629 

 

 

EEJ 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

 

English Education Journal 
 

http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej 

 

Achievement Strategies in Facing Communication Breakdown Used by 

the Learners in the Basic Speaking Class of Kampung Inggris Jogja  

 

Novia Uswatun Hasanah, Januarius Mujiyanto 

 

Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia 

Article Info 

________________ 

Article History: 

Accepted 09 May 2022 

Approved 04 July 2022 

Published 23 

December 2022 

 

________________ 

Keywords: 

Achievement 

strategies, 

Communication 

strategies, Speaking 

____________________ 

 

Abstract
 

___________________________________________________________________ 

The present study examines learners' strategies in a basic speaking class at 

Kampung Inggris Jogja to overcome communication breakdowns and effectively 

convey their ideas and messages to their interlocutors. Furthermore, the study 

aims to investigate the achievement strategies within the framework of Celce-

Murcia et al. (1995) in the classroom interactions among the learners at Kampung 

Inggris Jogja. A qualitative methodology, specifically discourse analysis of 

spoken interactions, was utilized to analyze the collected data. Data was 

gathered through observation of the learners' interactions and recording of their 

conversations. The investigation revealed that the learners at Kampung Inggris 

Jogja utilized various achievement strategies in their interactions. However, the 

foreignizing strategy was not observed among the participants. The strategies 

most frequently employed by the learners included code-switching, literal 

translation, non-linguistic means, restructuring, and retrieval. Additionally, the 

study indicated that learning activities, topics, and environments significantly 

impacted the learners' communication. Internal factors, such as vocabulary 

mastery, knowledge of proper grammar, and motivation, played a crucial role in 

the learners' speaking performance. It is essential to acknowledge the limitations 

of this study and recognize the need for further research to build upon these 

findings. Nevertheless, the results of this study contribute to a more 

comprehensive understanding of the strategies utilized by learners to overcome 

communication problems and have implications for language teaching and 

learning in similar contexts. The study highlights the significance of the findings 

for future research and language education. 

  
Correspondence Address :  

Jl. Kelud Utara III No.15, Kel. Petompon, Kec. Gajahmungkur, 

Kota Semarang, Jawa Tengah 50237 

E-mail : novia.hasanah@students.unnes.ac.id 

p-ISSN 2087-0108 

e-ISSN 2502-4566
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

630 

 

INTRODUCTION 

 

Communication breakdown frequently 

happens when people communicate with each 

other. In the case of non-native speakers who 

communicate in English, there will be some 

challenges. The English foreign language (EFL) 

learners in Indonesia, for instance, who get 

English as their foreign or third language (L3) 

after Indonesian as their second language (L2) 

and their vernacular language like Javanese, 

Sundanese, Maduranese, Balinese, etc. as their 

first language (L1) may encounter various 

problems in English communication.  

 In Indonesia, English is not spoken as a 

second language. Ellis (2015) points out that the 

context of 'second' refers to any language which 

is learned adjacent to the mother tongue. Hence, 

in the Indonesian context, English is considered 

as a foreign language. This fact influences the 

mindset and perception of Indonesian people 

toward English itself. As time passes, people 

learn English because it is required to procure an 

education level or a career living. Besides, since 

English has become an international language, 

they consider practicing it more seriously.  

It is broadly known that there are four 

primary language skills: listening, speaking, 

reading, and writing. The learners need to 

develop their skills to have a good mastery of a 

language. In the case of learning a foreign 

language, the core of it is the skill or the ability to 

use the target language (TL). Therefore, the most 

crucial skill is speaking. Through speaking skills, 

EFL learners can communicate with the 

interlocutor in any communication situation. As 

in communication, people can deliver and receive 

the idea or message and even negotiate the 

meaning (Rubin and Thompson in Fauziati, 

2017).  

To build good communication, the 

messages which the speaker conveys should be 

understood by the interlocutor. The ability to 

speak plays a crucial role in communication. 

According to Safitri and Faridi (2017), 

communication is a way of conveying the 

intended meaning from one to another.  

Furthermore, the interlocutor should understand 

the messages that the speaker intends. 

Unfortunately, some communication problems 

the speaker faces make the messages unable to be 

expressed maximally. The information gap 

between the speaker and the interlocutor: the 

encoded message differs from the decoded 

message may cause a communication 

breakdown. In other words, the message sent is 

not the message received. 

