Skipsi

Dicetak pada tanggal 2018-04-28
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
ENGLISH LISTENING STRATEGIES USED BY EFL

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS: A SURVEY STUDY AT ONE
PUBLIC UNIVERSITY IN JAMBI
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Education Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of SarjanaPendidikan (S.Pd.)
Written by:
GEBY WIRA PRATIWI
A1B211036
ENGLISH STUDY PROGRAM
LANGUAGE AND ARTS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF JAMBI
2015
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
i
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
ii
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
I, GEBY WIRA PRATIWI, A1B211036, clarifies that this thesis is my
own work and has not been submitted in any forms for another degree or
diploma to any other universities or other institutes or tertiary education.
Information derived from the published and unpublished work of others had
been acknowledged in the text and list of references are given in the
references.
Jambi, July 2015
GEBY WIRA PRATIWI

A1B211036
iii
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
MOTTO
Life is short, hard, but beautiful to go through it

(AmirulMukminin)
Your time is not hours, days, weeks, months, years. Your time is SECOND
(AmirulMukminin)
Try to pass the way, and enjoy the journey

(Mom)
You don’t have to be great to start, but you have to start to be great
(ZigZagler)
iv
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to:
My Beloved Family
My Grandmothers, Father, Mother, and my Sister

(Mbah, Nenek, Papa, Mama, danKakak)
v
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
ABSTRACT
Pratiwi, Geby Wira (2015). English listening strategies used by EFL

undergraduate students: A survey study at one public university in
Jambi.Thesis, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Jambi
University in Academic Year 2014/2015. First supervisor: Amirul
Mukminin, Ph.D, and second supervisor: Nely Arif, S.Pd.,M.Pd.
Key word: Language learning strategies, Listening Strategies, Listening

Comprehension
The study aimed to explore the listening strategies that EFL undergraduate
students used at one public university in Jambi. The participants were students
who are taking and passed in listening subject in English study program at Faculty
Teacher Training and Education, Jambi University. The total sampling was 94
participants from second semester, fourth semester, and sixth semester students.
This study used a quantitative design with a survey approach.The researcher used
SPSS to find out the reliability, and Microsoft Excel to describe about the
percentage and frequency in listening strategies that students used. There were
three categories of listening strategies. They were metacognitive strategy,
cognitive strategy, and socio-affective strategy. The result was most of students
used metacognitive strategy to increase their ability in listening. Meanwhile,
based on gender most of female students used metacognitive strategy, and male
students used cognitive strategy. The implication of this study are the students
may get the appropriate strategies in listening subject and for the teachers it can
motivate the teacher to find out the way to teach the appropriate the strategies to
make them get the comprehension in listening.
vi
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Acknowledgement
Assalamulaikumwarahmatullahiwabarakatuh..
Alhamdulillahirobbil’alamin, this thesis is finally done in the right time
with a long process. Firstly, I would like to say thanks to my God, Allah swt, who
helps me in every part of life. From this thesis Allah taught me everything, how to
become strong people, more patient, and grateful, and so on.
I would like say thanks to my parents who always stand here beside me,
never gone and always remind me for everything, and also their patient to wait me
in finishing this thesis. I dedicate this thesis to my beloved grandmothers,
handsome father, beautiful mother, and also my sweet sister. Also thanks to all of
my big family who cannot mention one by one here. I am really happy have a
warm family.
Then, I would like to say thanks to my first supervisor, Amirul Mukminin,
S.Pd., M. Ed., Ph.D and my second supervisor Nelly Arif, S.Pd., M.Pd. for their
guidance, motivation, support, correction, solutions and patience, in writing this
thesis. So I can finish this thesis and my study on time.
Next, thanks to my examiner, Eddy haryanto, S.Pd., M.Ed., Ph.D,Makmur
S.S., M.Hum, Nunung Fajaryani, S.Pd., M.Pd, Masbirorotni, S,Pd, M.Sc, Ed,
Hustarna, S.Pd, MA, and Rd. M. Ali, S.Pd, M.Pd, who gave comments and
suggestions that really contribute to this thesis.
vii
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
And then, I would like to say thank you very much to my academic
supervisorIndri Anastasia, SS, MA who has given me motivation and suggestions
to finish my study. And also for all of my lecturers who have taught me many
things, whether it is academic and non academic during I study in English
department. Furthermore, I do not forget to say thanks to Mukhtar, the one who
always be patient to help me in giving information about lecturers and solving my
problem with my laptop.
Next, special thanks to my beautiful friends, (Ira as my spoiled and shrill
friend, Lupi as my strong friend, and Asih as my fashionable friend) always make
me laugh, I am not only having the beautiful friend, but you are my sister. Have
full time for me to support, critics, and so on from semester one until now. Thanks
to Dian and Shinta who always help me in everywhere and help me to correct my
thesis. Also for my housemate, Pita and Pagilang, who always gives me support.
Thanks to mygeng friends as a team work in same supervisor (yukTiara, Titin,
Raja, Fathia, Putri, Ira, Lupi,Santi, Ucing, mbakErma,yuk Sari and Lili), to
reminding, supporting, helping, crying, laughing and critics each other because we
know we are not smart but we are lucky. After that, thanks to my new family
(Posko 47) for two months that always spent the time together, I learnt how to
become social person, and became my ayuk and abang, I miss you so much,
especially for Penti, thank you so much for your helping during my exam. Then,
thanks for my classmates (English regular A, 2011). I have helpful classmates in
here during my study. I hope all of you can finish your study in the right time.
Also thanks to my UNO friends, my second family that always together in 8
viii
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
years. I cannot mention your name one by one. I hope we can create our dream
soon, and always remember “Takseorangpunsepintarkitasemua”. I miss you all.
And for abangHengkiSatriaEka Putra who has become my brother, friend
for fighting. Thanks for your patient in facing me, and thanks for the time you
have given to me, although you are not in here, but you always company and
motivated me. Thanks to become my super abang.
ix
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL..............................................................................................................................i
LETTER OF RATIFICATION........................................................................................ii
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY..........................................................................iii
MOTTO......................................................................................................................................iv
DEDICATION.........................................................................................................................v
ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.....................................................................................................x
LIST OF FIGURE................................................................................................................xii
LIST OF APPENDICES.....................................................................................................xiv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study.................................................................................................1
1.2 Purpose of the Study.........................................................................................................3
1.3 Questions of the Study.....................................................................................................3
1.4 Limitation of the Study....................................................................................................4
1.5 Significance of the Study................................................................................................4
1.6 Definition of the Key Terms..........................................................................................4
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Language Learning Strategies in general...................................................................6
2.2 Categories of Listening Strategies................................................................................8
2.3 Previous Studies.................................................................................................................9
2.4 Reason Why Choosing English Listening Strategies.............................................20
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design and Approach....................................................................................22
3.2 Research Site and Access................................................................................................23
3.3 Population and Sampling Procedures..........................................................................23
3.3.1Population..........................................................................................................................23
3.3.2 Sample...............................................................................................................................24
3.3.3 Instrument........................................................................................................................24
3.4 Data Collection Methods................................................................................................26
3.5 Reliability of the Questionnaire....................................................................................27
3.6 Techniques of Data Analysis..........................................................................................27
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Overview of the Study.....................................................................................................29
4.2 Biographical Description of Participants...................................................................31
4.3 Reliability of the Questionnaire....................................................................................32
4.4 Findings by Research Questions...................................................................................32
4.4.1 Descriptive Survey Based on listening strategies................................................32
4.4.1.1 Descriptive Survey Based on Metacognitive Strategy....................................34
4.4.1.2 Descriptive Survey Based on Cognitive Strategy............................................43
x
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
4.4.1.3 Descriptive Survey Based on Socio-Affective Strategy 49

4.4.2 Descriptive Survey of Listening Strategies Based on Gender 55
4.5 Discussion 58
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion 68
5.2 Suggestion69
REFERENCES 70
APPENDICES 73
xi
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Demographic biographical

based on Gender 31
Figure 2. Demographic biographical
based on Semester 32
Figure 3. Listening Strategies
“Metacognitive Strategy” 33
Figure 4. Listening Strategies
“Cognitive Strategy” 33
Figure 5. Listening Strategies “Socio-
Affective Strategy” 34
Figure 6. Pre-listening strategy “I clarify the objectives
of an anticipated listening task and/or propose strategies
for handing it” 35
Figure 7. Pre-listening strategy “Before listening, I prepare my mind
to concentrate” 35
Figure 8. Pre-listening strategy “Before listening, I request myself to
make progress” 36
Figure 9. Pre-listening strategy “Before listening, I think of similar texts
that I may have listened to” 36
Figure 10. Pre-listening strategy “Before I start to listen, I have a plan
in my head for how I am going to listen” 37
Figure 11. While-listening Strategy “While listening, I do not understand if I
am unfamiliar with speakers’ accents” 37
Figure 12. While-listening Strategy “While listening, I will check what
part of content I do not understand” 38
Figure 13. While-listening Strategy “While listening, I will double check
again for my answer” 38
Figure 14. While-listening Strategy “I am aware of my inattention
and correct it while doing listening test” 39
Figure 15. While-listening Strategy “I try to listen for specific details
to see whether I can understand them” 39
Figure 16. Post-listening Strategy “After listening, I think back to how
I listened and about what I might do differently next time” 40
Figure 17. Post-listening Strategy “After Listening, I think back
to the qualityof my strategy use (for example planning,
inferencing) and about how I can do better next time” 41
Figure 18. Post-listening Strategy “After listening, I reflect on
my problems, such as the key words that I do not understand” 41
Figure 19. Post-listening Strategy “After listening, I evaluate how much
I could understand” 42
Figure 20. Post-listening Strategy “I will write down the words
I do not know after the listening test and look” 42
Figure 21. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I will notice the questions
with who, how, when, where and what in the content” 43
Figure 22. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I try to understand
each word” 44
Figure 23. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I repeat words
or phrasessoftly or mentally” 44
xii
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Figure 24. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I piece things together

from the details” 45
Figure 25. Bottom-up Strategy “I take notes of main points and
keywords” 45
Figure 26. Top-down Strategy “I listen for main ideas first and
then details” 46
Figure 27. Top-down Strategy “I predict or make hypotheses
on text by titles” 47
Figure 28. Top-down Strategy “I can guess the meaning
based on the context” 47
Figure 29. Top-down Strategy “I try to think in English
instead of Indonesia” 48
Figure 30. Top-down Strategy “I make guess about the topic
based on what has already been said”48
Figure 31. Social Strategy “If I do not understand what someone says
in English, I ask them to repeat what they said” 49
Figure 32. Social Strategy “After listening, I ask my classmates
or teacher question I do not understand” 50
Figure 33. Social Strategy “I hope teachers can teach me more skills
to improve my listening comprehension” 50
Figure 34. Social Strategy “I ask others for feedback on how
to solve my listening problems” 51
Figure 35. Social Strategy “I practice listening and speaking
in English with my friends.” 51
Figure 36. Affective Strategy “While listening, I can keep calm and
not be nervous” 52
Figure 37. Affective Strategy “I am confident in understanding
the whole contents” 53
Figure 38. Affective Strategy “I encourage myself through
positive-self talk” 53
Figure 39. Affective Strategy “I try to relax myself, breathe deeply,
meditate, and clear my mind while listening” 54
Figure 40.Affective Strategy “I try not to feel nervous as
I listen to English” 54
Figure 41. Female “Metacognitive
Strategy” 55
Figure 42. Male “Metacognitive
Strategy” 56
Figure 43. Female “Cognitive Strategy”
....56
Figure 44.Male “Cognitive Strategy” 57
Figure 45.Female “Socio-affective Strategy” 57
Figure 46.Male “Socio-affective Strategy” 58
xiii
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Invitation Letter 73

