The Relationship Between Learning Styles and Vocabulary Mastery of The

Second Grade Students At SMAN 14 Samarinda

Nanda Anggraini, Dr. Ventje Janny Kalukar, M.A.

English Department, Mulawarman University
Email: nandanggraini79@yahoo.co.id

Abstract

This research was aimed to find out the students’ learning styles, the vocabulary
mastery, and correlation between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary
masteries of the second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda in academic year
2017/2018. The design of this study was mixed method with correlational design. The
sample of this study was the second grade students of SMAN 14 Samarinda in
academic year 2017/2018. The instruments of this study were questionnaire of
students’ learning styles, vocabulary test, and interview. In analyzing the data, the
researcher first analyzed students’ learning style questionnaire, scoring the
vocabulary test, correlated the score of students’ learning styles and their vocabulary
masteries using Product Moment Formula. The findings of this study showed that
there were 49 students (66%) preferred visual learning style, 16 students (22%)
preferred auditory learning style, and 9 students (12%) preferred kinesthetic learning
style. The mean score of students’ vocabulary mastery was 57.35. It showed that the
students’ vocabulary mastery was poor. The students’ vocabulary mastery scores can
be classified into five criteria, in which excellent 3 students (4%), good 19 students
(26%), fair 12 students (16%), poor 17 students (23%), and failure 23 students
(31%). Based on the calculation of the correlation between students’ learning styles
and vocabulary mastery showed that significance value was higher than 0.05 (0.200
> 0.05). It means that H0 was accepted and Ha was rejected. There was no significant
correlation between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary masteries of the
second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda in academic years 2017/2018.

Keywords: Correlational Study, Learning Style, Vocabulary Mastery

1. Introduction

Vocabulary, as the one of the language components, has an important

role for students in language learning. They have to master large storage of

vocabularies so that they will not have difficulty to read the text because of

the limited words they acquire, as Wilkins (1972: 111-112) explained that “...

while without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary

nothing can be conveyed”. Students have to retain large storage of

vocabularies in order to communicate with others easily. By retaining more

vocabulary, they also retain more knowledge of English. According to Soodeh

(2012: 1), gaining language which is a dynamic process requires vocabulary

acquisition of the target language frequently for students.

However, some students may also still have lack vocabulary and have

problems in acquiring English vocabulary. They may still have the difficulty

in memorizing the words and making sentence, in which the words used are

too general and have no variation. They also still do not know the meaning of

some certain words so that they still have the difficulty in comprehending the

text. If they did not know how to increase their vocabulary, they will

increasingly lose interest in learning. One of the causes is that they learn

vocabulary in boring and ineffective ways.

From the explanation above, the researcher wanted to know more

about the relationship between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary
masteries by conducting this study. This research was conducted to find the

relationship between students’ learning style and their vocabulary masteries,

the learning style of the second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda, and

to know the students whose adequate storage of vocabulary, and the students

whose inadequate storage of vocabulary, based on their learning style. The

problem will be expounded into three research questions such as:

1. What are students’ learning styles of the second grade students at SMAN

14 Samarinda ?

2. What are students’ vocabulary masteries of the second grade students at

SMAN 14 Samarinda ?

3. Is there any significant correlation between learning styles and

vocabulary mastery of the second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda

2. Review of Related Literature

It is important for the researcher to discuss the review of related

literature which is underlying and assisting the title of the thesis. Some

theories are given by the researcher that support the study as follows:

2.1. Concept of Learning Styles

Students have different abilities in comprehending information. Some

of them can easily comprehend the information, while some of them

comprehend the information slowly. Students’ learning styles are different

from each other to comprehend the same information and knowledge to be

easy. Their learning styles are influenced by subject matter, context, age,

background knowledge, gender, motivation, and society, as argued by Dunn &

Dunn (1990: 2) who say that learning styles often alter with age, culture, and

gender. They also defined learning style as “the way in which each learner

begins to concentrate on, process, and retain new and difficult information.”.

According to Jensen & Nickelsen (2011: 35), there are three types of

learning style that can be used by students to learn and improve their

vocabulary skill, such as visual style, auditory style, and kinesthetic style. By

using visual style, the students can learn vocabulary by turning the words into

pictures, using vocabulary wordlists or flashcards, reviewing vocabulary

cartoons and memes, and so on, so that they have a great visual memory.

According to Reid (1998: 162), students with visual learning style tends to

learn by seeing and observing things. They tend to see and observe pictures,

diagrams, demonstrations, displays, handouts, films, flip-chart, etc. DePorter

& Hernacki (1999: 116) argue that visual learners are also neat and

disciplinary. De Porter & Hernacki (1999: 116) also contend that visual

learners tend to have difficulty in memorizing verbal instruction. They usually

forget to deliver verbal message and also have problem in selecting words
when they want to tell something, so that they prefer to demonstrate

something than to present it.