To overcome those communication 

problems, the speaker should have good 

competencies and skills, namely communicative 

competencies. After the elaboration, revision, 

and development of many linguists: Hymes 

(1972), Canale and Swain (1980), Canale (1983), 

the latest framework of communicative 

competences' theory was proposed by Celce-

Murcia Dornyei & Thurrel (1995). They brought 

up the concept of communicative competencies 

into linguistic, discourse, actional, socio-cultural, 

and strategic competence. Celce-Murcia then 

proposed a revision of the 1995 model by 

considering some pedagogical input for language 

teachers: sociocultural, discourse, linguistic, 

formulaic, interactional, and strategic 

competence which is later known as 

communication strategies (Celce-Murcia, 2007).  

Communication strategies can be defined 

as systematic attempts used by the learners to 

express meaning in the target language, in 

situations where the appropriate systematic target 

language rules cannot be formed properly (Faerch 

& Kasper, 1983). There are several taxonomies of 

communication strategies in order to classify the 

strategies used by the learner. There are Tarone, 

Dornyei and Celce-Murcia et al. Tarone 

proposed seven main categories of 

communication strategies: topic avoidance, 

message abandonment, paraphrasing, word 

coinage, native language switching, miming, and 

appeal for assistance. Meanwhile, Dornyei 

simplified them into two categories: avoidance 

and compensatory or achievement strategies. 

Later Celce-Murcia et al. also proposed a 

comprehensive set of communication strategies' 

taxonomy. They divided their taxonomy into five 

main classifications: topic avoidance, 

achievement, time gaining, self-monitoring and 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

631 

 

interactional. Among all the strategies, 

achievement strategies have more alternative 

strategies than others. It can be used by learners 

more varied. They deal with how the speaker 

compensates for the communication in achieving 

effective communication. Galvez (2018) found 

that the compensatory or achievement strategies 

of the students affected in developing 

phonological competence in a language alien to 

them. The result showed that the they had a 

positive impact on the student’s performance. 

Moreover, competent speakers reportedly much 

more used achievement strategies than poor 

speakers. Therefore, its significant implication for 

pedagogy is that the achievement strategies are 

beneficial as guidance to avoid communication 

gaps in speaking activities (Syafryadin, et al., 

2020). 

Unfortunately, communication strategies 

got the smallest portion in English teaching and 

learning (Marsakawati, 2012). Teachers are not 

always aware of the importance of teaching 

communication strategies to their students, or if 

they are aware, they do not explicitly train their 

students to use them. Many teachers do not make 

use of these strategies in their everyday practice 

(Suryaningpram, 2019). It is ironic because 

communication strategies allow learners to use 

them when they have communication problems. 

In English language learning, the need to teach 

communication strategies is highly required 

because many Indonesians knew English just 

when they entered school (Widyaningrum, 

2020). They still have limited knowledge and 

competence in communicating well in English. 

Hence, a genuine effort from the teacher is 

needed to introduce the strategies that can be used 

by their students when they have communication 

problems. 

Related to the background of the problems 

mentioned before, the researcher was interested 

in observing the achievement strategies in facing 

communication problems used by the EFL 

learners at Kampung Inggris Jogja. 

Achievement strategies are the attempts 

made by the learners to solve the communicative 

problem by expanding their communicative 

resources (Faerch & Kasper, 1983). Meanwhile, 

Celce-Murcia et al. (1995) stated that they involve 

manipulating available language to reach a 

communicative goal. There are ten types of 

achievement strategies such as circumlocution, 

approximation, all-purpose words, non-linguistic 

means, restructuring, word-coinage, literal 

translation, foreignizing, code-switching, and 

retrieval strategy. Masithoh et al. (2018) 

mentioned that achievement strategies happened 

when the learners decided to keep the original 

communicative goal but compensated for 

insufficient means or made an effort to retrieve 

the required items. 

