teaching speaking skills using problem solving...
TRANSCRIPT
i
TEACHING SPEAKING SKILLS USING PROBLEM
SOLVING ACTIVITIES
(An Experimental Research in speaking 1 at the first semester of IAIN
SALATIGA in the Academic Year of 2014/2015)
A GRADUATING PAPER
Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan Islam
(S.Pd.I)
English Education Department of Teacher Training and
Education Faculty
State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
By:
FIZANI FADILAH
113 11 089
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN)
SALATIGA
2015
ii
iii
iv
v
MOTTO
O children of Adam, We have bestowed upon you
clothing to conceal your private parts and as
adornment. But the clothing of righteousness - that is
best. That is from the signs of Allah that perhaps
they will remember. (QS Al A’raf verse: 26)
vi
DEDICATION
This graduating paper is dedicated to:
My beloved parents, Mrs. Ifa Miyanti and Mr. Agus Satyawan, who always
educate me in doing good thing. They are my hero, thanks for all generosity,
finance, and encouragement, and also thanks for your love, trust, and
everlasting praying. Allah bless you mom and dad.
vii
viii
ix
ABSTRACT
Fadilah, Fizani, 2015:“Teaching Speaking Skills Using Problem Solving
Activities” (An Experimental Research in speaking 1 At The First
Semester of IAIN Salatiga in The Academic Year Of 2014/2015)”A
Graduating Paper. Teacher Training and Education Faculty
(TTEF). English Education Department. State Institute for Islamic
Studies Salatiga. Consultant: Ari Setiawan, S. Pd., M. M.
The objectives of this research entitled “Teaching Speaking Skills Using Problem-
Solving Activities in speaking 1 at first semester of IAIN Salatiga in academic
year of 2014/2015” was to find out does the Problem Solving Activities improved
students’ speaking skills at the first semester of IAIN Salatiga. The research used
quantitative method with one group pretest-posttest design. The instrument of this
research was the t-test. The population of this research 20 of class control and
experiment group speaking 1 of IAIN Salatiga. The sample was entire population.
The data of this research were collected by using the pretest and posttest to the
students’ sample. The results of the data analysis showed that: the mean of control
group was 1.04 and the experiment group was 2.56 and t-observed was 1.81. The
t-critical value with degree of freedom (df) = 19 and significance level at 0.05 was
0.90. Based on the analysis above the alternative hypothesis of this research was
accepted, because the t-observed was bigger than t-critical value (1.81 > 0.90). It
could also be concluded that teaching speaking skill using problem-solving
activities improved the students’ speaking skills.
Keywords: Teaching, Speaking Skills, Problem-Solving Method
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE........................................................................................................ i
DECLARATION.................................................................................................. ii
ATTENTIVE COUNSELOR............................................................................. iii
CERTIFICATION PAGE.................................................................................. iv
MOTTO................................................................................................................. v
DEDICATION..................................................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT................................................................................. vii
ABSTRACK......................................................................................................... ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................... x
LIST OF TABLE............................................................................................... xiii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Research................................................................................... 1
B. Statement of the Problem Research................................................................... 4
C. Objective of the Research.................................................................................. 4
D. Benefit of the Research......................................................................................5
E. Limitation of the Research……………………………………………..............6
F. Definition of Key Term…………………………………………………...........6
G. Review of previous research………………………………………...................8
H. Outline of graduating paper………………………………………..................10
xi
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF ELATED LITERARTURE
A. Problem Solving Activities (PSA)…………...………………………….........11
1. Aspects of Problem Solving Activities to Language Teaching ………............13
2. The purpose and the benefits of PSA …………….…………..........................14
3. The steps of PSA ………………………………..…………….........................15
4. The strengths and weaknesses of PSA …………...…………...........................16
B. Speaking…………………………………………………………................... 17
1. The Elements of Speaking…………………………………............................ 18
2. Type of classroom speaking performance ……………………………….........19
3. Classroom speaking activities …………………….......................................... 20
4. Teaching Speaking Skill ……………………………….................................. 23
5. The Principles for Teaching Speaking to Beginners .…………....................... 23
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH
A. The setting of the research………………………………............................... 26
1. General Situation of IAIN Salatiga …………………….................................. 26
2. Faculties of IAIN Salatiga ………………………………................................ 27
B. Subject of Researc …………………………………………...........................32
C. Research Design ………………………………………………...................... 34
D. Research method…………………………………………………................. 35
E. Research Procedures…………………………………………………............. 35
F. Data Collection technique……………………………………….....................37
xii
CHAPTER IV THE RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
A. Pretest Score ................................................................................................... 39
B. Postest Score .................................................................................................... 42
C. Questionnaires Analysis .................................................................................. 49
CHAPTER V CLOSURE
A. Conclusion........................................................................................................ 64
B. Suggestion........................................................................................................ 64
REFERENCES
APPENDIX
DOCUMENTATION
xiii
LIST OF TABLE
1. The list of facilities and tools of IAIN Salatiga
2. The list of lecture of IAIN Salatiga
3. The list of Staff IAIN Salatiga
4. Students List
5. Rating scale for each students
6. The result of pretest score
7. The result of postest score
8. Questionnaire score
9. Score classification
10. Graphich data of question 1-6
11. Presentage of question 1-6
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
English is one of the international languages used by most of the world
population, so each school has given English lesson, but this is not maximal
because the condition of class does not support learning process, almost the class
is messy class, students are not ready to learn and to understand the material. Ideal
English classroom should be enjoyable and learning methods should be fun so
students fell enjoy during teaching learning process.
Most of people who take an education will learn English. As a student,
learning English language is very important and necessity. One of the aims of
teaching English is students could speak in English. In language teaching exactly
English, there are four skills; listening, speaking, reading and writing. Many
people feel that speaking in a new language is harder than reading, writing or
listening for two reason. First, unlike reading or writing, speaking happens in real
time usually the person we are talking to is waiting for us to speak right then.
Second, when we speak, we cannot edit and revise what we wish to say, as we can
if we are writing.
Learning English means learning language components and language
skills. Grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and spelling are examples of
language components. Among the four skills, speaking is often considered as the
most difficult skill to be learned by the students. Brown and Yule (1983) states
2
that: “learning to talk in the foreign language is often considered being one of the
most difficult aspects of language learning for the teacher to help the students
with”.
Speaking is one of important skills to be mastered. Speaking is very
important because by mastering speaking skill, students are able to make
conversation with others, to give the ideas and to exchange the information with
others. In fact, most of IAIN Salatiga students still cannot explain something well
by using English. It happens because English teacher only focus on grammar so
students do not have enough space to practice English in class.
According to many teaching theorists, speaking skill can be developed
through many activities which include an information gap, a jigsaw puzzle,
games, problem-solving, and Role-playing. In addition, supported this idea that
the activities that can assist better speaking skills are free discussion and role-
playing. Also, stated that the language activities are important factors in teaching
language for communication. Activities help create interaction in the language
classroom. Additionally, communicative activities can motivate the learners and
establish good relationships between the teacher and the students as well as
among the students thereby encouraging a supportive environment for language
learning.
English teacher should have teaching strategies to solve the problems
faced by the students. The teacher must be able to manage their assignments
effectively. They are demanded to motivate the students in order to learn English
3
well. Related to that statement, teaching technique becomes one of the important
points on the teaching learning activities.
To teach speaking is not an easy job. There are many problems in teaching
speaking. First, students who have poor of vocabulary. Second, students are use to
speak Javanese language. Third, they rarely practice English to communicate with
others. When the teacher asked students to make conversation with their friends in
front of class, they would refuse it. Another problem related to the students is that
they are not interested with the material given to them. This situation caused them
bored and they do not want to continue studying.
Based on the explanation above, the writers tried to use problem solving
activities to improve speaking skills for students in IAIN Salatiga. Problem
solving method which ensures individuals participation in group of any size.
