Students’ Motivation on Learning EFL Writing Skills …€¦ · · 2017-07-26Students’ Motivation on Learning EFL Writing Skills ... and lesson plan (Stern, 1992; Depdiknas

©Journal of Applied Sciences & Environmental Sustainability 2 (4) 1-16, 2016 e-ISSN 2360-8013

1 | P a g e

Research Article

Students’ Motivation on Learning EFL Writing Skills

Through Inquiry Approach

Sitti Hamsina S1., Ahmad Johari Sihes2

1Institut Parahikma Indonesia, Jl.Mustafa Dg. Bunga No. 191 Gowa Sulawesi Selatan Indonesia, Post Code 92113.

2Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor Bahru, Malaysia

ARTICLE INFO

Article history

Received: 11/07/2016

Accepted: 04/09/2016

A b s t r a c t

The purpose of the study is to find out the differences of students’ motivation

in learning writing skills between using inquiry learning and using traditional

methods. The study used post-test only research design in experimental-control

groups in quasi-experimental research. Its subject is twenty students of XI

grade-science program in experimental group and twenty students of XI grade-

science program in control group. The study conducted within 6 meetings in 3

weeks in High School in Makassar. Data obtained by using three scales in

MSLQ as a post-test and analyzed by using SPSS. It is found that inquiry

learning can create meaningful differences on students’ control of learning

beliefs. Besides, inquiry-learning procedure is also found to create meaningful

differences on students’ self-efficacy in learning writing skills. However,

inquiry learning is not found to create meaningful differences in the anxiety

dimension. The recommendation of the study also discussed in this article.

© Journal of Applied Sciences & Environmental Sustainability. All rights reserved.

students’ motivation, learning,

writing skills, inquiry learning

1. Introduction

Teaching and learning becomes central issue in curriculum and instruction. If teaching and learning process

runs well, it tends to gain learning achievement as general learning objectives seem easy. This occurs to all

subjects including learning English as a foreign language. So, all components in teaching and learning have

to function well such as teaching methods and strategies, teaching media and aids, classroom facilities,

syllabus, and lesson plan (Stern, 1992; Depdiknas KTSP, 2006).

Teacher strategies in teaching and learning are necessary to be varied to gain learners’ motivation

and achievement in learning. One of teaching strategies which involve students’ participation and

engagement in the classroom is inquiry learning instruction. This instruction involves learners to learn on


2 | P a g e

their own ways although teachers have limited experience with using inquiry activities in their classrooms

(Newman et al., 2004). Teachers definitely need to be well prepared and confident in their knowledge and

understanding in order to properly direct, guide, focus, challenge and even negotiate with students as they

guide them through the process.

More specifically, teachers’ preparation in all subjects in curriculum is necessary including English

language teaching and learning as a foreign language. It may determine students’ achievement in all

language competence (such as listening, reading, speaking, and writing). One which teachers need to

prepare is teaching strategies and to apply those strategies in front of the classroom. A strategic competence

of English in school based curriculum is writing although teachers face big challenges in teaching and

students have difficulties to explore the competence.

This study would focus on developing students’ motivation in learning writing skills through

inquiry approach in EFL. Inquiry approach wishes increasing students’ motivation. Students’ motivation

involves in the study is control of beliefs, self-efficacy, and anxiety. The developing of them would be

found by using inquiry based learning.

1.1 Motivation

Some factors determine second or foreign language learning achievements such as aptitude, learner

preferences, learner beliefs, age of acquisition, and motivation. among those factors, motivation gains

widespread acknowledgement as the most influential. Thus, being able to conceptualize motivation as

exactly as possible will, without a shred of doubt, be beneficial to all who related, like educationalists,

psychologists, teachers and learners, to name a few. Donjey (2005) also agrees that motivation is guilty for

shaping human behavior by energizing it and opening it solution. He said that motivation has been broadly

received by teachers and researchers as a key among various factors that determine success or failure of

second/foreign language learning, because motivation in learning may influence other environmental

factors.

