TITLE : “Exploring young EFL learners’ motivation: Individual

work on dictogloss tasks”

BAB I
INTRODUCTION
This article discusses exploring the motivation of young learners towards the dictogloss
task for individuals. Motivation is one of the most important variables in learning a second
language (L2) (Doiz, Lasagabaster, & Sierra, 2014; Dörnyei, 2009; Gardner,1985) . Motivation
such as the desire to achieve the goal of mastering a language and striving to do so combined
with favorable attitudes towards it (Gardner, 1985). Further, he characterized the attitudes of a
student's “evaluative reactions (positive or negative)” towards LF, which may have behavioral
implications in the process of learning LF (Gardner, 1985, p. 9).
Although motivation has long been considered a stable trait, recent developments in the
field have highlighted its complex and changeable nature (Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015), and have
focused on the sociodynamic perspective of motivational variation through the prism of
dynamical systems theory complexes(CDS) (Larsen-Freeman, 2015; Larsen-Freeman &
Cameron, 2008).
Apart from discussing the motivations related to dictogloss, the meaning of dictogloss is
a multi-skill and systems activity consists of listening, writing and speaking and relies on the
students' knowledge of the semantic, syntactic and pragmatic systems of the target language to
solve the task with an emphasis on grammatical skills. Essentially, the dictogloss is a dictation in
which the students do not have enough time to write the target text while the teacher reads it;
However, students listen to the text they read four or more times, which gives them several
opportunities to take away from it, and then use their notes and work in pairs to try to reconstruct
the target text from memory. This method gives students a more precise understanding of
English grammar than other approaches and therefore leads to greater precision in the use of the
language (Wajnryb, 1990). Compared to other more traditional approaches to teaching grammar,
the value of dictogloss lies in its interactive approach to language learning which promotes both
negotiation of meaning and negation of form. As for the use of dictogloss in this study, due to
the contrasting procedure because the learner focuses on "form" (FonF) under the explicit
direction of the teacher. Since FonF is assumed to occur in the context of meaning-centered
linguistic usage, methods intended to induce FonF avoid openly targeting certain forms either by
teachers or material writers (Doughty & Williams, 1998).

BAB II
LITERATURE REVIEW
In training motivational skills, teaching techniques are needed that are in accordance with
students' abilities, while these techniques are able to train students in writing and pronunciation.
One of the techniques discussed is the dictogloss technique which emphasizes specific
grammatical structures for summarizing the target-language text, in its activities it is integrated
with 4 language skills, namely listening, reading, speaking, and writing and also dictogloss is
able to provide support to students so that students are enthusiastic in learning. participate as part
of the structure of the activity. The dictogloss comprises the four phases of preparation, dictation,
reconstruction and analysis with accompanying correction (Wajnryb, 1995). He also explains
that during these phases the students prepare for some vocabulary by understanding the subject,
writing down key words while listening to a short passage, then work together to generate a
reconstructed text form, and in the final phase these reconstructed forms are carefully analyzed
and compared to the original text. In dictogloss "listening is the input, i.e. the material, speaking
is the means of communication and writing is both the input and the output or the product"
(Smith, 2011, p. 69).
In this case, it is certain that the dictogloss technique is very important to deepen English
language skills. Meanwhile, the dictogloss technique is fun and very effective in exploring
language and linguistics at the same time. Dictogloss, which Wajnryb first borrowed from
dictation, has established itself as one of the most effective, fun, and non-threatening ways to get
students to collaborate in exploring meaning through language and linguistics at the same time
(Smith, 2011, p. 69). Besides being able to explore at the same time, dictogloss is able to help
students reconstruct linguistic outputs related to previously read texts. The students made some
notes in terms of content and style, but it is not just a copy of the original text, because the
students use their registers, their different perceptions in groups and their previous information to
construct a text (Kooshafar, Youhanaee, and Amirian, 2012).
 The implementation of dictogloss must pay attention to important issues that must be
considered by teachers and students. Teachers need to be careful with the socio-cultural context,
the composition of the working group and the assessment of the students (Vasilijevic, 2011). It is
also argued that students need to recognize the benefits of collaborative learning. No program
can be learner-centered if the subjective needs of the learner and their perceptions of the
learning process are not taken into account (Nunan, 1988). Moreover, students have two
responsibilities: to maximize their own learning and to maximize the learning of all other
members of the group (Johnson & Johnson, 1999a). They also add that heterogeneously grouped
groups are more beneficial than heterogeneously grouped groups. Finally, students should be
assessed fairly with feedback and coaching from teachers.
In addition to its implementation, dictogloss also focuses on collaborative tasks which is
proof of its effectiveness in paying attention to sentence form. Dictogloss (Wajnryb, 1990) is
among the collaborative writing assignments, this research was found to be effective in terms of
attention to form (Alegría de la Colina & García Mayo, 2007; Swain, 1998; Swain & Lapkin,
2001) and this is the type of assignment chosen for this study. In a dictogloss assignment, a short
text is read twice at normal speed: the first time students listen and the second time they jot down
words. Then, individually or in collaboration, the students pool their resources to reconstruct as
faithfully as possible the text they have heard. While reconstructing, students notice their own
strengths and weaknesses in the target language. "In the phase of text reconstruction, the students
expand their understanding of the possibilities that are available to them in the language"
(Wajnryb, 1990: 12). The aim of the reconstruction, however, is the production of full texts that
contribute to language development on various levels (discursive, syntactic, lexical and
phonological) (Thornbury, 1997). Several studies have also demonstrated the benefits of running
a dictogloss task collaborative rather than individually. All have reported that while the
quantitative differences between the collaborative and the individual modalities are not always
significant (Kuiken & Vedder, 2005), there are always qualitative differences collaborative mode
(Adams, 2007; Fernández Dobao, 2012, Kuiken & Vedder, 2005; Storch, 2005).

