hhff iiiitttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbcccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaattttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

1. 1
What is Fundamentally Missing in Language Instruction in Indonesia?
Ririn Ovilia
Universitas Negeri Padang, ririn.ovilia@fbs.unp.ac.id
Abstract
Industrial revolution 4.0 brings along fundamental change in many aspects
of life including language education. The traditional way of teaching
language has begun to fade away as claimed ineffective in this disruption
era which demands people to be critical. Besides, the demand of mastering
English has been increasingly growing. In the meantime, language
education system in Indonesia has been facing great challenge due to this
sweeping change. There is also discrepancy between the time spent in
learning English and the expected learning outcome. Despite 6, even 12,
consecutive years of formal English learning, students are seemingly to
have trouble in communicating and the result is even categorized
unsatisfactory. Having gained some experiences as a language learner and
teacher, and interest in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research, I
attempt to explore deeper on the pieces that are missing in most of language
instruction in Indonesia from both practical and theoretical viewpoint
Language Learning in Indonesia
The prominent role of English as international language has been agreeably acknowledged
in various fields of works. It has become a common knowledge in which people with English
communication skill are likely highly accepted in the certain fields such as commerce,
advertising, diplomacy, industry, technology, and etc. Moreover, in recent years, as stated by
Hutagalung and Ovilia (2016), an imperative requisite of mastering English in business world is
even greater in which people have been putting their best efforts to develop their business into
international business scale. Besides, industrial revolution 4.0 which enhances the greater
involvement of technology has also brought the demands as well as the new challenge (Hocheng,
2018). Owing to this fact, the need of mastering English is increasingly growing.
Concerned for the growing demand of mastering English, government has put the best
endeavor to improve teaching and learning English in Indonesia. For the last four decades,
teaching English has received a lot of attention, particularly, on how to teach English as foreign
language in Indonesia. A lot of efforts have been executed for the improvement, one of which
was to change language teaching curriculum. From 1950s until now, the curriculum has
undergone several major changes in terms of strategies, methods and approaches implemented.

2. 2
These changes basically aimed to help students to achieve higher communicative competence.
Furthermore, the recent attempt that the Minister of Education did to cope with this straight
challenge of mastering English was issuing the Decree of Minister of Education about
Curriculum 2013, number 59, 2014 which pinpoints that all learning aspects of English
(objective, material, teaching-learning process, media, sources, and assessment) are suggested to
equip learners with communicative skills in which they will be able to use English in real-world
context outside the classroom.
Apropos of the shifting curriculum, the most apparent and highlighted change is in the
focus of language instruction, from teacher-centre to students’ centre learning. Decades ago, the
dominated role controlling the process and outcome in teaching and learning English was
teacher, known as teacher-centre instruction. For many years, teacher-centre instruction had been
dominated all around the world. In this instruction, teacher was put in charge on everything
going on in the class. One obvious condition that happened in the class was that teacher
explained and students did what they are told compliantly. They were totally obedient and
uncritical on most of circumstances (Marcellino, 2008). Besides, communicative activities were
scarcely involved. The considerable impact which is vividly seen in this instruction was that the
students became passive during the learning process, and all of learning processes were driven
and controlled by teachers. As the result, the students had no control over their own learning;
what is learned is what is taught.
Going back few years ago when I was in the middle school, I vividly remember how
English was taught. Teaching English was merely about memorizing a set of grammar rule,
translating a text and memorizing new vocabulary. Besides, the textbook was designed to fulfill
the objective of learning English at school which were provided with the set of grammar rules,
and reading text in which the student would translate and answer the comprehension questions.
In terms of learning sources, it is very limited to only one textbook for a whole semester without
any other alternative sources given. Furthermore, drilling was mostly used strategy in which the
students repeated the words or sentences without given clear context. In that level, I had the
understanding on how to form a grammatically correct simple sentence; however, to use it
spontaneously in conversation was achingly demanding. In other words, my oral communication
skill was somewhat of zero.
By seeing the trends that is best suited the new revolution industry 4.0 era, learning a
language is beyond memorizing a set of rules; communicative competence is what most matters.