Students’ motivation, as expressed by Wigfield (1997), is being influenced by the environment in

which students find themselves. He discusses teacher control and few opportunities for student choice as

factors that can actually decrease task value towards reading. If the environment is a large factor in

motivating students to read, then educators should be particularly interested in finding ways to optimize

literacy learning environments to support an increase in motivation. Some approaches to teaching reading

may be more advantageous than others. Teachers, who make reading socially interactive, teach strategies to

help students comprehend, and use a coaching style instead of a corrective style has been shown to increase

reading motivation (Gambrell, 1996 & Pressley, 2006).


3 | P a g e

Rusman’s study (2010) highlighted that teaching and learning process should support community

wishes although teachers’ participation and students’ motivation in the process are low. Community

members hoped students have learnt and practiced their ability in the classroom in order to use in social

interaction in community. Teachers’ involvement and students’ motivation are crucial in practicing

students’ ability in the classroom. One of teacher’s involvements in teaching and learning process is their

competence of using various teaching techniques to activate students in learning.

Sanjaya (2009) also concluded that students got low encouragement to increase their high order

thinking ability because they only are focused on memorizing competence. Memorizing competence

according to him was not connected to daily context. In this case, teachers are necessary to guide students in

learning with various interesting teaching approaches. Low motivation in learning significantly correlated

with motivation principles (attention, relevancy, confidence, and satisfactory). Students’ motivation in the

classroom was effected by the interesting teaching and learning process such as learning materials and

learning approaches (Sanjaya, 2006). It can be concluded that the higher motivation of students is effected

by interesting ways of teachers in delivering their students to touch learning objectives.

Student motivation, according to Kaylene & Caroline (2012) is impacted by five main ingredients.

They are student, teacher, content, method/process, and environment. From this, it may be concluded that

teacher and learning content as parts of learning context become two determinants to enrich student

motivation. Teacher in teaching process has to use appropriate learning content such as learning materials,

learning methods, and lesson plan on a consistent basis. What teacher implements in teaching is suitable

with students’ context because students have complex needs and desires. The interesting point in this view

is student. Student, according to Kaylene & Carolineis is an ingredient to motivate itself. It means

motivation may come from inner (intrinsic) or outer (extrinsic) parts of students. Students can increase their

motivation from intrinsic and extrinsic encouragement. Understanding student motivation including

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation means understanding students’ potency to learn.

From those studies (Rusman, 2010; Sanjaya, 2009; Sanjaya, 2006), it could be concluded that

students’ motivation becomes a challenge for teachers in English teaching and learning as a foreign

language. Teacher should solve this challenge by implementing teaching approach in the classroom. By

implementing appropriate teaching approach, students have great potency to increase their motivation to

learn. So, teacher has to understand the causes of which improve students’ motivation in the classroom.

According to Pintrich et al. (1991), there are six components of motivation namely intrinsic

orientation, extrinsic orientation, task value, control of learning beliefs, self-efficacy, and test anxiety. Three

of them involve in the study as motivation scales are control of learning beliefs, self-efficacy, and test

anxiety. Control of learning beliefs focuses on students’ belief degree to support their efforts to study and

hopefully bring about positive results. Self-efficacy focuses on the students’ performance expectations and


4 | P a g e

their confidence level in mastering tasks. Test anxiety focuses on how to measure students’ test anxiety in a

course. This test anxiety also specifically measures the students’ pessimistic thoughts and emotional aspects

of anxiety that undermine performance on an exam.

1.2 Writing Skill

Writing is not a single attribute in language learning. It may be linked with orthography, written discourse,

the act of writing, or literature (Silva & Matsuda, 2002). However, whatever meaning and understanding

adopted, know about writing is integral part of other language skills. It makes writing always becomes a

complex skill to master whether it is mother language or foreign language. Its development involves much

more than accurate use of grammar and a good range of vocabulary, or joining together the written down

words (Richards, 2002). Writing consists of some elements. They are organization, grammar, diction,

cohesion, and unity. On the other hand, the writer is put in a place to anticipate the reader’s reactions

(Olshtain, 1991), while the speaker and hearer can provide immediate feedback in oral communication.