Appendix B: Inform Concern Form 74
Appendix C: Summary of Previous Studies 75
Appendix D: Demographic Background and Questionnaire 79
Appendix E: Reliability 83
Appendix F: Curriculum Vitae 90
xiv
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter isdivided into six parts, they are background of the study,
purpose of the study, question of the study, limitation of the study, significance of
the study, and definition of key item.
1.1 Background of the Study
Listening has an important role in communication. Listening is a process
where students must understand grammar structures and vocabularies to acquire
the meaning of the communication (Mianmahaleh&Rahimy, 2015). Additionally,
Rivers (1984 as cited in Chelli, 2013) stated that listening had 30% to 40%
position in communication.Additionally, according to Mendelsohn (1994 as cited
in Gilakjani&Ahmadi, 2011)in daily communication, people spent 45% of time in
listening, 30% in speaking, 16% in reading, and only 9% in writing. However, it
seems that listening skill gets less attention than any other skills in language
learning. Teachers do not want to spend more time to pay attention inlistening
skill to increase students’ ability in listening (Mianmahaleh&Rahimy, 2015).Then,
Chelli (2013) said that although listening has vitalrole in language learning, it is
ignored from other skills in learning language.
Although the ignorance of the listening skill in learning a foreign language
may prevent language learners from understanding speech in a foreign language,
which may finally make learners confused if they cannot comprehend what people
intend to express, there may be other factors that influence their comprehension,
including learning strategies in listening. Listening strategies help students in
1
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
language input and also to get success in learning language (Vandergrift,
1997).Learningstrategy is the strategy or technique that is used to learn
something. According to O’Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Russo, and
Kupper (1985 as cited in Al-Awan, Asassfeh, and Al-shboul, 2013), there are three
types of learning strategies. The first is metacognitive strategies; it refers to the all
of component of learning process from the students such as planning, thinking
about the process of learning monitoring, and also the evaluating of all activity in
learning process. The second is cognitive strategies, it refers toknowledge that
students used to learning (make a note, give question, and make summarizing).
The last is social-affectivestrategies; it refers to the individual behavior to other
person to get the information in learning process.
The importance of learning strategies in listening has been part of a
number of studies such as Teng (1998), Chulim (2008), Jou (2010), Bidabadi and
Yamat (2011), Birjandi, and Rahimi (2012), Watthajarukiat, Chatupe, and
Sukseemuang (2012), Al-Alwan, Asassfeh, and Al-Shboul (2013), Bidabadi and
Yamat (2013), Chelli (2013), Ghoneim (2013), Ratebi and Amirian (2013), Afshar
and Hamzavi (2014), Nowrouzi, Shim, Zareian, and Nimehchisalem (2014), Lin
and Gan (2014), Amirian and Farahian (2014), and Mianmahaleh and Rahimy
(2015). For example, a study done by Amirian and Farahian (2014) found that
using listening strategies (metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective strategies)
has contributed to increase the ability of students’ comprehension in learning
listening.
2
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Nevertheless, it seems that many studies on the English listening strategies
is from other areas, studies on the English listening strategies used by Indonesian
undergraduate students seems to be rare. It proven by the researcher that tries to
find out international journal by Indonesian researchers especially researchers
from Jambi is rare than other countries. It motivates the researcher doing this
study. This study examine the English listening strategies used by EFL
undergraduate students to cope with listening problems so they can achieve the
target language at one public university in Jambi, particularly the type and
frequency of listening strategies that the students use.
1.2 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study wasto examine the English listening strategies
used by English foreign language undergraduate students to cope with listening
problems so they can achieve the target language at one public university in
Jambi, particularly the type and frequency of listening strategies that the students
used.
1.3 Questions of the Study
To achieve the purpose of the study, the study attempts to answer the following
questions:
1. What types of listening strategies doEFL undergraduate students at one public
university in Jambi useto cope with listening problems?
2. What are the common strategies (frequency) that EFL undergraduate students
at one public university in Jambi useto cope with listening problems?
3. What are the different listening strategies between male and female students at
one public university in Jambi useto cope with listening problems?
3
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
1.4 Limitation of the Study

In doing this study, the researcher had some limitation. First, this study
focused on listening strategies used by undergraduate students in listening skilland
the common strategy used at one public university in Jambi. Next, the researcher
limited the study with the different listening strategies used by male and female
students. Last, a quantitative method which used a survey questionnaire to get the
data as a method in this study. Then, the participants were the students who passed
andtakingthe listening skill and also had experience in learning listening.
1.5 Significance of the Study
The finding of this study is expected to be useful for lecturers, students,
and next researchers. As for lecturers, this study can guide them to teach listening
with strategies that have good impact in listening based on the findings in this
study. Furthermore, for the students this studyhopes to be useful tolearn listening
to increase their ability in listening comprehension. For the next researchers, this
study becomes a source for their future research.
1.6 Definition of the Key Terms
In this case, the researcher gives some definition of key term to avoid
misunderstanding. They are:
Language Learning Strategies: Abedini, Rahimi, and Zare-ee (2011 as cited in
Souriyavongsa, et.al., 2013), “Learning strategies are approaches that learners use
to enrich and succeed their own learning, especially it is important for language
learning because they were valuable tool that can foster learner autonomy in
language learning and help learners in promoting their own achievement in
4
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
language proficiency”. It refers to the way, technique that students used to get the
target language or easier to understanding in learning language.
Listening Strategies: Oxford (1990, as cited in Watthajarukiat,
Chatupote,&Sukseemuang, 2012) stated, tool for student in learning that make
them easier and enjoyable in listening process. It refers to the way or technique for
students in learning listening to get the comprehension of listening subject.
Listening Comprehension: AfsharandHamzavin (2014) explained that listening
comprehension isan activity that invites the understanding of the students in
learning listening. It means like an activity that using full concentrate to
understand the utterance spoken with students own words.
5
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter reviews some theories and previous studies related to English
listening strategies. It begin with discussions that relate to this research: (1) The
Concept of Language Learning Strategies in General; (2) Categories of Language
Learning Strategies; (3) Previous Studies; and (4) The Reasons of Choosing
English Listening Strategies.
2.1 Language Learning Strategies in General
In learning language, the learners need technique, strategy, or tactic to obtain
the success in learning process of language. Language learning strategies make
learner become competence learners (Rahimi, 2012). According to Bidabadi and
Yamat (2013), learning strategies havecontribute to success in language learning.
“Strategy plays its role as a key factor that influences the English language
learning to gain achievement” (Ikeda & Takeuchi, 2006 as cited in Souriyavongsa,
et.al, 2013). In this case, with language learning strategy as a tool, students could
improve their ability which was chosen in learning language.
According to Abedini, Rahimi, and Zare-ee (2011 as cited in
Souriyavongsa, et.al., 2013), “Learning strategies are approaches that learners use
to enrich and succeed their own learning, especially it is important for language
learning because they are valuable tool tha can foster learner autonomy in
language learning and help learners in promoting their own achievement in
language proficiency”. Learning strategies will be useful as a tool if following by
three terms as stated by Oxford (1990 as cited in Oxford 2003).
6
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Therewerestrategies for foreign language students that had task when they were
learning it, the strategy was appropriate with learning style of students to one
degree or other and effective strategywas better if the students combined with
other strategy. Hence, learning language strategy made learning become more
active, enjoyable and also easier.
There are some experts that explained about types of language learning
strategies such as O’Malley and Chamot (1990, as cited in Nowrouzi, Sim,
Zareian, Nimehcisalem, 2014): metacognitive strategies (advanced organizers,
directed attention, selective attention, self management, functional planning, self-
monitoring, delayed production, and self-evaluation), cognitive strategies
(repetition, resourcing, translation, grouping, note taking, deduction,
recombination, imagery, auditory representation, keyword, contextualization,
elaboration, transfer, and inference), and socio-affective strategies (cooperation
and question for clarification).
Oxford (1990, as cited Abdalhamid, 2012) categorizes language learning
strategies into: direct strategies (memory strategies, cognitive strategies,
compensation strategies) and indirect strategies (metacognitive strategies, social
strategy, affective strategies).
Rubin (1987, as cited in Oktavia 2014) classify: direct strategies that
include cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies. Indirect strategies
include communication and social.
7
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Furthermore the researcher that also explains about language learning is
Vandergrift (1997). Listening strategies is divided into: metacognitive, cognitive,
and socio-affective strategies.
2.2 Categories of listening Strategies
In this section, the researcher focused inthree types of listening
comprehension strategies: metacognitive, cognitive, socio-affective strategies
(Vandergrift, 1997). In metacognitives, learners planthe strategies, monitor, and
evaluate strategies in understanding the task (Vandergrift, 1990 as cited in Jou,
2010). Meanwhile, Bacon (1992 as cited by Nowrouzi, et al., 2014) stated, types
of metacognitive strategies arepre-listening strategy, while-listening strategy, and
post-listening strategy. According to Nowrouzi, et al., (2014), “Pre-listening
strategy is the learners preparation for listening through manipulating the
environment, focusing attention, applying advance organizer, selecting attention,
and deciding to think in English”. While-listening strategy was the learners’
focuses on monitoring their listening and attract their attention. Post-listening
strategy was the evaluation of their understanding in listening and also tried to
find out what should they did to help their listening comprehension.
Vandergrift (1997) stated, cognitive strategyisthe specific wayfrom the
students self to learn the lesson, such as, they make the important note or
summarize, and try to found the meaning of difficult word to get the information
from the speaker.Cognitive strategy is divided in two categories; they are top-
down and bottom-upprocessing strategy (National Capital Language Resource
Center, 2004 as cited in Nowrouzi, et al., 2014). Top-down processing strategy
8
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
refers to predicting what the speaker says by the signal given (Jou, 2010). In top-
down processing strategy, the students guessing the meaning from the topic and
also made summarize about the speaker said. While,Suwarni (2014) said that,
bottom-up processing strategy is a process of understanding the meaning of sound
by finding out the meaning of word, semantic content, and syntactic level.
Social-affective strategy is divided in social strategy and affective strategy
(Bacon, 1992 as cited in Nowrouzi, et al., 2014). Social strategy refers to sharing
the idea to others to get the comprehension in listening and affective strategy
refers to learners’ confidence during the listening process (Vandergrift, 1997).
The categories of Listening strategy
Listening Strategies
1. Metacognitive strategy 2. Cognitive Strategy 3. Socio-Affective

