior, and the quasi-experimental method applying the pretest-posttest design

was the right method for this research (Setiyadi, 2006:131-132b). The treatment

was the teaching whose activities were governed by Natural Approach. The one

group pretest-posttest design employed in this research can be represented as

follows:

43

T1 X T2

T1 : Pretest

X : Treatment (NA-Based Activities)

T2 : Posttest

(Setiyadi, 2006:131-132b)

The treatment itself required six meetings. The writer distributed the

questionnaire to the students before the treatment for the pre-treatment

motivation data. Then, after the sixth treatment, the writer distributed the same

questionnaire to the students again for the post-treatment motivation data. Then,

the two kinds of responses were calculated and compared in order to see in what

manner the NA-based activities had affected their motivation.

After having the results of the students’ writing and motivation, the writer

correlated the two variables in this research to see whether there was significant

correlation in between. The writer then compared the effects of the activities on

the intrinsically and extrinsically motivated students in the field of the writing

achievement to find out whether one group’s writing achievement improved more

than the other’s. The same type of comparison was carried out to see whether the

highly motivated students of each type improved more than their respective

counterparts of the low motivation groups in the writing achievement.

3.2 Source of Data

The data source of this research came from the students’ scores for the

pre-test given before the treatment and for the post-test given after it and the

44

points of their responses to the motivation questionnaire before and after the

treatment.

3.3 Population and Sample

Burns and Grove (as cited in Sawalmeh, 2013) state that a population is

defined as all elements (individuals, objects and events) that meet the sample

criteria for inclusion in a study. The population of this research was the fifth

semester students of the English Education Department of the University of

Lampung. This population was taken because the students were at the middle

stage of their lessons. They were considered intermediate learners since they had

learnt English writing in general and at the beginning of advanced English

writing, so the tests were suitable to be an instrument of this research and they

should already be familiar with the kind of the tested writing and the writer had

conducted preliminary research on them and found out that they still made a lot

of mistakes in their writing. So, considering the result of the conducted

preliminary research, the writer assumed the students of this semester were not

good enough at writing yet. It was also because students at this semester would

start deeper writing lessons. For that reason, the writer thought that it was of

uttermost importance to conduct this research in order to see whether the

treatment was able to raise their writing achievement as well as their motivation

and to figure out the other answers as well.

Mouton (as cited in Sawalmeh, 2013) perceives a sample as a set of

elements selected with the intention of finding out something about the total

population from which they are taken. Thirty-five students of one class were

45

taken as the sample. The pre-test and the post-test shared the same sample. The

writer applied the random sampling technique since the students were considered

homogenous as the classes were not distinguished by the students’ levels of

proficiency.

3.4 Instruments

There were two instruments used in this research, i.e. writing tests and a

questionnaire.

3.4.1 Writing Tests

There were two writing tests administered in this research, i.e. pre-test

and post-test. Either was a sixty-minute test. The themes of the tests before and

after the treatment were free ones, so the students themselves decided on them.

Both types of writing should consist of 350-500 words.

The criteria of scoring were modified from Heaton’s (1991:146) that are

described by the following table of specifications:

Table 3.1 The Specifications of WritingNo. Element Percentage Point

1. Content 30%

30-27(Excellent – very good)

26-22(Good - average)

21-17(Fair - poor)

16-13(Very poor)

2. Judgment 20%

20-18(Excellent – very good)

17-14(Good - average)

13-10(Fair - poor)

9-7(Very poor)

3. Language Use 25%25-22

(Excellent – very good)

46

21-18(Good – average)

17-11(Fair – poor)

10-5(Very poor)

4. Style 20%

20-18(Excellent – very good)

17-14(Good – average)

13-10(Fair – poor)

9-7(Very poor)

5. Mechanics 5%

5(Excellent – very good)

4(Good – average)

3(Fair – poor)

2(Very poor)

3.4.2 Questionnaire

A motivation questionnaire adapted from Baker and Wigfield (1999);

Ryan and Deci (2000); Wang (2008); Icmez (2009); Challak and Kassaian

(2010); Lasagabaster (2011); Vibulphol (2016) was distributed to the students

before and after the treatment. It was a Likert Scales-based questionnaire because

it is the commonest scale to measure motivation (Setiyadi, 2006:58b) so that the

students would not find it too confusing or odd. The scale has the following

categorical terms: Strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree.

The writer used the reverse-scoring system for the negatively-keyed items in the

questionnaire.

The questionnaire included ten aspects, five aspects were categorically

intrinsic items and the other five were categorized into extrinsic items. Here is the

table of specifications of the motivation questionnaire:

47

Table 3.2 The Specifications of the Motivation Questionnaire

No.Category

Item Number Positively-Keyed Negatively-KeyedIntrinsic

1. Curiosity 19, 21, 29, 31 19, 21 29, 312. Pleasure 33, 35, 37, 39 33, 35 37, 393. Stimuli 18, 20, 22, 24 18, 20 22, 244. Self-Determination 26, 28, 30, 32 26, 28 30, 325. Desire 34, 36, 38, 40 34, 36 38, 40