She wanted to elaborate on the factors that 

influence the learners' communication problems 

and the reasons for choosing the strategies. Akan 

(2018) found that both internal and external 

factors contribute to the learners’ speaking 

performances. Internal factors were. The internal 

factors discovered the age, aptitude, motivation, 

personality, intelligence, cognitive style, 

experience, mother language, and gender. The 

external factors were the things presented in the 

process of teaching and learning that impersonal 

and changeable. These things were included in 

external factors such as teacher, syllabus, 

curriculum, class size, culture and status, 

encouragement, group discussion, access to 

native speakers, teachers’ expectation, and 

classroom management. Meanwhile, Widagdo 

(2020) also discovered two types of psychological 

factors in students’ language learning. The 

internal factors were the things that were 

mentally and spiritually concerned with anxiety, 

attitude, aptitude, and motivation. In contrast, he 

argued that external things such as the 

characteristic of the teacher, class, and school 

conditions did not influence the speaking 

performance of the learners. 

 

METHOD 

  

In this study, the researcher applied a 

qualitative approach exposing spoken-

discourse analysis. She described and 

explained the application of the achievement 

strategies in the learners' interaction. The study 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

632 

 

subjects were twenty-three learners at the basic 

speaking class of a full-day one-month program 

in Kampung Inggris Jogja. It is an English 

language course and practice in Yogyakarta 

located on Jl. Ontorejo, Ngebel, Tamantirto, 

Kasihan, Bantul regency, Special Region of 

Yogyakarta. It applied a concept of an English-

speaking village that requires everyone to speak 

English anytime and anywhere around the area. 

Twenty-four learners in the Basic Speaking 

Class for Full Day month program came from 

different backgrounds and knowledge. The data 

were collected through observation and 

interviews. This research used the taxonomy of 

Celce-Murcia et al. focusing on achievement 

strategies. After collecting the data, it was 

analyzed using the achievement strategies of 

Celce-Murcia et al. (1995) taxonomy. The 

interview was used to support the validity of the 

research. Finally, the findings were explained 

qualitatively. 

The main instrument of this research was 

the researcher herself. The researcher played the 

role of a non-participant observer and as the 

interviewer in the interview section. 

Furthermore, four supporting instruments were 

used by the researcher to collect data. The first 

was a video and audio recorder. The second 

instrument was the rubric of achievement 

strategies. The last one was interview guidelines. 

The object of the study was the learners' 

interaction among learners. The interactions 

were in utterances and taken through the learners' 

impromptu discussion. The unit of analysis was 

phrases, clauses, and clause complexes from 

utterances in their interaction. 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 

 

The present study finds nine achievement 

strategies in learners' interaction at Kampung 

Inggris Jogja. They are explained in the table 

below. 

 

Circumlocution Strategy 

A circumlocution strategy is the first 

achievement strategy identified in learners' 

interaction. It is the effort of the learners to 

replace a particular object or action by using the 

synonym term which has the closest meaning to 

it. The tutor realized the example of the 

circumlocution strategy. Instead of using the 

appropriate terms in the TL, she chose to express 

a specific Indonesian slang, "akamsi," which 

referred to "native people". The term "akamsi" 

was constructed from the three different words; 

"anak kampong sini". People then made an 

acronym of that terms to be "akamsi". It was the 

Indonesian slang word that commonly used in a 

non-formal context of interaction. It was used 

among the group of people that quite close each 

other. 

 

Approximation Strategy 

An approximation can be the replacement 

of a particular term with a word with a close 

meaning. The present study found that the 

learners rarely used this strategy in 

communication. 

The findings show that only one example 

of approximation strategy is realized in learners' 

interaction. It was the term "special time". The 

context of the communication was when the 

learner discusses how long a child should be 

allowed to use a gadget in one day. He wanted to 

emphasize a specific time for a child being 

exposed to the gadget, but instead of using the 

particular term "specific," he chose to use 

"special", which did not match the term stating 

time. It showed that the learner substituted the 

word with another word with a close meaning. 

 

Non-Linguistic Means Strategy 

Non-linguistic means as the learners’ clue 

to the interlocutor to show the intended message. 

In other words, non-linguistic means are the ways 

the learners in gesturing part of the body to 

express a word they did not know in the TL.  

