OUT-OF-CLASS LANGUAGE LEARNING: CASE STUDY OF INDONESIAN

SENIOR HIGH STUDENTS IN BANDUNG.

Ihsan Ibadurrahman

G1025429

Literature Review

Out-of-class language learning (OCLL) is defined as any language learning activities that

are performed outside the class, be it for the sake of learning the language itself or for pure

pleasure. Studies on OCLL, however, show that there has been inconsistency in wording the

term; different authors use slightly different word, for example Hydra (2004) and Chausanachoti

(2009) use ‘out-of-class language activity’, Al-Otaibi (2004) prefers to use ‘out-of-class language

practice’, and Anderson (2004) chooses ‘out-of-class language use’. Pickard (1996), in

particular, uses ‘out-of-class Language Learning Strategy” for the same definition. A closer look

at the meaning of “Learning Strategy” suggests that it is a method employed in performing

specific learning tasks such as the use of synthesis of learning materials in problem solving

activities (cognitive), and self-regulation in language learning (meta-cognitive), all of which

capture the essence of conscious behaviors (Ellis, 1997; Brown, 2007). MacIntyre succinctly

explains that learning strategy is a conscious behavior that learners use as a plan or tactic towards

success in language learning (as cited in Al-Otaibi, 2004). As such, this study will not try to

attempt learning strategies employed outside the class, rather it describes and quantify out-of-

class language activities (e.g. reading novels, watching movies, and so on) whether done

consciously or unconsciously.

Out-of-class language learning is a scope of research that has received much attention

and interest over the years. In this exhaustive research, there has been a great consistency of

receptive skills (listening and writing) being the most widely used out-of-class language learning

activities (Pickard, 1996; Pearson, 2003; Hyland, 2004; Al-Otaibi, 2004; Chausanachoti, 2009).

Specifically, Pickard (1996) sought out to identify out-of-class language learning employed by

20 advanced German learners of English. Survey from the distributed questionnaires reveals that

receptive skills such as listening to the radio, and reading newspapers are among the most

popular activities. Productive skills, such as speaking or writing, are not considered since the

opportunities to use them outside the class are severely limited. However, given the small

number of sampling, such conclusion should be made cautiously.

In EFL contexts, a similar array of activities has also been reported. In Hong Kong,

Hyland (2004) notes that passive skills such as reading books, and surfing the net are among the

most frequently used out-of-class activities by 228 university English-education students. She

argues that a hindrance in speaking English outside the class stems from students’ fear of

negative judgments primarily caused by social or political factors there. 106 Chinese students

studying English in New Zealand are also reported of employing passive skills as the top five

most frequently used OCLLs (Pearson, 2003). These activities are listening to news on the radio,

independent study in the library, reading books, watching television programs and listening to

the music. According to a study conducted in Thailand, it is reported that browsing the net,

reading posters, and watching movies are the top three OCLL (Chausanachoti, 2009). In Saudi

Arabia, passive out-of-class activities such as watching movies, listening to songs, and reading

for pleasure are the most widely used by 237 English language learners. The frequency differs

somewhat between females (n = 97) and males participants (n = 140), with female showing a

higher frequency than the male counterparts (Al-Ottaibi, 2004).

Studies of how OCLL is used in Indonesia seem particularly rare. However, there is one

invaluable study conducted by Martin Lamb (2001) who investigated Indonesia’s poor learning

conditions in a provincial area. Building on his previous quantitative research on learning

strategies, this exploratory research aims to look deeper into what enables students to learn

English under difficult circumstances. 16 undergraduate students from different faculties

participated in the interview. From the analysis, it is revealed that opportunities to use English in

meaningful communication outside the class are exceedingly rare. This might be due to the

negative images constructed by society to those who speak English in public – the same problem

faced by students in Hong Kong (Hyland, 2004). Other possible means for these students to gain

access to English are through media such as film, newspaper, magazines. Yet, he states that with

their poor level of English, they could not make sense of this authentic text, denying the

comprehensible input needed for their L2 acquisition. The findings need to be considered

cautiously, however, since it pictures only a small scale of population in a remote area of

Indonesia and cannot truly generalize OCLL used in Indonesia as a whole.

So far we have briefly identified some activities students do out-of-class, the question

now turns to ‘what influences the choice of out-of-class language learning?’ Some studies

indicate that learners choose activities that are intrinsically interesting to them, activities

suggested by the teacher which have little relevance or interest to them are not highly considered

(Pickard, 1996; Lai and Gu, 2011). Conversely, Al-Ottaibi (2004) argues that the teacher may

bear certain influence to students’ use of OCLL, especially in Saudi’s learning environment

where the teacher plays a dominant role in deciding what students do with their learning. As

previously mentioned, students might be limited to choose their OCLL due to the lack of

opportunities to use them. Pearson (2004) considers students’ type of accommodation as a

contributing factor towards these opportunities. He comments that students who live in

University hostels and houses have little opportunity to interact with people in English, they tend

to mix with their friends and chat in L1. On the other hand, accommodation in home-stays

provides students that rare opportunity to interact in English with their English-native-speaking

hosts. Other influencing factors include, but not exclusive to, students’ preferred learning style

and social context (Lamb, 2002; Pearson, 2004; Hyland, 2004).