Previous Studies
2.1 Previous Research about dictogloss task on another field in English.
a. Research by Maliheh Nouraei Yeganeh (2015) examines the comparison of the effects
that arise after the oral dialogue journal technique with the dictogloss technique is applied
 to EFL learners to acquire speech action skills. Which results in the use of the dictogloss
technique as an effective method to facilitate a pedagogical approach aimed at EFL
learners that focuses on form and meaning. when they are learning a foreign language.
b. Research by Seth Lindstromberg, et al. (2016) examines a way to help L2 students
remember and use the written forms of phrase expressions or " formula sequences" (FS)
that are common in academic English texts. Which results that the text in relation to the
lexicon was not difficult for any of the student groups and that the EGr members did not
begin the experiment with greater familiarity with the lexicon compared to the CGr
members.
c. Research by María Basterrechea, et al. (2014) examines the role of egress activities in
detecting some form of destination upon receipt of subsequent entries. Which results
most of the students stated that they had supplemented or corrected information that they
had missed during the first reconstruction, some pointed out that during the first
reconstruction they had written verbs at different times than the original text, but because
of the small number of students who mentioned it , cannot be considered significant.
d. Research by Maria Basterrecchea & Maria Del Pilar Garcia Mayo (2014) explain how the
use of dictogloss on how to produce third person English "-s" from CLIL and EFL
learners. With the results of the study, CLIL learners noticed and was able to produce
more instances third-person singular sentences than EFL learners.
e. Research by Yasaman Azmoon (2021) explain the effect of the dictogloss technique or
processing instructions used to train the writing accuracy of EFL students. With the
results of the study, that the dictogloss technique applied gave better results than the
process instruction technique in terms of application during teaching and syllabus.

So the conclusion to previous research, that dictogloss is still mostly teaching towards the
English writing system and English pronunciation, while the lack of research on dictogloss
towards teaching student motivation makes the dictogloss teaching system less certain to be able
to develop student motivation as a whole.
 BAB III
METHOD
1. Research Design

` The research design used an experiment, the experiment involved a dictogloss task
(listening, taking notes, and reconstructing the story) and a questionnaire containing several
types of motivations that were affected by the dictogloss task..

2. Participant

The participants were 64 grade 6 students from elementary school aged 11-12 years,
consisting of 33 girls and 31 boys who participated in the study.

3. Data Collection Procedures Instrument

Data collection was taken from two types of data, namely through data from
dictogloss assignments and motivational questionnaires. For the dictogloss task, the subject
will be in various types of activities by following standard procedures (Wajnryb, 1990):
listening to the recording twice, taking notes from the recording after the subject listened
twice, and reconstructing the recording into a story, while the researcher will make a
dictogloss task with a different theme basis of the participants’ linguistic ability and the
different topics they were covering in the classroom.

For data through motivational questionnaires, students will be given several

questionnaires related to personal information before filling out the questionnaire. After
filling in personal data, students will be given a general motivation questionnaire followed
by a traditional Likert scale which has a distance from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree, while the scale is divided into 4 scales, namely intrinsic motivation, instrumental
motivation, anxiety, and motivational power.

Example: Motivational questionnaire

How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Please indicate by putting
a cross or circling your answer on the scale:
Totally disagree Disagree Neither disagree Agree Totally Agree
nor agree
1 2 3 4 5
Here you have an example: If you like skiing, and you don’t like swimming, indicate it like
this:
I like skiing. 1 2 3 4 5

I don’t like swimming. 1 2 3 4 5

1. I really enjoy learning English. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I feel nervous when I have to speak in English in my English class. 1 2 3 4 5
3. Studying foreign languages is an important part of my education. 1 2 3 4 5

4. Data Analysis

Data analysis is taken from the results of questionnaires that have been taken both
quantitatively and qualitatively. For quantitative data, two different data were taken, namely pre-
test and post-test questionnaire data and mid-test and post-test data with Likert type questions.
For qualitative data taken from the questionnaire data were transcribed, coded and reviewed
according to the proposed three-step procedure by Garrett and Gallego (2014), First, the discrete
ideas in the YL responses were identified; on the other hand, they were classified under the
general themes of positive and negative aspects of the three questions considered (ie the task of
dictogloss, individual and couple work); and finally, the ideas were grouped into larger
categories of what these EFL YLs liked most / least.

REFERENCES
Azmoon, Y., (2021), Dictogloss or Processing Instruction: Which Works Better on
EFLLearners’ Writing Accuracy?, Porta Linguarum, Vol. 36, 263-277,
DOI:10.30827/portalin.v0i36.20909.
Basterreachea, M., del Pilar Garcia, M., M., (2014), Dictogloss and the production of the
English third person –s by CLIL and mainstream EFL learners: A comparative study,
International Journal of English Studies, Vol.14(2), 77-98,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/j.177321

Basterreachea, M., et al, (2014), Pushed Output and Noticing in a Dictogloss: Task
Implementation in the CLIL Classroom, Porta Linguarum, Vol. 22, 7-22.
Kopinska, M., Azkarai, A., (2020), Exploring young EFL learners’ motivation: Individual versus
pair work on dictogloss tasks, Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(3)
, 607-630, http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.10.
Lindsromberg, S., et al, (2016), A modified dictogloss for helping learners remember L2
academic English formulaic sequences for use in later writing, English for Specific
Purpose, Vol. 41, 12-21, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.08.002.

Nouraei Y., M., (2015), A Comparison of the Effects of Dictogloss and Oral Dialogue Journal
Techniques on Iranian EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Request Speech Act, International
Journal of Asian Social Science, Vol 6(1), 49-57,
DOI:10.18488/journal.1/2016.6.1/1.6.49.57.