No. Extrinsic Item Number Positively-Keyed Negatively-Keyed1. Grade 10, 12, 14, 16 14, 16 10, 122. Process 2, 4, 6, 8 6, 8 2, 43. Task 1, 3, 5, 7 1, 3 5, 74. Importance 9, 11, 13, 15 9, 11 13, 155. Method 17, 23, 25, 27 17, 25 23, 27

TOTAL 40 20 20

Either of the categories above, i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic, has five sub-

categories. The following are the sources of the intrinsic sub-categories along

with their respective items:

Curiosity (Baker and Wigfield, 1999) (Items 19, 21, 29 and 31)

Pleasure (Icmez, 2009) (Items 33, 35, 37 and 39)

Stimuli (Icmez, 2009) (Items 18, 20, 22 and 24)

Self-Determination (Wang, 2008) (Items 26, 28, 30 and 32)

Desire (Challak and Kassaian, 2010) (Items 34, 36, 38 and 40)

As for the extrinsic sub-categories, the sources are as follows:

Grade (Ryan and Deci, 2000) (Items 10, 12, 14 and 16)

Process (Lasagabaster, 2011) (Items 2, 4, 6 and 8)

Task (Ryan and Deci, 2000) (Items 1, 3, 5 and 7)

Importance (Baker and Wigfield, 1999) (Items 9, 11, 13 and 15)

Method (Vibulphol, 2016) (Items: 17, 23, 25 and 27)

48

3.5 Validity and Reliability

Validity and reliability show whether a test meets the criteria and is

considered usable or not. The writing tests and the motivation questionnaire were

the instruments of this research. Therefore, it was essential to measure the

validity and reliability of the tests and the questionnaire so as to get valid and

reliable data.

3.5.1 Writing Test Validity

A test is considered valid if it measures the object to be measured and is

compatible with the criteria (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:251). According to them,

there are two integral types of validity, i.e. Content validity and construct

validity. For that reason, the writing tests should have both of them.

3.5.1.1 Content Validity

According to Hatch and Farhady (1982:251), content validity concerns

whether the test is sufficiently representative and comprehensive from the

viewpoint of what it measures. It is the extent to which a test measures a

representative sample of the subject meter content. The focus of content validity

is on the adequacy of the sample and simply on the appearance of the test. In

order to meet this validity, the materials of the teaching were the ones suitable for

the college standard curriculum (KKNI). The themes underlying the teaching

were “Suggestion for the Government”, “Public Transportation” and “TV

Programs” which were supposed to be well-comprehended by the fifth semester

students of the English department.

49

3.5.1.2 Construct Validity

Construct validity deals with whether a test is in accordance with the

theories of what it is supposed to measure (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:252). So, it

is about whether the given test theoretically reflects what it measures. In this

research, the scoring criteria were based on the five aspects of writing adapted

from Heaton’s (1991:146), i.e. Content, judgment, language use, style and

mechanics.

3.5.2 Writing Test Reliability

Reliability of the test can be defined as the extent to which a test produces

consistent result when administrated under similar conditions (Hatch and

Farhady, 1982:243). In order to make sure of the reliability of the data and to

avoid the subjectivity of the research, the inter-rater reliability was exercised. It

means that the score for a test is independently obtained by two or more raters

who have corrected the work. There were two raters in this research. Both raters

based the scoring criteria upon Heaton’s (1991:146). In order to find the

coefficient of the correlation between the two raters, the writer employed the

calculation exercising the formula of rank-orders correlation as written below.ρ= 1 – .∑( )(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:206)

ρ : Coefficient of Rank Correlation

N : Number of the Students

D : The Difference of Rank Correlation

∑ : Constant Number

50

The interpretation of the correlation obtained from the calculation referred

to the following standard criteria:

0.0000 – 0.2000 = Very Low

0.2000 – 0.4000 = Low

0.4000 – 0.6000 = Medium

0.6000 – 0.8000 = High

0.8000 – 1.0000 = Very High

The two raters were Habi Septiawan and the writer himself. Both Habi

Septiawan and the writer have been teaching as professional English teachers for

years. Given the fact that they are professionals in the English teaching area, the

two raters were considered to be able to ensure that the writing tests were reliable

in the aforementioned way. Below are the results of the pre and post-test

reliability.

Table 3.3 The Pre-Test Writing ReliabilityReliability N

.992 35Table 3.4 The Post-Test Writing Reliability

Reliability N.994 35

Having seen the tables above, it is understood that both types of reliability

are very high considering the abovementioned interpretation.

3.5.3 Motivation Questionnaire Validity

The validity of the motivation questionnaire was construct validity. This

validity is a measure of whether a questionnaire is a valid one, in other words,

whether it measures what it is supposed to measure.

51

3.5.3.1 Construct Validity

Construct validity checks whether the items and the categories in the

questionnaire are in line with the theories of the motivation upon which they are

based (Hatch and Farhady, 1982:252).