Thus, this trend has brought along blistering change in a way that completely changes over
teachers’ belief in teaching. Students are now the centre of learning, known as students-centre
learning. Ideally, students take control over their own learning, while the teacher serves as
facilitator or a mentor (Suherdi, 2019). In order to take control over their learning, students need
what is called as learning autonomy. Thus, students-centre learning is closely associated with
learning autonomy in which the students are responsible on their own learning. Theoretically
speaking, curriculum implemented in Indonesia, the 2013 curriculum, has indicated the
importance of students- centre learning and has supported this new way of teaching by urging the

3. 3
teachers to actively involve the students in learning, not just to be recipient. However, in practice
there is still discrepancy between the practice and belief of students and teachers; thus, the
practice done in the class is still pretty close resemblance to the old way of teaching.
Ramadhiyah & Lengkanawati (2019) conducted qualitative study investigating the students
and teachers’ perception on learning autonomy referring to the implementation of 2013
curriculum. The students and certified teachers were purposely selected based on certain criteria.
The teachers have at least 15 years of teaching experience who have knowledge and have
implemented the 2013 curriculum. Moreover, for the students, they were chosen since they were
taught using 2013 curriculum. Based on three aspects observed from students’ perception
(technical, psychological and political perspectives), it was shown that these students were still
far from being autonomous learners; they were still dependent much on teacher. The impact of
teacher-centre learning seemed to be obvious, even though the teacher have attempted the
change. Regarding the teachers’ perception, there was discrepancy between their belief and their
practice. The teacher had the positive attitude towards learning autonomy in which they believed
that promoting students’ autonomy would be helpful. However, their practices went on the
wrong direction in which they even had misconception. They thought that learning autonomy
and student-center instruction would reduce their works because students should be responsible
on their own learning and fewer attempts especially preparing the materials were made by
teachers. In Indonesia, the discrepancy between belief and practice, I believe, occurs quite
frequently. The teachers believed in the power of learning autonomy and student-center
instruction and thought that they have promoted students’ learning autonomy while what they
did is lifting some of their works. Learning autonomy is not something that can happen over a
night; thus, it needs a repetitive practice guided by teacher.
Due to this fact, a concern of students’ English competence at secondary school in
Indonesia has been frequently addressed in recent years. The concerns are mainly focused on the
low English communicative competence of students both in spoken and written. Despite 6, even
12, consecutive years of formal English learning, students are seemingly to have difficulties in
English communication skill and the result is even categorized as unsatisfactory (Gunantar,
2016). Having gained some experience as a language learner and teacher, and interest in second
language acquisition research, I attempt to dig deeper on the pieces that are missing in most of
language instruction in Indonesia from both practical and theoretical viewpoint.
Input in Language Learning
First and foremost aspect that, I think, is missing in language instruction, especially in
primary and secondary levels, is abundant amount of input. The experts in realm of Second
Language Acquisition (SLA) research have agreed on the role of input in which acquisition will
take place as long as massive input is provided (Lightbrown & Spada, 1999). Krashen on his
well-known hypothesis, comprehensible input hypothesis, highlights the greater role of
considerable amount of input in learning a new language. He (2003) further states that “we
acquire language in only one way: when we understand messages; that is, when we obtain
comprehensible input.”

4. 4
Looking back at how I learned English, I greatly acknowledge the power of considerable
amount of input. I started it off from the very basic knowledge of English, nearly zero speaking
skill. I vividly remember my first TOEFL score which was slightly above 300. My four-year
period at University was not so great; the improvement in my language proficiency was not
significant, especially in writing. Then, I began to like reading. The most significant change
happened a year after finishing my first degree in which I got delectation of reading. Since then,
a zeal for reading, especially novels, keeps growing and I keep continually doing a lot of
pleasure reading until now. Due to behemoth exposure, I am gradually able to feel the
improvement on almost all aspects of language development. Additionally, similar case also
happens to one of my close confidante. Her case is rather unique in which she never intends to
learn English instead she just loves reading English books. She has been doing pleasure reading
for more than 7 years and has read more than three hundreds English books. Inasmuch as her
fondness of reading keeps growing, her English proficiency is simultaneously improved proven
by her TOEFL score, 573. Without being clued up from what happen, theoretically speaking she
experiences what we call as language acquisition process especially on some language aspects
such as vocabulary, grammar, reading and listening. As it is stated by Krashen (2008, p.180), in
acquiring a language “we are not aware we are acquiring, when we are acquiring, and after we
acquire, we are not aware that anything has happened.” Owing to this anecdotal and statistical
evidence, the power of input in learning is irresistible. Furthermore, the next questions raised
would be about the types of input and how the students expose themselves to massive input.
