The Correlation between Students Ability in Bahasa Indonesia and Their Ability in English

Abstract This study was conducted to find out the correlation between students ability in Bahasa Indonesia and their ability in English. This study used quantitative method and correlational design. The data were collected from one class of the third grade students of a senior high school in Cimahi. The class consisted of 26 students. The writer took the entire population to be studied. The data taken were their score of the final term test of Bahasa Indonesia and English. After analyzing the data using the Pearson Product Moment correlation coefficient, it was found that the r value is .44. Based on the scale of the Pearson r, the r value of this research is moderately high. So, there is a moderately high positive correlation between students ability in Bahasa Indonesia and their ability in English. The higher the score or level of ability in Bahasa Indonesia, the higher the score or ability in English will be. I. Introduction First language is the language that we acquired first, before any languages. It is language that is learned firstly before we learn any other foreign languages. First language is also called mother tongue. We are native speakers of our first language. Second language is a language or languages that are learned other than the mother tongue, regardless whether it is the third or fourth language you learn (Ellis, 1997). The language that is learned after you learn your mother tongue/ first language is your second language. It is the language that is learned after you have been able to speak a language. Uniquely, while we learned our first language easily and effortlessly, we face so many Research Report : Ainun Jariyah NIM: 1103341 difficulties when we learn our second languages. Yule (1985) revealed that for most people, the ability to use their first language is rarely matched, even after years of study, by a comparable ability in the second language. The ability in the second language does not match the ability in the first language. Then according to Lado (1957) in Krashen (1981), our first language contribute to the learning difficulties in the second language and cause the errors in the production of the second language utterances. According to Robert Lado, the only major source of syntactic errors in adult second language performance was the performer s first language. Thus, the first language contributes to the difficulties in learning second language. This implies that the first language retards the learning or development in the second language.

However, Krashen (1981) stated something different about the influence of the first language on the second language learning and development. He distinguishes between acquisition and learning. Acquisition is the process where humans acquire language unconsciously effortlessly. While learning is the process in which humans language learner- learn a language consciously. The learner is aware of his learning and processing and that he has to make effort for that. Thus, we do not learn our first language, rather we acquire it unconsciously and effortlessly. In contrast, we learn our second language consciously and we make effort for that. Then Krashen and Terrel (1983, in http://www.englishraven.com/) developed an approach to second language teaching and learning that assumes that second language learning should be done in the same way that we learn our first language. The approach is the Natural Approach. One of the underlying principles of this approach is that there should be a lot of language acquisition as opposed to language processing / learning. This theory about second language learning implies that there is a relation between the first language and the second language. In his book, Krashen (1981) stated that first language influence contributes to a clear theoretical picture of second language acquisition and performance. He also stated that first language plays a role in second language learning as a substitute utterance initiator. Differently, this implies that first language has a contribution to the second language learning or development. In this research, the writer was interested to find out whether there is a relationship or correlation between students ability in the first language and their ability in the second language. Here, the abilities of the first language and the second language investigated were the ability in Bahasa Indonesia as the first language of the place the writer conducted the research and the ability in English as the second language language other than mother tongue. The research problem is : Is there any correlation between students ability in Bahasa Indonesia and their ability in English? II. Method The method used in this research was quantitative method. The writer used correlational research design to find out whether there is a correlation or relationship between students ability in Bahasa Indonesia and their ability in English. The population of this research was a class of third grade students of a senior high school in Cimahi. The samples taken were entire population. The class consisted of 26 students: 18 males and 8 females. The data were collected from the result marks of final term test of Bahasa Indonesia and English. The score ranges from 0 to 10. The writer analyzed the data using the Pearson Product Moment correlation coefficient formula for calculating raw scores. Research Report : Ainun Jariyah NIM: 1103341


 

Note: r = the score of coefficient correlation

N = the sum of sample X = the score of Bahasa Indonesia Y = the score of English X2 = the sum of the squired X score Y2 = the sum of the squired Y score XY = the sum of the products of paired X and Y score III. Data Analysis and Discussion The data gathered were analyzed statistically using the Pearson Product Moment correlation coefficient formula. The followings are the scores of Bahasa and English of the third grade class of the senior high school, ranging from 0 to 10. X is the ability in Bahasa Indonesia and Y is the ability in English.

Research Report : Ainun Jariyah NIM: 1103341

Student X Y 1 6,6 9,75 2 3,4 5,5 3 4 8,37 4 5,6 6,62 5 4,4 8,95 6 5,4 9,05 7 4,6 7 8 3,6 5,86 9 4,8 4,6 10 6 4,75 11 7,5 8,8 12 5 8,37 13 7,4 8,9

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X = 135,9 Y = 167,8 X= 741,61

3,4 4,6 4,6 6 6,8 5,4 6,4 5,8 5,2 4,6 4,6 4,8 5,4

2,75 5,77 7,22 8,25 7,72 4,07 5,22 7,78 4,75 4,15 5,49 2,07 6,05 Y=1190,77 XY =902,698

The writer then analyzed the data statistically, using the Pearson Product Moment correlation coefficient formula.
  

       

 

  Research Report : Ainun Jariyah NIM: 1103341


  There does appear the value of rxy correlation is .44. Based on the scale of Pearson r below: r = .10 Small r = .30 Medium

r = .50 Large the r value of the correlation between students ability in Bahasa Indonesia and their ability in English is moderately high.

IV.

Findings and Conclusion From the calculation of the pearson product moment correlation coefficient above, the writer gained the r value .44. Based on the scale of the Pearson r, the value of the correlation is moderately high. We can conclude that there is a high positive correlation between students ability in Bahasa Indonesia and their ability in English. The higher the score of Bahasa Indonesia, the higher the score in English will be.

V.

References Krashen, Stephen D. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. December.2002. The Online Books page http://sdkrashen.com/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning.pdf 13 December 20011 at 05.32 p.m. Ellis, Rod. (1997).Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Language Teaching Methodology. September 2008 http://www.englishraven.com/ Yule, George. (1985). The Study of Language: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Research Report : Ainun Jariyah NIM: 1103341

Appendix List of Scores of X (Bahasa Indonesia) and Y (English) and Their Calculation Student 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 total mean X Y X Y XY

Research Report : Ainun Jariyah NIM: 1103341

6,6 9,75 43,56 3,4 5,5 11,56 4 8,37 16 5,6 6,62 31,36 4,4 8,95 19,36 5,4 9,05 29,16 4,6 7 21,16 3,6 5,86 12,96 4,8 4,6 23,04 6 4,75 36 7,5 8,8 56,25 5 8,37 25 7,4 8,9 54,76 3,4 2,75 11,56 4,6 5,77 21,16 4,6 7,22 21,16 6 8,25 36 6,8 7,72 46,24 5,4 4,07 29,16 6,4 5,22 40,96 5,8 7,78 33,64 5,2 4,75 27,04 4,6 4,15 21,16 4,6 5,49 21,16 4,8 2,07 23,04 5,4 6,05 29,16 135,9 167,8 741,61 5,227 6,454

95,0625 64,35 30,25 18,7 70,0569 33,48 43,8244 37,072 80,1025 39,38 81,9025 48,87 49 32,2 34,3396 21,096 21,16 22,08 22,5625 28,5 77,44 66 70,0569 41,85 79,21 65,86 7,5625 9,35 33,2929 26,542 52,1284 33,212 68,0625 49,5 59,5984 52,496 16,5649 21,978 27,2484 33,408 60,5284 45,124 22,5625 24,7 17,2225 19,09 30,1401 25,254 4,2849 9,936 36,6025 32,67 1190,77 902,698