Materials which focus on problem solving offer further opportunities for students
to work in pairs or small groups, to share information and opinions on topics,
which are meaningful to them. Problem-Solving method is a way of presenting
the lesson by presenting the material as a starting point the discussion of issues to
be analyzed and synthesized in an attempt to find a solution or answer by the
students.
This cooperative learning strategy promotes discussion and both individual
and group accountability. This strategy is beneficial for reviewing and integrating
subject matter. Students with special needs often lucky when this strategy is used.
After direct instruction of the material, the group supports each member and
4
provides opportunities to practice, to rehearsal, and to discussion of content
material.
Based on the background above the writer has conducted a research
entitled “TEACHING SPEAKING SKILLS USING PROBLEM-SOLVING
ACTIVITIES” (An Experimental Research in speaking 1 at the first semester of
IAIN Salatiga in the Academic Year 2014/2015). The use of problem-solving
method hopefully can improve students’ ability to develop their English especially
in speaking skills.
B. Statement of the Problems
Based on the background of the research, there are many problems that
arise. Some problems that can be identified are as follows:
1. What is the extent of using Problem Solving Activities to improve students’
sepaking skills in the first semester of IAIN Salatiga?
2. Does the Problem Solving Activities improved students’ speaking skills at the
first semester of IAIN Salatiga?
C. The Objectives of the Research
The objectives of this research are as follow:
1. To find out what is the extent of using Problem Solving Activities to improve
students’ sepaking skills in the first semester of IAIN Salatiga
2. To find out does the Problem Solving Activities improved students’ speaking
skills at the first semester of IAIN Salatiga
5
D. Benefit of the Research
Researcher hopes that this research has some benefits in the English
teaching speaking learning process, especially in teaching speaking skill. There
are two kinds of benefits in this research, theoretically and practically.
1. Theoretical benefit:
a. It is would like to know what is the extent of using Problem Solving
Activities to improve students’ sepaking skills in the first semester of IAIN
Salatiga
b. It is would like to know does the Problem Solving Activities improved
students’ speaking skills at the first semester of IAIN Salatiga
2. Practical benefit
a. For the writer
The finding of the research can be used as a starting point in improving the
writer’s teaching ability and to help to find out the best method in teaching
speaking.
b. For the students
This research can add student’s interest in English learning, so English is not
boring lesson.
c. For the teacher
This research can give additional contribution for English teacher to develop
their language teaching methods theoretically and practically, and this study
6
can help teacher to choose appropriate method for students. So, teachers are
able to improve the quality of teaching learning process.
d. For the institution
The finding of the research will improve the institutions of quality especially in
the English teaching learning process.
E. Limitation of the Research
This study takes place in speaking 1 at the first semester of IAIN Salatiga
in the academic year of 2014/2015. The writer wants to limit this study on the use
of problem-solving activities improve students’ speaking skill. This result must be
suitable and boarded from the problems. The topic must be limited in order to
examine the problems more precisely, and properly. Therefore, this research
especially would be focused on how far is the improvement of students’ speaking
skill in English teaching and learning process in using Problem Solving Activities.
F. Definition of Key Terms
1. Method of Teaching
According to Dewey (2007:17) the reflective method of solving the
problem, namely an active thinking process, be careful, which is based on
thought process towards definitive conclusions through five steps:
a) Students identify the problem, the problem came from outside the student's
own
7
b) The next student would investigate and analyzed the difficulty and
determine the issues it faces.
c) And then he connects these essays is the result of analysis or each other,
and the possibilities to
solve such problems in the act he was led by his
own experience.
d) Then he considered the possibility of an answer or a hypothesis with the
consequences of each
e) Then he tried to practice the one that considers the best possible solutions.
Results will prove whether or not solving the problem really is, when
solving a problem that is not quite right, it would be tried on other
possibilities to be found solving the right problem. Problem-solving that is
true, that is useful for life.