There are many non-linguistic means 

strategies found in the learners' interaction. They 

include "pointing somewhere", "shaking the 

head", "shaking hand roundly", "snapping the 

fingers", "nodding", "waving the hand", 

"imitating an activity" and "frowning the 

forehead". 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

633 

 

Learners used non-linguistic means very 

often partially in gesturing hands. That gesture 

had various meanings and functions, such as 

decreasing nervousness while speaking, giving a 

sign of asking help to the interlocutor, saying 

"no", acting or imitating particular activity, and 

pointing out somewhere or something. When the 

learners nodded, it was mostly a statement of 

agreement or understanding. Their forehead 

sometimes frowned due to the lack of knowledge 

of their partner's words. As has been mentioned 

by Dahl and Ludvigsen (2014) that learners 

tended to gesture their bodies for some reasons; 

asking for help, stating for understanding and 

confusion, stating for rejection and acceptance.  

 

Restructuring Strategy 

The learners restructured most on the 

sentences they feel they are in a wrong grammar, 

diction, or noun-phrase. It can be analyzed 

through the data like "I have special someone” "I 

playing guitar” "You can tell me to later” "My 

hobby is listen music". Most of the learners were 

not really aware of how they convey the term in 

proper sentences since they were beginners. A 

few learners who had a better knowledge of 

English helped the other who had mistakes in 

their communication. The tutor also had a crucial 

role in helping the learners correcting and 

restructuring their wrong sentences. 

Word Coinage Strategy 

The use of word coinage was not really 

often in the learners' interaction. Meanwhile 

some words were identified such as "we can 

provide our family and keep open communication 

with the family", instead of using term protect, a 

learner used the term of provide. Many learners 

having problem in pronouncing some words and 

finally uttered them wrong such as "river by 

raiver", "recycle by raisekl", "impact by aimpact", 

"fifteen by fiveteen" etc. Basically, it was a 

strategy applied by creating non-existing L2 word 

based on a supposed rule. Learners were making 

their own terms based on their linguistic 

knowledge. 

Literal Translation 

One of the most dominant type of the 

strategy that used by the learners was literal 

translation. When the learners or speakers found 

difficulties to express a certain term to the 

interlocutors, finally, they need to make a literal 

translation from their first language to the target 

language. The term was not appropriate to the 

structure of the target language. For instance, in 

the datum "….food traditional are nasi goreng 

Magelangan, kupat tahu, and sego godog. Drink 

traditional is wedang kacang ijo. Musical 

instrument from Magelang is trutug. Dance 

traditional from Magelang is……" and "Thanks 

for attention, brother, sister, father-father, 

mother-mother." 

 

Retrieval Strategy 

The use of retrieval strategy was quite 

common in the learners' interaction. It mostly 

happened when the learners tried to recall 

memory of what they were intended to say 

before. They tended to take a longer time to 

repeating syllable, word or phrase to acquire the 

correct ones. For instance, from the data "Next, 

the local ku… kui… cuisine." and "….technology 

is a science or knowledge eee… or knowledge… 

put into practic eee… part eee… partic… eee 

partical… eee practical problem solving." 

However, the use of fillers followed by the 

repetition of some terms were found in the 

learners' interaction. It could be noted as the 

realization of this retrieval strategy since the 

speakers had the same problem in recalling word, 

or sentence. The example of the use of other 

retrieval strategy could be seen from this data "It 

is also harmful to plant in… plant in… the forest” 

"it’s about eight… eight… eee… eight tons plastic 

waste for every year” and “…for short term time 

eee… if like… like… eee… this season in eee… 

raining season… rain season…” etc. 

 

Code Switching Strategy 

Code-switching was the dominant used 

strategy in the learners’ interaction. Mostly, the 

learners switched their language to the L1 due to 

the lack of vocabulary. That problem lead to the 

use of mixed language in communication. The 

learners including the tutor did switch the 

languages to make the messages of their 

statements easier to be understood each other. 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

634 

 

Some examples of the realization of the 

strategy could be seen in these data “Am I clear? 

Jelas nggak? Jadi, jelas yah?” “But every day you 

nyanyi-nyanyi eh… singing terus… always 

singing.” “Although there are disaster, biasanya 

orang Indonesia tetep nggak sadar…” “Can I… aku 

aja yang jawab bisa?” etc. 

 

All-purposes Word strategy 

The strategy named all-purpose word was 

almost unrealized in the learners’ interaction. 

The finding showed that only one word refers to 

the function of the strategy to replace a certain 

word, thing, or term that the interlocutors mostly 

understand because it is quite common in daily 

use. In this present study, the term “blablabla” is 

usually used to say “et cetera.” It is generally used 

at the end of a sentence. The function was to 

mention “other similar things” related to the 

communication topic. 

