PREFERENCES OF FACE-TO-FACE LEARNING VS ONLINE LEARNING OF

ENGLISH LANGUAGE AMONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN MALAYSIA

SALINA BINTI SULAIMAN

SITI NURUL FARZANA BINTI MOHAMAD NABORI

ROSSYAHIRAH NAJWA BINTI ROSLAN ZAINUDIN

ARISSA ASHIQIN BINTI MD KAMARU AL-AMIN

NUR ARDINI BINTI MUHAMMAD ZUKI

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION

UNIVERSITY SULTAN ZAINAL ABIDIN

GONG BADAK CAMPUS

DECEMBER 2019
 ABSTRACT

Learning styles determine how the students learn and achieve knowledge in

their education. However, which learning style is preferred the most by university

students in learning English? Therefore, to help the students, we have decided to do

a research regarding preferences of face-to-face learning vs online learning of

English language among university students in Malaysia. The research objectives

are to determine the students’ preference style in learning English language between

face-to-face learning and online learning and to analyse the frequency of students

asking questions during both of these methods. For the research methodology, the

data will be collected through online questionnaire. The respondents will be

answering a questionnaire that consists of two sections which are the demographic

profile and the students’ preference in learning English, also the frequency of asking

questions during face-to-face and online learning. The sample of our research is the

students from the first year and second year of Diploma in Teaching English as A

Second Language (TESL). We hope that this research will be beneficial and helpful

for the students to choose the best preference or method in learning English. The

finding shows that, the majority of the students with over 80% agree that they prefer

to learn through face-to-face classes than online learning. However, the frequency of

asking questions in online learning is higher than in face-to-face classes. Therefore,

our recommendation is learning does not have to involve only one particular style.

Instead, blended learning can be applied to satisfy the students’ needs in learning.
Table of Contents

DECLARATION LETTER ........................................................................................... 1

APPROVAL PAGE ..................................................................................................... 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... 3
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... 5
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................ 5

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 6

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 6
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ..................................................................... 7
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT .................................................................................. 8
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: ................................................................................ 9
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION: ................................................................................. 9
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ..................................................................... 9
1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ...................................................................... 10
1.7 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 10

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................... 11

2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 11
2.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...................................................................... 12
.............................................................................................................................. 12
2.2 LEARNING STYLE ......................................................................................... 13
2.2.1 INDEPENDENCE LEARNING .................................................................. 14
2.2.2 DEPENDENCE LEARNING...................................................................... 15
2.3 AFFECTIVE FILTER HYPOTHESIS ............................................................... 16
2.4 REVIEW OF RECENT STUDY ....................................................................... 17
2.5 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 19
3.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 19
3.1 RESEARCH APPROACH ............................................................................... 19
3.2 SAMPLING ..................................................................................................... 20
3.2.1 Population and Sample of the Study......................................................... 20
3.2.2 Sampling Technique ................................................................................. 20
3.3 DATA COLLECTION METHOD AND PROCEDURE ...................................... 21
3.3.1 METHOD .................................................................................................. 21
3.3.2 PROCEDURE ........................................................................................... 22
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 22
3.5 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 23

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS .......................................................................................... 24

4.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 24
4.1 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................... 25
4.1.1 SECTION A (SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC) ................................................... 25
4.1.2 SECTION B (QUESTIONNAIRES) ........................................................... 27
4.3 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................. 36
4.4 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 37

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 38

5.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 38
5.1 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 39
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 42
5.3 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 46

APPENDIX ............................................................................................................... 47
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 50
 DECLARATION LETTER
UNIVERSITY OF SULTAN ZAINAL ABIDIN

(UniSZA)

GONG BADAK CAMPUS,

21300, KUALA TERENGGANU,

TERENGGANU DARUL IMAN.

We hereby declare that this research is the result of our own investigation, except where otherwise
stated. Other sources are acknowledged by quote and bibliography is appended.

1. Name: Salina Binti Sulaiman

Signature: ________________ Date: ________________

2. Name:

Signature: ________________ Date: _________________

3. Name:

Signature: ________________ Date: _________________

4. Name:

Signature: ________________ Date: _________________

5. Name:

Signature: ________________ Date: _______________

1
 APPROVAL PAGE
UNIVERSITY OF SULTAN ZAINAL ABIDIN

(UniSZA)

GONG BADAK CAMPUS,

21300, KUALA TERENGGANU,

TERENGGANU DARUL IMAN.

DATE: 22 DECEMBER 2019

To the Dean,

We recommend that the paper by Salina binti Sulaiman, Nur Ardini binti
Muhammad Zuki, Arissa Ashiqin binti Md Kamaru Al-Amin, Rossyahirah Najwa binti
Roslan Zainudin and Siti Nurul Farzana binti Mohamad Nabori entitled “Preferences
Of Face-To-Face Learning Vs Online Learning Of English Language Among
University Students In Malaysia” be accepted by the Faculty of Languages and
Communication as evidence of research competence on the part of one seeking
Diploma in Teaching English as Second Language.

We understand that this paper is being submitted as a proof of a capacity for

research and its reporting.

___________________

(Wahidah binti Abd. Wahid)

Supervisor in Charge

__________________

(Prof. Madya Dr. Zulazhan bin Ab. Halim)

Head of Centre of English Language Studies

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, we would like to say alhamdulillah, thank you Allah S.W.T

and express our gratefulness to the Almighty for His blessings that is bestowed upon

us because without His permission, we would not be able to complete the project

paper in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Diploma in Teaching English as

a Second Language (TESL).

This acknowledgement must perform double duty. In completing dissertation,

we have developed upon countless act of support, generosity and guidance.