3.5.4 Motivation Questionnaire Reliability

The writer used SPSS to calculate the motivation reliability. The tables

providing the info of the reliability are as follows:

Table 3.5 The Motivation Reliability

Case Processing Summary

N %

Cases Valid 35 100.0

Total 35 100.0

Reliability

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.823 40

The writer referred to the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability levels in order to

decide how reliable the questionnaire items were. Here are the Cronbach’s Alpha

reliability classifications:

Table 3.6 The Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Classifications

Cronbach's alpha Internal consistency

α ≥ 0.9 Excellent

0.9 > α ≥ 0.8 Good

0.8 > α ≥ 0.7 Acceptable

0.7 > α ≥ 0.6 Questionable

0.6 > α ≥ 0.5 Poor

0.5 > α Unacceptable

Hence, the motivation reliability was classified into good because the

reliability of the items was 0.823. The formula employed in the Cronbach’s

Alpha reliability manual calculation is as follows:

52

r11 = (1 − ∑ )r11 = Instrument Reliability

k = The Number of Items∑ = The Number of Item Variances

= Total Variances (Arikunto, 2013:122).

3.6 Data Collection Technique

The employed techniques for collecting the data were the analyses of both

types of writing and the calculation of the responses to the questionnaire. So, the

writing analysis was broken down into two, i.e. pre-test and post-test analyses.

The writer analyzed the students’ pre-test and post-test work first before

determining the scores.

As for the questionnaire calculation, the responses of the students to the

same distributed questionnaire before and after the treatment were calculated and

then the results were compared to know the change in the students’ motivation

after the treatment in order to decide on whether the treatment was able to raise

their motivation.

3.7 Procedure

The following was the procedure run by the writer:

3.7.1 Determining the Subject of the Research

The subject of the research was one class which had been chosen

randomly from the fifth semester classes of the English Department in the

University of Lampung in the academic year 2017/2018.

53

3.7.2 Giving the Pre-Test

The pre-test was given before the treatment and the theme of the pre-test

was a free one. The students wrote 350-500 words with the topics in line with the

theme following the guidelines provided by the writer.

3.7.3 Distributing the Pre-Treatment Questionnaire

This questionnaire was called “pre-treatment questionnaire” because it

was distributed to the students before they got the treatment in order to know the

state of their motivation as regards the traditional way. To put it another way, it

was intended to give the writer information about their motivation before the

treatment was carried out. The questions in this questionnaire were adapted from

the questionnaires of several previous studies (Baker and Wigfield, 1999; Ryan

and Deci, 2000; Wang, 2008; Icmez, 2009; Challak and Kassaian, 2010;

Lasagabaster, 2011; Vibulphol, 2016). The questions were classified into two

types, i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic. Either had five sub classifications which had the

same number of items each.

3.7.4 Conducting the Treatment

There was only one treatment in this research, i.e. Natural Approach-

based activities. It means that the activities were based on the principles of

Natural Approach. The writer tried to have the students absorb the essence of the

learning process naturally, as what Natural Approach suggests. The dependent

variable was writing, so the writer brought Natural Approach principles into his

writing teaching.

The materials taught to the students as well as the examples and

everything else were relevant to real life, communicative and interesting in order

54

that they went with the principles of Natural Approach. The students were asked

to write English with relevant and interesting topics too. There was also such a

communicative process after they wrote it as their putting forward their opinions

about the corresponding theme to the teacher who was the writer himself. The

students were asked to understand what they would write first. One student

should comprehend the topic he was going to write about. The correction or

revision was performed in writing by the fellow students and they were given a

chance to revise their writing in alignment with the revision. The students should

also have some self-evaluation based on the other students’ review.

3.7.5 Giving the Post-Test

The post-test was given after the treatment and the theme of the post-test

was also a free one like the pre-test theme. The students wrote 350-500 words

with the topics in alignment with the theme following the guidelines provided by

the writer.

3.7.6 Distributing the Post-Treatment Questionnaire

This questionnaire was called “post-treatment questionnaire” because it

was distributed to the students after the treatment was given. The questionnaire

was the same as the pre-treatment questionnaire. It was intended to let the writer

know about their motivation state after such treatment. After the writer got both

types of responses to the questionnaire, the writer calculated them and

determined which students belonged to intrinsic motivation and which ones

belonged to extrinsic motivation.

55

3.7.7 Scoring the Writing Tests

The writer scored both types of writing, i.e. pre-test and post-test, after the

students submitted them. After that, the scores of the first were compared to the

scores of the other so as to see whether the treatment raised the students’ writing

achievement. The scoring aspects taken into account were content, judgment,

language use, style and mechanics. SPSS was used for the calculation of the

comparison.

3.7.8 Motivation Comparison

The results of the motivation questionnaire before the treatment and after

the treatment were then compared to see whether the treatment raised the

students’ motivation. The comparison was calculated via SPSS too after both

results were obtained.

3.7.9 The Correlation between the Writing Achievement and the Motivation

Having obtained the results of the writing achievement and the

motivation, the writer saw whether there was significant correlation between the

achievement and the motivation. As before, the writer used SPSS for the

computation of the correlation.

3.7.10 The Motivation Division

The writer divided the motivation of the students into four types, namely:

1) High intrinsic 2) Low intrinsic 3) High extrinsic 4) Low extrinsic.

The divisions were based on the results of their responses to the pre-treatment

questionnaire. This division was intended to let the writer know the students of

the groups because the writer would also compare the writing achievement of the

intrinsically motivated students to the extrinsically motivated students’ and of the

56

highly motivated students in either group to the low motivated students’ in their

respective groups.