Besides, aspects such as linguistic accuracy, clarity of expression, organization of ideas, naturalness and

spontaneity emerge as some of the basic additional factors to be taken into consideration in writing, apart

from spoken interaction (Silva & Matsuda, 2002). Followings are some explanations and examples of

writing as a difficult and complex skill to be solved in teaching and learning process.

Rita and Rita (2011) stated that most high school teachers in Indonesia have been teaching English

for years without taking care of their writing ability because they believed that writing skill is difficult.

They were difficult to understand in detail and guided them step by step in teaching writing. So, teachers’

perception are necessary to be strengthened to understand steps of teaching writing to improve their

students’ writing skill. Writing, according to them, is a skill which requires organization of ideas to be

communicated in a text because writing entails many complex components such as grammar, spelling,

vocabulary, mechanics, and more importantly, its unity, coherence and cohesion. It makes the importance of

complexity of teaching ways in teaching and learning process.

To develop EFL writing skills according to Alwasilah (2006), attention should be paid to the

process rather than product, quantity rather than quality, and fluency rather than accuracy. Indonesian

students failed to learn skills in English including writing skill. He concluded that it may happen because

teacher failed to meet students’ needs including to implement those aspects to develop his syllabus and tend

to use conventional approach of teaching such as lecturing, drills, translating, and summarizing. Teacher as

a front person in the classroom should design curriculum in connection with the needs of students for

developing academic writing and use various and appropriate approaches.

Melanie’s finding in her study (2012) indicated that the majority of teachers had low self-efficacy

in teaching writing. Giving appropriate instruction in teaching writing, according to her, needs high


5 | P a g e

teachers’ self-efficacy because they must guide students from organizing students’ ideas in their mind to

producing them in their writing. Surely, these activities need a specific focus to encourage and guide

students to do them. Teachers’ low self-efficacy may be avoided by training them with effective ways in

instructing students to write.

Mourtaga’s study (2011) showed that English instructors in Gaza misunderstood the nature of the

writing process, their learners did not practice enough writing in English. This study also revealed that

students had low competence in writing. From those cases, he suggested that to develop English writing

competence, instructors are necessary to use innovative classroom techniques within the process approach

and dealing with learners in a human fashion. One of classroom techniques which may fashion students’

activities is inquiry learning. Inquiry learning focuses on learning process which students may practice their

skills more flexibly.

From Buckingham’s study (2008) in Turkey, it could be concluded that learner strategies can be

incorporated to develop writing skill with academic writing program. It also found that Turkish learners

have difficult in developing writing skill specially in exploring their ideas in certain genre conventions, so

he suggested for solving this writing difficulty, it needs to combine an appropriate approach with writing

teaching sequences. It should refer to teachers’ competence to combine specific approach in teaching

certain skills in language such as teaching writing. It means that writing skill is necessary in teaching and

learning process because writing is a productive-process skill.

Fathi Huwari & Noor Hashima (2011) stated that Jordanian students have lack of writing ability in

English at schools or universities level because they do very little writing in English. They recommended

that future research can be done on learners’ use of strategies to reduce their high level of writing

apprehension by using qualitative method. This study also indicates that there is a positive relationship

between age and socio-economic status with writing apprehension.

1.3 Inquiry Learning

Inquiry, according to Colburn (2004), refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world

and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work. Inquiry also refers to the activities

of students in which they develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an

understanding of how scientists study the natural world. Inquiry-based instruction is a classroom creation

where students are engaged in open-ended, student-centered, and hands-on activities.