Perhaps more important, in engaging with challenges of life, we have depended

upon steadfast colleagues, lecturers and leaders. This is an important opportunity for

us to thank them for their support.

We wish to express the deepest appreciation to everyone who has

contributed their expertise to the completion of this study. Firstly, our gratitude does

to our dedicated supervisor, Puan Wahidah binti Abdul Wahid, who has been

advising and assisting us all the way in completing this study. Without her

supervision and constant help, this study will not have been possible. We sincerely

appreciate and thank her for her understanding, cooperation and advice.

3
 We honestly thankful to the Dean, Faculty of Languages and Communication

Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA), for supporting us during our stay in here.

We also would like to thank our beloved family and friends who continuously gave is

support and words of encouragement throughout the completion of the study. In

addition, we also wish to express our appreciation to TESL students as our

respondents for their cooperation in completing the questionnaire.

Lastly, thank you to our groupmates for all the hard works and positive

thinking. It would have been possible to finish this paper without each and every one

of your effort. Even though we have a lot of different opinions but we still can be

open minded and managed to settle the differences. It is really nice to work with all

of you.

4
 LIST OF FIGURES

1 2.1 Theoretical Framewrok 12

2 4.1 Gender 25

3 4.2 Current year of studying 25

4 4.3 Preferences of learning English through F2F 27

5 4.4 Learning through F2F is more motivating 27

6 4.5 Communication in English with friends during F2F 29

7 4.6 Communication in English with lecturer during F2F 30

8 4.7 Participation during F2F class 31

9 4.8 Often ask questions 32

10 4.9 Frequency of asking question in F2F class 32

11 4.10 Confident in asking questions during F2F class 34

12 4.11 Involvement in class activity 35

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

TESL Teaching English as a Second Language

UniSZA University Sultan Zainal Abidin

F2F Face-to-face

5
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presented the review of learning English language among

university students using their preferred methods. The first section has discussed

how English language is widely used globally nowadays (Section 1.1). Next is the

problem statement which was the recognition of the preferred methods by students

in learning English language (Section 1.2). This was followed by research objectives

and questions that consisted of how the way of students’ preference of learning

English language would be determined and analyzed (Section 1.3 & 1.4). Section 1.5

outlined the significance of the study on how this research would be beneficial for

students and educators. The next section was the limitation on how it would affect

the study (Section 1.6). The last section summarized the whole chapter in general

context (Section 1.7).

6
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Nowadays, learning English is important to any individual since it is a global

lingua franca. There are about 375 million English as first language speakers and

750 million English as second language speakers (Reddy, 2016). It was crucial for

students to learn English since most of the information displayed on the internet was

in English. More than 80% of the sites use English as the medium language while

20% of the rest use the other languages (Alfitri, 2012). There were two methods that

students could choose to learn the language, either face-to-face or online learning so

they could learn at ease. Understanding the beliefs of learners is important because

it helps teachers to understand learners’ approaches to language learning and

learners’ use of learning strategies better so that they can plan language instruction

appropriately (Horwitz, 1999). Therefore, this first chapter would focus on what was

the students’ preference in learning so that they could learn more effectively.

7
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

The Internet has made online learning possible and many researchers and

educators are interested in online learning to enhance and improve student learning

outcomes (Pape, 2010). In order for the students to have a better learning

experience, the educators should have recognized their students’ preferred way of

learning. Sometimes, teachers are not aware of the methods they use; consequently,

choosing activities for the classroom much depends on their preference or their

teaching style (Nahum, 2015).

However, in real situation, educators tend to deliver their lesson using

teaching strategies that they are used to it. For instance, if the educators put more

focus on face-to-face learning, the other students who preferred online learning will

be affected especially on their way of understanding since every student have their

own learning styles. The learning styles of the students influence their ability to

acquire information and respond to the learning environment (Azlinda, 2006). Hence,

this study would enlighten our view to identify the most preferred way of learning to

result in a more effective understanding when learning the language.

8
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE:

I. To determine the students’ preference medium in learning English language

between face-to-face learning and online learning.

II. To analyse the frequency of students asking questions during face-to-face

learning.

III. To analyse the frequency of students asking question during online learning.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION:

I. What is the students’ preference in learning English language between face-

to-face learning and online learning?

II. What is the frequency of students asking questions during face-to-face

learning?

III. What is the frequency of students asking questions during online learning?

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This research would be beneficial for students as they could decide their

preferences between face-to-face and online learning. Their chosen preferences will

be helpful for them to learn comfortably and understand better in learning English.

Moreover, this would be a catalyst for them to improve their grades as they had

acknowledged what were the most effective methods for them to learn as university

students. This finding may also enlighten the educators as it would be easier for

them to handle the teaching and learning session and give freedom for the students

to choose their preferred method.

9
1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The limitations of the present study, namely the sample, procedure and field

of the study have to be acknowledged. The scope of the study was limited to the

respondents of the survey. The sample was chosen from the population of Diploma

in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) in Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin

(UniSZA), Kuala Terengganu.

As this study only utilized online questionnaire, the results depended solely on

the students’ honesty in responding to the items in it. There was also the probability

where students might not answer what they truly believe as they might answer

according to what others want them to answer.

Lastly, there will be no variety in the respondents as it is only concerned to

TESL students. The students from other courses could not be included in this study

as most of them do not major in courses subject that related to English. Hence, this

study will fully focus on the TESL students as they are the students that studying and

majoring in English.

1.7 SUMMARY

This chapter discussed about the importance of knowing the preferences of

students when they were learning English language in university and what kind of

challenges that the researcher would encounter when the study was conducted. The

study will be continued and discussed deeper in the next chapter which was Chapter

2, Literature Review.