There are two ways in which the students can massively be exposed to input; by doing extensive
reading and extensive listening simultaneously and continually.
Extensive Reading (ER)
Unlike learning L1 in which the amount of available input is abundant, the input in L2
learning is rather incremental. Besides, in Indonesia English is adjudged a foreign language in
which it is scarcely used in daily communication. Generally speaking, the only circumstance that
the students come across English is in the class. Due to this fact, the demand of input is even
higher than the places in which English is as their L2. One of the most effective ways to
maximize the outcome of learning is by providing large supply of English books which the
students can enjoy reading (Renandya, 2007). Renandya (2007) also confirms the greater power
of doing a lot of pleasure reading. He further ascribes that with teachers’ assistance in selecting
the books that they are interested in and leading them to regulate their own reading, it will not be
surprising when they are able to achieve higher language proficiency.
The question that might arise is that in the class the students also do reading practice and
what makes it different? Reading activities done in the classroom is known as Intensive Reading
(IR). According to Renandya (2007), IR frequently deals with short text following the teacher
guidance and it is then followed by some exercises to test students’ comprehension. Besides, the
goals are to develop reading skill, language and grammar skill. In this reading, the students are

5. 5
not given privilege to choose their own reading; they read what is given accordance to the
reading strategy built on that particular meeting.
The Extensive Reading (ER), however, is just the opposite. ER which comes under many
names such as pleasure reading, Uninterrupted Sustained Silent Reading (USSR), Drop
Everything and Read (DEAR), requires the students to read in great quantities in which they are
also given privilege to take control over their reading. Enjoyment is the primary goal of reading.
Thus, this kind of reading is not necessarily followed by any task due to the fact that the purpose
of this reading is to read in large quantities and enjoy it without any burden. This reading can be
done in and outside the classroom.
Concerning these two types of reading, great number of research has been conducted to
discover the type of reading which gives dramatic improvement in language learning. The
findings of studies have proven that ER contributes more on language development almost in all
aspects of language; on grammar mastery (Khansir and Deghani, 2015; Stokes, Krashen, &
Kartchner, 1998), vocabulary (Atilgan, 2013; Pigada and Schmitt, 2006), writing (Lee & Hsu,
2009; Lee & Krashen, 1996; Sakurai 2017), and language proficiency (Mason, 2011).
Khansir and Deghani (2015) conducted experimental study aiming to figure out the impact
of doing extensive reading for forty five days. The post test in form grammar test was then given.
The findings showed that the experimental group outperformed the control group significantly.
In correlational study, based on the study conducted by Stokes, Krashen, and Kartchner (1998), it
is also confirmed that extensive reading was the most contributed factor in language
development. It was highly correlated to students’ mastery on subjunctive in Spanish outdoing
other factors such as amount of formal study of Spanish, length of residence in Spain, and
subjunctive study conducted in class.
Extensive reading also contributes to vocabulary development as it is shown by findings of
the study conducted by Pigada &Schmitt (2006). In this case study, they attempted to explore the
impact of doing extensive reading for one month on Spanish vocabulary acquisition. The
findings showed that some aspects of vocabulary acquisition such as meaning, spelling,
grammatical knowledge, were all enhanced. More recently, Atilgan (2013) did a literature review
on impact of extensive reading on vocabulary. After doing a lot of deeper literature review on
relationship and contribution of extensive reading to vocabulary development, he came out with
conclusion that extensive reading greatly impacts the students’ vocabulary growth in which they
are able to pick up words subconsciously. For overall language proficiency, Mason (2011)
observed a middle-age man, Mr. Tanaka, who willingly participated in this study. Mr. Tanaka
did extensive reading for about two years without giving any language instruction. Mr. Tanaka
took TOEIC test six month after reading and the score was 475. Then he did extensive listening
in listening class for one year. While doing listening practice, he was also reading graded books.