The extent to how much these OCLL is used is largely determined by learners’ autonomy

and motivation (Mori, 2002; Lamb, 2002; Saville and Trioke, 2009). Pearson (2004), in

particular, notes that intrinsically motivated students (the desire to learn the language coming

from one-self, as opposed to external rewards) seem to exert more effort in using the language

outside. However, according to him, we cannot make such easy generalization because the nature

of out-of-class language learning is idiosyncratic in a sense that learners spend their time and

effort outside the class differently. At the heart of the study, he suggests that teachers should

foster learner autonomy in the classroom to develop learners’ awareness of such out-of-class

strategies. In the same vein, Brown (2007) and Gao (2009) confirm the need for teachers to

develop learners’ autonomy by helping learners to look beyond the classroom. In other words,

learning English in the classroom is only the beginning of the journey towards the reality that

learners will face outside. In fact, in EFL contexts where opportunity to use English outside is

limited, learner autonomy is “a necessary pre-condition for success in language learning”

(Lamb, 2001).

In relation to L2 development, it is generally accepted that exposure to the language is

essential to language acquisition (Harmer, 2007). The rich exposure that OCLL brings to learners

might as well contribute to their L2 achievement. Studies have shown a positive correlation

between the two. For example, reading for pleasure is reported to have a high correlation with

overall language proficiency (Green and Oxford as cited in Brown, 2001). Language gains from

extensive reading have also been reported in detail by Renandya (2007) who observes that

students exposed to free reading have more significant growth not only in their reading

comprehension but also in word recognition and oral sentence repetition compared to those who

are not. Similarly, extensive listening is also reported to be highly beneficial to students’ L2

improvement (Ucán, 2010). Chausanachoti (2009) provides a comprehensive account of the

perceived benefits of OCLL towards students’ L2 proficiency. For example, she notes that

listening to songs help improve students’ accuracy of pronunciation.

As regards to how OCLL is compared across three different proficiency levels (high,

mid, and low-achieving students), it is suggested that the high-achieving group tend to employ

out-of-class language learning more than those in mid or low achieving group (Lamb, 2001;

Marefat and Barbari, 2009). It is also noted that activities that do not require students to

understand English such as using dictionaries, are chosen mostly by low-achieving group. On

the other hand, the use of authentic materials such as magazines, novels, newspaper seem to be

favored more by high-achieving group. This seems to indicate that because of their English,

high-achieving students might just have the ability to comprehend authentic materials that would

otherwise be too difficult for mid or low-achieving group. In other words, as students’ level of

proficiency increase so do their complexity of OCLL (Pearson, 2004).

In the discussion of OCLL and its link to L2 proficiency, there is always the notorious

theory of chicken-and-egg as identified by Gass and Selinker (1994), and Ellis (1997). This

problem of directionality poses a question: which causes which. Is it OCLL that in the first place

causes the growth of students’ L2 development? Or do learners have to readily achieve a certain

degree of English proficiency in order for them to be able to use OCLL?

References

Al-Otaibi, G. (2004). Language learning strategy use among Saudi EFL students and its

relationship to language proficiency level, gender and motivation. (Doctoral dissertation).

Retreived from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Accession Order No. 3129188).

Anderson, K. (2004). ‘Teachers’ conceptions of language learning: out-of-class interactions’,

Proceedings of the Independent Learning Conference 2003.

Brown, H. (2001). Teaching by Principles, 2nd edn., New York: Pearson Education.

Brown, H. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 5th edn., New York: Pearson

Education.

Chun Lai & Mingyue Gu (2011). ‘Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with

technology’, Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 317-335.

Chusanachoti, R. (2009). EFL learning through language activities outside the classroom: A

case study of English education students in Thailand. (Doctoral dissertation).

Retreived from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Accession Order No. 3363815).

Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gao, X. (2008). ‘The ‘English Corner’ as an out-of-class learning activity’, ELT Journal, Vol.

61. No. 1, pp. 60-67.

Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (1994). Second Language Acquisition : An introductory course, New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching, 4th edn., Essex: Pearson

Longman.

Harmer, J. (2007). How to Teach English, Essex: Pearson Longman.

Hyland, F. (2004). ‘Learning Autonomously: Contextualising Out-of-Class

English Language Learning’, Language Awareness, Vol. 13, No.3, pp. 180-202.

Lamb, M. (2002). ‘Explaining successful language learning in difficult circumstances’, Prospect:

An Australian Journal of TESOL, Vol. 17, pp. 35-52.

Marefat, F., Barbari, F. (2009). ‘The relationship between out-of-class language learning strategy

use and reading comprehension ability’, Porta Linguarum, (12), pp. 91-106. 

Mori, S. (2002). The relationship between motivation and the amount of out-of-class reading.

(Doctoral dissertation). Retreived from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Accession

Order No. 3040345).

Pearson, N. (2004). ‘The idiosyncrasies of out-of-class language learning: A study of mainland

Chinese students studying English at tertiary level in New Zealand’, Proceedings of the

Independent Learning Conference 2003.

Pickard, N. (1996). ‘Out-of-class language learning strategies’, ELT Journal, Vol. 50, No.2,

pp.150-159.

Renandya, W. (2007). ‘The power of extensive reading’, RELC Journal, Vol. 38. No. 2, pp. 133-

149

Saville, M. & Troike. (2006). Introducing Second Language Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Ucan, J. (2010). ‘Benefits of using extensive listening in ELT’, retrieved from:

http://fel.uqroo.mx/adminfile/files/memorias/borges_ucan_jose_luis.pdf