a. Pre-listening a.Top-Down Strategy
b. While-listening processing a. Social
c. Post listening b.Bottom-Up b. Affective
processing
2.3 The Previous Studies
A number of studies have relatedthe importance of listening strategies in
English as a second or foreign language such as Teng (1998), Chulim (2008),
Yang (2009), Jou (2010), Bidabadi and Yamat (2011), Watthajarukiat, Chatupe,
and Sukseemuang (2012), Al-Alwan, Asassfeh, and Al-Shboul (2013), Bidabadi
and Yamat (2013), Chelli (2013), Ghoneim (2013), Ratebi and Amirian (2013),
9
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Afshar and Hamzavi (2014), Nowrouzi, Shim, Zareian, and Nimehchisalem
(2014), and Mianmahaleh and Rahimy (2015).
For example, “A Study of EFL Listening Comprehension Strategies”
wasresearch by Teng (1998) in National Yunlin University in Taiwan. The aim of
this study was not only to find out the strategies used by students but also to find
out the differences strategies between effective students and ineffective students in
listening comprehension. Total of participants in this study were 51 students from
the freshman of science and technology faculty. In collecting the data, the
researcher used a test of listening comprehension. There were 18 effective
students and there were 17 ineffective students. The researcher also used
questionnaire adapted from listening strategy model proposed by Oxford
(1990).The result, the compensation strategies was more frequently and followed
by cognitive, metacognitive, memory, and social strategies. The least strategy used
by the students was affective strategies. The category mostly used by students in
listening strategies was paying attention (metacognitive) and translating
(cognitive) and the last strategies were writing a language learning diary
(affective), and cooperating with proficient users (social). The researcher found
that the effective students usedmore often compensation strategies and use
affective strategies least often. It was different from the ineffective students, they
used more frequent in cognitive strategy and least strategy was social strategies.
A study was conducted by Chulim (2008) to investigate “The use of
Listening Strategies by Lenguainglesa Students in Universitasidadautonoma De
Yucatan, Universidad Autonoma Del Cermen, Universidad Autonoma Del
10
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Chiapas, Universidad Veracruzana, and Universidad Autonoma Del Estado In
Mexico. The aim of this study was to know the most and least of strategies that
students used, differences in using listening strategies across universities, between
male and female differences in using listening strategies across reported levels of
English. The participants were 796 English students. This study used
questionnaire that made by the researcher. The result of this study was “focus on
getting the information to answer the question”. The least strategies students used
were “taking notes while listening”. Other result, there was no significant
difference of across universities students in using listening strategies. The strategy
female and male used in listening had the same strategies used by five Mexican
universities.
Also Jou (2010) conducted a study in one university in Taiwan. The aim of
this study was to find out the strategies that students used in listening
comprehension test. The participants in this study were 239 students. In collecting
the data, the researcher used test adapted from basic level of the GEPT (General
English Proficiency Test) and the questionnaire that adapted by Chang (2002) that
include of metacognitive, cognitive, and socio affective strategies. In
metacognitive strategies consist of planning, monitoring, and also evaluation
strategies. The researcher found that the students prepared their mind to
concentrate before listening, the students had trouble when the speakers had
different accent while listening, and also the students evaluated about how far they
understand about the material after listening. In cognitive strategies consist of
formal practicing, bottom-up, and top-down strategies. Then the result, most of
11
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
students used new vocabulary, phrases, or grammar to understand the content
while listening in formal practicing strategies. In bottom-up strategies, most of
students paid attention in information question with who, how, where, when, and
what in the content while listening. The last, top-down strategies; the students
guessed the meaning based on the context. About the socio affective strategies
consist of social and affective strategies. In the result of social strategies, the
students hoped teachers could teach them by some strategies to improve their
listening comprehension. In affective strategies, the students encouraged their self
through positive talk.
“The relationship between listening strategies used by Iranian EFL
freshman university students and their listening proficiency levels” was studied by
Bidabadi and Yamat (2011) in South of Esfahan. The aims of this study were
investigating listening strategies used by three different English listening
proficiency groups and also the relationship between listening strategy used and
listening proficiency levels. The participants of this study were Iranian EFL
freshman, 92 students were selected from 120 students, they were 19 students in
advanced group, 39 students in intermediate group, and 39 students in lower-
intermediate group. The instruments that researchers used in this study were
Oxford Placement Test (OPT) which adopted by Allen (1992). Then, listening
strategy questionnaire (metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective strategy)
which adapted by Vandergrift (1997). The researcher found most of students in
three groups used metacognitive strategy, cognitive strategy, and socio-affective
strategies. All of students used their thinking in learning process, planning
12
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
strategies for learning, paying attention to the main points and paying attention to
details in the listening task. Then, the researcher found that there was significant
and had positive relationship between listening strategies and listening
proficiency. It was showed from the value of the correlation between three groups
and language proficiency was 32% (advanced group), 10% (intermediate group),
14% (lower-intermediate). It meant all of students should use listening strategies
which appropriate for them to increase their language proficiency.
“An Investigation of English Listening Strategies Used by Thai
Undergraduate Students in Public Universities in the South” investigated by
Watthajarukiat, Chatupe, and Sukseemuang (2012). The aim of this study was to
find out top and bottom ten individual strategies which used in listening subject,
the significant differences listening strategies that used by higher level of students
in listening and also lower level of students, and also some differences in the
choice of individual strategies among the group of students across the universities.
All participants were 146 students who chosen randomly from four universities.
The result was 39 students selected in highest group and 39 students selected in
lowest group. While, the instrument was listening strategy questionnaire made by
researcher which summarized from Oxford (1990). The reliability had been test.
Then, listening test adopted by Cambridge IELTS practice test 7 (Cambridge,
2009). At the first aim of this study, the researchers found that top 5 of
10strategies which students used were cognitive strategies. Then, two strategies
that students used were metacognitive strategies. Next, two strategies were
affective strategies and the last was compensation strategies. About the bottom ten
13
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
of strategies that students used were metacognitive, cognitive, compensation, and
the least was memory strategy. In second question, the researchers found there
was no significance between MAS (students group who had the highest score) and
LAS (students group who had the lowest score) in using the strategies. The third
question, there was no significant difference in overall frequency from all of
groups of university students used.
“EFL learners’ listening comprehension and awareness of metacognitive
strategies: howarethey related” is study in 2013 by al-Alwan, Asassfeh, and Al-
Shboul in tenth-grade public schools in Amman, the capital city of Jordan. The
aim of this study was to investigate students’ level of metacognitive listening
strategies awareness and correlation between EFL tenth graders’ metacognitive
listening strategies and their listening comprehension performance. The total
number of participants of this study was 386 students whereas 207 female and 179
male. The instruments were Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire
(MALQ) which adopted by Vandergrift (2006) and listening comprehension test
that developed by the researchers. There were five sub-scales of metacognitive
strategy; they were problem solving, planning and evaluation, directed attention,
mental translation, and person knowledge. The result of MALQ was problem
solving have higher response of students and lower response of students was
person knowledge. The correlation between metacognitive listening strategies
2
awareness and listening comprehension showed significant correlation (r =.56).
Mental translation and personal knowledge were two sub-scales that did not have
correlation between listening comprehensions. The highest correlation happened
14
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
in listening strategy that was the problem solving strategies whereas students
analyze the information, solving the problem, evaluation the information.
Bidabadi and Yamat in a 2013 study investigated “EFL learners’
perception towards meta-cognitive strategy use in English language listening”.
The aim of this study was to explore the metacognitive strategy that usedby
students in listening. The participants of this study were 84 Iranian EFL female
freshmen at a university in the west of Eshafan, Iran, 6 female freshmen were
selected to interview. They were in intermediate level based on their scores from
the test. In collecting the data the researcher used Oxford Placement Test (OPT)
and Meta-cognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) which adapted
from Vandergrift et al, (2006). The researcher used semi-structured interview that
have relation with meta-cognitive strategy. Each of students had 30-45 minutes for
interviewed. In questionnaire included four factors of meta-cognitive strategy,
they were planning and evaluation, problem solving, personal knowledge, and
directed knowledge. The result was directed knowledge is more chosen than
planning and evaluation, problem-solving, and personal knowledge by the
students to understand the listening task. Furthermore, in semi-structured
interview was found that four factors of meta-cognitive strategy (planning and
evaluation, problem-solving, about personal knowledge, and directed knowledge.
“An investigation of the listening strategies used by second-year EFL
students at Biskra University” is studied by Chelli (2013). The purpose was to
find out the second year of EFL students strategy in learning listening. In
collecting the data the researcher used questionnaire that adapted by strategy
15
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
inventory for language learning worked out by Oxford (1993) and think aloud.
There were 70 students became the participant in this study. All of them were
second year students and have same education background. In this study, the
researcher divided the finding in 3 categories. The first was listening strategies;
she found the students often used three cognitive strategies and also one of social
strategies. There was none of students used metacognitive strategy to improve
their ability in listening comprehension. The second was about strategies that less
frequently used by students and she found that metacognitive strategies, and also
some of social affective strategies. The researcher also used think-aloud method.
The result was the students often guessing the meaning of some word if they
cannot understand and sometimes they ask to peers. The most strategies used are
same like the result in questionnaire.
In 2013 the study of “the listening comprehension strategies used by
college students to cope with the aural problems in EFL classes: An analytical
study” that conducted by Ghoneim in MenoufiaUniversity. The aim of this study
was to investigate the listening comprehension strategies used by the students
when aural message was processing and when they find the problem in listening.
The participants in this study were 20 students in advanced group and 20 students
in intermediate groups. In collecting the data the researcher usedthink aloud
technique and also listening comprehension test. In this study, the researcher
found in advanced group some problems and how they use strategy to solve the
problem. Most of advanced students used top-down strategies and most of
intermediate students used of bottom up strategies in solving the problem. In
16
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
intermediate group 10% students used making inferences, 20% seeking
confirmation (rejecting wrong hypotheses). In making prediction 15% of
advanced students and 5% of intermediate students used it. Advanced students
used word by word meaning and selecting to move on 10%. In intermediate
students selecting to move on is 50% and word by word meaning is 75%. The
result showed that there was significant differences strategy that both of students
group in using listening strategy.
Next previous study was investigated by Ratebi and Amirian (2013) at
university of Isfahan, Iran. The aim of this study is investigated about the using of
metacognitive strategies used by the students in different level of the students in
listening comprehension. There were 60 sixty freshman under-graduate students
became participants in this research. In collecting the data, the researcher used
International English Language Testing System (IELTS). The result of the test
divided students in high proficient listeners (students who get score 6 or more
than it) and low proficient listeners (students who get low score). Metacognitive
Awareness Listening Questionnaire that adapted by Vandergrift et al (2006) was
used in this research. The researchers found that 40 students in higher group and
20 students in lower group based on the score of the students in IELTS test. The
highest level of metacognitive awareness was problem solving, and directed
attention in the second highest frequently, the third was mental translation and the
fourth was planning evaluation and the lowest level of metacognitive awareness
was personal knowledge.
17
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
“Listening strategy use, test anxiety and test performance of intermediate
and advanced Iranian EFL learners” by Afshar and Hamzavi (2014) in English
language institute in Kermanshah. The aim of this study was to find out the
relationship between listening strategy used, test anxiety, and listening test
performance of Iranian intermediate and advanced EFL learners. The participants
of this study were 80 EFL learners who divided in two groups. In collecting the
data the researchers used listening performance test that adopted from TOEFL’s
listening part (Educational Testing Service, 1998, pp.68 and 76), test anxiety
questionnaire that adopted by Sarason (1975) and listening strategy used
questionnaire that modify by Golchi (2012). The researchers found that there was
statistical significant reverse relationship between test anxiety and listening test
performance of Iranian EFL learners. Between listening strategy and listening test
performance of Iranian EFL learners, the researchers found that there was positive
correlation both of them. Between advanced group and intermediate group in
using listening strategy, the researchers found that advanced groups was more
frequently in using listening strategy and it gave positive effect on EFL learners’
listening strategy used. At their anxiety test, the researcher found that advanced
students had lower level of test anxiety than intermediate students. It depended on
their ability in foreign language.
In a study 2014 by Nowrouzi, Shim, Zareian, and Nimehchisalem
investigated 100 college students’ four universities at KhorasanRazafiProvince.
Most of participants were female (70%). The aim of this study was to investigate
how far the students-perceived about cognitive, metacognitive, socio-affective
18
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
strategies in listening comprehension. In collecting the data the researchers used
questionnaire that called Listening Strategy Use Questionnaire (LSUQ). The
questionnaire was made by researcher. The validity of questionnaire had been test
by the researchers. The result of this study was all of participants had low level of
their perceived in using listening comprehension. In cognitive, there were 12
items of strategies and the result was the students had low level of all cognitive
strategies. All of students often used listening to the radio in English, watching
English program on TV, watching movies in English, and practicing new sounds.
In metacognitive strategy, there were 15 items of this strategy and the researchers
found self-perceived of the students in this strategy was in low level (mean=
2.36). Listening for specific details, using one’s experience and knowledge to help
him understand, and ‘avoiding word-for-word translation’ was more frequently
strategies that students used in listening comprehension. In socio-affective
strategy, there was 5 items of this strategy. Those three items showed that students
rarely used it. It meant that students-perceived in using this strategy was in low
level.
Mianmahaleh and Rahimy in a 2015 study investigated of the listening
comprehension strategies used by Iranian EFL learners and also find the
significant differences between male and female EFL students in using listening
comprehension strategies at Payam-e-Nour University in Iran. There were two
instruments used to collect the data, the first was OPT (Oxford Placement Test)
which adopted by Allan (2004) for 76 students. In investigating the significant
differences between male and female students in using listening comprehension
19
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
the researcher used Mann-Whitney U test. In this study, the researcher found that
most of students or high level of student chose metacognitive strategies to get
their comprehension in listening and low level of students chose socio-affective
strategies. There was significant difference between the strategy used by male and
female which female participant had higher rank (46.53) than male (30.47). This
paper argued that all of the strategies in listening comprehension have the same
purpose to help the students to get the comprehension in learning process
especially in listening comprehension and these strategies can be used by the
teacher in teaching.
2.4 The Reasons of Choosing English Listening Strategies
Listening had vital role to success in communication especially in learning
second language because from the listen, hearer took many information. Listening
is not easy because it requires listeners to input the information from the oral
(Bidabadi&Yamat, 2011). According to Jou (2010), in learning a foreign
languagelistening become a big problem because the different dialect sometime
make the listeners confuse and misunderstanding about the information. In Lu’s
(2008 as cited in Jou, 2010) stated that 93,8% of student tell that listening skill is
the important skill than other skill in learning English. Also from the study of
many researchers explain that listening strategies is important to make the
students increase their ability in listening comprehensions (Nowrouzi, Shim,
Zareian&Nimehchisalem, 2014).
Therefore, to get the comprehension of the students in listening skill they
should had a technique to success in learning listening or made them easily in
20
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
listening comprehension. According to National Capital Language Resource
Center (2004, as cited in Nowrouzi, Shim, Zareian&Nimehchisalem, 2014)
listening strategies is a tool or activities that have contribute in input of listening
comprehension for the students.
21
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses about the method of the research to investigate the
strategy in listening comprehension that is used by the students at one of public of
universities in Jambi. This chapter displays the research design, research site and
access, population and sampling procedures, instrument, data collection
procedures, validity and reliability, and technique of data analysis.
3.1 Research Design and Approach of the Study

In this study, the researcher used a quantitative method with a survey
approach to investigate the strategies students used in listening comprehension at
one public university in Jambi. Quantitative method is an approach used to
describe a research problem from the data with statistical analysis and the result is
compare with previous study (Cresswell, 2012). According to Cozby and Bates
(2011, p.114) “Quantitative researchers emphasize collecting in-depth information
on a relatively few individuals or within a very limited setting; quantitative
investigations generally include larger samples”. Briefly, quantitative method was
one of educational method which the result as numerical and it explained by the
researcher became complete information.
Then, the survey approach used to find out the listening strategies used by
the students of English study program at one public university in Jambi.
According to Cozby& Bates (2012) survey research tell aboutthe information by
participant demographics (age, gender, material status, and other facts) and also
explained their knowledge about the topic. While Cresswell (2012) states,“Survey
research designs are procedures in quantitative research in which investigators
22
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
administer a survey to a sample or to the entire population of people to describe
the attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or characteristics of the population” (p. 376).
So, survey founded outthe participants’ attitude, knowledge, and opinion which
related to the topic of this study. Researcher used survey approach in doing this
study to know the listening strategies in listening comprehension used by students
at one public university in Jambi.
3.2 Research Site and Access
In this study, the researcher choseone public university in Jambi as site for
this research. Particularly ofEnglish study program students in this university. The
researcherconcernson the classes that passed and taking listening subject. To get
access in obtaining the data, the researcher asked permission to the head of
English study program. Then, the researcher asked permission to the lecturer to
deliver the survey questionnaire.
3.3 Population, sample and instrument
3.3.1 Population
Creswell (2012) stated that population is a group of some people where
had different characteristics from other group. According to Yount (2006),
population consists of some people who choose by the researcher to be the
participant in a study. Moreover, Lavrakas (2008), “Defined a population is
strictly a finite collection of the units from which information was sought in the
survey, with additional specification” (p.590). In addition, population is limited or
unlimited people in a group which chosen by the researcher and had an important
23
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
role in doing this research. The population of this study was English study
program at one of public universities in Jambi. The total of English study program
is 600 students.
3.3.2 Sample
In doing this research, the researcher chose some of level students in this
study called sample. Sample is some parts that are chosen from larger population
(Lavrakas, 2008). According to Dornyei (2003), sample is group of people that
researcher examine from large population. Researcher used probability sampling
with cluster sampling where chose some participants from the large group.
According to Dornyei (2007) , Cluster sampling is “one way of making sampling
more pratical, especially when the target population is widely dispersed, is to
randomly select some larger grouping or units of the population and then examine
all the students in those selected units” The researcher chose the students of
English study program who are taking in listening subject and passed the listening
subject as the participants in this study. In this study, the researcher
involvedMandiri class (2H) in second semester who did not categorize sample to
give them test to find out the reliability. After researcher discovered the reliability
and it was acceptable, the researcher involved two classes (6A & 6H) in
sixthsemester, one class (4B) in fourth semester, and one class (2A) in
secondsemester as participants. Total real participants in this study were 94
participants.
3.3.3 Instrument
24
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
The researcher used questionnaire as instrument in this study. Johnson and
Christensen (2008) stated that, questionnaire isan instrument which tells about self
report which each of participant should fill all of the part of this study.
Questionnaire is the instrument which all parts have relation with topic that
researcher chooses. Then all of the participants should answer it or choose with
their knowledge (Creswell, 2012). In questionnaire the researcher obtained the
information about the attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, values, interests,opinions and
other information from the participant that had relation with topic and it became
the resulted of a study.
The questionnaire of this research was adaptedfrom some previous studies
that had same topic; theywere (Cheng (2002 as cited in Jou, 2010); Oxford (1990
as cited in Watthajarukiat,Chatupote,&Sukseemuang, 2012); Vandergrift and
Tafaghodtari (2010 as cited Abdalhamid, 2012). The researcher chose some of
statements from some of previous studies which categorized are easy to
understand by the participants. The statement in questionnaire was related to the
strategies of listening that students used in listening process. The strategies are
divided in three categories, metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective
strategies where all of the items or statement related to the strategies above. It
tested for the sample that did not categorized as a sample to show that
questionnaire was acceptable to deliver for the real sample.
In the questionnaire, the researcherused close-ended question. According
to Johnshon&Cristenses (2008, p.176), “closed- ended questions requires the
respondent to decide a limited number of responses that are predetermined by the
25
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
researchers”. According Creswell (2012), close-ended question is the question that
serves with response option for the participants in answer the question. The
questions used Likert scale for the options were it had five options, they
wereStrongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Not Sure (NS), Disagree (D), and Strongly
Disagree (SD) (Dornyei, 2003). All of the participants’ hadbeen asked to answer
the question by giving a symbol (√) in the slot or box in questionnaire.
Demographic background alsoused in the questionnaire that told about
general information of participants and followed by the statement that consisted of
ten of metacognitive strategy, ten of cognitive strategy, and also ten of socio-
affective strategy.
3.4 Data Collection Method
In collecting the data, the researcher followed some steps of data collection:
1. Permission
The researcher gained the permission from the dean of faculty teacher
training and education, the head of English education study program.
Furthermore,for the distributing of questionnaire, the researcher obtained
permission from the lecturers and also gave the formal letter in doing this
research.
2. Giving Invitation Letter and Inform Consent Form