The division was on the basis of the students’ intrinsic extrinsic final

points. If one student’s intrinsic final point was higher than the extrinsic one, then

he was classified into the intrinsic motivation group and vice-versa. As to decide

on the highly and low-motivated students in each group, i.e. intrinsic and

extrinsic, the writer used the corresponding overall points as the separators. It

means if one student’s total point was lower than the overall point of his group,

he would be classified as a low motivated type of the group.

3.8 Data Analysis

3.8.1 Writing Test Data

The writing was viewed from the five aspects which the students should

consider for the sake of the quality. The five aspects which were taken into

consideration in scoring the work were content, judgment, language use, style

and mechanics.

The scoring percentage allocation of the writing aspects was:

1) Content : 30 %

2) Judgment : 20%

3) Language use : 25%

4) Style : 20%

5) Mechanics : 5%

The EFL composition was used because the sample was EFL students, so

it was supposed to provide a well-defined standard and interpretive framework

57

for evaluating the students’ compositions based upon communicative

effectiveness of theirs.

The range of the possible score one student would get based on the

criteria above was from 0 to 100. To help the raters determine the students’

scores, the writer provided the following table of score allocations for the writing

aspects.

Table 3.7 The Score Allocations for the Writing Aspects

No Students’ Name C(13-30)

J(7-20)

LU(5-25)

S(7-20)

M(2-5)

Total(0-100)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

…

C : Content

J : Judgment

LU : Language Use

S : Style

M : Mechanics

3.8.2 Motivation Questionnaire Data

The motivation questionnaire was Likert Scales-based consisting of 2

classifications respectively constituted by five categories which had 4 items each,

so there were 40 items altogether. The writer calculated both types of the

58

students’ responses to the questionnaire in reference to the point of each response

scale. Here is the table showing the points of the scales:

Table 3.8 The Point of Each Questionnaire Scale

Scale PointStrongly agree 2Agree 1Neutral 0Disagree -1Strongly disagree -2

Then, the writer totaled the whole points of each student. These steps

were taken for both pre and post-treatment motivation data for the sake of the

comparison. As for the students’ classification on the motivation basis, after

getting the entire students’ total points for the pre-treatment questionnaire, the

writer classified the students into the four types of motivation based upon the

calculation results. These motivation-based groups did not change till the end of

the research, so this grouping was carried out once only, before the treatment, in

order to identify to which group each of the students belonged before it started. It

was needed to compare the writing achievement of one group to the others.

3.9 Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing was used to prove which hypotheses were accepted

and which were rejected. The writer used SPSS in order to test the five

hypotheses. The writer applied Repeated Measures T-Test to test the first and

second hypotheses. As for the third hypothesis test, the writer picked out Pearson

Product Moment as the formula. The calculations for testing the last two

hypotheses were both fueled by One Sample Test. The writer also figured out the

significance levels. The 0.05 significance level was applied to each hypothesis. It

means the significance would be approved if Sig < α, which signifies that the

59

probability of error of a hypothesis is only 5%. The hypotheses are stated as

follows:

H1 = Natural Approach-based activities are able to raise students’ writing

achievement.

H01 = Natural Approach-based activities are not able to raise students’

writing achievement.

H2 = Natural Approach-based activities are able to raise students’ motivation.

H02 = Natural Approach-based activities are not able to raise students’

motivation.

H3 = There is significant correlation between students’ writing achievement

and their motivation.

H03 = There is not significant correlation between students’ writing

achievement and their motivation.

H4 = Intrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement improves more

than extrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement.

H04 = Intrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement does not improve

more than extrinsically motivated students’ writing achievement.

H5 = Highly motivated students’ writing achievements in both the intrinsic

and extrinsic groups respectively improve more than their antipodes.

H05 = Highly motivated students’ writing achievements in both the intrinsic

and extrinsic groups respectively do not improve more than their

antipodes.

Despite the strong association between these two variables, i.e. writing

and motivation, and the applicability of the treatment on a Natural Approach

60

basis for treating them, none of the prior studies specifically connects Natural

Approach-based activities to the writing achievement. Neither does any of them

relate such activities to students’ motivation. In other words, none has paid

attention to the types of motivation. For that reason, the writer put forward those

six hypotheses to test.

This chapter has expounded the method used in this research with the

information of the design, source of data, population and sample, data collection

technique, procedure, data analysis, instrument, validity and reliability and

hypothesis testing.

104

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter encompasses the encapsulation from the findings of this study,

the suggestions to the related components and the expectations in connection with

the further research regarding any of the variables involved in this study which

result from the acknowledged limitations.

5.1 CONCLUSION

This study has built on the existing knowledge in the areas of Natural

Approach, writing and motivation. It extends our knowledge of intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation as well. The findings of this study lead to the following

conclusive points:

1. The beneficial impacts of NA-based activities on students, especially in

respect of the writing achievement, are out of the question.

2. The magnitude of such activities extends to the mitigation of students’

lack of motivation, which means those activities can also be applied in

the orientation of motivation enhancement.

3. Motivation has a negative relationship with the achievement. So,

motivation shortage does not potentially flaw students’ achievement. It

even goes this way, the higher the achievement, the lower the motivation,

presumptuously because of the plateau effect. In a nutshell, as far as

writing achievement improvement is concerned and particularly when the

105

learning is governed by Natural Approach, motivation is not a

determining element. As for the plateau effect case, the writer supposes it

is the achievement that affected the motivation, not the other way around.