Guided inquiry learning incorporates the idea of learning being student centred rather than

traditionally teacher directed. When students help to shape the direction of their learning, they are

empowered and learning is taken to whole new level. Students take ownership for their own learning, which

results in more effective learning (Brown, 2008). Throughout the study, as students were observed and


6 | P a g e

made field notes, always came back to the idea that never followed a cookbook recipe for a lab in the

future. Students need to have the ability to discover their own answers, to lead their own inquiry. The

students rose to the challenge and were motivated and engaged to direct their own learning or to be

independent learners.

In order to promote students’ independent learning, inquiry learning model is mostly helpful

(Atkinson et al., 2008). Inquiry-guided learning includes a variety of teaching methods that may assist

students in guiding students to learn, to assess, and to practice their skills in order to be independent

learners. Besides, students also have low level of thinking skills. To increase these skills still become the

main problem for teachers. Inquiry-guided learning, according to them, also may increase students’ high

order thinking skills. It may concluded that students are still difficult to be independent and to have higher

level thinking skills.

Furthermore, Chan Hok On’s research (2010) shows that different teachers held diverse beliefs

about inquiry-based learning. Those different beliefs of teachers were found to force on their

implementation of inquiry-based learning. This study recommended that teachers’ reflection, arrangement

of resources, preparation for teachers and students and in-services training are necessary to be related to

curriculum development, local authority, and school administration. Those all are important to motivate

students and maximally involve their strategies in teaching and learning process. So, to develop school

curriculum, those recommendations require to be integrated in order to accommodate curriculum goals.

Yet another issue is that students need both modelling in advance of and support while engaging in

inquiry learning (Friedrichson & Meis, 2006). Students need to be taught how to conduct an inquiry

activity, how to develop higher order thinking, and how to put the inquiry skills into practice. Another

dilemma is limited resources. Finding the time to teach using this method, which generally tends to be more

time consuming than traditional methods, may be a problem. Teachers must find a way to allocate the time

to teach using this method, as well as, fitting in standard curriculum and assessments (Newman et al.,

2004). Teachers are the vehicles through which students are able to make successful interactions with

content material.

The primary issue of an education that is founded on experience is to choose the kind of

experiences or activities that are productive and lead to future fulfilling experiences (Dewey 1997). Inquiry

Learning can provide those experiences. Haranda and Yoshina (2004) describe inquiry learning as having

the ability to promote deeper levels of thinking and improve students’ motivation for the learning of

science.

Teaching English using inquiry learning involves designing or using a learning activity that allows

for the promotion of student inquiry and is collaborative, student driven and open ended. When students are

involved in an inquiry activity they are following their own line of questioning to solve a problem and


7 | P a g e

arrive at a solution. In the process they will have utilized higher order thinking, problem solving,

collaboration, communication and literacy skills and scientific process skills.

White et al. (1999) stated that the role of the teacher in an inquiry-based classroom is quite different

from that of a teacher in a conventional classroom. Instead of providing direct instruction to students,

teachers help students generate their own content-related questions and guide the investigation that follows.

Because of the role of the teacher in an inquiry-based classroom is unconventional, it is sometimes

misunderstood. When teachers choose to use an inquiry-based approach, they commit to provide rich

experiences that provoke students’ thinking and curiosity; to plan carefully-constructed questioning

sequences; to manage multiple student investigations at the same time; to continuously assess the progress

of each student as they work toward their solution or final product; and to respond in the moment to

students’ emerging queries and discoveries.

2. Method

The post-test only design is used to find out the differences of students’ motivation which taught by inquiry

approach and which received instruction through traditional methods. The quasi-experimental research has

been conducted on 6 meetings of teaching English within 3 weeks in Madrasah Aliyah Negeri 3 Makassar.

Twenty students of XI grade-science program in experimental group and twenty of twenty two students of

XI grade-science program in control group. They are all 40 students as study subject. Their age is between

16-18 years old. Both groups were randomly selected as experimental group and control group. As far as

the procedures are concerned, inquiry was selected as teaching approach in order to motivate students to

learn English writing skills.