Then, the researcher gave the invitation letter and the inform consent form
to the students to make convincing that they were like to be participants in this
study. In other hand, the researcher gave briefly explanation about this research to
make them understand about the study and also questionnaire that was distributed.
3. Distributing the Questionnaire
26
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
The last was distributing the questionnaire. The researcher distributes the
questionnaires for students that had been ready and agreed to be participants in
this study. The researcher gave 15-20 minutes in answer the questionnaire. After
that, the researcher collected the data and analyzed it.
3.5 Reliability of the Questionnaire

According to Dornyei, (2003), “Reliability is score of the instrument
where there is no error of the items in the instrument” (p.110). In this study, the
researcher used questionnaires that adapted by previous study. There were some
items that had correlated of listening strategies where in listening strategies there
were metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective strategies. In each of strategies
consists of five items adapted by (Cheng (2002 as cited in Jou, 2010); Oxford
(1990 as cited in Watthajarukiat,Chatupote,&Sukseemuang, 2012); Vandergrift
and Tafaghodtari (2010 as cited Abdalhamid, 2012).
The questionnaire was tested firstly before the researcher delivered it to
find out the reliability of questionnaire. The test was called pilot study. The pilot
study was tested for a class that had passed listening subject or class where the
students are taking the listening subject in English study program at one public
university in Jambi but did not categorized as real sample. The class that chose as
pilot study was Mandiri class (2H). Meanwhile, in getting the reliability of
questionnaire, the researcher used the Cronbach’s Alpha formula with SPSS.
3.6 Technique of Data Analysis

In analyzes the data, descriptive statistics wasused to describe the data of
the respondents’ demographic background and questionnaire. According to Cozby
and Bates (2012, p. 245), “descriptive statistics allow researchers to make precise
27
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
statements about the data”. According to Dornyei (2003), “Descriptive statistics
are used to summarize sets of numerical data in order to conserve time and
space”(p. 114). In other word, descriptive statistics had goal to set of data became
a good form in presenting the data.
Then, the researcher used Microsoft Excel in analyze the data. From the
data that wasgained in questionnaire, the researcher expected to find the frequency
about the strategies used by students in listening comprehension. The frequency
mayarrange the data and also gave the ranked from the lower until higher
strategies that is chosen by the students (Johnson & Christensen, 2008).
28
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This study explores about the English listening strategies that EFL
undergraduate student used in listening subject at one of public universities in
Jambi. The findings of this study are to answer the research question, a). What
types of listening strategies do EFL undergraduate students use to cope with
listening problem? b). what are the common strategies (frequency) that EFL
undergraduate students use to cope with listening problem? And c). What are the
different listening strategies between male and female students use to cope with
listening problem? This chapter is divided into three sections. Part one discusses
about participant demographic information. Next part discusses about the finding
that have related with research question, and the last part is discussion of finding
with previous studies and theories.
4.1 Overview of the Study
This study was to analyze the listening strategies (metacognitive,
cognitive, socio-affective strategies) that EFL undergraduate student used to solve
listening problem at one public university in Jambi. This study used quantitative
design with survey approach by using Likert scales (5 option :Strongly Agree
(SA), Agree (A), Not Sure (NS), Disagree (D), and Strongly Disagree (SD). The
site for this study was one public university in Jambi. This chapter described the
29
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
findings and discussions of the study that answered the research questions, they
were:
1. What types of listening strategies do EFL undergraduate students at
one public university in Jambi use to cope with listening problems?
2. What are the common strategies (frequency) that EFL undergraduate
students at one public university in Jambi use to cope with listening
problems?
3. What are the different listening strategies between male and female
students at one public university in Jambi use to cope with listening
problems?
The instrument of this study in collecting the data was questionnaire where
in this instrument included demographic profile of participants. Demographic
profile of participants also included to get information of the participant
background. This study used close-ended question in questionnaire to make
students easy to answer and chose some options in the questionnaire that
answered about listening strategies that EFL undergraduate students used in
listening.
In collecting the data, the researcher delivered the questionnaire to sample
th
as a pilot study to find out the reliability of the questionnaire in May 20 2015,
where the class as pilot study of this study was second semester of one Mandiri
(2H) class at English study program. After the researcher found out the
reliability(0.909) of questionnaire the researcher delivered the questionnaire to
sample and collected it. The researcher started delivered the questionnaire from
30
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
th th
May 21 until May 22 in year 2015. Then, the researcher conducted the data to
find out about strategies that EFL undergraduate students used in listening at one
public university in Jambi. In collecting the data, the researcher found the answer
that related to the research question and it discussed with previous studies.
4.2 Biographical Description of Participants
Total of the participant of this study was ninety four participants. They
were from second semester, fourth semester and also six semesters. All of classes
of real sample were four classes. Demographic profile questionnaire used to get
information in general from the participants. According to Johnson and
Christensen (2008), in a questionnaire there is self report that should be filled by
the participants as data collection instrument. In describing the demographic
profile of participants the researcher used charts. The researcher divided the
demographic profile questionnaire into two categories; they are based on gender
and stages.
In getting the general data from the participants, the first data profile that
researcher wanted to know was gender of participants. They were seventy two
participants’ female (76.6%) and twenty two participants’ male (23.4%).
Figure 1. Demographic biographical based on Gender
Gender
100%
50% Male
76.6%
Female
23.4%
0%
Male Female
31
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
In this section, the researcher wants to get information about semester
from participants. There were twenty one participants from second semester
(22.3%), nine teen participants from fourth semester (20.2%), the last was fifty
four participants from six semester (57.5%).
Figure 2. Demographic biographical based on Semester
Semester
80%
60% 57.5%
40% Second semester

22.3% 20.2% Fourth semester
20%
0% Sixth semester
Second Fourth Sixth semester
semester semester
4.3 Reliability of the Questionnaire
In getting the score of reliability, the questionnaire was tried out for
Mandiri class (2H) at English study program students where twenty participants
th
and it had been done in May 20 2015. The score of reliability of the
questionnaire was 0.909. It means that questionnaire was reliable became
instrument in this study because the standard point of reliability was 0.7 based on
Cronbach alpha and the reliability score of this questionnaire was pass of standard
score. Then, the questionnaire delivered to the real sample or target sample of this
research.
4.4 Findings by Research Questions
4.4.1Descriptive Survey Based on Listening Strategies
32
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Listening strategies is strategy that students used to make them easier in
learning listening. There were three categories of listening strategies
(metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective strategies).
This part, the researcher wanted to know the frequency of participants that
chose three categories of listening strategies. In metacognitive, there were 18
participants (19.7%)chose “strongly agree”, fifty seven participants (60.5%)chose
“agree”, eight participants (8.3%) chose “not sure”, nine participants (9.5%) chose
“disagree”, and 2 participants (2%) chose “strongly agree”.
Figure 3. Listening Strategies “Metacognitive Strategy”
Metacognitive Strategy
80%
60.5%
60%
19.7%
40%
8.3% 9.5%
20% 2.0%
0%
Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly
Disagree
In cognitive strategy, there were 14 participants (15%) chose “strongly
agree”, fifty five of participants (58.8%) chose “agree”, nine participants (9%)
chose “not sure”, 14 participants (14.6%) chose “disagree”, and two participants
(1.8%) chose “strongly agree”.
Figure 4. Listening Strategies “Cognitive Strategy”
33
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Cognitive Strategy
100%
58.8%
50%
15.0% 9.0% 14.6%
0% 1.8%
Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly
Disagree
The last is about socio-affective strategy. There were nine teen participants
(21.3%) chose “strongly agree”, fifty four participants (57,8%) chose “agree”,
eight participants (8.9%) chose “not sure”, nine participants (9.1%) chose
“disagree”, three participants (2.8%) chose “strongly disagree”, and one of
participants (0.10%) not answer the questions.
Figure 5. Listening Strategies “Socio-Affective Strategy”
Socio-Affective Strategy
80%
57.8%
60%
40%
21.3%
20%
8.9% 9.1% 2.8% 0.1%
0%
Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly Not Answer
Disagree
4.4.1.1 Descriptive Survey Based on Metacognitive Strategy
Metacognitive strategy is the way that students used to manage their
learning process. In metacognitive, learners planned the strategies, monitored, and
evaluated strategies in understanding the task (Vandergrift, 1990 as cited in Jou,
2010). Bacon (1992 as cited by Nowrouz, et.al., 2014) stated,kinds of
34
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
metacognitive strategieswere pre-listening strategy, while-listening strategy, and
post-listening strategy.
a. Pre-listening strategy
Pre-listening strategy is preparation that preferred by the students before
their learning listening. This strategy consists of five items.
Figure 6. Pre-listening strategy “I clarify the objectives of an anticipated

listening task and/or propose strategies for handing it”
100%
86.36%
80%
60%
40%
20%
5.32% 9.57% 9.57% 1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that seventy participants (86.36%) chose “agree” for the
statement “I clarify the objectives of an anticipated listening task and/or propose
strategies for handing it”. It was followed by nine participants (9.57%) chose “not
sure”, nine participants (9.57%) chose “disagree”, five participants (5.32%) chose
“strongly agree”, and one participants (1.06%) chose “strongly disagree”
Figure 7. Pre-listening strategy “Before listening, I prepare my mind to

concentrate”.
35
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
80%
63.83%
60%
40% 32.98%
20%
2.13%
1.06% 0.00%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that sixty participants (63.83%) chose “agree” for the
statement “Before listening, I prepare my mind to concentrate”. Then followed by
thirty one participants (32.98%) chose “strongly agree”, two participants (2.13%)
chose “not sure”, one participants (1.06%) chose “disagree”, and no one (0.00%)
of participant chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 8. Pre-listening strategy “Before listening, I request myself to make

progress”
80%
69.15%
60%
40%
22.34%
20%
5.32% 3.19% 0.00%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that sixty participants (69.15%) chose “agree” for
statement “before listening, I request myself to make progress”, and followed by
twenty one participants (22.34%) chose “strongly agree”, five participants
(5.32%) chose “not sure”, three participants (3.19%) chose “disagree”, and no one
of participants chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 9. Pre-listening strategy “Before listening, I think of similar texts that