10
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the literature review of the study. Section 2.1 discusses

the theoretical framework which includes several theories that related to the

research. Next, section 2.2 presents the learning style theories which focus on

independence and dependence learning, also the students’ behavior and

engagements in the classroom. In section 2.3, it discusses the students’ participation

on how they ask questions based on the affective filter hypothesis. Section 2.4

presents the review of recent studies which related to our research. Lastly, Section

2.5 summarizes the whole chapter in general context.

11
2.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Preferences of Face-to-Face Vs Online

Learning of English Language Among
University Students In Malaysia

Learning Style
Thories Monitor Model Theories

Independence Affective Filter

Learning Dependence
Learning Hypothesis

In this study, learning styles, learning theories and monitor model theories are

explained in detail on how all of these related to this research. Firstly, a learning style

is not in itself ability but rather a preferred way of using ones’ ability (Stenberg,

1994). There are several learning styles and this study is focusing on independence

and dependence learning style on how students learn through face-to-face and

online learning. The last theory is monitor model hypothesis where it focuses on

affective filter hypothesis.

12
2.2 LEARNING STYLE

According to Sun and Chen (2016), Moore and Kearsley defined online

learning or distance education as the teaching and planned learning in which

teaching normally occurs in a different place from learning, requiring communication

through technologies as well as special institutional organization. Another method for

learning is by having face-to-face learning. It can be defined as two-way interaction

between teachers and students which in classroom there is an interaction between

two parties and they can interact face-to-face (Aminuddin et al., 2014).

13
2.2.1 INDEPENDENCE LEARNING

One of the ways to learn is through online learning where it is more suitable

for field independence learner. According to Vicky (2014), “independent study is a

process, a method and a philosophy of education in which a student acquires

knowledge by his or her own efforts and develops the ability for enquiry and critical

evaluation”. This is aligned with constructivism theory where people construct their

own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and

reflecting on those experiences. Moreover, it is beneficial for students as Tam (2000)

highlighted that the perceived benefits of constructivists learning may be particularly

valuable where the teaching of complex skills such as problem-solving or critical

thinking skill are concerned.

Besides, Meyer et al., (2008) suggested that the key ingredient in

independent learning was the shift of responsibility for the learning process from the

teacher to the student. The key elements are self-motivation and ‘enabling

environment’. Self-motivation was identified as necessary for successful independent

learning and enabling environment as one which included an appropriate ‘physical

environment’ (Meyer et al., 2008).

14
2.2.2 DEPENDENCE LEARNING

Another way to learn is through face-to-face learning which suitable for field-

dependence learner and closely related with behaviourism theory. Behaviourism is a

perspective of learning that focuses on changes in individuals’ observable

behaviours – changes in what people say or do (Seifert & Sutton, 2009). Field-

dependence learner tends to look to teacher and peers as a source of guidance and

learns only what is required (Hoda & Alireza, 2018). Hence, educator support is

crucial for dependent-learner as it encourages them to participate actively during

learning session.

According to Arif and Mehtap (2006), they explained the characteristics of

field-dependence learner where the person relies on the surroundings perceptual

field, have difficulty providing structures to ambiguous questions and have difficulty

retrieving information from long-term memory. In field-dependent mode of perceiving,

parts of the field are reflected as separated from the organized ground and the

learner depend on the environment of the learning situation for structure (Nahla,

2014).

15
2.3 AFFECTIVE FILTER HYPOTHESIS

This affective filter is like a barrier that can prevent students from acquiring

second language. People with high affective filter will lower their intake whereas

people with low affective filter allow more input into their language acquisition device

(Du, 2009). Based on research in second language acquisition, the affective filter

hypothesis has identified three kinds of affective variables: motivation, self-esteem

and anxiety (Yang, 2012).

There are many kinds of students’ engagement in learning. However, this

study will explain more on the frequency of students asking questions in face-to-face

versus online class and how the students’ motivation and anxiety level are related to

it. Firstly, motivation is seen as a pre-requisite of and a necessary element for

student engagement in learning (Sitwat & Zyngier, 2012). Students with high

motivation in learning second language will tend to ask more questions freely and

spontaneously in face-to-face classroom and vice versa. As Suraya et al., (2015)

mentions “Online social networking educational activities may increase students’

participation in the classroom, particularly among quieter students”.

Then, others have suggested that the less confrontational or personal nature

of e-learning might encourage shyer students to engage more (Hobbs, 2002). It has

been agreed that anxiety is a big problem that prevents students to perform in their

language class. Hence, students with low anxiety level can just point out questions in

face-to-face classroom while students with high anxiety level will choose to ask their

questions in the online class. To conclude, some students prefer one method than

the other and vice versa since they have different personality.

16
2.4 REVIEW OF RECENT STUDY

A recent study by Paechter and Maier (2010) aimed to obtain a

comprehensive view of students’ experiences and preferences in e-learning in

Austria. It investigated which learning experiences, online learning or face-to-face

learning contributes most for course satisfaction to students. This research was

conducted using a survey to students attending Austrian universities and a sample of

2196 students from 16 universities in Austria that offer e-learning courses and from

13 selections of universities of applied sciences. The main finding of this research

was students reported a high degree of satisfaction and gave favorable evaluations

towards e-learning in their universities. The result of this study relates to students’

participation and their preferred learning styles and fully justifies the need of our

research.

Suzanne and Heather (2014) conducted a study comparing students rating of

instruction in online and face-to-face (F2F) in higher education courses. 2,994

graduate and 5,277 undergraduate students from College of Education, University of

Wyoming had been assigned to online or face-to-face classroom across seven

semesters. This research was quantitative and using questionnaires to collect the

data. The student ratings had been collected from online and F2F that yielded similar

findings. The significant differences that they found between the two delivery

methods were in Communication, Faculty/Student Interaction, Grading, Instructional

Methods, Course Outcomes and Student Effort. Excluding Student Effort, F2F

ratings were higher than online ratings and in every comparison, ratings favored

face-to-face courses. In conclusion, this research has shown significance differences

in student/teacher communication such as asking and answering questions in the

two different learning methods.