The students who use auditory style can learn vocabulary by

identifying the words through sounds of voice, its tone and timbre. Fleming

(2014) adds that students with this types like oral reports. They like to speak,

discuss, and explain things with others. Oral test or task are preferred to them

than written test or task. They tend to be speaker in discussing activity and

they tend to do conversation easily. Moreover, DePorter & Hernacki (1999:

118) say that auditory learners have difficulty with visual works. They have

problem in reading small fonts and easily tired to read, so that they often

wrong to read.

While for the students who use kinesthetic style, they can acquire

vocabulary by identifying the information through feelings, emotions,

instincts, contacts, in which their muscles play a big role in learning. Reid

(2005: 121) says that kinesthetic learners are courageous to take a risk. They

prefer to answer question than to read the instruction first. DePorter &

Hernacki (1999: 118) state that kinesthetic learners provide response to

physical attention and touch and stand close to people who talk to them to get

their attention
2.2. Concept of Vocabulary Mastery

According to Neuman & Dwyer (2009: 385), vocabulary refers to

''words we must know to communicate effectively; words in speaking

(expressive vocabulary) and words in listening (receptive vocabulary)''.

Vocabulary as an important aspect and basic factor in learning English is

required by students in using English skill, such as reading, writing, speaking,

and listening. The definition of vocabulary is also stated by Longman

Dictionary (1995) as “the words that are typically used when talking about a

particular subject”. Vocabulary is also defined by Hornby (1995: 461) as ''the

total number of words in a language; vocabulary is a list of words with their

meanings”.

Mastery is defined by Swannel (1994: 656) as comprehensive

knowledge or use of a subject or instrument. In line with that, Hornby (1984:

777) also defines mastery as ability or comprehensive knowledge. From these

definitions, it comes to the conclusion that mastery refers to the ability to

comprehend and learn something. In school, students try to learn and practice

English to improve their vocabulary skill so that they are able to communicate

in English well to others with vocabularies that they retain.

Vocabulary mastery is important for the students. It is more than

grammar for communication purpose, particularly in the early stage when

students are motivated to learn the basic words. Lewis & Hill (1990: 12)
explained that vocabulary mastery which is more useful for communication

than grammar is very important for students to master English as foreign

language in speaking, listening, reading, and writing especially in the initial

stage when they are motivated to learn the basic words. Bachman (1990: 84)

stated that vocabulary ability involves both knowledge of language and the

capability to put language in context. There are three components of

vocabulary ability, such as the context of vocabulary usage, vocabulary

knowledge and fundamental process, and metacognitive strategies for using

vocabulary.

2.3. The Role of Learning Style In Learning Vocabularies

Learning style has an important role for students to improve their

learning skill, especially in acquiring vocabulary. Tulbure (2012: 1) explained

that students can improve their learning outcomes if they apply an appropriate

learning style in learning process. Therefore, it is required specific approach,

such as learning method and instruments which are interesting and innovative

to help students to understand new information and master English vocabulary

in learning process.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Design

In order to obtain the significant result and complete information about

the relationship between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary

masteries, the researcher used mixed method, in which quantitave method

through questionnaire learning style and a test of vocabulary, and qualitative

method through interview. According to Creswell & Plano Clark (2007: 5),

mixed method is a method which focuses on collecting, analyzing, and mixing

both quantitative and qualitative data in one study or series of studies with the

combination of quantitative and qualitative approach to provide a better

understanding of research problems than one approach. This study used

correlational design. Gay (1987: 229) explained that correlational research

includes collecting data in order to determine whether, and to what degree a

relationship emerges between two or more quantifiable variables. This study

investigated the correlation between two variables, learning style and

vocabulary mastery. This research data was obtained from questionnaire to

identify students’ learning style, vocabulary test to measure their vocabulary

master, and interview to collect complete information about students’ learning

styles and their vocabulary masteries and to support the result of this study.

Based on the research question, this study deals with one relationship, which

is the relationship between independent variable (X variable) and dependent

variable (Y variable). The X variable is the students’ learning style, and the Y

variable is the students’ vocabulary mastery.

3.2. Population and Sample

3.2.1. Population

Krysik & Finn (2007: 108) define population as the amount of people,

events, organizational units, and so on that is focused on the research problem.