Then, he retook TOEIC score, and his score was 655. Thus, his score was improved about 180
points. Being exposed to these findings, it is obvious that the benefits of extensive reading are
way too great to disregard.

6. 6
Extensive Listening (EL)
Extensive exposure to written form of English turns out to be not the only one to get
comprehensible input. According to Harmer (2003), extensive exposure to oral input is also one
of the best ways to teach Language. Renandya’s narrative (2011) also claims that higher
competence can be achieved when doing reading and listening extensively. This claim seems to
be widely accepted by practitioners, researchers as well as linguists, and strengthens the stand of
comprehensible input in realm of second language acquisition research. The researchers such as
Krashen even puts stronger claim regarding this matter by stating that this is the only way to
learn a language (Renandya, 2011). Despite all the claims, extensive listening, along with
extensive reading, provides greater opportunity for students to achieve higher language
communicative skill.
Similar to extensive reading, the questions might arise concerning the definition of
extensive listening and the difference between extensive listening and listening practice done in
the class. Listening practice done in the class is known as Intensive Listening. IL is one approach
in teaching listening which typically lasts only for short period and merely focuses on the
vocabulary and grammar (Renandya, 2011). It usually follows the instruction stages, pre, whilst
and post listening. Unlike IL which is rather fixed, Extensive Listening (EL) is more flexible and
attractive. Extensive listening is defined as “all types of listening that allows learners to receive a
lot of comprehensible and enjoyable listening input (Renandya, & Farell, 2005, p.5).” The most
distinguished characters of extensive listening, which makes it difference from intensive reading,
lie in the time spent, the choice of listening material and the atmosphere. The time spent in doing
listening practice should be bloated with interesting topic and enjoyable atmosphere.
At first, researchers unlikely put high interest on this area; however, the interest has been
growing which resulting the growing body of research studying this matter. Recent research from
an array of listening area indicates that extensive listening is proven giving greater learning gains
and increasingly recognized as important part of learning. BOZAN (2015), for instance,
conducted experimental study investigating the effect of EL activity outside the class. The
extensive listening practice was going on for a whole semester. 85 participants from A1 and A2
Proficiency level participated in the study which then grouped into two. The findings showed
that experimental group received larger learning gains which gave significant impact on the
students’ language proficiency.
Additionally, Permadi, Sholihah & Umamah (2017) sought the voice of teachers in
Indonesia on the importance of EL in learning a language. Four teachers teaching listening at
Universitas Islam Malang were interviewed about their voice on extensive listening. All
participants were in one voice that extensive listening is urgently needed. This claim is not
without posing a challenge. Owing to the limited time available in class, it is rather difficult to
implement.
Reflected on my experience studying English for 12 years from primary to senior high
school, the time given for listening skill was far from enough. Needless to say, at some grades
listening was nearly zero since the instruction focused more on reading skill. As a result, in

7. 7
college, there was a time when I was unsurprisingly frustrated due to the pronunciation of word
which differs from its written form. I knew the form and the meaning of the words. However,
when it came to listening, I got it wrong. Making a guess on how the words pronounced did not
work either since the pronunciation is arbitrarily fixed. Similarly, reading practice was limited
only to text provided in the textbook. Thus, the vocabulary development was rather stuck.
Having this experience made me realize that listening and reading practice were the best option
to master English. Due to the growing fondness for extensive listening and reading, I can feel
significant improvement on my language proficiency. Besides, this reflection also made me
realize that the limited time given to teach listening and the unavailable authentic material for
reading were the challenges integrating ER and EL in language instruction. However, it is still
plausible to integrate this practice outside the class. Though seemingly challenging, both kinds of
input offer greater gains and benefits in language learning. Therefore, the second missing piece,
which is students’ learning autonomy, is needed to cope with this challenge.
Learning Autonomy and How to Promote Students’ Learning Autonomy
After discovering the foremost role of both written and oral input, we surely cannot
undermine the benefits of input and must give the best endeavor to help students learning a
language by integrating extensive listening and reading into their learning inside and outside the
class. It is surely not easy since it poses great challenges in which the time provided to learn in
the classroom is far from enough, especially for senior high school in which they study English
for about 2 hours per week. This is when it comes to the second missing piece needed in
language instruction in Indonesia; students’ learning autonomy.
