learning resources available” (63,3%), and item 5: “I am responsible for my own learning” (56.7%).
Students also experience another aspect learning
strategies, such as item 16: “I find inter-active teaching-
learning sessions more effective than just listening to
lecture”(66,7), item 19: “My inner drive directs me towards
further development and improvement in my
learning”(66,7%), item 17: “ I find simulation in teaching- learning useful” (53,3%), item 20: “I regard problems as challenges” (50%).
Students also experience activities that should actively engage in order to become self-directed in their learning process. They endorse items that will lead them to learning
activities aspect, such as item 25: “ I rehearse and revise new
lessons” (60%), item 33: “I raise relevant questions in
teaching-learning sessions” (66,7%).
Regarding the items that are related with item
Evaluation and interpersonal skills aspect, they endorse item
41: “ I am able to identify my areas of strength and weakness” (50%), item 45: “I monitor whether I have accomplished my learning goals” (50%), item 46: “ I check my portfolio to review my progress” (53%), item 51: “I make use of any opportunities come across” (53%), item 57, “I
identify the need for inter-disciplinary links for maintaining
social harmony”(60%), item 58: “I am able to express my
ideas affectively in writing” (50%), item 59: I am able to
express my views freely” (50%), item 60: “ I find challenging to pursue learning in a culturally diverse milieu” (53,3%).
The questionnaire involves the items load on five subscales under five broad areas of self-directed learning. So, the result of the student score was divided into five categories. After examining the percentages of the students’ SRSSDL responses, the researcher calculated each score of the students manually by adding the score of each subscales. After adding all the score of each subscale, the final score is categorized into
three categories, which are “high self-directed learning”, “moderate self-directed learning”, and “low self-directed learning” The result is presented in the table below.
Table 4. 2
Students’ Scores from the Self-rating Scale of Self-directed Learning (SRSSDL) Students Indicator of SDL Total SDL Level Aware- ness Learning Strategies Learning activities Evaluation Inter- personal skills 1 36 30 35 37 32 171 Moderate 2 39 38 39 38 40 194 Moderate 3 38 46 38 28 36 186 Moderate 4 43 45 44 44 45 221 High 5 47 49 45 48 47 236 High 6 36 43 42 35 40 196 Moderate 7 44 36 40 35 41 196 Moderate 8 36 32 33 31 26 158 Moderate 9 49 43 36 33 40 201 Moderate 10 37 44 43 44 39 207 Moderate 11 38 39 39 37 39 192 Moderate 12 46 42 51 43 43 225 High 13 36 40 43 34 40 193 Moderate 14 48 44 42 46 38 218 Moderate 15 28 30 32 29 32 151 Moderate 16 33 35 30 32 32 162 Moderate 17 33 34 29 29 31 156 Moderate 18 35 30 28 31 28 152 Moderate 19 40 32 24 29 30 155 Moderate 20 36 29 26 32 29 152 Moderate 21 30 31 34 43 33 171 Moderate 22 34 40 38 40 42 194 Moderate 23 39 38 39 38 40 194 Moderate 24 35 40 30 40 37 182 Moderate 25 38 40 37 41 39 195 Moderate 26 39 38 39 38 40 194 Moderate 27 44 46 40 35 41 206 Moderate 28 36 40 43 34 40 193 Moderate
41
29 31 30 34 43 33 171 Moderate
30 36 43 42 35 40 196 Moderate
Based on the table 4.2, the classification of students’ self-directed learning skill can be viewed from the total score. The total score which reaches 60-140 is classified into “low self-directed learning”, 141-220 score is categorized into “moderate self-directed learning”, and 221-300 is categorized into “high self-directed learning”.
Table 4.2 shows there are 3 students who got high score in SRSSDL scale. They are student number 4 with the score 221, student number 5 with the score 236, and student number 12 with the score 225. The more score the students get, the higher level of self-directed learning they have. Students who are classified into high self-directed learners are considered to have adequate independency in learning English. They have clear learning goal. They are considered to be able to identify their lack and strength in learning English. However, they still need to maintain their learning process.
The next level below “High self-directed learning” is “moderate self-directed learning”. As we can see in the table 4.2, most of the students are categorized in “moderate self- directed learning” levels, which is 90% of the students. There are 26 students who are categorized in this level. They are student 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30. Although they have similar SRSSDL levels, they get different scores. The scores of the students range from 151 to 218. Students who are categorized into moderate self-directed learners have moderate independency in learning English. The improvement in some English aspects must be identified and evaluated. They also need teacher’s guidance to adopt better strategy to learn English.
Last but not least is “low self-directed learning” level. From the table above, it can be seen that there are no students who get low score in self-directed learning level, which means there are no student in thesis proposal seminar course that are classified in range that indicates low level of self- directed learning. This level ranges between 60 to 140.
Students in the low levels of self-directed learning must be considered guidance from the teacher and need any specific changes for improve their learning English; also re- structuring the methods of learning is needed. It is relieved to know that there are no students in thesis seminar proposal course who get this score, because it means that students have already passed a half way or even successful towards becoming a self-directed learning.
In short, fortunately there are no students who get score in low level of self-directed learning in thesis seminar proposal course, although only three students get score in high level of self-directed learning. The percentage of student who get “high self directed learning” level is only 10% of the total students. The highest score is 236 (student 5) and the lowest score is 151 (student 15), which is still far from the limit. The category that the students are mostly categorized is “moderate self-directed learning” level, because almost all of the students are categorized in this level (90%). It indicates that the students have the possibility to increase their self- directed learning level to “high self-directed learning” level. It can be seen from the most of the students score. Out of 26 students, 23 of their scores range above 150 and 4 of them got score above 200. It means that their scores are approaching the maximum score in this level, 220.
The last, mostly students get score in “moderate self- directed learning” level. Based on this fact, the researcher wondered that what make students got a lot of “moderate self- directed learning” level because they have positive self- awareness of themselves in the learning. It can be seen on the table 4.1, the students answered the most awareness aspect of the Self-Rating Scale of Self-Directed Learning ( SRSSDL) questionnaire. Awareness aspect of self-directed learning indicates that students understand the factors that contribute to become good self-directed learners. To get to the “high self-directed learning” level, students are required to maintain their self-directed learning level through keeping their positive self-awareness in the learning process. If they cannot maintain their self-directed learning level, their self-directed