The population of this research was the second grade students of SMA Negeri

14 Samarinda in the 2017/2018 academic year. It consists of 5 classes. They

are XI IPA 1 which consists of 30 students, XI IPA 2 is 29 students, XI IPS 1

is 27 students, XI IPS 2 is 29 students, and XI IPS 3 is 29 students. The total

population of this study is 144 students.

3.2.2. Sample

The researcher took 104 students as the sample using simple random

sampling. According to, random sampling technique is defined by Gay (1987:

104) as the process of selecting a sample in such a way that all individuals in

the defined population have an equal and independent chance of being

selected for the sample. The sample consists of 74 students were chosen as

sample of real test, and the other 30 students were chosen as the participant of

try out. It was done in order to make the significant result for this study.
3.3. Research Instruments

3.3.1. Questionnaire

The researcher used the the questionnaire which was adapted from

Perceptual Learning Style Preference Survey by Reid (1998). The items on the

questionnaire were chosen based on the indicators of students’ learning style.

The indicators of students’ learning style were adopted from the research

study by Faridah (2014: 21) which are based on the characteristics of each

learning style (visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles). The purpose

of questionnaire is to find out in which type of learning styles the students are.

The items were divided into two forms such as positive and negative items, in

which each item has five options which represented each type of learning

styles. The indicators of students’ learning style can be seen in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1. Learning Style Instrument Prediction before the Instrument

Validity and Reliability

Types Indicators Item No.

(+) (-)

Visual a. Neat and disciplinary 1,2 3

b. Hard to get verbal instruction 4 5

c. Memorize well about position, shape, 8 6,7

 numeral, and color of the thing

d. Learning by visual memory 9,11 10

Auditory a. Weak in visual activity 12,13 14

b. Good in oral activity 16,17 15,18

c. Having sensitivity through music 19 20

d. Learning by hearing/listening 21,22 -

Kinesthetic a. Having orientation to do trial-error activity 24,25 23

b. Learning through physical activity 26,27 -

c. Physical-oriented and always moving 28,30 29

d. Having sensitivity through expression and 31,33 32

gesture

Total 21 12

Total Item 33

Note: The above total items in the questionnaire were before validity and

reliability test of instrument. After the test of instrument, there were only 15

items which were used to determine the students’ learning style.

3.3.2. Vocabulary Test

In this study, the researcher used vocabulary test to measure students’

vocabulary mastery. The researcher used some items based on the syllabus for
second graders of senior high school used by SMAN 14 Samarinda. This test

is in the form of multiple choice which consists of four options, a, b, c, and d.

The item of vocabulary test consists of 60 items, including adjectives 20 items

number 1 to 20, nouns 20 items number 21 to 40, and verbs 20 items number

41 to 60. After conducting try out, there were only 24 items, in which

adjectives 11 items number 1 to 11, nouns 8 items number 12 to 19, and verbs

5 items number 20 to 24. These items are included as content words.

3.3.3. Interview Protocol

In order to collect complete information about students’ learning styles

and their vocabulary masteries and to support the result of this study, the

researcher did interview in this research study. The researcher used semi-

structured interview which is identification of perceptions into an issue from

the perspective of respondents. It was used to develop a preliminary

hypothesis, explain relationships and create a foundation for further research

(Zorn, 2010: 1). The research asked five questions to the respondents which

consists of three students, in which the researcher took one student from each

group after classifying their learning styles such as visual, auditory, and

kinesthetic style, so that. The questions are about students’ way to learn

vocabulary and their difficulty when they learn vocabulary.

3.3.4. Try Out of The Test

In order to get the valid and reliable instrument, the researcher

conducted try out for the second grade students of SMAN 14 Samarinda

before the final forms are prepared and distributed. The researcher analyzed

the learning style questionnaire and vocabulary test items in the try out to

measure the effectiveness of each item used. The items were analyzed whether

it can be used for real test or required to be revised, such as revising certain

question and adding other items. In this study, the researcher took 30 students

as the participant of the try out by using simple random sampling.

3.4. Difficulty Index

In this study, the researcher analyzed the items of vocabulary test,

which consists of difficulty index. Difficulty index was used to measure how

good or bad the item is. A good items means that the items are not too easy or

too difficult. (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997: 173) The researcher used the

following formula to measure the difficulty index:

P=B

JS

Where: P = Difficulty Index

B = Number of Correct Answer

JS = Number of Students
 An item was determined by standard of difficulty index by Arikunto

(1999: 207) as follows in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2. Standard of Difficulty Index