17
 A recent study by Al-Rahmi et al., (2018) discussed the students’ intention to

utilize e-learning in higher education courses. The study was conducted in higher

education institutions in Malaysia particularly Faculty of Computing, University of

Technology, Malaysia (UTM) involving 106 undergraduate students for random

sampling. The paper was quantitative as the methodology used was questionnaire

where it was being overseen by an enumerator to collect data from different students

with different nationality. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version

20 and Smart PLS software were used for data analysis. The main finding from the

study was it had six hypotheses where they were all supported and verified. There

was significant relationship between the factors proposed in the hypotheses, such as

satisfaction and perceived usefulness, and the intention of using e-learning among

university students in Malaysia. To conclude, this study provided us the view of

factors that influenced the students preferred way of learning where this information

is essential for our study.

2.5 SUMMARY

This chapter discussed the meaning of face-to-face learning and online

learning and the theories related to the preference of students on learning English

language. The study will be continued and discussed deeper in the next chapter

which is Chapter 3, Methodology.

18
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the methodology of the study. Section 3.1 discusses

the research design and approach where the study is using quantitative method.

Next, the chapter discusses the sampling in detail and how the participants of the

study are chosen (Section 3.2). Section 3.3 presents the data collection method and

procedure where it explains the process of collecting data. In Section 3.4, it

discusses how the data will be analyzed. Lastly, Section 3.5 summarizes the whole

chapter in a general context.

3.1 RESEARCH APPROACH

In finding out which medium of learning style is more preferred, a research

method of questionnaire had been carried out. There are three basic components in

a research approach and one of it is the research methods that are ways to get

information from the sample population (Grover, 2015). Hence, this study

accustomed with a quantitative research that dealt with quantifying and analysis

variables in order to get results (Apuke, 2017). This was because one of the features

in quantitative approach that Apuke (2017) cited for this method is it employs

strategies of inquiry such as experiments and surveys, and collect data on

predetermined instruments that yield statistical data (Creswell, 2003). These features

were corresponding with the need of interpreting the research data into data

numbering and steps taken to contemplate the sample populations chosen.

19
3.2 SAMPLING

3.2.1 Population and Sample of the Study

Population is the group of people, events or things of interest that researcher

want to investigate (Kumar et al., 2013). The target populations for this study were

the first and second year students of Diploma TESL in UniSZA Gong Badak Campus

since these were the students within this study’s reach. The population of this study

stood at 93 students (second year) and 96 students (first year) of Diploma TESL.

The portion of the population that is studied is called a sample of the population

(Nworgu, 1991:69). Each person in the sample was known as subject. In the sample

of this study, data was collected from 127 respondents from 64 seniors and 63

juniors.

3.2.2 Sampling Technique

Simple random sampling is involved to select a sample at random from the

sampling frame using either random number table manually or on computer, or by an

online number generator (Saunders et al., 2009). In this technique, a name list of

Diploma TESL students with each of them have set of number from 1 to 189. Then,

the number will be randomly chosen within 1 until 127 by using the table of random

numbers. The process was repeated until 127 Diploma TESL students were

selected. Lastly, the selected respondents answered the questionnaire.

20
3.3 DATA COLLECTION METHOD AND PROCEDURE

3.3.1 METHOD

This study was conducted using online questionnaire. The Likert scale and

multiple choice questions was used for the data collection. This internet-based

survey allowed the researcher to obtain large volumes of survey data quickly and

cheaply compared to more traditional survey methods (Rice et al., 2017). However,

the drawback of this method is the response rate will not be high since some of the

online participants might just answer half of the survey or just left it out. They often

review a study to see if it is interesting, and then if it does not seem appealing, they

will often quit after the instructions (Buhrmester et al., 2011). Hence, to overcome

this problem, the questionnaire needs to be short and precise without missing any

important items for this study because much of the retention rate depends on factors

like interest in the study, amount of pay, and length of the study (Buhrmester et al.,

2011).

21
3.3.2 PROCEDURE

In this study, data was collected using questionnaire. Firstly, the term of the

questionnaire was created in order to ensure and convince the sample that all the

information given was secured and used for this research purpose only. The

questionnaire was provided with the details of the research such as who the one that

conducted the research, what course and who are the supervisor. Then, the type of

questions that would be asked in the questionnaire will be selected. Once the

questionnaire was done, permission was needed from the head of faculty and

research supervisor in order to distribute the questionnaire. After the approval was

received, the questionnaire was dispensed to the sample in order to collect the

required data.

3.4 DATA ANALYSIS

The data was analyzed using the Microsoft Excel, used to calculate the

frequency and the percentage of the data. The frequency was used to indicate the

preferences of the sample between online and face-to-face learning in learning

English language. The percentage was also used to compare the preferences of

using the two methods between two variables. The two variables in this study were

gender and the year the students were in when the research was conducted.

Through these methods, the preferred medium of the students when learning English

language was determined.

22
3.5 SUMMARY

This chapter discussed the methodology of the study and how the data was

collected and analyzed where it determined the preferences of students in learning

English language between face-to-face and online learning. The study will be

continued and discussed deeper in the next chapter.

23
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS

4.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the data analysis of the results based on the

questionnaires that had been distributed. The data analysis is presented in the form

of bar charts and also pie charts so that it can be used effectively in summarising the

findings. The results were also presented according to the research questions which

are:

a) What is the students’ preference in learning English language between face-to-

face and online learning?

b) What is the frequency of students asking questions during face-to-face learning?

c) What is the frequency of students asking questions during online learning?