During the experimental study, both groups received the same writing materials although writing

skills were not measured. The difference of students’ motivation would be measured between group

received writing instruction with inquiry learning and group received writing instruction with traditional

teaching methods. Motivation of both groups were measured by using Motivation Strategy Language

Questionnaire (MSLQ) after 3 week-teaching and learning. MSLQ questionnaire used a 7 point likert scales

from never true until always true. Its scales interpretation according to Pintrich et al. (1993) is that 1.00-

1.50 means exceptionally low, 1.51-2.50 means very low, 2.51-3.50 means low, 3.51-4.50 means moderate,

4.51-5.50 means high, 5.51-6.50 means very high, 6.51-7.00 means exceptional high. Motivation would be

measured by three scales namely control of beliefs, self-efficacy, and anxiety. Those three scales have 18

items; 6 items of control of beliefs, 4 items of self-efficacy, and 8 items of anxiety.

Before using MSLQ questionnaire, it was translated into Indonesian language (language of research

subject) by using back translation technique and was validated by 3 experts in English language teaching

from State University of Makassar. Reliability of the questionnaire was also measured by using cronbach

alpha. The cronbach alpha of control of beliefs is 0.65, self-efficacy is 0.75, and anxiety is 0.79. The


8 | P a g e

cronbach alpha of three motivation scales showed consistent reliability and it means it can be used in the

study.

With regards of validate and reliability process, MSLQ questionnaire in Indonesian version, then,

was distributed into both experimental and control group before and after treatment in order to collect data

about students’ motivation. The treatment ran during 6 meetings by using inquiry approach in experimental

group and by using traditional methods in control group. Data were analyzed by using one independent

sample t Test.

3. Results and Discussion

As regards of students’ motivation test result of control and experiment group, posttest only group design

was used to find out the difference of students’ motivation between control and experiment group. Before

presenting those differences, the following would be shown mean and standard deviation of each scale of

motivation. Table 1 shows the mean and standard deviation of motivation scale.

Table 1: Comparison of Scale Mean Between Control and Experiment Group

Scale Group N Mean SD

Belief Control 20 5.18 1.09

Experiment 20 5.76 0.60

Total 40 5.47 0.91

Self-Efficacy Control 20 5.14 0.60


Total 40 5.41 0.60

Anxiety Control 20 4.99 0.95


Total 40 5.22 0.90

Data analysis in Table 1 shows that three scales of motivation used in the study have higher mean

score in experimental group than one in control group. Control of beliefs and self-efficacy in control group

is in high level and in experimental group is in very high level. Both are different from anxiety. Anxiety in


9 | P a g e

both control and experimental group is in high level. It can be concluded that all three scales of motivation

in experimental group with receiving inquiry learning have higher mean score of control of beliefs, self-

efficacy, and anxiety than control group with receiving traditional learning approach in learning writing

skills.

Regarding to the result in table 1, it was found that among 6 items in measuring students’ control of

beliefs, only item 6 [understanding the subject matter of this course is very important to me] is not

consistently higher in experimental group. Mean score [4.50] of item 6 in control group is higher than its

mean score [3.95] in experimental group (see Appendix A). Furthermore, from 3 of 4 items in self-efficacy

have consistently higher mean score in experiment group than in control group and only item 3 is not

consistent [if I try hard enough, then I will understand the course material]. Item 3 shows the same mean

score between experiment group and control group (see Appendix B). In anxiety scale, from 8 items, only

one item in experimental group shows lower mean score than in control group. It is item1 [I believe I will

receive an excellent grade in this class]. And other seven items in experimental group shows higher than in

control group (see appendix C).

The difference between experimental group with learning writing through inquiry and control group

with learning writing through traditional methods are shown in table 2. Independent t-test has been used to

test the difference between posttest points in the experimental group and the control group.