No. Score P Interpretation

1. 0.00 – 0.19 Difficult

2 0.20 -0.80 Accepted

3. 0.81 – 1.00 Rejected

3.5. Instrument Validity and Reliability

3.5.1. Intrument for Validity

The researcher used SPSS 16.0 to find out the validity of the

instrument in order to determine the legality level of an instrument. It

measures the real aptitude in the skill being tested and the extent to which the

analyses of the results of a test are acceptable, which depends on the particular

use the test is intended to serve (Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008: 2278). A

high valid of data can be produced by a valid instrument. On the contrary, a

low validity of data can be produced by an invalid instrument can produce a

low validity of data. The judgment criteria whether the item is valid or invalid

is based on the result of Corrected Item-Total Correlation. If the score is

smaller than r table score (< 0.361) with the level of significance is 5 %,

which is r table score is the total respondents of try out test (N), is 30 students,
the item is invalid (dropped). On the contrary, if the score is higher than r

table score (> 0.361), the item is valid.

3.5.2. Instrument for Reliability

The same as the validity, SPSS 16.0 was also used to find out the

intrument is reliable or not. Reliability is a consistency of an instrument. It

means that an instrument can be reliable if it has a consistency in the result of

measurement. The reliability of an instrument is needed to support the validity

of an instrument. Alpha Cronbach formula was used to test the reliability of

the instrument. The reliability criterion based on Guilford (1954: 401) is

presented in the Table 3.3.

Coefficient Correlation (r) Interpretation

0.00–0.20 Not reliable

0.21–0.40 Less reliable

0.41–0.70 Reliable enough

0.71–0.90 Reliable

0.91–1.00 Very reliable

Table 3.3. Reliability Coefficient Correlation (r) Interpretation

The reliability coefficient which was obtained from the calculation was 0.610.

From the interpretation of reliability coefficient correlation (r) as in Table 3.3,

it could be concluded that the questionnaire was reliable enough.

The indicators of learning style used to determine the students’ learning style

for the real research can be seen in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4. Learning Style Instrument Prediction in the Real Research

Types Indicators Item No.

(+) (-)

Visual a. Neat and disciplinary 1 2

b. Learning by visual memory 3 -

Auditory a. Weak in visual activity - 4

b. Good in oral activity 5 -

c. Having sensitivity through music 6 -

Kinesthetic a. Having orientation to do trial- 7 -

error activity 9 8

b. Physical-oriented and always

moving

Total 6 3

Total Item 9

3.6. Data Collection and Analysis Technique

 In order to find the relationship between students’ learning styles and

their vocabulary masteries, the researcher used correlation technique with

Pearson product moment correlations which was developed by Karl Pearson

(1948). According to Kurtz & Mayo (1979: 193), the Pearson product moment

coefficient of correlation is a real number between the limiting values of

+1.00 and -1.00 which conveys the degree of correlation between two

variables.

4. Research Finding and Discussion

4.1. Finding of Students’ Learning Styles

The result of students’ learning styles was obtained by the researcher

by using questionnaire. The researcher used likert scale to score the

questionnaire of students’ learning styles. To determine the students’ learning

style (X), the researcher calculated score for each type of learning style. The

highest students’ score determined what type they were. The following table

shows the frequency and the percentage of each classification of students’

learning styles:

Table 4.1. Classification of Students’ Learning Style Questionnaire

No. Frequency (F) Percentage Qualification

1 49 66% Visual Learning Style

2 16 23% Auditory Learning Style
3 9 12% Kinesthetic Learning Style
 From the calculation, it was obtained that the most dominant students’

learning style was visual (49 students), followed by auditory (16 students),

and the last was kinesthetic (9 students). The ratio of the student total of each

learning style could be seen in Chart 4.1.

Chart 4.1. The Result of Students' Learning Style

12%

22%

66%

Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

4.2. Finding of Students’ Vocabulary Mastery

In order to measure students’ vocabulary, the researcher used

vocabulary test which consists of 24 items based on the students’ syllabus in

which the items are included as content words, such as 11 adjective items, 8

noun items, and 5 verb items. The total score of students’ vocabulary mastery

(Y) was 4244.4 from 74 students. The following table shows the frequency

and percentage of each classification of students’ vocabulary mastery:

 Table 4.2 Classification of Students’ Vocabulary Mastery

No. Frequency (F) Percentage Range Score Qualification

1 3 4% 85 – 100 Excellent
2 19 26% 70 – 84 Good
3 12 16% 60 – 69 Fair
4 17 23% 50 – 59 Poor
5 23 31% 0 – 49 Failure

Chart 4.2. The Result of Students' Vocabulary Mastery

F
35%
r
30%
o 25%

20%
m
15%

10%

5%
t
0%
100%
h
Excellent Good Fair Poor Failure
e

Table 4.2, it could be seen that the highest score was 96 and the lowest score

was 21. Based on the data, the range score was 75 (96 - 21), the mean score

was 57.35, and the standard deviation score was 16.95. It could be concluded

that the students’ vocabulary mastery was poor.