In other words, the students, who thought they had ceased improving as

much as they had, lost their motivation, either gradually or drastically. So,

they were basically those who had had good achievements at the

beginning.

4. Intrinsically motivated students benefit more from NA-based activities in

the domain of writing achievement improvement. Therefore, it is not

baseless to say it is of high probability that intrinsically motivated

students are on the upper hand over extrinsically motivated ones in

the writing achievement after the long-term application of such activities.

5. Students of low intrinsic and extrinsic motivation respectively transcend

their counterparts of the opposite levels of motivation from the viewpoint

of writing achievement improvement when taught through such activities.

As stated earlier, it is presumably part of the domino effect of the plateau

phenomenon.

5.2 SUGGESTIONS

Correspondingly, the writer would like to put forward several suggestions to

the components of English, especially English Language Teaching (ELT). They are

as follows:

106

1. There should be more activities adopting or adapting from NA principles

since they are proven effective to help students improve their writing

achievement, even significantly, and motivation.

2. The teachers should see NA as an alternative to an approach, or even a

more appropriate approach considering the traits it has, used to tackle

current educational issues, especially those of writing teaching.

3. Two of the substantive practical implications of this research are more

attention to topic relevance and students’ interest in the topics is a

necessity, thus the teacher is expected to completely leave the topic

matter to students.

4. The findings of the research also lead to the suggestion that teachers

should regard students’ motivation as something totally different from

how it is commonly regarded since it is inversely related to students’

achievement, particularly the writing achievement.

5. Such course of action for the learning designers as looking into the current

order of lessons and revising it if necessary, in accordance with what is

better for students in either the short run or the long run, is highly

recommended and, in consideration of it, the key policy should also be

viewed from the educational short-term and long-term points of view.

To wrap up, the holistic implication of the findings is that the activities

underlain by NA principles should be taken into account in formulating the learning,

especially to enhance students’ writing achievement as well as their motivation.

Last but not least, several suggestions in relation to the further research are

provided below.

107

1. The further research regarding motivational factors originating from NA

principles would be worthwhile.

2. Such things as activity expansion, different levels, more specific tests,

a broader range of sample units and longer span of research are highly

advisable for the next researchers since they will provide much more

input in connection with the application of NA-based activities. Such

research is also expected to help establish a greater degree of accuracy.

3. Driven by the fact that there are only a few studies directly relating

the plateau effect to EFL, deep research specifically on the plateau effect

and its connection with the realm of learning should be conducted so that

it will supply extremely precious findings in this respect.

4. Considerably more work could be done to determine the prospective

shortcomings of intrinsically and extrinsically motivated students in their

study along with the solutions as the follow-up.

5. Gender issues in education should also be the concern of the next

researchers. It would be gainful to bring gender matters to the surface as

the variables in the next research, for instance, to know to what extent

NA-based activities impact male and female learners respectively and

the comparison between their states of motivation and achievements

after the treatment.

It is the deduction from the findings in the form of conclusion, suggestions

for the components of language education, especially English, and expectations of

the further research that this chapter has spotlighted. Hopefully, the next researchers

will regard this study as the one on which they should also build theirs since there is

108

still abundant room to fit in, particularly for those who wish to take these variables

or any of them into account.

109

REFERENCES

Abrar, M., Mukminin, A., Habibi, A., Asyrafi, F., & Makmur, M. (2018). "If ourEnglish isn’t a language, what is it?” Indonesian EFL Student Teachers’Challenges Speaking English. The Qualitative Report (23), 129-145.

Abukhattala, I. (2013). Krashen’s Five Proposals on Language Learning: AreThey Valid in Libyan EFL Classes. English Language Teaching (6), 128-131.

Adi, S. S. (2012). Modifying EFL Communicative Language Teaching forIndonesian Context. jlt-polinema.org/, 1-6.

Afzal, H., Ali, I., Khan, M. A., & Hamid, K. (2010). A Study of UniversityStudents’ Motivation and Its Relationship with Their AcademicPerformance. International Journal of Business and Management (5), 80-88.

Ahmad, S., & Rao, C. (2012). Applying Communicative Approach in TeachingEnglish as a Foreign Language: a Case Study of Pakistan. PortaLinguarum (20), 187-203.

Ahmed, M., Aftab, M., & Yaqoob, H. (2015). Students’ Motivation towardEnglish Language Learning at Undergraduate Level. Advances inLanguage and Literary Studies (6), 230-238.

Aksu, N., & Gönül, Ü. (2014). Learning Languages without Grammar. Journal ofEducational and Social Research (4), 39-42.

Al-Mansour, N. S., & Al-Shorman, R. A. (2014). The Effect of an ExtensiveReading Program on the Writing Performance of Saudi EFL UniversityStudents. International Journal of Linguistics (6), 258-275.

Al-Tamimi, A., & Shuib, M. (2009). Motivation And Attitudes TowardsLearning English: A Study Of Petroleum Engineering Undergraduates AtHadhramout University Of Sciences And Technology. GEMA OnlineJournal of Language Studies (9), 29-55.

Alwazir, B., & Shukri, N. (2017). The Use of CLT in the Arab Context: ACritical Perspective. International Journal of English LanguageEducation (5), 15-32.