Table 2: Difference of motivation scales between Control Group and Experimental Group

Scale

F Sig. T Sig. (2-

tailed)

Control of

Belief

Equal variances assumed 5.737 .022 2.058 .047

Equal variances not

assumed

.048

Self-Efficacy Equal variances assumed 1.714 .198 3.082 .004

Equal variances not

assumed

.004

Anxiety Equal variances assumed 3.026 .090 1.676 .102

Equal variances not

assumed

.102


10 | P a g e

Among motivation’s scale in the experimental group and the control group, t-values between the

two groups have been analyzed respectively as, 2.058 in control of beliefs, 3.082 in self-efficacy, and 1.676

in anxiety. From t-values of three scales, two of them are control of beliefs revealed a significant difference

at 0.05 level and the rest is anxiety did not reveal a significance difference at 0.05 level. It could be

concluded that there was significant difference of control of beliefs and self-efficacy between experimental

group with inquiry learning and control group with traditional learning methods. On the other hand, anxiety

as one of motivation scales did not showed significant difference between experimental group with inquiry

learning and control group with traditional learning methods.

Comparison of posttest points of the groups would be discussed in this stage in order to show

students’ motivation in learning writing skills through inquiry. As stated before that motivation scales used

in the study are control of beliefs, self-efficacy, and anxiety. All items in overall scales showed that they are

in high and very high level in both groups. Although it showed the similarity, both experimental and control

group have differences of three scales of motivation.

Students which receiving writing instruction with inquiry approach had higher control of beliefs

than ones which receiving writing instruction with traditional methods. It means that students receiving

inquiry learning had high hope to use of English and high interest in content area and subject matter of

English. They hoped they may use English after learning in the class. Despite of it, they feel that it is very

important to continuously understand subject matter of English lesson. Based on Covington (1992), in order

to maintain a sense of self-worth and self-control of learning, students need understanding the attributes of

their failure and weaknesses. It means that when students may have controlled their learning beliefs, their

success becomes more closed. In this study, students still faced difficulties and they know they have some

weaknesses in learning writing skills, but this kind of understanding maintains their creativity to master

writing skills. Because by using inquiry, students looked having high control of beliefs as an integral part of

motivation.

Furthermore, students’ self-efficacy in learning writing skills through inquiry consistently higher

than one in learning writing skills through traditional methods. It may be concluded that although students

feel very hard to shortly understand the materials, inquiry learning has potency to improve students’ self-

efficacy. Its potency was shown by the appropriate ways of teacher, students’ understanding of their own

fault, and students’ hard efforts in inquiry learning. The findings of this study supported Graham’s (2003)

viewpoint of self-efficacy although this study specifies in learning EFL writing skills through inquiry.

Graham, (2003) pointed that self-efficacy as an integral aspect of motivation influences individual reflects

on learning. Bandura (1993) also stated that students' realistic perceptions of high self-efficacy attributed to

an increase in their academic achievement that could surpass their academic ability. So, the high self-


11 | P a g e

efficacy in performing learning EFL writing skills in this study shows great potency to improve students’

writing skills.

Besides, the higher students’ anxiety was also shown in inquiry learning. It is shown that inquiry

learning has great potency to stabilize students’ anxiety in learning English writing skills. Although students

believed that they did not received an excellent grade in English lesson, they still have certainty to

understand all subject matters taught. Students also have high confidence to understand basic concepts

although it is complex because they still believed that they can get an excellent job in the coming test in

English writing skills. At the end, students hopefully mastered English writing skills with high motivation,

of course, if they have an excellent teacher.

The study also revealed the differences of motivation posttest points between experimental group

and control group. It was indicated that there were significant differences of students’ control of beliefs and

self-efficacy between experimental group and control group. On the other hand, there were no significant

differences of students’ anxiety between experimental group and control group.

4. Conclusion

The study purposed at finding out students’ motivation in learning writing skills through inquiry. One of the

findings is that students’ control of learning beliefs, self-efficacy, and anxiety as integral parts of motivation

are found higher on inquiry learning. However, from viewpoint of control of learning beliefs, it is still

necessary to deepen students’ understanding the subject matter of English writing. To more develop their

self-efficacy in learning and performing, students try to learn hard enough to understand the writing

material. Furthermore, in viewpoint of students’ test anxiety, they still need to increase their belief that they

will receive an excellent grade if they learn harder. Another finding is that inquiry learning is found to

create meaningful differences on students’ control of learning beliefs. Besides, inquiry-learning procedure

is also found to create meaningful differences on students’ self-efficacy in learning and performing in

learning writing skills. However, inquiry learning is not found to create meaningful differences in the

anxiety dimension.