 4.3. Finding Relationship Between Students’ Learning Styles and Their

Vocabulary Masteries

The distribution of the students’ learning style and their listening skill

achievement could be seen in Table 4.3

Table 4.3. The Analysis of Relationship between Students’ Learning

Style and Their Vocabulary Masteries

N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Standard

Score Score Score Deviation
Visual 48 12 33,3 96 60 16,66294
Auditory 17 10 21 75 51.4 18,22666
Kinesthetic 9 9 25 71 54.7 14,23067
Total 74 75 21 96 57.3

From the Table 4.3, it could be seen that there was no significant

difference between the mean vocabulary mastery score of each students’

learning style. The mean score of the students with visual learning style was

60, the mean score of the students with auditory learning style was 51.4, and

the mean score of the students’ with kinesthetic learning style was 54.7.

Furthermore, the mean score of all students’ was 57.3. It means that the

students’ with auditory learning style had the lowest mean score, the students’

with kinesthetic learning style had the average mean score, and the students’
with visual learning style had the highest mean score. Those students’

vocabulary mastery mean score also could be defined as in Chart 4.4.

Chart 4.3.The Comparison between Each Students’ Learning

Style and Their Vocabulary Masteries Mean Score

60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Students' Learning Style

After collecting the score of students’ learning styles questionnaire,

the researcher correlated it with the data of students’ vocabulary mastery to

find out the relationship between both of them by using Pearson Product

Moment Correlation on SPSS 16.

Table 4.4. Product Moment Correlation on SPSS

Students' Students'
Learning Vocabulary
Styles Mastery
1 -.151
Students' Learning Pearson
 Styles Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .200
N 74 74
Pearson
Students' Vocabulary Correlation -.151 1
Mastery
Sig. (2-tailed) .200
N 74 74

Based on the table of correlation above, the students’ learning styles

and their vocabulary masteries scores were calculated by using Pearson

Product Moment Correlation on SPSS 19. The result indicated that the

correlation between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary masteries

was -0.151, and the significant value was 0.200.

When the correlation coefficient close to +1.00, it means that there is

positive correlation between students’ learning styles questionnaire (X) and

vocabulaey mastery test (Y). On the contrary, when the correlation coefficient

close to -1.00, it means that there is negative correlation between these two

variables. This closeness of the correlation between variables could be

identified by using the interval correlation coefficient and the interpretation by

Rumsey (2003).
 Table 4.5. R Value Interpretation

R Value Interpretation

-1.00 A perfect downhill (negative) linear

relationship

-0.70 to 0.60 A strong downhill (negative) linear relationship

-0.50 to 0.40 A moderate downhill (negative) linear

relationship

-0.30 to -0.10 A weak downhill (negative) linear relationship

0 No linear relationship

+0.30 to 0.40 A weak uphill (postive) linear relationship

+0.50 to 0.60 A moderate uphill (positive) relationship

+0.700 to 0.900 A strong uphill (positive) linear relationship)

+1.00 A perfect uphill (positive) linear relationship

Based on the result showed that correlation between students’ learning

styles and their vocabulary masteries was -0.151, it means that the relationship

between students’ learning styles and their vocabulary masteries could be

classified as weak downhill (negative) linear relationship.

5. Conclusion

From the analyzed data about the relationship between learning styles

and vocabulary mastery of the second grade students at SMAN 14 Samarinda,

the researcher concluded that there was no significant relationship between

students’ learning styles and their vocabulary masteries of the second grade

students at SMAN 14 Samarinda in academic year 2017/2018. Based on the

purposes of this study, the conclusions are as the following:

a. From the result of students’ learning styles questionnaire, it was found

that from 74 number of sample, 49 students (66%) preferred visual

learning style, 16 students (22%) preferred auditory learning style, and 9

students (12%) preferred kinesthetic learning style.

b. The mean score of students’ vocabulary mastery was 57.35. It showed

that that the students’ vocabulary mastery was poor. The students’

vocabulary mastery scores can be classified into five criteria, in which

excellent 3 students (4%), good 19 students (26%), fair 12 students

(16%), poor 17 students (23%), and failure 23 students (31%).

c. There was no significant correlation between students’ learning styles and

their vocabulary masteries with the level of significance 5%. Significance

value was higher than 0.05 (0.200 > 0.05), so that it could be concluded

that H0 was accepted and Ha was rejected.