24
4.1 FINDINGS

4.1.1 SECTION A (SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC)

Figure 4.1 Gender

Figure 4.2 Current Year of Studying

25
 Based on the pie charts above, it revealed the percentage of students’ gender

and the year that they are currently studying in. The gender chart consists of male

and female while the year of studying chart represents the first and second year of

studying among Diploma in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL)

students which are the respondents. Female has the largest contribution in

answering the questionnaire which is 82.7% and it is the five times more than male

number which is 17.3% only. This is because the number of female students in both

year of Diploma TESL course exceeds half of the classroom and only a quarter for

male students. For the year of studying, the first year and second year students

share almost the same percentage where it is 49.6% and 50.4% respectively. This is

aligned with the targeted number of respondents that are needed for this study which

is 63 respondents from first year and 64 respondents from second year.

26
4.1.2 SECTION B (QUESTIONNAIRES)

Question 1 and 2

Figure 4.3 Preferences of Learning English Through Face-to-Face

Figure 4.4 Learning through Face-to-Face is More Motivating

27
 Based on Figure 4.3, the survey indicated that the majority of the respondents

agree that they prefer learning English through face-to-face rather than online

learning (82.7%). These percentages can be related to Figure 4.4 where 85.9% of

the respondents agree that learning through face-to-face is more motivating. Next,

based on Figure 4.3, 17.3% disagree that they prefer face-to-face rather than online

learning. These show that they very much prefer and feel motivated with online

learning when learning English language because it is more convenient and flexible.

28
Question 3

Figure 4.5 Communicating in English with Friends during Face-to-Face

Based on the chart shown above, there were about 57 or 44.9% students who

mostly agreed saying that they feel much more comfortable talking with their friends

in English language in face-to-face learning than online learning. This shown that

they feel pleasant and being more certain communicate with friends as they do not

have to be so formal and too aware refraining themselves making mistakes like in

pronunciation or grammar aspect. However, there was quite an amount that disagree

about it that was 32.2% students by indicating they do not feel comfortable talking in

English with their friends. These students may have the lowest confidence level and

feel intimidated to even talk with their circle of friends as they are not very good and

doesn’t have more exposure at their second language.

29
Question 4

Figure 4.6 Communicating in English with Lecturers during Face-to-Face

Based on the evidence in bar chart shown above, it indicated that university

students feel more comfortable communicating in English language during face-to-

face class rather than in online learning. There were about 38.6% students who

agreed and choose to communicate more when they are in the classroom. This

shown that more students feel confident talking or asking questions to the lecturer in

person than just through internet web like group Whatsapp or any online courses.

But, there were about 35.4% students who choose to disagree by saying they feel

uncomfortable communicating in English language in the class. This portion of

students may be the one who have lower confident and self-assured when been ask

to get involved in the learning process.

30
QUESTION 5

Figure 4.7 Participation during Face-to-Face Class

The bar chart deals with a statement that said ‘I participate actively in any

activities during face-to-face class than online learning’. The result for this item was

the total of both years of students. From the chart, we found out 41.7% (53 out of

127) of the respondents disagreed with the statement. It can be that these students

are having issues with their anxiety or self-motivation level. Maybe some of them

think that they are not good enough in the lesson until discourage themselves from

participate actively. On the other hand, 58.3% presents half of the students admitted

that they participate actively in the face-to-face class compared to online class.

Hence, we can say that most of the students still do not give their all out in face-to-

face class (41.7%), but, there are also many students that taking it positively by

involved actively in it (58.3%).

31
QUESTION 6 AND 7

Figure 4.8 Often Ask Questions

Figure 4.9 Frequency of Asking Questions in Face-to-face

32
 Based on the data above, 56.7% of the students disagree that they often

asked questions during face-to-face learning. However, only 43.3% of them agree

that they always ask questions during face-to-face learning. Most of the students

were not interested to participate during learning. Besides, the lowest data for this

statement is 4 students. These students usually ask the questions around 7

questions and above. The data shows that most of the students were not really into

the questioning session. There were 17 students that ask around 4 to 6 questions

and the highest frequency is 84 students where they just asking around 1 to 3

questions in the class. However, there were 22 students did not participate at all in

asking during face-to-face class.

33
Question 8

Figure 4.10 Confident in Asking Questions during Face-to-Face

Based on the bar chart above, 31.5% that is 40 students agree and 13.4%

strongly agree that they feel confident to ask questions during face-to-face than

online learning. Meanwhile, 15.7% that is 20 students strongly disagree and 39.4%

that is 50 students disagree that they do not feel confident to ask questions during

face-to-face learning. This shows that most of them prefer to not ask questions as

they might feel reluctant to participate during class activities.

34
Question 9

Figure 4.11 Involvement in class activities when asking questions

Based on the bar chart shown above, 93 students (73.2%) agree that they

feel involved whenever they ask questions during face-to-face learning rather than

online. This might be because of whenever they ask questions, they get to focus and

understand more of what they learn. However, there are some particular students

which is 34 students (26.8%) do not feel involved during class activities even if they

ask questions. They probably do not feel satisfied with the answers given for the

questions asked which do not meet their expectations.

35
4.3 DISCUSSION

From the data that had been collected and analysed, most of the respondents

prefer face-to-face learning rather than online learning where it can be seen in most

of the data. In one of the items for the questionnaire, 42.5% agree and 40.2%

strongly agree that they prefer learning English through face-to-face than online

learning. This answered the first research question for this research where we

asked: What is the students’ preference in learning English language between face-

to-face learning and online learning? The reason behind it is because more than half

of the respondents strongly agree that they feel more confident learning through

face-to-face.