Achievement strategies employed were the 

impact of many communication difficulties faced 

by the learners. Especially in the context of real 

conversations, learners realized the factors that 

placed them in the situation that forced them to 

apply the strategies (Hua, et al., 2012). Besides, 

based on the observation and interview, the 

researcher discovered some factors that influence 

them in realizing the strategy to maintain their 

communication. The researcher generally 

grouped them into two groups; internal and 

external factors. 

The interview result showed that the 

learners have their own factors that influenced 

them in maintaining communication 

breakdowns. 

First, is the learners’ Educational 

Background. The experiences of EFL learners in 

interacting and communicating in English 

determined their foundation for speaking. How 

often someone is exposed to a foreign language 

influences their learning habits. The outcome was 

different for those who are frequently exposed to 

English versus those who are not. The members 

of the basic speaking class of the full-day one-

month program in Kampung Inggris Jogja had 

different educational backgrounds, such as senior 

high school students, gap year students, 

university students, graduate students, 

professional workers, and job seekers. Most of 

them who came to the course intended to 

improve their speaking skills, but their different 

educational background gave them a different 

start. 

Second, is the learners’ cultural 

background. The variation of the members gives 

consequences to the interpretation of the cultures 

in that community. The language was a product 

of culture. In a group of different cultural 

backgrounds, cultural understanding became 

important because culture changes people’s 

values and habits and affects people’s language 

and behaviors (Kuo, M.M. & Lai, C.C 2006).  In 

language acquisition, learners need to acculturate 

to learn a language. In the context of speaking 

learning interaction in Kampung Inggris Jogja, the 

learners’ cultural backgrounds affected their 

familiarity with new words. Some words emerge 

as they become identified with particular cultural 

activities. The whole learners might not 

understand the slang words used in their 

interactions. The same thing happened to the 

specific terms used only by certain traditions in 

the learners’ hometowns. It is influenced by 

ethnic background, gender, race, and religion. 

Hence, the researcher discovered that culture 

affected the learner’s speaking. 

The third factor is the motivation of 

learning. Learners saw motivation as vital to their 

desire to attend the speaking class. Most of them 

wanted to improve their skills, especially 

speaking skills, to support their dream job and 

education. This is in line with a study conducted 

by Bakhtiar (2022). He found that learners’ 

motivation came from the inside and outside. 

Things that were coming from within a person 

such as demanding work, recognition, and 

responsibility as the inside motivation. 

Meanwhile, the things such as praise, reward, 

punishment, and advise from teachers, friends 

and parents were considered as the outside 

motivation. Next, learners’ personalities also 

influence their speaking performance. There were 

two kinds of learners, extrovert and introverted, 

in learning communication and interaction at 

Kampung Inggris Jogja. The extroverted learners 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

635 

 

were more expressive and not afraid of making 

mistakes. They were brave enough to take a risk 

and keep on learning. Mujahadah (2018) 

mentioned that extroverted students used more 

strategies than introverted students. 

Next, lack of confidence becomes a factor 

that influences the learners. Some learners felt 

shy, worried, and nervous in their 

communication. So, it influenced their speaking 

performances. As learners said in the interviews, 

their worry and nervousness can break their focus 

and make them feel unconfident. The shyness, 

nervousness, and worry made them overthink 

and afraid of making mistakes, so it broke their 

concentration. This was in line with a study by 

Dewi (2021) who found that learners did not 

believe in themselves when speaking English. 

They did not relax because they were afraid of 

making mistakes. Besides, some others felt 

pressure whenever their partner asked and spoke 

to them. 

Ellis (2015) discovered the external factors 

that influence learning achievement are social 

factors, input, and interaction. Kondo (2018) 

found that the environment, peers, and teacher 

played a role in students’ English-speaking 

performance. In line with Kondo, the researcher 

in the present study found that those things 

influence the learners' speaking performance in 

Kampung Inggris Jogja. 

