LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY PROFILES ACROSS SELF-PERCEIVED SPEAKING LEVELS OF INDONESIAN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Abstract

Language learning strategies (LLS) may vary across learners, even when they study in the same speaking classroom. Although previous research has documented learners’ overall strategy preferences, less is known about whether LLS profiles differ according to self-perceived speaking ability among Indonesian lower-secondary EFL learners. Moreover, overall category-level descriptions may conceal differences in strategy use across learner groups. This study examined differences in LLS profiles among lower, medium, and higher self-perceived speaking groups of Indonesian junior high school EFL students. A focused secondary analysis was conducted using questionnaire data from 104 eighth-grade students at a public junior high school in Tebo Regency, Jambi Province, Indonesia. The analysis covered 28 LLS items based on Oxford’s (1990) taxonomy and 15 self-report items measuring speaking skills. Students were classified into three groups using empirical tertile cut points derived from their speaking self-perception scores. Descriptive statistics, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and Spearman rank correlations were used to analyze the data. The descriptive results showed that the lower group reported relatively higher cognitive and affective strategy scores, the medium group reported comparatively higher metacognitive, affective, and social strategy scores, and the higher group reported the highest compensation and memory strategy scores. Compensation was the only LLS category that differed significantly across the three groups (H = 15.736, p < .001, ε² = .136) and showed the strongest positive association with self-perceived speaking (ρ = .389, p < .001). These findings suggest that students’ reported strategy profiles vary according to their self-perceived speaking ability, particularly regarding compensation strategies for maintaining communication when linguistic resources are limited. The findings suggest that differentiated strategy instruction may be more appropriate than a uniform strategy package. Because the measures were self-reported, the group classifications represent relative speaking self-perceptions within this sample rather than standardized speaking proficiency levels.

Read More Abstract