It might be concluded that inquiry learning has great potency to increase and, then, maintain students’

motivation as viewed from control of learning beliefs, self-efficacy in learning, and anxiety in learning EFL

writing skills. It is recommended that to motivate students in learning EFL writing skills, teacher should

include inquiry learning as an integral part of instructional teaching and learning procedures in syllabus and

lesson plan. In terms of strengths and weaknesses of inquiry approach, it is also necessary to be varied with

other interesting instructional methods, instead of being suitable with students’ needs and goals. Those

kinds of syllabus and lesson plan as instructional parts of a curriculum can help students more independent

and flexible in learning since they are used to govern overall learning process.


12 | P a g e

Further studies on similar area should focus on exploring one dimension of motivation to have

better understanding in one specific dimension. On the other hand, further studies also may expand on other

dimensions of motivation, and then relate to other dimension of another construct. Teachers need to have

knowledge of how to design syllabus and lesson plan on the exact level of students and recovery of various

classroom circumstances. By including inquiry learning among other professional teaching strategies,

classroom activities would be more creative and innovative.

References

Alwasilah, A.C. (2006). From Local To Global: Reinventing Local Literature Through English Writing

Classes. TEFLIN Journal, 17, 1.

Atkinson, Maxine P. Hunt, & Andrea N. (2008). Inquiry-Guided Learning in Sociology Teaching

Sociology; 36, 1: 1-7.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational

Psychologist, 28, 117-148.

Brown, Douglas H. (2008). Teaching by Principles; An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy,

Second Edition, Longman Inc.

Buckingham, L. (2008). Development of English Academic Writing Competence by Turkish Scholars.

International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 3.

Colburn, A. (2004). An Inquiry Primer. Special Issue.1-4

Chan, Hok On. (2010). How do teachers’ beliefs affect the implementation of inquiry-based learning in the

PGS Curriculum? A case study of two primary schools in Hong Kong. Durham theses. Durham University.

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform.

Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Depdiknas (2006). Pedoman Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan 2006. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and education. New York: Touchstone.

Dornyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of The Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language

Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Fathi Huwari, Ibrahim & Noor Hashima Abd Aziz. (2011). Writing Apprehension in English Among

Jordanian Postgraduate Students At Universiti Utara Malaysia. Academic Research International, 1.2.

Friedrichsen, P. & Meis. (2006). Brokering at the Boundary: A Prospective Science Teacher Engages

Students in Inquiry. Science Education, 90: 522- 543.

Graham, S. (2003). Learner's metacognitive beliefs: A modern foreign language case study. Research in

Education, 70: 9-20.

Harada, V. H., & Yoshina, J. M. (2004). Inquiry learning through librarian–teacher partnerships.

Worthington, OH: Linworth Publishing.


13 | P a g e

Kaylene C. Williams & Caroline C. Williams (2012). Five key ingredients for improving student

motivation. Research in Higher Education Journal. 1-23.

Melanie M. Landon-Hays (2012). I Would Teach It If I Knew How: Inquiry, Modeling, Shared Writing,

Collaborative Writing, and Independent Writing (IMSCI), a Model for Increasing Secondary Teacher Self-

Efficacy in Integrating Writing Instruction in the Content Areas. Unpublished Ph.D Tesis. Utah State

University: Logan.

Mourtaga, Kamal R. (2011). Poor Writing in English: A Case of the Palestinian EFL learners in Gaza Strip.

Unpublished Paper. Islamic University of Gaza.

Newman, W. J., Jr.; Abell, S. & Hubbard, P. D. (2004). Dilemmas of Teaching Inquiry in Elementary

Science Methods. Journal Science Teacher Education, 15: 257-279.