Kampung Inggris Jogja provided the 

speaking area that obliged the learners to speak 

English around the speaking camp program. It 

brought a homey and friendly learning 

environment because it allowed learners to 

practice more outside the classroom. Hence, the 

English-speaking area affected the learners’ 

progress in speaking in a good way. Learners 

enjoyed practicing with their friends in the camp 

to increase their learning process. As stated by 

Bima and Adi (2021) that learning environment 

had a big influence on the learners’ achievement 

of their educational outcomes because it covers 

the aspects that make learners enjoy studying and 

practicing. Moreover, the area of Kampung Inggris 

Jogja; the office, classroom, canteen, and the 

camp included the English area where the 

learners should speak English. Hence, the 

learning environment in Kampung Inggris Jogja 

supported the learners’ speaking practice. 

The human resources of Kampung Inggris 

Jogja were energetic, young, and cheerful people. 

Those characteristics gave an impact on the 

learning process. The age gap not too far from the 

learners made the learning process more 

enjoyable. Learners acknowledged that the role 

of the tutor really helps them in practicing 

speaking. The tutor helped them in correcting and 

giving them solutions to their problems. It was in 

line with a study conducted by Areta and 

Purwanti (2021) who found that feedback from 

tutors contributed to learners’ speaking 

performance. The feedback from the tutor during 

speaking activities helped the learners in 

identifying and correcting their mistakes. 

The tutors' learning methodology, 

especially Kampung Inggris Pare's adopted 

methods, brought the typical learning nuance. 

Generally, the basic-speaking class at Kampung 

Inggris Jogja implemented thematic peer 

conversations every day. So, the tutor gave the 

topics and clues of what they should mention in 

conversation before they practiced speaking. 

During and after the practice, the tutor gave 

feedback and evaluation about the learners’ 

conversations. The interviews with the learners 

discovered that some learners enjoyed the 

technique. However, other learners, wanted to 

experience learning speaking in other ways. They 

said that the methodology needs improvement 

and variation. They wanted to experience 

techniques that facilitated them to be more active. 

The data from the interviews showed that 

the learners agreed that learning topic has a big 

contribution to their speaking performance. The 

learners considered the topic and the tutors' clues 

before the practice helped them construct what 

they wanted to speak. However, other learners 

revealed the opposite opinion about the learning 

topics. She considered that some topics were not 

the daily topics she needed to learn. 

 

CONCLUSION  

 

According to the analysis and the interview 

of how the learners of the basic speaking class at 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

636 

 

Kampung Inggris Jogja use achievement 

strategies in delivering their ideas and 

overcoming communication breakdown, nine 

types of achievement strategies were realized. 

The most dominant and the rarest strategy, are: 

literal translation, code-switching, restructuring, 

retrieval, non-linguistic means, word-coinage, 

circumlocution, and approximation.  

The classification was based on the 

taxonomy of the achievement strategies proposed 

by Celce-Murcia et al. (1995). The learners used 

those strategies for several reasons. Actually, the 

learners employed some communication 

strategies, but sometimes they did not realize it. 

For instance, they employed a literal translation 

strategy to make their message more 

understandable. Code-switching was realized 

because they had a problem in the middle of 

communication, so to reach the goal of 

communication, they switched languages. When 

the learners were gesturing their bodies, it was 

supposed to be how they gave the interlocutors 

some clues and signs to keep their 

communication going. Meanwhile, since they 

were beginners in speaking English, they were 

unaware of their grammatical mistakes. They 

repeated some words or terms followed by the 

fillers to take longer to think of the proper words 

they wanted to say. 

Based on the interviews, it could be 

concluded that their communication breakdowns 

came from their lack of vocabulary, unfamiliarity 

with the proper grammar use, confidence in 

performing in front of their partner or the public, 

and motivation to engage in the activity on the 

class. Those were included in the internal factors 

influencing the learners’ speaking performance 

during class. On the other hand, some points 

from the learners had influenced the speaking 

performance. They are the class activity, the 

learning method, the discussion topic, the study's 

setting, and the relationship between the learners 

and the tutor. 

 

REFERENCES 

 

Akan, Md. F. (2018). The influencing factors of 

language development: Learners developing 

second and foreign languages. REFAAD 

Bulletin of Advanced English Studies, 1 (1), 

119-129. 

Areta, D.P., & Purwanti, I.T. (2021). Factors 

contributing to EFL learners’ speaking 

performance. International Journal of 

Education Best Practices (IJEBP), 5(1), 60-

79. 

Bakhtiar, M. R. & Suwandi. (2022). The 

psychological factors impacts on the 

students’ speaking skill. English Education 

Journal, 12(3), 356-363. 