Amabile, T. M. (1985). Motivation and Creativity: Effects of MotivationalOrientation on Creative Writers. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology (48), 393-399.

Amirkhanova, K. M., Ageeva, A. V., & Fakhretdinov, R. M. (2016). EnhancingStudents’ Learning Motivation through Reflective Journal Writing. IFTE2016 : 2nd International Forum on Teacher Education (pp. 1-18). FutureAcademy.

110

Amrai, K., Motlagh, S. E., Zalani, H. A., & Parhon, H. (2011). The relationshipbetween academic motivation and academic achievement students.Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences (15), 399–402.

Arfiandhani, P. (2015). An Investigation of Challenges Related toCommunicative Language Teaching Practices in Indonesian Senior HighSchools. 4rd English Language Teaching Literature and Translation(ELTLT) International Conference Proceedings, (pp. 602-624).Semarang.

Arikunto, S. (2013). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: PT.Rineka Cipta.

Ashari, N., & Zarrin, N. (2014). Problems in Using Communicative LanguageTeaching in Iran and Possible solutions. Technical Journal of Engineeringand Applied Sciences (4), 257-266.

Awada, G., & Ghaith, G. (2014). Effect of Using the Blog Educational Tool onWriting Achievement and Motivation for Legal Writing. InternationalJournal of Education and Research (2), 371-388.

Bahous, R., Bacha, N. N., & Nabhani, M. (2011). Motivating Students in the EFLClassroom: A Case Study of Perspectives. English Language Teaching(4), 33-43.

Bahrani, T. (2013). Importance of Language Input in Language Learning.International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences (6), 1376-1379.

Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of Children’s Motivation forReading and Their Relations to Reading Activity and ReadingAchievement. Reading Research Quarterly (34), 452–477.

Barkaoui, K. (2007). Teaching Writing to Second Language Learners: Insightsfrom Theory and Research. TESL Reporter (40), 35-48.

Braine, G., & Yorozu, M. (1998). Local Area Network (LAN) Computers in ESLand EFL Writing Classes: Promises and Realities. JALT Journal (20), 47-59.

Buyukyavuz, O., & Cakir, I. (2014). Uncovering the Motivating Factors BehindWriting in English in an EFL Context. Anthropologist (18), 153-163.

Buzdar, M. A., Mohsin, M. N., Akbar, R., & Mohammad, N. (2017). Students’Academic Performance and its Relationship with their Intrinsic andExtrinsic Motivation. Journal of Educational Research (20), 74-82.

Chalak, A., & Kassaian, Z. (2010). Motivation And Attitudes Of IranianUndergraduate EFL Students Towards Learning English. GEMA Online™Journal of Language Studies (10), 37-56.

Cheng, H.-F., & Dornyei, Z. (2007). The Use of Motivational Strategies inLanguage Instruction: The Case of EFL Teaching in Taiwan. Innovationin Language Learning and Teaching (1), 153-174.

Choosri, C., & Intharaksa, U. (2011). Relationship between Motivation andStudents’ English Learning Achievement: A study of the Second – yearvocational certificate level Hatyai Technical College Students. The 3rdInternational Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences (pp. 1-15).Prince of Songkla University.

111

Darwish, S. A., & Sadeqi, A. A. (2016). Reasons for College Students toPlagiarize in EFL Writing: Students’ Motivation to Pass. InternationalEducation Studies (9), 99-110.

Dislen, G. (2013). The Reasons of Lack of Motivation from the Students’ andTeachers’ Voices. The Journal of Academic Social Science (1), 35-45.

Dornyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign LanguageClassroom. The Modern Language Journal (78), 273-284.

Dornyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning.Language Teaching (31), 117-135.

Fadillah, R. (2014). Learning Motivation and English Achievement of Students atPoliteknik Negeri Semarang Central Java. Jurnal Penelitian Humaniora(15), 89-98.

Fernández, D. M., & Cañado, M. L. (2001). Exploring the Student's Motivationin the EFL Class. Present and Future Trends in TEFL, 321-364.

Gogtay, N., & Thatte, U. (2017). Principles of Correlation Analysis. Journal ofThe Association of Physicians of India (65), 78-81.

Graham, S. (2008). Effective Writing Instruction for All Students. WisconsinRapids: Renaissance Learning, Inc.

Gultom, E. (2015). English Language Teaching Problems in Indonesia.Proceeding: 7th International Seminar on Regional Education (3), (pp.1234-1241).

Gupta, P. K., & Mili, R. (2016). Impact of Academic Motivation on AcademicAchievement: A Study on High Schools Students. European Journal ofEducation Studies (2), 43-51.

Hadriana, Ismail, M. A., & Mahdum. (2013). The Relationship betweenMotivations and Self-Learning and the English Language Achievement inSecondary High School Students. Asian Social Science (9), 36-43.

Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1982). Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics.Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.

Hayenga, A. O., & Corpus, J. H. (2010). Profiles of intrinsic and extrinsicmotivations: A person-centered approach to motivation and achievementin middle school. Motiv Emot (34), 371–383.

Hayikaleng, N., Nair, S. M., & Krishnasamy, H. N. (2016). Thai Students’Motivation on English Reading Comprehension. International Journal ofEducation and Research (4), 477-486.

