Factors Affecting the English Language Preparedness of College Freshman Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1202.05Keywords:
level of preparedness, English Language, Second LanguageAbstract
This study determined the factor that affects the level of preparedness in the English language of the College of Education (COED) freshman students majoring in Elementary Education. Eighty (80) students were chosen as the participants of this study. A survey questionnaire was used to explore the students' opinions by considering six factors that may have affected their preparedness in English: Prior knowledge of the second language of learners, students' motivation, learning styles of students, instructional methods of teachers, classroom setting, and school amenities. The findings revealed that the classroom environment and the classroom and school facilities affected their preparedness. Moreover, the teacher's availability of learning materials, teaching method, and student's motivation were also additional factors that affected them. The results imply that the government should do its best to provide these students with facilities and more learning materials. As a result, the English I course teachers should consider all these when teaching English to enhance their preparedness.
References
Mijares. (2009). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: Acquiring successful strategies. ELT Journal. 53 (3) 168 – 176.
Bailey. (2009). Preparedness of Chinese students for American culture and communicating in English. Journal of International Students, 3(1), 29-40.
Boylan, H. (2009). Targeted intervention for developmental education students (T.I.D.E.S.). Journal of Developmental Education, 32(3), 14-23.
Bennui. (2009). Study on First-Year Students Perceptions Concerning Causes of Their Poor Performance in the English II Course.
Piras. (1998). Experimental study of the effectiveness of using printed text as a learner support strategy in the teaching of listening comprehension. Unpublished M.A. (Linguistics) Thesis. Mahidol, Bangkok.
Richard E. Petty, John T. Cacioppo &David Schumann. (1983). Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages 135–146, https://doi.org/10.1086/208954.
Misati. (2009). Skills and strategies: Towards a new methodology for listening. ELT Journal.52 (2) 110-118.
Budden. (2003). Problems in teaching English listening of teachers in government secondary schools in Chon Buri. Unpublished M.A.T. (Teaching of English) Thesis. University of Bangkok.
Gregogy L. Murphy. (2002). The Big Book of Concepts. Cambridge: MIT Press
Abbott, Lauter, & Dalton. (2007). Inclusion of students with limited English proficiency in NAEP: Classification and measurement issues. Retrieved November 30, 2005, from http://www.nagb.org/pubs/conferences/abedi.doc.
Haneda. (2006). Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hanuskek, Eri A, John F Kain & Steven G Rivkin. (1999). Do higher salaries buy better teachers?, Technical report, National bureau of economic research.
G. Barbieri, Claudio Rossetti & Paolo Sestio. (2017). Teacher motivation and student learning .April 2017 Politica Economica 33(1):59-72,DOI:10.1429/86376
Howley, C., Strange, M., & Bickel, R. (2000). Research about school size and school performance in impoverished communities. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
W. Harbison & Eric A. Hanushek. (1992). Educational Performance of the Poor: Lessons from Rural Northeast Brazil.
Husen. (2001). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horwitz, E. K. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement, Annual review of applied linguistics. v21 p112-26.
Komenský, J. (2008). English instruction problems of undergraduate English major students in the faculty of education of closed universities in Bangkok metropolis. Unpublished Thesis Kasetsart University.