I may have listened to”
36
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
50%
45.74%
40%
30% 29.79%
20%
10% 13.83%
7.45% 5.32%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that forty three participants (45, 74%) chose “strongly
agree” for statement “Before listening, I think of similar texts that I may have
listened to”, twenty eight participants (29.79%) chose “agree”, thirteen
participants (13.83%) chose “not sure”, seven participants (7.45%) chose
“disagree”, and five participants (5.32%) chose “strongly agree”.
Figure 10. Pre-listening strategy “Before I start to listen, I have a plan in my

head for how I am going to listen”
80%
60% 68.09%
40%
20% 17.02%
7.45% 6.38%
1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that sixty four participants (68.09%) chose “agree” for
statement “Before I start to listen, I have a plan in my head for how I am going to
listen”and followed by sixteenparticipants (17.02%) chose “strongly agree”,
seven participants (7.45%) chose “not sure”, and 6 participants (6.38%) chose
“disagree”, andone participants (1.06%) chose “strongly agree”,
b. While-Listening Strategy
37
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
While-listening strategy was the learners’ focused on monitoring their
listening and attracted their attention. This strategy consists of five items.
Figure 11.While-listening Strategy “While listening. I do not understand if I

am unfamiliar with speakers’ accents”
50%
45.74%
40%
30%
22.34%
17.02%
20%
11.70%
10%
3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on chart above, showed that forty three participants (45.74%) chose
“agree” for statement “While listening. I do not understand if I am unfamiliar
with speakers’ accents”, and followed by twenty one participants (22.34%) chose
disagree, eleven participants (11.70%) chose “strongly agree”, and three
participants (3.19%) chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 12. While-listening Strategy “While listening, I will check what

part of content I do not understand”
80%
60% 64.89%
40%
20% 12.77% 9.57% 10.64%
0% 2.13%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the chart above showed that sixty participants (64.89%) chose
“agree” for statement “While listening, I will check what part of content I do not
understand”, it followed by twelve participants (12.77%) chose “strongly agree”,
38
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
ten participants (10.64%) chose “disagree”, nine participants (9.57%) chose “not
sure”, and two participants (2.13%) chose “strongly disagree”,
Figure 13. While-listening Strategy “While listening, I will double check

again for my answer”
70%
60% 61.70%
50%
40%
30%
22.34%
20%
10% 3.19% 8.51% 4.26%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty eight participants (61.70%) chose “agree” for
statement “While listening, I will double check again for my answer”, and
followed by twenty one participants (22.34%) chose “strongly agree”, eight
participants (8.51%) chose “disagree”, four participants (4.26%) chose “strongly
disagree”, and three participants (3.19%) chose “not sure”.
Figure 14. While-listening Strategy “I am aware of my inattention and

correct it while doing listening test”
70%
60% 57.45%
50%
40%
30%
20% 15.96% 18.09%
7.45%
10%
1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
39
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Based on the chart above showed that fifty four participants (57.45%)
chose “agree” for statement “I am aware of my inattention and correct it while
doing listening test”, seventeen participants (18.09%) chose “disagree”, fifteen
participants (15.96%) chose “strongly agree”, seven participants (7.45%) chose
“not sure”, and one participant (1.06%) chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 15. While-listening Strategy “I try to listen for specific details to see
whether I can understand them”
80% 71.28%
60%
40%
20% 18.09% 5.32% 4.26% 1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above, described that sixty seven participants (71.28%)
chose “agree” for statement “I try to listen for specific details to see whether I can
understand them”, and followed by seventeen participants (18.09%) chose
“strongly agree”, five participants (5.32%) chose “not sure”, four participants
(4.26%) chose “disagree”, and one of participants (1.06%) chose “strongly
disagree”.
c. Post-listening Strategy
Post-listening strategy is the evaluation of their understanding in listening and
also trying to find out what should they do to help their listening comprehension.
This strategy consists of five items.
Figure 16. Post-listening Strategy “After listening, I think back to how I

listened and about what I might do differently next time.”
40
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
60%
50% 50.00%
40%
30%
20% 17.02% 19.15%
12.77%
10%
3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data above showed that forty seven participants (50.00%) chose
“agree” for statement “After listening, I think back to how I listened and about
what I might do differently next time”, and “disagree” was chosen by eighteen
participants (19.15%), and followed by sixteen participants (17.02%) chose
“strongly agree”, twelve participants (12.77%) chose “not sure”, in “strongly
disagree” was chosen by three participants (3.19%).
Figure 17. Post-listening Strategy “After Listening, I think back to the

quality of my strategy use (for example planning, inferencing) and about
how I can do better next time”
80%
65.96%
60%
40%
22.34%
20%
7.45% 4.26%
0% 0.00%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above, described that sixty two participants (65.96%)
chose “agree” for statement “After Listening, I think back to the quality of my
strategy use (for example planning, inferencing) and about how I can do better
next time, it followed by “strongly agree”was chose by twenty one participants
41
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
(22.34%), seven participants (7.45%) chose “not sure”, four participants (4.26%)
chose “disagree”. And no one of participants (0.00%) chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 18. Post-listening Strategy “After listening, I reflect on my problems,

such as the key words that I do not understand”
80%
70.21%
60%
40%
20% 18.09%
6.38% 5.32%
0% 0.00%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on chart above, showed that sixty six participants (70.21%) chose
“agree” for statement “After listening, I reflect on my problems, such as the key
words that I do not understand”, and followed by seventeen participants (18.09%)
chose “strongly agree”, “not sure” was chosen by six participants (6.38%),
“disagree” was chosen by five participants (5.32%), and no one of participants
(0.00%) chose “strongly agree”.
Figure 19. Post-listening Strategy “After listening, I evaluate how much I

could understand”
80%
70.21%
60%
40%
20% 19.15%
4.26%
0% 4.26% 2.13%
SA A NS DA SD
42
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Based on chart above, showed that sixty six participants (70.21%) chose
“agree”, eighteen participants (19.15%) chose “strongly agree” and followed by
four participants (4.26%) chose “not sure”, “disagree” was chosen by four
participants (4.26%), and two participants (2.13%) chose “strongly disagree” for
statement “After listening, I evaluate how much I could understand”.
Figure 20. Post-listening Strategy “I will write down the words I do not
know after the listening test and look”
50%
45.74%
40%
30%
20% 15.96% 13.83% 19.15%
10%
5.32%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above showed that forty three participants (45.74%)
chose “agree”, and followed by eighteen participants (19.15%) chose “disagree”,
fifteen participants (15.96%) chose “strongly agree”, thirteen participants
(13.83%) chose “not sure”, and five participants (5.32%) chose “strongly
disagree” for statement “I will write down the words I do not know after the
listening test and look”.
4.4.1.2 Demographic Survey Based on Cognitive Strategy
According to O’Malley’s (1990, as cited in Fadloan 2013) cognitive
strategy is the wayfrom the students self to learn the lesson. Such as, they make
the important note or summarize, important question for themselves, and try to
find the meaning of difficulties word to get the information from the speaker. In
cognitive they use their spontaneous knowledge to solve their problem in learning
43
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
listening. National Capital Language Resource Center (2004 as cited in Nowrouzi,
et.al., 2014) is divided cognitive strategy in two categories, they werebottom-up
and top-down strategy.
a. Bottom-up Strategy
Bottom-up strategy is process understanding the meaning by words, semantic
content, and syntactic level (Suwarni, 2014). It consists of five items.
Figure 21. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I will notice the questions
with who, how, when, where and what in the content”
60%
50% 52.13%
40%
30%
20% 18.09% 19.15%
10%
6.38% 4.26%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that forty nine participants (52.13%) chose “agree” for
statement “While listening, I will notice the questions with who, how, when,
where and what in the content”, “disagree” was chosen by eighteen participants
(19.15%), “strongly agree” was chosen by seventeen (18.09%), six participants
(6.38%) chose “not sure”, four participants (4.26%) chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 22. Bottom-up Strategy“While listening, I try to understand each

word”
44
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
50%
43.62%
40%
30%
20.21% 17.02%
20% 13.83%
10%
3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above described that forty eight participants (43.62%)
chose “agree”, and followed by nineteen participants (20.21%) chose “strongly
agree”, “disagree” was chosen by sixteen participants (17.02%), “not sure” was
chosen by nine participants (13.83%), and two participants (3.19%) chose
“strongly disagree” for statement “Whilelistening, I try to understand each word”.
Figure 23. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I repeat words or phrases

softly or mentally”
50%
43.62%
40%
30% 27.66%
20%
11.07% 13.83%
10%
3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that forty one participants (43.62%) chose “agree” for
statement “While listening, I repeat words or phrases softly or mentally “, and
followed by twenty six participants (27.66%) chose “disagree”, thirteen
participants (13.83%) chose “not sure”, eleven participants (11.07%) chose
“strongly agree”, and three participants (3.19%) chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 24. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I piece things together from
the details”
45
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
80%
60% 59.57%
40%
20%
6.38% 13.83% 12.77%
2.13%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data, showed that fifty six participants (59.57%) chose
“agree”, and followed by “not sure” was chosen by thirteen participants (13.83%),
“disagree” was chosen twelve participants (12.77%), six participants (6.38%)
chose “strongly agree”, and two participants (2.13%) chose “strongly disagree”
for statements “While listening, I piece things together from the details”.
Figure 25. Bottom-up Strategy “I take notes of main points and keywords”
70%
60% 63.83%
50%
40%
30%
23.40%
20%
10% 4.26% 7.45% 1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the chart above, showed that sixty participants (63.83%) chose
“agree” for statements “I take notes of main points and keywords”. It followed by
twenty two participants (23.40%) chose “strongly agree”, “disagree” was chosen
by seven participants (7.45%), four participants (4.26%) chose “not sure”,
“strongly disagree” was chosen by one participant (1.06%)
b. Top-down Strategy
46
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Top-down strategy is predicting the meaning from the speaker by the signal or
gesture. Top-down strategy consists of five items.
Figure 26. Top-down Strategy “I listen for main ideas first and then details”
80%
70% 68.09%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 18.09%
10% 7.45%
2.13% 1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that sixty four participants (68.09%) chose “agree”,
“strongly agree” was chosen by seventeen participants (18.09%), “disagree” was
chosen by seven participants (7.45%), two participants (2.13%) chose “not sure”,
and one participant (1.06%) chose “strongly disagree” for statement I listen for
main ideas first and then details.
Figure 27. Top-down Strategy “I predict or make hypotheses on text by

titles”
47
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
60%
53.19%
50%
40%
30%
23.40%
20%
15.96%
10% 7.45%
0.00%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty participants (53.19%) chose “agree” for
statement I predict or make hypotheses on text by titles, “disagree” was chosen by
twenty two participants (23.40%), fifteen participants (15.96%) chose “not sure”,
“strongly agree” was chosen by seven participants (7.45%), and no one of
Figure 28. Top-down Strategy “I can guess the meaning based on the
context”
80%
60% 57.45%
40%
20% 12.77% 12.77% 14.89%
0% 2.13%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty four participants (57.45%) chose “agree”,
“disagree” was chosen by fourteen participants (14.89%), “strongly agree” was
chosen by twelve participants (12.77%), twelve participants (12.77%) chose “not
sure”, and two participant (2.13%) chose “strongly disagree” for statement I can
guess the meaning based on the context.
Figure 29. Top-down Strategy “I try to think in English instead of Indonesia”
48
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
80%
70.21%
60%
40%
20% 15.96%
8.51% 5.32% 0.00%

0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that sixty six participants (70.21%) chose “agree” for
statement I try to think in English instead of Indonesia,“strongly agree” was
chosen by fifteen participants (15.96%), eight participants (8.51%) chose “not
sure”,“disagree” was chosen by five participants (5.32%), and no one of
Figure 30. Top-down Strategy “I make guess about the topic based on what
has already been said”
80%
69.15%
60%
40%
20% 15.96%
9.57%
3.19% 2.13%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on chart above showed that sixty five participants (69.15%) chose
“agree” for statements “I make guess about the topic based on what has already been
said”. It followed by fifteen participants (15.96%) chose “strongly agree”, “disagree”
was chosen by nine participants (9.57%), three participants (3.19%) chose “not sure”,
and “strongly disagree” was chosen by two participants (2.13%).
4.4.1.3 DescriptiveSurvey Based on Socio-Affective Strategy
49
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Socio-affective strategies are one of strategies which are strategy that
includes the social or environment in learning process (O’Malley's, 1990 as cited
in Fadloan, 2013) and this strategy is divided into social strategy and affective
strategy.
a. Social Strategy
Social strategy refers to sharing the idea with other people in learning process.
Social strategies are divided into asking question, cooperating with others, and
empathizing with others. This strategy consists of five items.
Figure 31.Social Strategy “If I do not understand what someone says in

English, I ask them to repeat what they said”
70%
60% 58.51%
50%
40%
30%
20% 20.21%
10% 9.57% 9.57%
1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty five participants (58.51%) chose “agree” for
statement “If I do not understand what someone says in English, I ask them to
repeat what they said”,“strongly agree” was chosen by nineteen participants
(20.21%), nine participants (9.57%) chose “not sure”,“disagree” was chosen by
nine participants (9.57%), and one participant (1.06%) chose “strongly disagree”
and one participant (1.06%) did not answerthe question.
Figure 32.Social Strategy “After listening, I ask my classmates or teacher

question I do not understand”
50
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
80%
62.77%
60%
40%
20% 14.89% 10.64%

8.51% 3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty nine participants (62.77%) chose “agree”,
“strongly agree” was chosen by fourteen participants (14.89%), “disagree” was
chosen byten participants (10.64%), eight participants (8.51%) chose “not sure”,
and three participants (3.19%) chose “strongly disagree” for statement After
listening, I ask my classmates or teacher question I do not understand.
Figure 33.Social Strategy “I hope teachers can teach me more skills to

improve my listening comprehension”
80%
59.57%
60%
40% 38.30%
20%
0% 2.13% 0.00% 0.00%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above described that fifty six participants (59.57%)
chose “agree”, and followed by thirty six participants (20.21%) chose “strongly
agree”,“not sure” was chosen by two participants (2.13%), no one of
participants(0.00%) chose “disagree” and “strongly disagree”for statement “I
hope teachers can teach me more skills to improve my listening comprehension”
Figure 34.Social Strategy “I ask others for feedback on how to solve my

listening problems”
51
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
70% 63.83%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 19.15%
10% 10.64% 4.26%
2.13%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that sixty participants (63.83%) chose “agree” for
statement “I ask others for feedback on how to solve my listening
problems”,“strongly agree” was chosen by eighteen participants (19.15%), ten
participants (10.64%) chose “not sure”,“disagree” was chosen by four participants
(4.26%), and two participant (2.13%) chose “strongly disagree”
Figure 35.Social Strategy “I practice listening and speaking in English with

my friends.”
60%
50% 52.13%
40%
30%
22.34%
20%
13.83% 8.51%
10% 3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above described that forty nine participants (52.13%)
chose “agree”, and followed by twenty participants (20.21%) chose “strongly
agree”,“not sure” was chosen by thirteen (13.83%), eight participants (8.15%)
chose “disagree”, “strongly disagree”was chosen by three participants (3.19%) for
statement “I practice listening and speaking in English with my friends”.
52
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
b. Affective Strategy
Affective strategies refer to attitudes, motivation and also the emotion of
learner. According to Nowrouzi, Sim, Zareian, &Nimehchisalem (2014), affective
strategy refers to learners’ confidence during the listening process.Affective
strategy consists of five items.
Figure 36.Affective Strategy “While listening, I can keep calm and not be
nervous”
60%
50% 47.87%
40%
30%
21.28%
20%
13.83%
12.77%
10%
4.26%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that forty five participants (47.87%) chose “agree” for
statement “While listening, I can keep calm and not be nervous”,“strongly agree”
was chosen by twenty participants 221.28%),“disagree” was chosen by thirteen
participants (13.83%),twelve participants (12.77%) chose “not sure”, and four
participant (4.26%) chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 37.Affective Strategy “I am confident in understanding the whole