Heaton, J. B. (1991). English language test. New York: Longman Inc.Houghton, K. L. (2015). A Dissertation: Impacts of Intrinsic and Extrinsic

Motivation on Reading Achievement of First-Grade Students.Minneapolis: Walden University Press.

Htoo, H. D. (2014). Academic Motivation and Academic Achievement of KarenRefugee Students. 41-46.

Huang, S.-H. (2016). Communicative Language Teaching: Practical Difficultiesin the Rural EFL Classrooms in Taiwan. Journal of Education andPractice (7), 186-202.

Huy, N. T. (2015). Problems Affecting Learning Writing Skill of Grade 11 atThong Linh High School. Asian Journal of Educational Research (3), 53-69.

112

Icmez, S. (2009). Motivation and Critical Reading in EFL Classrooms: A Case ofELT Prepatory Students. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education(5), 123-147.

Javed, M., Juan, W. X., & Nazli, S. (2013). A Study of Students’ Assessment inWriting Skills of the English Language. International Journal ofInstruction (6), 129-144.

Javidkar, S., & Soleimani, H. (2016). On the Relationship between Iranian EFLTeachers' Interaction Style and L2 Learning Motivation. InternationalJournal of Asian Social Science (6), 525-536.

Kang, B., & Tan, S. H. (2014). Interactive Games: Intrinsic and ExtrinsicMotivation, Achievement, and Satisfaction. Journal of Management andStrategy (5), 110-116.

Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmentalperspective. Journal of Writing Research (1), 1-26.

Keskin, H. K. (2015). The Relationships between Dimensions of WritingMotivation and Reading Comprehension. Educational Research andReviews (10), 856-860.

Koosha, M., & Yakhabi, M. (2013). Problems Associated with the Use ofCommunicative Language Teaching in EFL Contexts and PossibleSolutions. International Journal of Foreign Language (1), 63-76.

Krashen, S. D. (1983). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.California: Pergamon Press Inc.

Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The Natural Approach: LanguageAcquisition in the Classroom. Alemany Press.

Kreishan, L. J., & Al-Dhaimat, Y. (2013). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation,Orientation and Achievements in L2 of Arab Learners of English, Frenchand German: A Study from Jordan. International Education Studies (6),52-63.

Kubanyiova, M. (2006). Developing a Motivational Teaching Practice in EFLTeachers in Slovakia: Challenges of Promoting Teacher Change in EFLContexts. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (10), 1-17.

Lasagabaster, D. (2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLILand EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching (5), 3-18.

Lemos, M. S., & Veríssimo, L. (2014). The relationships between intrinsicmotivation, extrinsic motivation, and achievement, along elementaryschool. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (112) (pp. 930 – 938).Elsevier Ltd.

Lin, M. H. (2015). Learner-Centered Blogging: A Preliminary Investigation ofEFL Student Writers’ Experience. Educational Technology & Society(18), 446–458.

Liu, D. (2015). A Critical Review of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis: Three MajorArguments. Journal of Education and Human Development (4), 139-146.

Lo, J., & Hyland, F. (2007). Enhancing students’ engagement and motivation inwriting: The case of primary students in Hong Kong. Journal of SecondLanguage Writing (16), 219-237.

Mali, Y. C. (2015). Motivational Factors in the Indonesian EFL WritingClassroom. bahasa & sastra (15), 1-11.

113

Mani, K. R. (2016). The Natural Approach. Journal of English Language andLiterature (3), 8-16.

Maric, M., & Sakac, M. (2014). Individual and Social Factors Related toStudents’ Academic Achievement and Motivation for Learning.Suvremena psihologija (17), 63-79.

Matamoros-Gonzalez, J. A., Rojas, M. A., Romero, J. P., Vera-Quiñonez, S., &Soto, S. T. (2017). English Language Teaching Approaches: AComparison of the Grammar-translation, Audiolingual, Communicative,and Natural Approaches. Theory and Practice in Language Studies (7),965-973.

Meinarni, N. P., & Willdahlia, A. G. (2017). Communications Skills of Studentsthrough Electronic Messaging Study Case: Students of STMIK STIKOM(STIKI) Indonesia. Proceeding of 2nd International Conference of ArtsLanguage And Culture, (pp. 570-576). Bali.

Memiş, A., & Bozkurt, M. (2013). The relationship of reading comprehensionsuccess with metacognitive awareness, motivation, and reading levels offifth grade students. Academic Journals (8), 1242-1246.

Mendoza, G. I. (2016). A Thesis: Exploring Gesturing as a Natural Approach toImpact Stages of Second Language Development: A Multiple Baseline,Single Case Study of a Head Start Child. Tennessee: East Tennessee StateUniversity.

Mohammad, M. F., & Hussein, A. A. (2013). Enhancing Students’ Motivation toWrite Essays through Brainstorming: A Comparative Study. InternationalJournal of Humanities and Social Science (3), 191-196.

Moreen, M., & Soneni, M. (2015). The Acquisition – Learning Distinction: ACritique of Krashen’s Monitor Model. Journal of Emerging Trends inEducational Research and Policy Studies (6), 198-200.