The concept of learning autonomy has been around for quite some times; this concept is
not completely new. According to Smith (2008), this concept was firstly introduced in early
1970s by Henry Holec at University of Nancy, France. This concept means that one should take
control over his/her own learning starting from the determining the purpose, content, his/ her
progress, method and strategies used and the progress. One thing that Holec highlighted is that
even the students are in charge on their own learning, the practice of learning autonomy is
required. In other words, the learning autonomy does not come in instant; it requires repetitive
practices guided by teachers. Thus, teachers hold great role in promoting the students’ learning
autonomy.
Theoretically speaking, education practitioner and decision makers in Indonesia have
started to acknowledge the importance of learning autonomy notion. The recent curriculum
implemented, 2013 curriculum, has urged the teacher to move on from the old-fashion way of
teaching, teacher-centered, to new way of teaching focusing more on students’ own learning.
With this movement, it has also been explicitly stated that the demand to involve more activities
that can promote students’ learning autonomy is increasing. However, considering the
circumstance of language instruction in Indonesia, encouraging self regulated learning is
challenging (Ramadhiyah, & Lengkanawati, 2019). First reason is due to the cultural background

8. 8
of Indonesian’s people; total obedience, unquestioned mind, the concept elder- know-all, and
belief that teacher can do no wrong impacted greatly on learning outcome (Darjowidjojo, 2001
cited in Ramadhiah & Lengkanawati, 2019). The second reason is the large number of students
in class. Normally, one class in Indonesia consists of more than 30 students where it is supposed
to lesser to get better result.
Moreover, due to the importance of learning autonomy, considerable amount of research
has been conducted. One of which is case study conducted by Ramadhiah & Lengkanawati
(2019). They attempted to explore the teacher and students’ perception on learning autonomy
simultaneously. The findings showed that the teachers were well aware of the importance of
learning autonomy; yet, the implementation was not well done due to limitation on teaching
material. Furthermore, the students were still tied with old-fashion way of teaching, teacher-
centre.
Contemplating on these two things which are missing in language instruction in
Indonesia made me aware that either of them is easy. Each of them undeniably poses demanding
challenge. However, actions to turn this condition upside down need to be taken. Broadening the
mind set about the notion of learning in this digital era is necessarily required. Teaching English
in this disruption era is different due to the dramatic revolution impacting all aspects of life.
In this disruption era, learning should be part of people’s lifestyle which is not dependent
on and tied to the formal instruction (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). With advancement of
technology, learning highly plausibly takes place anywhere and anytime. Besides, in this
borderless world, the sources of learning are not limited to teacher and textbook. Abundantly
available sources can be easily accessed, and it is the teachers’ job to design the activity to
maximize the use or these large sources inside and outside the classroom. Thus, in this era, not
only are the students required to have critical thinking and self regulated learning, but the
teachers should also posses these 21st century skills since they are the ones who are going to lead
and facilitate the students.
Seemingly, utilizing technology is the best option to promote students’ self regulated
learning since the students can be categorized as digital natives in which they are born with the
skill. After reviewing literatures related to utilizing technology in formal instruction setting,
Ahmadi (2018) concludes that “technology provides interaction between teachers and learners,
provides comprehensible input and output, helps learners to develop thinking skills, makes
learning and teaching becomes more student-centered, promotes learners’ autonomy and helps
them feel more confident, and increases learners’ motivation to effectively learn a foreign
language” (p. 122). Furthermore, Suherdi (2019) tried out pilot project called SMELT I 4.0 DE
which stands for Synergetic Multilayered English Language Teaching Industry 4.0 Disruption
Era. There are 3 layers on this model namely ICTC (ICT cultivation), SRLI (Self Regulated
Learning Inculcation), and TVCD (Transversal Competence Development). Based on the
findings, this multilayered model successfully enhanced students’ language skill in which each
layer gave distinctive impacts. ICTC has successfully increased students engagement and
motivation, given experience in utilizing digital device in learning, grown students’ creativity,

9. 9
while SRLI successfully promoted students’ self regulated learning. Lastly, TVCD has been
successfully built students characters.