However, for the following research questions, the results contradict with what

the first research question indicated. Even though the students preferred learning

through face-to-face, the frequency of asking question is not that high. This is proven

by ‘figure’ that 66.1% of the respondents ask only one to three questions during face-

to-face learning and only a small number of them (3.2%) that ask more than seven

questions. Students with high motivation in learning will tend to ask more questions

freely and spontaneously compared to the students with high anxiety level that will

prevent themselves from participating actively in learning session in class.

36
 For the last research question, frequency of the students asking questions

during online learning is higher compared to face-to-face learning. It is because the

students will be able to think first before they ask the question without the need to do

it spontaneously. Hence, this will lower down their anxiety level and they are more

motivated to ask questions. As a result, this will increase students’ participation

during online learning particularly among quieter students. They cannot stand the

attention that they will get when asking questions in the classroom. This is different

from online learning where the students will not be seen by their classmates

whenever they want to voice out their opinions.

4.4 SUMMARY

This chapter discussed the findings of the results and the analysis of each

items in the questionnaire. Based on the results, most of the respondents preferred

learning English through face-to-face learning but they did not participate actively

such as asking questions in the class, making them prefer to ask questions during

online learning. The conclusion of the study will be discussed in the last chapter.

37
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION

5.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the conclusion of our findings on students’ preference

method in learning English language. The first section discusses what can be

concluded from the findings and the reasons why students like the method that they

preferred (Section 5.1). Next, Section 5.2 outlines the recommendations that can be

applied in improving the teaching and learning effectively as it will be helpful for both

students and lecturers. The last section will summarize the whole chapter in general

context (Section 5.3).

38
5.1 CONCLUSION

The findings of our research indicated that 82.7% of the respondents agree

that they prefer learning English through face-to-face learning. This might be

because they can understand better when they listen and see directly what the

lecturer taught in the class. They can also visualise better what they are learning in

the classroom and can ask questions while getting immediate answers from the

lecturer. Immediate feedback can be crucial as they can clear up any

misunderstanding that they got while learning without wasting time waiting for the

lecturer to answer their questions. Unlike online learning, students have to wait for

their questions to be answered because the lecturer might not be online all the time.

Hence, the students cannot continue their learning until they get the answers to their

questions as the next lesson are related with what they are learning now.

There are many factors on why most of the respondents preferred learning in

the classroom. Firstly, the students feel more comfortable learning by face-to-face as

54.9% of students agreed that they like to communicate in English with their friends.

There are also 38.6% of students agreed that they feel comfortable when talking with

their lecturers like asking questions or giving opinions in the class. The reason

behind this is maybe because they feel that they are taking part in the lesson when

they communicate in English whether they are willing or not asking questions to their

lecturers or discussing with friends. However, when the students unwillingly had to

answer question from the lecturer, their anxiety level will eventually become low as

they still participate in the lesson.

39
 Moreover, the students have more motivation to participating themselves in

face-to-face learning in the class as they feel they have gained something beneficial

from the lesson. The students may see the support given by the educator until

encourage them to participate actively during learning session. They may feel shy or

do not have the courage to ask questions directly to their lecturer as other students

will hear and see the particular student talking when the learning session is carried

out. These students may have already gotten used to just listen as their previous

school teachers do not encourage and help them to be active learners by

participating in the classroom.

Besides, their level of anxiety also can be seen where some of these

students probably do not have high of it or they know how to control it. It might be

because of their low confident level and high anxiety level. Some of them might be

afraid of being judged by their own classmates or too shy to voice out their opinions.

By receiving support from their lecturer, this will help them to receive more input and

give more output in the class. For those who are more into online learning, maybe

they just feel more comfortable learning by themselves or in other words, they are

independent learners. However, it is not meant that every online learner is

independence and vice versa. Students can learn and study anywhere and anytime

with the access of internet and they can be more comfortable in their own spaces.

They do not have to travel anywhere when using online learning.

40
 Most of the time, students did not know which method that they preferred

when learning in English. They do not place importance on how to learn the

language more effectively because English is their second language and they are

still learning on it. As the respondents are TESL students where they are learning

how to teach English, they might think that they are comfortable in learning English

in both face-to-face and online learning. However, there are a minority of the

students struggle to learn English because the method of learning that were used by

the lecturer in the class are not compatible with their own learning styles. In addition,

there are too many students in the class for the lecturer to match the learning styles

of each of the students. Hence, the lecturer had to choose one of the methods that

can suit most of the students, usually face-to-face learning.

The following section will discuss about some of the recommendations that

can be used according to the findings and the result from this research to improve

the students’ ways of learning English so that it can help in the future.

41
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

From the conclusion above, a few suggestions are proposed in order to help

educators in planning the suitable teaching methodologies for learning session.

Besides, it can also satisfy the university students’ preference in learning English

language through two different methods which are face-to-face learning and online

learning. Hence, these recommendations are highly applicable as they comprise

suggestions that may help both sides in teaching and learning English effectively.

5.2.1 The educators can consider applying blended learning technique during the

teaching process. This is because most of the students preferred to learn in

face-to-face classes but in terms of asking questions, they prefer to do it

online. This can be explained by their anxiety level. For instance, students

with high anxiety level will tend to ask only a few questions or not at all

compared to the students with low anxiety level. Hence, this blended learning

technique will be beneficial for the students with different methods of learning.

It can give the same opportunity for the students to perform better in English

class despite the difference in learning style. For the students with high

anxiety level, they can accomplish more learning objectives on that day when

they learn through online and vice versa. It does not mean that they are not

performing better in face-to-face classes but during online learning they will

learn more effectively.