Olshtain, E. (1991). Functional Tasks for Mastering the Mechanics of Writing and Going Just Beyond. In

Marianne Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 235-245). Boston:

Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity

of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological

Measurement, 53: 801-813.

Richards, J. C. (2002). Theories of Teaching in Language Teaching. In Jack C. Richards & Willy A.

Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current practice. (pp. 19-25). New

York: Cambridge University Press.

Rita Inderawati & Rita Hayati (2011). Short-Term Training Model of Academic Writingnto High School

Teachers. US-China Foreign Language, 9, 8: 517-523

Silva, T., & Matsuda, P. K. (2002). Writing. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), An Introduction to AppliedLinguistics.

(pp. 251-267). New York: Arnold.

Stern, H. H. (1992) Issue and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

White, Barbara, Todd A. Shimoda, and John R. Frederiksen. (1999). Enabling Students to Construct

Theories of Collaborative Inquiry and Reflective Learning: Computer Support for Metacognitive

Development. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 10: 151-182.

Acknowledgements:

Our unlimited thankfulness addressed to our colleagues and all staffs of Faculty of Education,

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) and Governor of South Sulawesi Indonesia.

APPENDIX

Appendix A: Comparison of Mean and Standard Deviation of item in Control of Beliefs

Item Control Group Experimental Group

N Mean SD N Mean SD


14 | P a g e

1 20 5.80 1.24 20 6.25 1.02

2 20 5.75 2.17 20 6.80 0.41

3 20 5.80 1.24 20 6.05 1.28

4 20 5.25 1.29 20 6.00 0.79

5 20 6.15 1.18 20 6.20 0.77

6 20 4.50 1.70 20 3.95 1.93

Appendix B: Comparison of Mean and Standard Deviation of item in Self-efficacy


N Mean SD N Mean SD

1 20 4.80 1.47 20 5.35 0.74

2 20 4.75 1.69 20 6.25 0.85

3 20 5.35 1.35 20 5.35 1.59

4 20 5.85 0.99 20 6.10 0.97

Appendix C: Comparison of Mean and Standard Deviation of item in Anxiety


N Mean SD N Mean SD

1 20 4.50 1.96 20 4.25 1.65

2 20 5.20 1.10 20 5.60 1.53

3 20 5.10 2.07 20 6.20 0.69

4 20 5.50 0.94 20 6.40 0.68


15 | P a g e

5 20 5.65 1.22 20 6.65 0.49

6 20 5.10 1.37 20 5.35 0.93

7 20 4.70 1.81 20 5.40 1.05

8 20 5.40 1.19 20 5.60 0.89

Item Control of Beliefs

1 I think I will be able to use what I learn in this course in other courses.

2 It is important for me to learn the course material in this class.

3 I am very interested in the content area of this course

4 I think the course material in this class is useful for me to learn.

5 I like the subject matter of this course.

6 Understanding the subject matter of this course is very important to me.

Item Self-Efficacy

1 If I study in appropriate ways, then I will be able to learn the material

in this course.

2 It is my own fault if I don’t learn the material in this course.

3 If I try hard enough, then I will understand the course material.

4 If I don’t understand the course material, it is because I didn’t try hard

enough.

Item Anxiety

1 I believe I will receive an excellent grade in this class.

2 I am certain I can understand the most difficult material presented in


16 | P a g e

the readings for this course.

3 I am confident I can understand the basic concepts taught in this course.

4 I am confident I can understand the most complex material presented

by the instructor in this course.

5 I am confident I can do an excellent job on the assignments and tests in this

course.

6 I expect to do well in this class.

7 I am certain I can master the skills being taught in this class.

8 Considering the difficulty of this course, the teacher, and my skills, I

think I will do well in this class.

Documents

Students’ Motivation on Learning EFL Writing Skills …€¦ · · 2017-07-26Students’ Motivation on Learning EFL Writing Skills ... and lesson plan (Stern, 1992; Depdiknas