Muriungi, P. K., & Mbui, M. K. (2015). The Influence of Motivation onAcquisition of English Language Skills among Day Secondary SchoolStudents in Imenti South District, Kenya. International Journal ofResearch in Humanities and Social Studies (2), 52-58.

Nasihah, M., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2017). Language Learning Strategies,Motivation, and Writing Achievement of Indonesian EFL Students. ArabWorld English Journal (8), 250-263.

Ningrum, S., & Matondang, S. A. (2017). The correlation between students’motivation and achievement in reading comprehension. The InternationalJournal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention (4), 3636-3639.

Nugent, T. T. (2009). A Dissertation: The Impact of Teacher-Student Interactionon Student Motivation and Achievement. Florida: The University ofCentral Florida.

Olmez, F. (2015). An investigation into the relationship between L2 readingmotivation and reading achievement. Procedia - Social and BehavioralSciences (199) (pp. 597 – 603). Elsevier Ltd.

Parham, M., Goudarzi, A., Mahdian, M. J., & Goudarzi, M. M. (2013). NaturalApproach: The Influence on Learning English Language Skills among B.A. Students of Borujerd Azad University. Journal of Science and today'sworld (2), 1391-1401.

114

Puengpipattrakul, W. (2009). The Use of Journals to Develop GrammaticalAccuracy in Writing. 90-108.

Rehman, A., Bilal, H. A., Sheikh, A., Bibi, N., & Nawaz, A. (2014). The Role ofMotivation in Learning English Language for Pakistani Learners.International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (4), 254-258.

Resnick, L. B. (1987). The 1987 Presidential Address: Learning in School andout. Educational Researcher (16), 13-20+54.

Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2012). The Intricate Relationship BetweenMotivation and Achievement: Examining the Mediating Role of Self-Regulated Learning and Achievement-Related Classroom Behaviors.International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education(24), 197-208.

Ruiz-Funes, M. (2015). Exploring the potential of second/foreign languagewriting for language learning: The effects of task factors and learnervariables. Journal of Second Language Writing (28), 1-19.

Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived Locus of Causality andInternalization: Examining Reasons for Acting in Two Domains. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology (57), 749-761.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: ClassicDefinitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology(25), 54–67.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of Self-Determination Theory: AnOrganismic Dialectical Perspective. In R. M. Ryan, & E. L. Deci,Handbook of Self-Determination (pp. 1-33).

Sawalmeh, M. H. (2013). Error Analysis of Written English Essays: The case ofStudents of the Preparatory Year Program in Saudi Arabia. English forSpecific Purposes World (14), 1-17.

Schaffner, E., & Schiefele, U. (2016). The Contributions of Intrinsic andExtrinsic Reading Motivation to the Development of ReadingCompetence over Summer Vacation. Reading Psychology (37), 917–941.

Setiyadi, A. B. (2006a). Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Yogyakarta:Graha Ilmu.

Setiyadi, A. B. (2006b). Metode Penelitian dan Pengajaran Bahasa Asing:Pendekatan Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.

Singh, K. (2011). Study of Achievement Motivation in Relation to AcademicAchievement of Students. International Journal of Educational Planning& Administration (1), 161-171.

Stirling, D. (2013). Motivation in Education. Aichi Universities EnglishEducation Research Journa (29), 51-72.

Syomwene, A. (2016). Motivating Learners in the Teaching and Learning of theEnglish Language Curriculum in Schools in Kenya: The Teacher’s Role.International Journal of Education and Research (4), 19-30.

Terrell, T. D. (1977). A Natural Approach to Second Language Acquisition andLearning. The Modern Language Journal (61), 325-337.

Terrell, T. D. (1986). Acquisition in the Natural Approach: The Binding/AccessFramework. The Modern Language Journal (70), 213-227.

Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and ExtrinsicMotivation. Waterloo: Academic Press.

115

Vibulphol, J. (2016). Students’ Motivation and Learning and Teachers’Motivational Strategies in English Classrooms in Thailand. EnglishLanguage Teaching (9), 64-75.

Wang, F. (2008). Motivation and English Achievement: An Exploratory andConfirmatory Factor Analysis of a New Measure for Chinese Students ofEnglish Learning. North American Journal of Psychology (10), 633-646.

Westera, W. (2011). On the Changing Nature of Learning Context: Anticipatingthe Virtual Extensions of the World. Educational Technology & Society(14), 201-212.

Xu, Q. (2009). Moving beyond the Intermediate EFL Learning Plateau. AsianSocial Science (5), 66-68.

Yi, F. (2007). Plateau of EFL Learning: A Psycholinguistic and PedagogicalStudy. 137-177.

Yulia, Y. (2013). Teaching Challenges in Indonesia: Motivating Students andTeachers’ Classroom Language. Indonesian Journal of AppliedLinguistics (3), 1-16.

Yusuf, Y. Q., Inayah, N., & Maulida, M. (2015). Linking Acehnese Students’Motivation in English Language Learning to their English Scores. 5thAnnualL International Conference Syiah Kuala University (pp. 236-242).Banda Aceh: Syiah Kuala University Press.

Zafar, M. (2009). Monitoring the 'Monitor': A Critique of Krashen's FiveHypotheses. The Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics (2), 139-146.

Zhao, L. (2016). Motivation in Chinese Children’s English Teaching. OpenJournal of Social Sciences (4), 185-188.