2. Definition of Speaking
“Speaking is also one of the language arts that is most frequently
used by people all over the world”. The art of speaking is very complex. It
requires the simultaneous use of the number of abilities which often
develop at different rates. Generally, there are at least four components of
speaking skill concerned, they are: comprehension, grammar, vocabulary,
pronunciation, and fluency (Jeremy Harmer, 1998:87).
8
3. Problem Solving Activities
“Problem-Solving activities is a method of problem-solving in a
rational, logical, correct, and precise with a useful alternative solution”.
The problem-solving method is a method to solving the problem as
starting point for discussion, researched, analyzed to seek alternative
solution that are useful for students.
4. Definition of Discussion
“Discussion is essentially a method to solve the problems with the
process of group thinking”. Therefore, the discussion is a cooperative
activity or coordinated activities that contain certain basic steps that must
be obeyed by the whole group (Tarigan,2008:40).
G. The Review of Previous Research
In this thesis, the writer uses the previous research dealing with the topic
of this study. The research was done by Hidayat (2013) in The objectives of this
research entitled “Teaching Speaking Skills Using Problem Based Learning at
Class Tenth of SMK 1 Salatiga” was to find out whether or not teaching speaking
skill using problem based learning increased the students’ speaking skills at class
tenth of SMK 1 Salatiga. The research used quantitative method with one group
pretest-posttest design. The instrument of this study was the test. The population
of this research is 47 of tenth class students of SMK 1 Salatiga. The sample was
the entire population. The data of this research were collected by using the pretest
9
and posttest to the students’ sample. The results of the data analysis showed that:
the mean of pretest score was 53.51, the mean of posttest score was 75.74, and t-
observed was 10.10. The t-critical value with degree of freedom (df) = 46 and
significance level at 0.05 was 2.3. Based on the analysis above the alternative
hypothesis of this research was accepted, because the t-observed was bigger than
t-critical value (10.10 > 2.3). It could also be concluded that teaching speaking
skill using problem based learning increased the students’ speaking skill.
The second review related to this research, the purposes of this research
were: 1) to study and compare speaking skills of Grade 11 students using three
communicative activities, and 2) to study the students’ attitude towards teaching
English speaking skills using the three communicative activities. The sample
group consisted of 49 students at a secondary school in Udon Thani, Thailand,
classified by high, medium, and low according to their abilities of English
speaking proficiency level. The design of the research were mixed method design.
The quantitative data came from the speaking test and the students’ attitude
towards teaching English speaking. Percentage, mean, standard deviation and t-
test for dependent samples were employed to analyze data quantitatively. The
research findings were as follows: 1. The students’ English speaking abilities after
using the three communicative activities were significantly higher than before
their use. (Pretest = 60.80; Posttest = 85.63). 2. The students’ attitude towards
teaching English speaking skills using the three communicative activities were
rated as good ( Χ =4.50).
10
From the previous two researchs, there is differentiate between this
research such as in the research, the writer uses an experimental research which
use control and experiment group in class and using problem solving activities
improved the students’ speaking skills in first semester of IAIN Salatiga.While,
the previous research is used one group pretest posttest design. And the difference
between this research and second previous research is in her research she used
quantitative method and the data was collected by pretest and posttest from
students’ speaking ability test.
H. The Outline of Graduating Paper
Chapter I is Introduction. It contains; the background of the study, the
statement of the study, the objective of the study, the benefits of the study,
definition of term, research methodology, and the system of the thesis
presentation.
Chapter II is Thereotical Framework, it consist of underlying theory about
action research, speaking and problem-solving activities.
Chapter III is Research Methodology. It contains of general situation of
IAIN Salatiga.
Chapter IV is Implementation of Research. It contains about field note and
scores of speaking.
Chapter V contains of Closure percentages by giving conclusion,
implication and suggestion.