42
5.2.2 Educators can also carry out learning activities for students with high anxiety

level such as individual or pair work activities. It is up to the students whether

they want to do it individually or in pairs so that they can do their works more

effectively because they are the one that know themselves. Even though the

students have a high level of anxiety but some of them are able to do the task

individually but there are also students that need someone who can trigger

them to do the work. Hence, that is why they choose to do the task in pair.

The lecturer also can trigger the students to talk by asking them to answer

question that have been given to them. Thus, these students also can have

the same progress with other students who have low anxiety level.

43
5.2.3 The students themselves need to develop their own self-motivation in learning

English language. This is because self-motivation is required for face-to-face

learning to ensure the students will participate actively in the lesson and not

just remained passive by just listening to the lecture. For the students who

preferred face-to-face learning, it will not be a problem for them to maintain

their motivation and focus in the class. However, for students who preferred

more on online learning, their self-motivation usually become low when

learning in the classroom and this can be their main reason for them to

choose over online learning as their preferred method. Their motivation can

be low when they feel like they do not really understand and feel lost with the

lesson and at the same time been surrounded by other students who their

high proficiency level and better than them. Thus, to prevent this negative

thought, the students must know the suitable method to encourage

themselves by seeking other initiatives that can help them in learning English.

This can be done slowly but surely will increase their self-motivation no matter

what methods they are using in order for them to learn more effectively.

44
5.2.4 The students must have initiative to learn English language by using another

method other than just what they prefer. For example, students that prefer

face-to-face learning also need to consider online learning and vice versa.

This is because by able to adapt with different kinds of methods, students will

have a variety of activities in their learning. Besides, it will be easier for

educators to select the suitable approaches for teaching since it will become

more flexible where all the students can accept it. In addition to this, the

learning style of the students also will not just fully focused either

independence or dependence learner. It does not mean that each student

only have one learning style. Usually, most of them will have more than one

and it will change according to the suitability of the methods used. Hence, it

will not harm the students if they prefer both of the methods to learn English

instead it will encourage them to learn more effectively.

45
5.3 SUMMARY

This chapter discusses what has been concluded from our findings on

students’ preference in learning English as a second language. Based on their

preferred method, a few recommendations are suggested in order to improve the

teaching and learning process. Thus, it is hoped that it will be beneficial for both

students and educators especially lecturers as it will be helpful for them to identify

the best way on how to manage the class efficiently so that every student can

perform better based on their preferred learning style and ability.

46
 APPENDIX

Preferences of Face-to-Face Learning Vs Online

Learning of English Language among University
Students in Malaysia

Dear respondents,

We are final year students of Diploma in Teaching English as Second Language

from Universiti

Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA) are currently working on our research titled

Preferences of Face-to-Face vs Online Learning of English Language Among

University Students in Malaysia. Hence, your contribution in answering this

questionnaire will be much appreciated in order to complete our project paper

successfully.

Your responses are highly confidential and will be used only for research

purposes. This questionnaire consists of Section A and B.

Thank you.

This project is under the supervision of Madam Wahidah binti Abd. Wahid from the

Faculty of Language and Communication (FBK), University Sultan Zainal Abidin

(UniSZA).

*Require

47
SECTION A
Respondent Information

1. Gender
Mark only one oval.

Male
Female

2. Current year of studying Mark only one oval.

First year
Second year

Section B
This section consists of 10 questions.

3. I prefer learning English through face-to-face than online learning. Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree

4. I believe that learning through face-to-face is more motivating than online learning.
Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree
5. I feel comfortable communicating in English with my friends during face-to-face class
than online learning. Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree

6. I feel comfortable communicating in English with my lecturers during face-to-face

class than online learning. Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree

7. I participate actively in any activities during face-to-face class than online learning.
Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

48
 Strongly disagree Strongly agree

8. I often ask questions during face-to-face class than online learning. Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree

9. The frequency I ask questions in face-to-face is: * Mark only one oval.

Never ask
1-3
4-6
7-9
10 and above

10. I feel confident to ask questions during face-to-face than online learning. Mark only one
oval.

1 2 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree

11. I feel involved in the class activities when I ask questions during face-to-face class
than online learning. Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

49
 REFERENCES
Abu Bakar, Z., Yun, L. M., Keow, N. S., & Li, T. H. (2014). Goal-Setting Learning
Principles: A Lesson from Practitioner. Journal of Education and Learning
(EduLearn), 8(1), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v8i1.204

Aminuddin, H., Norhasni, Z. A., & Sim, K. Y. (2014). The Philosophy of Learning and
Listening in Traditional Classroom and Online Learning Approaches. Higher
Education Studies, 4(2), 1925–4741. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v4n2p19

Apuke, O. D. (2017). Quantitative Research Methods: A Synopsis Approach. Kuwait

Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 6(10), 40–47.
https://doi.org/10.12816/0040336

Arif, A., & Mehtap, C. (2006). International Forum of Educational Technology &
Society Undergraduate Students’ Academic Achievement, Field Dependent /
Independent Cognitive Styles and Attitude toward Computers Arif Altun Mehtap
Cakan. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 289–297.

Bada, S. O. (2015). Constructivism Learning Theory: A Paradigm for Teaching and

Learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education Ver. I, 5(6), 66–70.
https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-05616670

Britwum, S. A. (2014). Discuss The Educational Implications of the Behaviourist

Theory in the Mathematics Classroom.

Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical Turk: A
new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393980

Carmen, T.-D., Brett, J. M., & John, R. S. (2011). Values: A Conceptual Analysis.
Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice and Research, 1(2), 118–
131.