Bima, F.M., & Adi, S.S. (2021). Classroom 

environment, students motivation, and 

speaking anxiety among vocational high 

school students in English lesson. 

EURODIO, 8(1), 83-94. 

Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. 

(1995). Communicative competence: A 

pedagogically motivated model with content 

specifications. Issues in Applied 

Linguistics, 6(2), 5-35. 

Celce-Murcia, M.  (2007). Rethinking the Role of 

Communication Competence. In: Soler E. A. 

S and Maria P. S. J. Intercultural Language 

Use and Language Learning. Dordrecht: 

Springer. 

Dahl, T. I., & Ludvigsen, S. (2014). How i see 

what you’re saying: The role of gestures in 

native and foreign language listening 

comprehension. The Modern Language 

Journal, 98(3), 813–833.  

Demir, Y., Mutlu, G., & Şişman, Y. S. (2018). 

Exploring the oral communication 

strategies used by Turkish EFL learners: A 

mixed methods study. International 

Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 539-554.  

Dewi, F.H., Faridi, A., & Saleh, M. (2021). 

Psychological problems faced by nautical 

students of politeknik bumi akpelni 

semarang in speaking maritime 

English. English Education Journal, 11(4), 

550-557.  

Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding second language 

acquisition (2nd ed). Oxford University 

Press. 



Novia Uswatun Hasanah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 629-637 

637 

 

Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (Eds). (1983). Plans and 

strategies in foreign language 

communication. In. C. Faerch & G. 

Fauziati, E. (2017). Native and target language 

influence on the students’ interlanguage 

production: A case of Indonesian EFL 

compositions. Indonesian Journal of Applied 

Linguistics, 7(1), 54-63. 

Galvez, E. P. (2018). Using compensatory 

strategies: A mixed-method in analyzing 

phonological competency of tertiary ESL 

Filipino students. European Journal of 

English Language and Literature Studies, 6(2), 

1-9. 

Hua, T. K., Moh Nor, N. F., & Jaradat, M.N. (2012). 

Communication strategies among EFL 

students- an examination of frequency of use 

and types of strategies used. GEMA Online 

Journal of Language Studies, 12(3), 831-

848. 

Kondo, P. (2018). Contributing factors to 

students’ English speaking performance at 

University Klabat. Human Behavior 

Development and Society, 17, 79-88. 

Kuo, M.M., & Lai, C.C. (2006). Linguistics 

across cultures: The impact of culture on 

second language learning. Journal of Foreign 

Language Instruction, 1-9. 

Marsakawati, N. P. E. (2012). Strategi komunikasi: 

Sebuah solusi bagi permasalahan 

komunikasi. Lingua Didaktika, 6(1), 51-58. 

Masithoh, H., Fauziati, E., & Supriyadi, S. 

(2018). Communication strategies used by 

the students on the perspective of language 

proficiency. International Journal of 

Multicultural and Multireligious 

Understanding (IJMMU), 5(5), 21-32.  

Mujahadah, S., Rukmini, D., & Faridi, A. 

(2018). The realization of communication 

strategies used by extrovert and introvert 

students in conversation. English Education 

Journal, 8(2), 178–185. Retrieved from  

Safitri, R. & Faridi, A. (2017). The flouting of 

Grice’s cooperative principle by native and 

non-native speakers of English. English 

Education Journal (EEJ), 7(3), 279-285. 

Suryaningpram, Y. B., Agustien, H. I. R., 

Mujiyanto, J. (2019). The realization of 

communication strategies in teacher-

student interactions in Tunas Harum 

Bangsa Trilingual National School. 

English Education Journal (EEJ), 9(3), 361-

367. 

Syafryadin, Martina, F. & Salniwati. (2020). 

Compensation strategies in speaking 

activities for non-English department 

students: Poor and competent speakers. 

Journal of English Education Society, 5(2), 

109-116.  

Widagdo, A. (2020). Faktor pdikologis 

siswa/mahasiswa dalam pembelajaran 

bahasa asing: Sebuah dilemma bagi 

pengajar bahasa Inggris. KREATIF, 11(1), 

28-38.  

Widyaningrum, L., Faridi, A., & Saleh, M. 

(2020). The relationship between 

communication strategies and language 

proficiency among the English Department 

Students of IAIN Kudus. English Education 

Journal, 10(4), 504-602.