11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Problem SolvingAvtivities
Problem-Solving activities is a way of presenting the lesson by
presenting the material as a starting point the discussion of issues to be
analyzed and synthesized in an attempt to find a solution or answer by the
students. The second opinion is based on the above, it can be concluded that
the problem-solving activities is a to solving the problem as starting point for
discussion, researched, analyzed to seek alternative solution that are useful for
students.
Teaching English speaking skills using the problem solving activities
is a learning method focusing onthe learner-centeredness. Students work in
small groupsdivided by their language proficiency, i.e., high, medium and low
levels. Using this technique, students can have anopportunity to work together
providing help to others whileperforming the activity. The atmosphere in
working ingroups can lessen their fear in making mistakes whenspeaking
English. Students in the group can support othersin the team needing help.
They can express themselvessuccessfully while working in groups. This can
lead to selfmonitoring, more confidence in speaking, and enjoymentcan
encourage them to participate more in learning.
The primary objective at such activities may change significantly as
students’ oral proficiency develops. In beginning classes, for examples,
12
students can be divided into pairs; each supplied with simplified maps
illustrating a neighborhood or campus area in the vicinity of the classroom.
Each pair of maps can be designed to present incomplete but complementary
information, so that the two members of each pair must trade information
about streets and buildings marked on their maps but not their partner’s in
order to fill in the gaps on their own. They can be asked to drill each other on
grammar or vocabulary or to work together to discuss and write glocery list, or
very simple narratives to describe picture series (Fong: 1978)
White (1971) suggest that more advanced students be given problems
which require going out into the community or on campus to interview people
who can supply concrete information about the problem. Classroom activities
include the preparation of informal ‘script’ to be used as guides during the
interviews. After the students have completed their research, they present their
findings to the classby re-enacting the interview and then answering questions
from the group in the guise of persons whom they interviewed. Problem
Solving Activities in the form of discussion.
“Discussion is essentially a method to solve the problems with the
process of group thinking.” Therefore, the discussion is a cooperative activity
or coordinated activities that contain certain basic steps that must be obeyed
by the whole group (Tarigan,2008:40).
Group discussion took place when the people who are interested in a
particular matter gathered to discuss it on purpose in hopes to arrive at a
resolution of the or explanation. A group is dynamic whole with properties
13
different with properties of its members. In other words, a group showed a
plurality of persons, but the final destination if which you want to achieve is a
single rather than plural. To avoid in order not to lose the direction of the
group one of its member designated or appointed as chairman or discussion
leader.
1. Aspects of Problem Solving Activities to Languange Teaching
Foreign language as a school subject is skill oriented. Thus, problem
solving approach applied to it implies different components than when it is
applied to subjects that are knowledge oriented. Problem solving in teaching a
languagemeans:
a. avoidance of giving ready-made answers in the process of presentation of
new grammar and vocabulary, involvement of students in the formulation
of grammatical rules and elicitation of vocabulary meanings from the
given examples,
b. ability of students to overcome independently the language problems
arising in the process of communication,
c. discussing / solving non-professional, everyday life problems through
communication in the foreign language,
d. discussion of texts dealing with problems,
e. discussing / solving professional problems through communication in the
foreign language (Gorgiladze, 2005: 51).
14
To develop the students' ability to overcome foreign language problems
independently it is necessary to spend several lectures on working out their
strategies of linguistic problem solving. For reading and writing these strategies
are derivational, context and situational analysis, application of general
knowledge and knowledge of native and other known languages. For speaking
and writing these strategies involve avoidance and paraphrasing.
2. The purposes and benefits of Problem Solving Activities
Learning activity is not only focused on getting as much knowledge but
also how to use all the knowledge gained to solve problems associated with the
material being studied, it is the goal of applied learning model problem solving.
Students who can door can solve the problem given by the teacher to the
students well, then the student is considered to have learned the lesson well.
Besides other purpose applied learning model of problem solving are as
follows:
a. Produce students who have knowledge and skills in solving problems that
will be encountered laterin the community. Experts argue that the"problem-
solving abilities within certain limits can be established through a field of
study and disciplines are taught", SuharsonoinWena (2009:53)
b. Using the knowledge gained tosolve problems associated with the material.
c. Students become skills edat selecting relevant information and then analyze
them and eventually re-examine the results.
d. Potential increased intellectual
e. Students learn how discoveries through the process conduct discovery.