Du, X. (2009). The Affective Filter in Second Language Teaching. Asian Social
Science, 5(8), 162–165. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v5n8p162

Eugene, S.-S. (1996). Learning styles: a holistic approach. Journal of European

Industrial Training, 20(7), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090599610127891

Genie, B. (2002). A COMPARISON OF TRADITIONAL, ONLINE AND HYBRID

METHODS OF COURSE DELIVERY Genie Black Arkansas Tech University.
Journal of Business Administration Online, 1(1).

Gilbert, B. (2015). Online learning revealing the benefits and challenges. Education
Masters, 4, 1–32. Retrieved from
http://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/education_ETD_masters

50
Grover, V. K. (2015). Thoughts. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal,
4(8), 1–8.

Hamid, S., Waycott, J., Kurnia, S., & Chang, S. (2015). Understanding students’
perceptions of the benefits of online social networking use for teaching and
learning. Internet and Higher Education, 26, 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.004

Hobbs, D. (2002). Constructivist approach to web course design: a review of the

literature. Int. J. E-Learn. 1, 60-65. Available online at:
http://www.editlib.org/p/10821

Hoda, N., & Alireza, B. (2018). the Difference Between Field-Dependent and Field-
Independent Efl Learners’ Critical Thinking and Use of Oral Communication.
International Journal of English and Education, 7(4), 22278–24012.

Joseph, A. (n.d.). Face to face learning and distance learning.

Kelly, J. (2012). Learning Theories, Behaviorism, Constructivism. Retrieved from

http://thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-learning/learning/theories/

Khalid, K., Hilman, H., & M, D. K. (2012). Get along with quantitative research
process. International Journal of Research in Management, 2(2), 15–29.

Meyer, B., Haywood, N., Sachdev, D., & Faraday, S. (2008). What is independent
learning and what are the benefits for students? How is independent learning
viewed by teachers? London: Department for Children, Schools and Families
Research Report, 051, 1–6. Retrieved from
http://www.curee.co.uk/files/publication/%5Bsite-
timestamp%5D/Whatisindependentlearningandwhatarethebenefits.pdf

Mojtaba, M. (2007). The Interaction Between Field Dependent / Independent

Learning Styles and Learners’ Linguality in Third Language Acquisition Mojtaba
Maghsudi. South Asian Language Review, 17(1), 100–112. Retrieved from
http://bibliotecavirtualut.suagm.edu/Glossa2/Journal/dec2007/Linguality in Third
Language Acquisition.pdf

Nahla, M. M. (2014). The Importance of Learning Styles in Education. Institute for

Learning Styles Journal, 1, 19–27. Retrieved from
http://www.auburn.edu/academic/education/ilsrj/Journal Volumes/Fall 2014 Vol
1 PDFs/Learning Styles Nahla Moussa.pdf

Ortega-Maldonado, A., Llorens, S., Acosta, H., & Coo, C. (2017). Face-to-Face vs
On-line: An analysis of Profile, Learning, Performance and Satisfaction among
Post Graduate Students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(10),
1701–1706. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051005

51
Paechter, M., & Maier, B. (2010). Online or face-to-face? Students’ experiences and
preferences in e-learning. Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 292–297.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.004

Patricia, A., & Isaac, K. B. (2017). Comparing Face-to-Face and Online Teaching
and Learning in Higher Education. MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends
& Practices, 7(2), 165–179.

Pravat Kumar, S., & Subhash, C. (2014). A Study of the Relationship between
Students’ Learning Styles and Instructional Inputs in a Teacher Education
Programme of IGNOU. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 9(1),
17–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaouj-09-01-2014-b003

Reddy, M. S. (2016). Importance of English Language in today’ s World Introduction:

International Journal of Academic Research, 3(4), 179–184. Retrieved from
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ah
UKEwiHq8_k2YTdAhXKuo8KHU5fDN4QFjAAegQIABAC&url=http%3A%2F%2F
ijar.org.in%2Fstuff%2Fissues%2Fv3-i4%282%29%2Fv3-i4%282%29-
a021.pdf&usg=AOvVaw11GZ_AkJeBFW9Z_ZHtomwj

Rice, S., Winter, S. R., Doherty, S., & Milner, M. (2017). Advantages and
Disadvantages of Using Internet-Based Survey Methods in Aviation-Related
Research. Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering, 7(1), 58–65.
https://doi.org/10.7771/2159-6670.1160

Saeed, S., & Zyngier, D. (2012). How Motivation Influences Student Engagement: A
Qualitative Case Study. Journal of Education and Learning, 1(2), 252–267.
https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v1n2p252

Simonson, I. (2008). Will I like a “medium” pillow? Another look at constructed and
inherent preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18(3), 155–169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2008.04.002

Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online Education and Its Effective Practice: A Research
Review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15(September
2015), 157–190. https://doi.org/10.28945/3502

Tuan Nguyen. (2015). The Effectiveness of Online Learning: Beyond No Significant

Difference and Future Horizons. Merlot Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching, 11(2), 309–319. Retrieved from
http://jolt.merlot.org/Vol11no2/Nguyen_0615.pdf

Vicky, W. (2014). Independent learning. Effective Learning and Teaching in Modern

Languages, 133–141. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203023785

Yang, J. (2012). The Affective Filter Hypothesis and Its Enlightenment for College
English Teaching. Psychology Research, 7, 40–43.
https://doi.org/10.5503/J.PR.2012.07.009

52
Young, S., & Duncan, H. (2014). Online and face-to-face teaching: How do student
ratings differ? Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 70–79.

Zhiping, D., & Shamala, P. (2013). Anxiety of Speaking English in Class Among
International Anxiety of Speaking English in Class Among International.
International Journal of Education and Research, 1(11), 1–17.

53