contents”
53
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
60%
50% 47.87%
40%
30%
20% 13.83% 13.83% 19.15%
10%
5.32%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
Based on the data above described that forty nine participants (52.13%)
chose “agree”, and followed by twenty participants (20.21%) chose “strongly
agree”,“not sure” was chosen by thirteen (13.83%), eight participants (8.15%)
chose “disagree”, and “strongly disagree” was chosen by three participants
(3.19%) for statement “I practice listening and speaking in English with my
friends”.
Figure 38.Affective Strategy “I encourage myself through positive-self talk”
70%
60% 58.51%
50%
40%
30%
20% 17.02% 13.83%
10% 9.57%
1.06%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty five participants (58.51%) chose “agree” for
statement “I encourage myself through positive-self talk”,“strongly agree” was
chosen by sixteen participants (17.02%),“disagree” was chosen by thirteen
participants (13.83%), nine participants (9.57%) chose “not sure”, and one
participant (1.06%) chose “strongly disagree”.
54
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Figure 39.Affective Strategy “I try to relax myself, breathe deeply, meditate,

and clear my mind while listening”
80%
67.02%
60%
40%
19.15%
20%
7.45%
3.19% 3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data above described that sixty three participants (67.02%) chose
“agree”, and followed by eighteen participants (19.15%) chose “strongly
agree”,seven participants (7.45%) chose “disagree”, “not sure” was chosen by
three (3.19%), and “strongly disagree” was chosen by three participants (3.19%)
for statement “I try to relax myself, breathe deeply, meditate, and clear my mind
while listening”.
Figure 40.Affective Strategy “I try not to feel nervous as I listen to English”
70%
60% 59.57%
50%
40%
30% 26.60%
20%
10% 5.32% 4.26% 4.26%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that fifty six participants (59.57%) chose “agree” for
statement “I try not to feel nervous as I listen to English”, “strongly agree” was
chosen by twenty five participants (26.60%), five participants (5.32%) chose “not
55
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
sure”, “disagree” was chosen by four participants (4.26%), and four participants
(4.26%) chose “strongly disagree”.
4.4.2 Descriptive Survey of Listening Strategies Based on Gender
a. Metacognitive Strategy
Figure 41.Female “Metacognitive Strategy”
70%
60% 61.10%
50%
40%
30%
20% 21.10%
10% 7.77% 8.33%

1.67%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The first strategy is metacognitive. Based on the data, there were 61.10%
of female participants chose “agree” in “metacognitive strategy”, 21.10% of
female participants chose “strongly agree”, 8.33% of female participants chose
“disagree”, 7.77% of female participants chose “not sure”, and 1.67% of female
participants chose “strongly disagree”.
Figure 42.Male “Metacognitive Strategy”
56
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
70%
60% 58.78%
50%
40%
30%
20% 14.84% 10.30% 13.63%
10%
2.45%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data showed that 58.78% of male participants chose “agree” for
“metacognitive strategy”, “strongly agree” was chosen 14.84% of male
participants, “disagree” was chosen by 13.63% of male participants, 10.30% of
male participants chose “not sure”, and 2.45% of male participants chose
“strongly disagree”.
c. Cognitive Strategy
Figure 43.Female “Cognitive Strategy”
70%
60% 58.89%
50%
40%
30%
20% 16.25% 9.44% 13.05%
10%
1.94%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
The data above described that 58.89% of female participants chose
“agree”, and followed by 16.25% of female participants chose “strongly
agree”,13.05% of female participants chose “disagree”, “not sure” was chosen by
9.44% of female participants, and “strongly disagree” was chosen by 1.94% of
female participants for “cognitive strategy”
57
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Figure 44. Male “Cognitive Strategy”
70%
60% 60.90%
50%
40%
30%
20% 10.90% 6.99% 19.30%
10%
1.81% 0.00%
0%
SA A NS DA SD NA
The data above described that 60.90% of male participants chose “agree”,
and followed by 19.30% of male participants chose “disagree”,10.90% of male
participants chose “strongly agree”, “not sure” was chosen by 6.99% of male
participants, and “strongly disagree” was chosen by 1.81% of male participants
for “cognitive strategy”.
d. Socio-affective Strategy
Figure 45.Female “Socio-affective Strategy”
80%
60% 58.61%
40%
20% 21.94%
9.03% 7.63% 2.64% 0.15%

0%
SA A NS DA SD NA
The data showed that 58.61% of female participants chose “agree” for
“socio-affective strategy”, “strongly agree” was chosen by 21.94% of female
participants, 9.03%of female participantschose “not sure”, “disagree” was chosen
by 7.63% of female participants, 2.64% of female participants chose “strongly
disagree” and 0.15% of female participants not answer the questions.
58
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Figure 46. Male “Socio-affective Strategy”
60%
55%
50%
40%
30%
20% 19.09%
14.09%
10% 8.63% 3.19%
0%
SA A NS DA SD
According to data above described that 55% of male participants chose
“agree”, and followed by 19.09% of male participants chose “strongly
agree”,14.09% of male participants chose “disagree”, “not sure” was chosen by
8.63% of male participants, and “strongly disagree” was chosen by 3.19% of male
participants for “socio-affective strategy”.
4.5 DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to investigate the English listening strategies
used by EFL undergraduate students at one public university in Jambi. Based on
the previous studies, there were many strategies that influenced the students’
comprehension in learning listening. The strategies were categorized into three
strategies; there were metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies, and socio-
affective strategies.
In this study, three strategies of listening that included thirty five strategies
hadrelated to the research questions based on the questionnaireand the research
questions were (1) What types of listening strategies do EFL undergraduate
students at one public university in Jambi use to cope with listening problems?,
(2) What are the common strategies (frequency) that EFL undergraduate students
59
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
at one public university in Jambi use to cope with listening problems?, and (3)
What are the different listening strategies between male and female students at
one public university in Jambi use to cope with listening problems? In this case,
the researcher used the previous studies that have related with the finding that
researcher discovered in study Teng (1998), Chulim (2008), Yang (2009), Jou
(2010), Bidabadi and Yamat (2011), Watthajarukiat, Chatupe, and Sukseemuang
(2012), Al-Alwan, Asassfeh, and Al-Shboul (2013), Bidabadi and Yamat (2013),
Chelli (2013), Ghoneim (2013), Ratebi and Amirian (2013), Afshar and Hamzavi
(2014), Nowrouzi, Shim, Zareian, and Nimehchisalem (2014), and Mianmahaleh
and Rahimy (2015).
Listening strategiesare the method that students used in cover the problem
in listening and also to increase their ability in listening. “Listening strategies or
tools or actions learners employ to make theirL2 learning easier, enjoyable and
transferable to new input” (Oxford, 1990 as cited by Watthajarukiat, et al., 2012).
According to O’Malley and Chamot (1990 as cited inJou, 2010) three types of
listening strategies are metacognitive strategy, cognitive strategy, and socio-
affective strategy. In metacognitive strategy included fifteen items; cognitive
strategy consists of ten items, and ten items for socio-affective strategy. The
findings of listening strategies was discussed and showed based on the highest
percentage of the categories of listening strategies. Metacognitive strategy in
figure 1 showed that it has high percentage 60.5% (57 participants) chose “agree”,
55 participants (58.8%) chose “agree” in cognitive strategy in figure 2, for socio-
affective strategy 57.8% (55 participants) chose “agree”in figure 3. It means that
60
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
metacognitive strategy was frequently used by the participants to increase their
ability in listening and followed by cognitive strategy, and socio-affective strategy.
They used their self planned before listening, and while listening they focused to
the attention, and evaluated about what they had done in listening and what should
they did to make it better. The finding have related with a study by Bidabadi and
Yamat (2011) showed that the Iranian EFL freshman university students
frequently used metacognitive than cognitive and socio-affective strategies.
Theytold that the students tried to think about how they got the comprehension in
listening with planned, monitored, and evaluated their listening and
metacognitiveincreased their language learning in general and also the listening
skill in specific, and made the students active in listening process. It different from
the resulted by Watthajarukiat, Chatupe, and Sukseemuang (2012) that intend that
cognitive is more frequently used like taking a note than metacognitive where the
students try to find out the ways in learning listening from their self.
Metacognitive strategyis one of strategy that demand the students to
prepare the strategies from their self in learning listening, although before
listening, while listening, and after listening. Studentsplanning the strategies,
monitoring, and evaluating the strategies in understanding the task is refers to
metacognitive strategy (Vandergrift, 1990 as cited in Jou, 2010). According to
Bacon (1992 as cited by Nowrouzi, et al., 2014) metacognitive strategies isdivided
in three strategies. They are pre-listening strategies, while-listening strategies, and
post-listening strategies.
61
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
First, pre-listening strategiesare students prepare their self before listening
such as focusing attention, applying advance organizer, and deciding to think in
English. In pre-listening strategies included five items. The data showed that “I
clarify the objectives of an anticipated listening task and/or propose strategies for
handing it” got the highest percentage (86.36%) seventy participantsfor “agree”,
and followed by sixty four participants (68.09%) for “Before I start to listen, I
have a plan in my head for how I am going to listen”, sixty participants (69.15%)
for “Before listening, I request myself to make progress”, sixty participants
(63.83%) for “Before listening, I prepare my mind to concentrate”, and the last is
“Before listening, I think of similar texts that I may have listened to”. From the
data above, I clarify the objectives of an anticipated listening task and/or propose
strategies for handing itwas most strategies that students used inlistening for EFL
undergraduate students. It different result of the research that conducted by Jou
(2010) most of students prepare their mind to concentrate before listening. In this
study before the students joined the listening process, the students should had a
step or measured to get success in listening. Bidabadi and Yamat (2013) stated
that the learners who prefer before listening it can help their understanding in
learning process and also give the good effect for students learning process.
Before the students started the listening they should prepare anything that have
related in listening skill such as prepared about the vocabulary, grammar that
became big problem in listening. it same with Yan (2006, as cited in Jou, 2010)
that tell the students lack of knowledge about grammar and vocabulary because
they prepare their mind to concentrate and request themselves to make progress.
62
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Second,while-listening strategyis how the students monitoring their
strategies while listening process. Abdalhamid (2012) said that while-listening the
students monitoring their way in listening process. The data showed that in while-
listening the highest percentage is “I try to pay full attention to and concentrate
on what I am listening to, especially when I do not understand it” with 71.78%
(67 participants) chose “agree”, and followed by 64.68% (60 participants) chose
“agree” for “While listening, I will check what part of content I do not
understand”, for “While listening, I will double check again for my answer” was
chosen by 58 participants (61.70%) in option “agree”,“I am aware of my
inattention and correct it while doing listening test” was chosen by 54 participants
(57.45%) for option “agree”, and the last is “I decide in advance to selectively
listen to some parts of the whole text” was chosen by 43 participants (45.74%) in
option “agree”. So, from the data above, the EFL undergraduate students most
usedI try to pay full attention to and concentrate on what I am listening to,
especially when I do not understand it. It means that focused with pay attention
full about what speaker said was strategies that made them easier to understand
about what speaker said, especially when the students did not understand about
speaker said.It same with the finding that had been done by Chulim (2008), where
the data showed that the students worried to lose their focuses and concentrate in
listening, it made they did not get point about what they listen.
Third, post reading strategies is evaluated that students did find out how
far their success in learning listening. Based on the data appeared that, “After
63
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
listening, I reflect on my problems, such as the key words that I do not
understand”, and “After listening, I evaluate how much I could understand” is
more frequently used for students in post reading, the percentage is 70.21% (66
participants) , that followed by “After Listening, I think back to the quality of my
strategy use (for example planning, inferencing) and about how I can do better
next time” was chosen by 62 participants (65.96%), “After listening, I think back
to how I listened and about what I might do differently next time” was chosen by
forty seven participants (50.00%), and least is “I will write down the words I do
not know after the listening test and look up the dictionary” was chosen by forty
three participants (45.74%). The finding was most of students had problem in
vocabularies and to know the unknown vocabularies the students should open the
dictionary, but in this case the students could not open the dictionary while
listening process. It same finding with a study by Jou (2010) told that the students
lack of vocabularies because while listening process can not open the tools to help
them cope their problem. Lin’s (2000) said that the problem lack vocabularies can
be coping by the student by looking the dictionaries.
Then, cognitive strategy “isdirectly relate to learning tasks and is used by
learners when they mentally and or physically manipulate material to be learner,
or when they apply a specific technique to a learning task.” (Mianmaleh, et al,
2015). In cognitive students used their spontaneous knowledge to cope the
problem in listening. Cognitive strategies is divided in two categories, they were
bottom-up and top-down strategies.
64
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Bottom-up strategies is strategy to guessing the meaning from the speaker
by word, sentence, and syntax. In this case, bottom-up is divided in five items.
The highest percentage in bottom-up is “I take notes of main points and
keywords” (60%) and followed by “while listening, I piece things together from
the details” for (59.57%), “While listening, I will notice the questions with who,
how, when, where and what in the content” for (52.13%), “While listening, I try
to understand each word” for 43.62%, and the last is “While listening, I repeat
words or phrases softly or mentally” for 43.62% in options “agree”. The finding
was taking notes was the highest than other items. It same like while they made
take a note it could help them remember about the difficult one, and they could
find out the meaning after listening process to add their knowledge. The result has
same with Chelli (2013) in Biskra University that most of student used take a note
to help them remember about what the speaker said. Watthajarukiat, Chatupe, and
Sukseemuang (2012) in his study for Thai undergraduate students told that when
the student taking a note it make they remember it and keep particular information
longer. Meanwhile, it different from the results by Chulim (2008) showed that
taking a note is the least strategies that students chose, he said that perhaps the
students need towork more on those listening stages and strategies.
Top-down strategies is the strategies that guessing the meaning by the
gesture or signal that speaker gives. In top-down strategies there were five items.
The highest one that student more frequently used is “I try to think in English
instead of Indonesia”with 70.21%, and followed by “I make guess about the topic
based on what has already been said” with 69.15%, “I listen for main ideas first
65
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
and then details” with 68.09%,%, “I predict or make hypotheses on text by titles”
with 58.19%, and the last is “I can guess the meaning based on the context” with
57.45% for “agree” option. The percentages showed that tried to think English
instead Indonesia was more chosen by EFL undergraduate students. When
learning something, try to focus about what the topic to get succeed in learning.
Especially in learning language, do not often used the own language when they
learning foreign language it could help the students got success in learning
language. Think English when the students learning English is more effectively
ways to get the meaning from the topic (Jou, 2010).
The last strategies in listening strategies issocio-affective strategies, it
refers to the environmentsthat have role play in to increase the students’ ability in
listening. Mianmahaleh, et al., (2015) “socio-affective strategies that happens
when language learners interact with each other to clarify a confusing point,
question the teacher for clarification, to solve problems when they participated in
a group discussion or cooperative learning group, or apply specific techniques to
lower their anxiety level”. In socio-affective there were two categories, they were
social strategies and affective strategies.
In social strategies the students need peers to help them when they were
have a problem to share the idea to get the meaning about the speaker said. In
socio affective there were five items that have related with socio strategies. Based
on the data, most of students use “I ask others for feedback on how to solve my
listening problems” with 63.83%, followed by “After listening, I ask my
classmates or teacher question I do not understand” with 62.77%, “I hope
66
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
teachers can teach me more skills to improve my listening comprehension” with
59.57%, “If I do not understand what someone says in English, I ask them to
repeat what they said” with 58.51%, and least chose by the students is “I practice
listening and speaking in English with my friends” with 52.13%. It told that asked
the others to help them and got the feedback from the others it could increase the
students understanding in listening, they shared the idea and got the conclusion
how to cope their problem in listening. It same with the result of the research that
conducted by Jou (2010) working with others, asking the information, sharing the
idea, also find the solution involved more linguistic knowledge (Teng, 2003 as
cited Jou, 2010).
The last strategies in socio-affective strategies isaffective strategies, it
referred about the self confidence of the students. In this case there were five
items that have related with affective strategies. Based on the data showed that “I
try to relax myself, breathe deeply, meditate, and clear my mind while listening.”
have the first strategies that most of students use with percentage 67.02%,
followed by “I try not to feel nervous as I listen to English” with 59.57%, “I
encourage myself through positive-self talk” with 58.51%, “I am confident in
understanding the whole contents” with 47.87%, and “While listening, I can keep
calm and not be nervous” in option “agree”. It means that most of students
needed calm from their self to make them could concentrate while listening
process. It also helps the students enjoying the listening, and get more focuses
also before they in listening process they had deep breathing that has contribute
67
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
for the students tofeel relax, and increase the students’ self-confidence (Jou,
2010).
In other hand, between male and female sometimes had different
strategies. In this case, from the data at figure 40 until figure 46 showed that
female was most frequently use “metacognitive strategy” with 61.10%, and
followed by “cognitive strategy” with 58.89%, and last is “socio-affecive
strategy” with 58.61% for option “agree”. It different from female that male
students often used is “cognitive strategies” with 60.90%, it followed by
“metacognitive strategies” with 58.78%, and the last is “socio-affective”
strategies with 55%. It showed that there are different strategies that male and
female students used in listening to increase their ability in listening. Female
students more organized about what should they did like they planned something
before listening, monitored while-listening, and after listening process they
evaluated about what they had done in listening and what should the do after it.
Male students chose cognitive strategy, where they used their knowledge
spontaneously to cope the problem in listening without planning before listening.
So, the conclusion is there was a different strategy that used by female students
and males students in listening comprehension. This finding implied that all of
strategy that male and female used in listening is not always efficient and
successful, it based on the ability of the students in used the strategy actively in
solve the problem (Mianmahaleh, 2015).
CHAPTER V
68
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter aims to explain the conclusion of the research and suggestion
for all of the students, teacher, and also to the future research.
5.1 Conclusion
The aim of this study was to analyze the listening strategies that EFL
undergraduate students used in listening at one of public universities In Jambi.
Based on the findings and discussion, there were many strategies that get impact
to increase the students ability in listening for EFL undergraduate students. There
were metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies, and socio-affective strategies.
Based on the result, it showed that most of students used metacognitve strategies
in got the comprehension in listening.
In metacognitive strategies, most of students used preparing the step or
measured to cover the problem that could be happened in listening process,
focused and concentrated while listening, and also recheck about what they had
done and what should they did to make it better. Then, in cognitive the students
often taking a note while listening to make them remember it in long term, and
also tried to think English while learning process. The last strategywas socio-
affective strategies, based on the result the strategy that most students used is they
should relaxing before they listening to make them concentrated and also they like
to asking others to make them got the comprehension in listening.
In addition, between male and female have different strategies. Female
like to usemetacognitve strategy, and followed by cognitive and socio-affective
69
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
strategy. For male, they used cognitive strategy, and followed by metacogntive
strategy, and socio-affective strategy.
5.2 Suggestion
Based on the finding of the research, the researcher suggests students to
use the strategies that appropriatewith them and also tries to the new strategies
that can increase their ability.In addition, the researcher recommend the teacher to
find out the interesting way in teaching listening, hence the students are easier to
comprehend the listening subject. Then, the other suggestions are addressed to
another researcher, where the next researcher can develop more information about
the listening strategies.
70
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
REFERENCES
Abedini, Rahimi, &Zare-ee. (2013). Investigating learning English strategies and