Conclusion
Reflection on my experience as language learner and teacher and based on my limited
reading, there are two aspects which needed to be enhanced on language instruction endeavoring
to help students to achieve expected language proficiency. These aspects are input, both written
and oral input, and students’ learning autonomy. Should this inclusion was easy; the language
learning would be successful. As a matter fact, the inclusion of these two aspects is both
complicated and challenging; yet, it is highly convincingly plausible to do as long as the teachers
willingly find out or design alternatives activities which can help students to be autonomous
learner as well as provide a lot of input from various sources. The question left is “are the
teachers willing to do it?”
References
Ahmadi, M. R. (2018). The use of technology in English language learning: A literature review.
International Journal of Research in English Education, 3(2), pp. 115-125.
Atilgan, A.B. (2013). Effects of extensive reading on writing in terms of vocabulary. ITJ, 10 (1),
53-63.
BOZAN, E. (2015). The Effect of Extensive Listening for Pleasure on the Proficiency Level of
Foreign Language Learners in an Input-based Setting. Unpublished MA dissertation,
University of Kansas.
Gunantar, D.A. (2016). The Impact of English as an International Language on English
Language Teaching in Indonesia. Language Circle, 9 (1), 141-151.
Harmer, J. (2003). Listening. English Teaching Professional, 26, 29-30.
Hocheng, H. (2018). Crossing-border journey of elearning in higher education. A keynote
speech in eLFA2018 (e-Learning Forum Asia 2018 “eLearning for the Future”, held in
National Taipei University of Business, Taipei, Taiwan, 23-25 May 2018.
Hutagalung, E,Y., & Ovilia, Ririn. (2016). Boosting Students’ Self-esteem through Self Footage.
LOOW 5; Amplitude, 156-162.
Lee, S., & Hsu, Y. (2009). Determining the crucial characteristics of extensive reading programs:
The impact of extensive reading on EFL writing. The International Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching, 5 (1), 12-20.
Lee, S.Y., & Krashen, S. (1996). Free voluntary reading and writing competence in Taiwanese
high school students. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 83, 687-690.
Lightbrown, P.M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford University Press.
New York.
Mason, B. (2011). Impressive gains on the TOEIC after one year of comprehensible input, with
no Output or grammar study. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(1).
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2007). Listen and learn: A systematic review of the evidence
that podcasting supports learning in higher education. In C. Montgomerie,& J. Seale

10. 10
(Eds.),Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications (pp. 1669–1677). Chesapeake, VA: AAC.
Khansir, A.A., & Deghani, N. (2015). The Impact of extensive reading on grammatical mastery
of Irania EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 5 (7), 1501-1507.
Krashen, S. (2003). Exploration in Language Acquisition and Use. Heinamann.USA.
Krashen, S. (2008). Language education; past, present and future. RELC Journal. 39 (2), 178-
187.
Permadi, M.B., Sholihah, M.A., & Umamah, A. 2017. Extensive Listening: Listen to EFL
Teacher’s Voice. Proceeding International Seminar on Language Education and Culture.
197-202.
Pigada, M. & Schmitt, N. (2006). Vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading; A Case Study.
Reading in a Foreign Language. 18, (1), 1-28.
Ramadhiyah, S., & Lengkanawati, N,S, (2019). Exploring EFL Learner Autonomy in the 2013
Curriculum Implementation. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 9(1), 231-240.
Renandya, W.A. (2007). The power of extensive reading. RELC Journal. 38(2), 133-149
Renandya, W.A. (2011). Extensive in Language Classroom. In H.P Widodo, & A. Cirocki (eds),
Innovation and creativity in ELT Methodology (pp28-41). New York; Nova Science
Publisher.
Sakurai, N. (2017). The Relationship between the amount of extensive reading and the writing
performance. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal. 17(2), 142- 164.
Smith, R. (2008). Learner Autonomy. ELT Journal, 64 (4), 395-397.
Stokes, J., S. Krashen, and J. Kartchner. (1998). Factors in the acquisition of the present
subjunctive in Spanish: The role of reading and study. ITL; Review of Applied
Linguistics, 121(1), 19-25.
Suherdi. D. (2019). Teaching English in the industry 4.0 and disruptive era: Early lessons from
the implementation of SMELT 1 4.0 DE in a senior high lab school class. Indonesian
Journal of Applied Linguistics. 9(1), 67-75