English needs of undergraduate students at the national university of Laos.
Canadian center of science and education, 6(10),57-71.
Abdalhamid, F. (2012).Listening comprehension strategies of Arabic-speaking

ESL learners.Calorado State University.
Afshar, H. S.,&Hamzavi, R. (2014).Listening strategy use, test anxiety and test

performance of intermediate and advanced Iranian EFL learners. Applied
research on English language, 3(2), 101-116.
Al-Alwan, A.,Asassfeh, S.,& Al-Shboul, Y. (2013). EFL learners' listening

comprehension and awareness of metacognitive strategies: How are they
related?.Canadian center of science and education,6(9), 31-39.
Bidabadi, F. S.,&Yamat, H. (2011). The relationship between listening strategies

used by Iranian EFL freshman university students and their listening
proficiency levels. English language teaching,4(1), 26-32.
Bidabadi, S. F.,&Yamat, H. (2013).EFL learners’ perceptions towards meta-

cognitive strategy use in English language listening. Journal of Language
Studies, 13 (3), 31-43.
Birjandi, P., &Rahimi, A. H. (2012).The effect of metacognitive strategy

instruction on the listening performance of EFL students.International
Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 495-517.
Chelli, S. (2013).An investigation of the Listening strategies used by second-year

EFL students at BiskraUniversity. Jurnalilmumanusia danmasyarakat. (6).
52-68.
Chulim, F. D. (2008). The use of listening learning strategies by lenguainglesa

students in five Mexican universities: Preliminary results. Memorias del
ivforonacional de estudios en lenguas, 470-479.
Cozby, P. C.,& Bates, S. C. (2012).Methods in behavioral research. New York:

The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson
Education, Inc.
71
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research. London:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. New York: Oxford

University Press, Inc.
Ghoneim, N. M.. M. (2013). The listening comprehension strategies used by

college students to cope with the aural problems in EFL classes: An
analytical study. English Language Teaching, 6(2).100-112.
Gilakjani, P.A., &Ahmadi, R.M. (2011).A study of factors affecting EFL learners'
English listening comprehension and the strategies for
improvement.Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(5), 977-988.
Hung, J. C., Teng, H. C.,&Kuo, J. M. (2002). Taiwanese freshmen’s listening

strategies watching an interactive CD-ROM.
NasionalHuweiUniversitasSainsdanTeknologi,26, 65-74.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2008).Educational research: Quantitative,

rd
qualitative, and mixed approaches (3 ed.). Boston: Sage Publications, Inc.
Jou, Y. J. (2010). A study of English listening strategies applied by technological

university students.Journal of TOKO University.4(2), 1-16.
Lavraskas, P. J. (2008). Survey research method.USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Lin, C. Y.,&Gan, X. N. (2014).Taiwanese college students’ use of English

listening strategies and self-regulated learning.International Journal on
Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 2(5), 57-65.
Mianmahaleh, S. A.,&Rahimy, R. (2015).An investigation of the listening

comprehension strategies used by Iranian EFL learners. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature,4(1), 255-260.
Nowrouzi, S., Shim, S. T., Zareian, G., &Nimehchisalem, V. (2014).Self-

perceived listening comprehension strategies Used by Iranian EFL
students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English
Literature, 3(6), 35-41.
Oktavia, S. (2014).Students anxiety in speaking EFL in one of senior high school

in Kota Jambi.University of Jambi.
Ratebi, Z. &Amirian, Z. (2013). Use of metacognitive strategies in listening

comprehension by Iranian university students majoring in English: A
comparison between high and low proficient listeners. Journal of Studies
in Education, 3(1).140-154.
72
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Suwarni, Y. (2014). Challenges Encountered by English Study Program Students

in Listening Subject at One Public University in Jambi. University of
Jambi.
Teng, H. C. (1998).A study of EFL listening comprehension strategies.Annual

convention and exposition of the teachers of English to speakers of other
languages, 1-19.
Vandergrift, L. (1997). Facilitating second language listening comprehension:

Acquiring successful strategies.ELT Journal, 53(3), 168-176.
Watthajarukiat, T.,Chatupote, M.,&Sukseemuang (2012).An investigation of

English listening strategies used by Thai undergraduate students in public
universities in the South.Jurnal Liberal,4(2), 1-17.
73
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
APPENDIX A
INVITATION LETTER
Title: English Listening Strategies Used by EFL Undergraduate Students: A

Survey Study at One Public University in Jambi
Dear Students,
I am GebyWiraPratiwi (A1B211036), one of English teacher training
students from Jambi University would like to conduct a research on “English
Listening Strategies Used by EFL Undergraduate Students: A Survey Study at
One Public University in Jambi”. The purpose of the project is to examine English
listening strategies that used by EFL undergraduate students at one public
university in Jambi.
In the study, you will be asked to complete a questionnaire. In the

questionnaire, there are demographic backgrounds and several questions. If you
are willing to participate in the study, I do appreciate it if you contact me back by
emailing me at gebywirapratiwi@rocketmail.com or text my phone number
085266844315. Then, I will send you a consent form and a questionnaire. Your
records will be used for research purposes only and all data will be kept
confidential. I do appreciate your participation in my study.
Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
GebyWiraPratiwi
74
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONCENT FORM
Title: English Listening Strategies Used by EFL Undergraduate Students: A

Dear Students,
I am GebyWiraPratiwi, a student of English teacher training in Jambi
University. I am currently conducting a study on English listening strategy that
used by undergraduate students. The purpose of the study is to find out and
investigate the English listening strategy that used by the undergraduate students
for English study program. Attached here is the questionnaire for the finding of
this research. It will take you about 15 minutes to complete them. I kindly invite
you to take part in this study by filling in the questionnaire.
However, your participation in the study is completely voluntary. Even if
you decide to participate, you may skip any questions that you do not like to
answer or withdraw your participation at any time without negative consequences.
The identities of all people who participate in the study will remain pseudonym.
Your responses will be used as data for writing up a bachelor thesis which will be
submitted to Jambi University, in 2015. The results of the study will be presented
at my final examination to get my bachelor degree and/or published in academic
journals.
Taking part in this study will not cause any risks to you. Also, you will not
have any direct benefits. But it is assumed that the study will enhance our
understanding of issues and concerns related to English listening strategy that
used by EFL undergraduate students. If you have questions about the study, you
may contact me by email at gebywirapratiwi@rocketmail.comor text my phone
number 085266844315. I do appreciate your participation in my study.
I have read, or have read to me, the above study and have had an
opportunity to ask questions, which have been answered to my satisfaction. I
agree voluntarily to participate in the study as described.
___________________ Date:
Participant’s Signature
________________________ Date:
Researcher’s Signature
75
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
APPENDIX C
Summary of Previous Studies
Name Title Sample Design and Result

and Year Instrument
Teng A study of 51 freshman of - Quantitative The compensation strategy
(1998) EFL listening science and method was more frequently and
comprehension technology - Questionnaire followed by cognitive,
strategies faculty in metacognitive, social and
national affective strategy.
Yunlin
University in
Taiwan
Chulim The use of 796 English - Quantitative The result was “focus on
(2008) listening students (570 method getting the information to
strategies by women, 221 - Questionnaire. answer the question” was the
lenguainglesa men, and 5 not most chosen by the students
students in five reported sex) in listening. The least
Mexican strategies that students used
universities: were “taking notes while
Preliminary listening”. In the strategy
results that female and male use in
listening had same strategies
use by five Mexican
universities.
Yang A study of 160 students in - Quantitative Most of students using
(2009) metacognitive second grades method directed attention for best
strategies in Chinese - Listening test strategies that increase their
employed by university - Questionnaire ability. Second was selective
english attention and self-
listeners in an management. The least
EFL setting strategy is monitoring.
76
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Jou A Study of (110 males, - Quantitative Student was seldom used
(2010) English and 129 method Metacognitive strategies.

listening females) from - Questionnaire About cognitive strategies,
strategies a technological - Test most of students focus of
applied by university in vocabulary, grammar to
technological southern answer the question. Socio-
university Taiwan affective strategy, most of
students students seldom to asking the
question to get clearly
explanation.
Bidabadi The 92 students - Quantitative Most of students used

and relationship were selected method metacognitive first and
Yamat between from 120 - Oxford cognitive strategy. The last is
(2011) listening students Placement Test socio-affective strategy. The
strategies used (OPT) researcher found that there is
by Iranian EFL - Questionnaire significant and positive
freshman relationship between
university listening strategies and
students and listening proficiency.
their listening
proficiency
levels
Watthajar An 146 students - Quantitative The most strategy that

ukiat, Investigation who chose method students use is cognitive
Chatupe, of english randomly from - Questionnaire. strategy, and followed by
and listening four - Listening test metacognititve and
Sukseem strategies used universities compensation strategy. The
uang by Thai least is memory strategy.
(2012) undergraduate
students in
public
universities in
the South
Al- EFL learners’ 386 students - Quantitative Problem solving had the
Alwan, listening (207 female method higher response of students

77
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
Asassfeh, comprehension and 179 male) - Questionnaire and the lower was person
and Al- and awareness knowledge. There was
Shboul of significant correlation
(2013) metacognitive between metacognitive
strategies: strategies and listening
How are they comprehension.
related?
Bidabadi EFL learners 84 Iranian EFL - Mix-method The result is directed
and perception female - Questionnaire knowledge is more chosen
Yamat towards meta- freshmen in a - Interview than planning and evaluation,
(2013) cognitive university in problem-solving, and
strategy use in Iran personal knowledge by the
English students to understand the
language listening task
learning
Chelli An 70 students - Quantitative Most of students used
(2013) investigation who registered method cognitive and socio affective

of the listening 2010/2011 in - Questionnaire to improved their ability in
strategies used academic year - Think aloud listening.
by second-year
EFL students
at Biskra
University
Ghoneim The listening 40 students (20 - Quantitative The advanced group students
(2013) comprehension students in method used top downstrategies

strategies used advanced - Think aloud more than the intermediate
by college group and 20 technique ones.
students to students in
cope with the intermediate
aural problem group)
in EFL classes:
An analytical
study
Ratebi Use of 60 sixty - Quantitative The most level of
and metacognitive freshman method metacognitive awareness was

Amirian strategies in under-graduate - Test problem solving, directed
(2013) listening students (23 - Questionnaire attention, mental translation,
comprehension males and 37 planning evaluation, and the
by Iranian females) lowest was personal
university knowledge
students
majoring in
English: A
78
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
comparison
between high
and low
proficient
listeners
Afshar Listening 80 EFL - Quantitative Advanced group was more

and strategy use, learners (40 method frequently in using listening
Hamzavi test anxiety students for - Questionnaire strategy and it gave positive
(2014) and test advanced effect on EFL learners’
performance of group and 40 listening strategy used.
intermediate students for About their anxiety test, the
and advanced intermediate researcher found that
Iranian EFL group. advanced students had lower
learners level of test anxiety than
intermediate students.
Nawrouzi Self-perceived 100 college - Quantitative The students-perceived in
, Shim, listening students that method using this strategy was in

Zaerian, comprehension selected - Questionnaire low level. The students often
and strategies used randomly from used attending out of classes
Nihemhc- by four like conferences with native
hisalem Iranian EFL universities speakers
(2014) Students
Mianma- An 76 students (38 - Quantitative Most of students of student

haleh and Investigation males and 38 method chose metacognitive
Rahimy of the listening females) - Test strategies to get their
(2015) comprehension - Questionnaire comprehension in listening
strategies used and low level of students
by Iranian EFL chose socio-affective
learners strategies.
79
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
APPENDIX D
DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND AND QUESTIONNAIRE

Title: English Reading Strategies among EFL Undergraduate Students: A
DEMOGRAPHIC
BACKGROUND Name or Preferred Pseudonym:
Place of birth:
The name and location of senior

high school:
University of Origin
Semester
Gender:
Age:
80
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
QUESTIONNAIRE
Direction: Please put the symbol(√) on your choice for strongly agree, agree, not
sure, disagree, and strongly disagree in the following statements.
NOTE:
SA “means” Strongly Agree, A “means” Agree, DA “means” Disagree, SD
“means”Strongly disagree, NS “means” Not Sure
The strategies that I prefer to

N Strategy choose in Listening activity SA A DA SD NS
o
1. 1. (Metacognitive I clarify the objectives of an

strategy) anticipated listening task and/or
propose strategies for handing it.
2. Before listening, I prepare my
Pre-listening mind to concentrate
3. Before listening, I request myself
to make progress
4 Before listening, I think of similar
texts that I may have listened to
5 Before I start to listen, I have a
plan in my head for how I am
going to listen
6 While listening. I do not
understand if I am unfamiliar with
speakers’ accents
7 While listening, I will check what
While-Listening part of content I do not understand
8 While listening, I will double
check again for my answer
9 I am aware of my inattention and
correct it while doing listening test
10 I try to listen for specific details to
see whether I can understand them
11 After listening, I think back to how
I listened and about what I might
do differently next time.
81
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
12 After Listening, I think back to the

Post- Listening quality of my strategy use (for
example planning, inferencing)
and about how I can do better next
time.
13 After listening, I reflect on my
problems, such as the key words
that I do not understand
14 After listening, I evaluate how
much I could understand
15 I will write down the words I do
not know after the listening test
and look up the dictionary
16 2. Cognitive Strategy While listening, I will notice the
questions with who, how, when,
where and what in the content.
17 While listening, I try to understand
Bottom-up each word
18 While listening, I repeat words or
phrases softly or mentally
19 While listening, I piece things
together from the details
20 I take notes of main points and
keywords
21 I listen for main ideas first and

then details
22 I predict or make hypotheses on
text by titles
23 Top-down I can guess the meaning based on
the context
24 I try to think in English instead of
Indonesia
25 I make guess about the topic based
on what has already been said
26 3. Socio-affective If I do not understand what
Strategy someone says in English, I ask
them to repeat what they said
27 After listening, I ask my
82
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
classmates or teacher question I do

not understand
28 Social Strategies I hope teachers can teach me more
skills to improve my listening
comprehension
29 I ask others for feedback on how
to solve my listening problems
30 I practice listening and speaking in
English with my friends.
31 While listening, I can keep calm
and not be nervous
32 Affective I am confident in understanding
the whole contents
33 Strategies I encourage myself through
positive-self talk
34 I try to relax myself, breathe
deeply, meditate, and clear my
mind while listening.
35 I try not to feel nervous as I listen
to English
Adapted FromCheng (2002 as cited in Jou, 2010); Oxford (1990 as cited
inWatthajarukiat,Chatupote,&Sukseemuang, 2012); Vandergrift and Tafaghodtari (2010 as cited
Abdalhamid, 2012).
83
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
APPENDIX E
RELIABILITY
Case Processing Summary

%
C Valid 100.0
a
s a .0
Excluded
e
s Total 100.0
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's N of
Alpha Items
.909 35
Item Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation
4.0500 .39403
4.4000 .50262
4.2000 .89443
3.7000 1.12858
4.2000 .52315
4.0000 1.07606
84
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
4.3000 .65695
4.2000 .89443
4.1500 .93330
4.3500 .48936
3.9000 .91191
4.2500 .85070
4.2000 .76777
4.2500 .85070
3.7000 1.26074
3.2500 1.01955
4.4500 .60481
3.9000 .91191
3.3500 1.08942
85
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
3.6500 1.03999
3.6000 1.23117
3.4000 1.09545
4.0500 .75915
3.9000 .96791
3.7500 1.06992
4.2000 .69585
4.1500 .74516
4.4000 .50262
3.9000 .96791
3.8500 1.08942
4.1500 .93330
86
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
3.9500 .75915
4.2000 .61559
4.2000 .89443
4.4000 .99472
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Scale
Mean if Variance if Corrected Item-

Item Item Total Cronbach'sAlpha
Deleted Deleted Correlation if Item Deleted
136.500 231.000 .497 .908

0
136.150
228.450 .553 .907
0
136.350
221.397 .560 .905
0
136.850 224.134 .346 .909
0
136.350
234.555 .142 .910
0
136.550
238.155 -.067 .916
0
136.250 223.566 .667 .905
0
136.350
218.450 .675 .904
0
87
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
136.400 226.989 .329 .909

0
136.200
234.379 .166 .910

0
136.650
231.082 .187 .911

0
136.300
224.537 .464 .907

0
136.350
221.397 .662 .904

0
136.300
218.958 .692 .904

0
136.850
215.292 .547 .906

0
137.300
214.537 .721 .903

0
136.100
222.516 .788 .904

0
136.650
225.292 .401 .908

0
137.200
214.379 .675 .903

0
136.900
217.884 .591 .905

0
88
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
136.950 213.103 .626 .904
0
137.150
214.661 .662 .903

0
136.500
228.474 .351 .908

0
136.650
228.555 .260 .910

0
136.800
226.168 .304 .910

0
136.350
226.345 .491 .907

0
136.400
230.253 .278 .909
0
136.150
229.503 .482 .907

0
136.650
225.292 .374 .908

0
136.700
220.326 .482 .907

0
136.400
222.147 .506 .906

0
136.600
231.516 .217 .910

0
89
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
136.350 226.134 .572 .906
0
136.350
223.292 .487 .907

0
136.150
219.292 .571 .905

0
Scale Statistics
Std. N of
Mean Variance Deviation Items
1.4055E2 237.103 15.39814 35
90
Id Doc: 589c8c2181944d3e10493f2c
APPENDIX F
CURRICULUM VITAE
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Name GebyWiraPratiwi
Place/Date of MuaraBungo, June, 14 1993
Birth
Sex Female
Status Unmarried
Postal Address
Nationality Indonesian
E-mail gebywirapratiwi@rocketmail.com
Hobby
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
S-1 Faculty of Teacher Training and
2011-2015 Educational, EnglishStudy Program at Jambi
University
2007-2010 SMA N 1 MuaraBungo

2004-2007 SMP N 1 MuaraBungo
1998-2004 SD N 101 MuaraBungo
91

Skipsi

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Skipsi

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Dicetak pada tanggal 2018-04-28

ENGLISH LISTENING STRATEGIES USED BY EFL

Submitted to the English Education Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the

ENGLISH STUDY PROGRAM

LANGUAGE AND ARTS DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

I, GEBY WIRA PRATIWI, A1B211036, clarifies that this thesis is my

diploma to any other universities or other institutes or tertiary education.

Jambi, July 2015

GEBY WIRA PRATIWI

Life is short, hard, but beautiful to go through it

Try to pass the way, and enjoy the journey

This thesis is dedicated to:

My Grandmothers, Father, Mother, and my Sister

Pratiwi, Geby Wira (2015). English listening strategies used by EFL

Key word: Language learning strategies, Listening Strategies, Listening

become strong people, more patient, and grateful, and so on.

in finishing this thesis. I dedicate this thesis to my beloved grandmothers,

Then, I would like to say thanks to my first supervisor, Amirul Mukminin,

guidance, motivation, support, correction, solutions and patience, in writing this

thesis. So I can finish this thesis and my study on time.

Next, thanks to my examiner, Eddy haryanto, S.Pd., M.Ed., Ph.D,Makmur

suggestions that really contribute to this thesis.

supervisorIndri Anastasia, SS, MA who has given me motivation and suggestions

things, whether it is academic and non academic during I study in English

always be patient to help me in giving information about lecturers and solving my

problem with my laptop.

Next, special thanks to my beautiful friends, (Ira as my spoiled and shrill

Thanks to mygeng friends as a team work in same supervisor (yukTiara, Titin,

thanks for my classmates (English regular A, 2011). I have helpful classmates in

Also thanks to my UNO friends, my second family that always together in 8

soon, and always remember “Takseorangpunsepintarkitasemua”. I miss you all.

And for abangHengkiSatriaEka Putra who has become my brother, friend

motivated me. Thanks to become my super abang.

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.4.1.3 Descriptive Survey Based on Socio-Affective Strategy 49

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Figure 1. Demographic biographical

Figure 24. Bottom-up Strategy “While listening, I piece things together

Appendix A: Invitation Letter 73

the study, and definition of key item.

1.1 Background of the Study

Listening has an important role in communication. Listening is a process

where students must understand grammar structures and vocabularies to acquire

the meaning of the communication (Mianmahaleh&Rahimy, 2015). Additionally,

position in communication.Additionally, according to Mendelsohn (1994 as cited

in Gilakjani&Ahmadi, 2011)in daily communication, people spent 45% of time in

listening, 30% in speaking, 16% in reading, and only 9% in writing. However, it

skill to increase students’ ability in listening (Mianmahaleh&Rahimy, 2015).Then,

ignored from other skills in learning language.

Although the ignorance of the listening skill in learning a foreign language

may prevent language learners from understanding speech in a foreign language,

including learning strategies in listening. Listening strategies help students in

language input and also to get success in learning language (Vandergrift,

1997).Learningstrategy is the strategy or technique that is used to learn

something. According to O’Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Russo, and

of component of learning process from the students such as planning, thinking

learning process. The second is cognitive strategies, it refers toknowledge that

The last is social-affectivestrategies; it refers to the individual behavior to other

person to get the information in learning process.

The importance of learning strategies in listening has been part of a

Yamat (2011), Birjandi, and Rahimi (2012), Watthajarukiat, Chatupe, and

Sukseemuang (2012), Al-Alwan, Asassfeh, and Al-Shboul (2013), Bidabadi and