15
3. Steps of Problem Solving Activities
According to Dewey(in Trianto, 2007:17) the reflective of solving the
problem, namely an active thinking process, be careful, which is based on thought
process towards definitive conclusions through five steps:
a. Students identify the problem
For example each students in the groups talks about real problem their are
having. The teacher ask question about their daily activities “indoor and
outdoor sports” and the students can choosing one topic and it can be a
picture shown if the students speak in their group discussion and in front of
the whole class.
b. The next student would analyze the the issues it faces
The students can make a list about the problems, for example students
choose outdoor sport is swimming, then the students make a list question
about “what the students choose swimming?”, “when student swimm?”,
“how student do swimm?”, “what the benefit if thestudents do swimm?”
c. And then students connects these essays is the result of analysis or each
other, and the possibilities to solve such problems in the act he was did by
his own experience
d. Then students considered the possibility of an answer or a hypothesis with
the consequences of each
e. Then students tried to practice the one that considers the best possible
solutions. Results will prove whether or not solving the problem really is,
16
when solving a problem that is not quite right, it would be tried on other
possibilities to be found solving the right problem.
4. The strengths and weaknessess of Problem Solving Activities
The strengths of learning problem solving are as follows:
a. Educating students to think systematically
b. Being able to find a way out of the situation in face
c. Learning to analyze a problem from various aspects
d. Educating students believe themselves
e. Think and act creatively
f. Solve problems faced realistically
g. Can make school education more relevant deng early life,
especially the world of work
h. Stimulate the development of student thinking progress to
complete problems encountered with the right.
The weakness learning problem solving are:
a. It takes quite a lot, because the students need the much time to
think and analyze the problems
b. The ability of students in solving different problems, sometimes
studentscan not to solve the problems because they difficult to
think and analyze the problems.
17
B. Speaking
Speaking is very important because language is primarily speech. Oral
communication is seen as basic skills, so it is much needed. For most people,
mastering the art of speaking is the single most important aspect of learning a
second or foreign language, and it is measured in term of ability to carry out a
conversation in the language Nunan (1991: 39). The other definition of speaking
come from Levine and Adelman (1993:100) speaking is a spoken communication
that used to deliver meaning. To get purpose of developing speaking skill,
students should be focus on communicative abilities of interpretation and
expression.
Moreover speaking consists of producing systematic verbal utterance to
convey meaning. Speaking is “an interactive process of constructing meaning that
involves producing and receiving and processing information” (Flores in Bailey,
2005:2). Moreover Manser(1991: 387) that speaking is complex skill requiring the
simultaneous use of a number of different activities which develop at different
rates, whereas skill is ability to do something well.
According to Brown (2004: 140) speaking is productive skill that can be
directly and empirically observed, those observation are in variably are in variably
colored by the accuracy and effectiveness of a test-takers listening skill, which
necessarily compromise the reliability and validity an oral production test.
18
1. Elements of Speaking
Knowledge of language features and the ability to transfer information to
language on the spot influence the ability of speaking English. According to
Harmer (2001: 269) there are four elements necessary for spoken production.
a. Connected speech
Effective speakers of English need to be able not only to
produce the individual phonemes of English. Sounds are modified
(assimilation), omitted, (elision), added (linking), or weakened
(through contractions and stress patterning). It is for this reason that we
should involve students in activities designed specifically to improve
their connected speech.
b. Expressive devices
Nativespeakers of English change the pitch and stress of
particular parts of utterances, vary volume, speed, and show by other
physical and non-verbal (paralinguistic) means how they are feeling
(especially in face-to-face interaction).
c. Lexis and grammar
The use of common lexical phrase, especially in performance
of certain language is to make spontaneous in speech. Teacher should
prepare kind of phrases for different purpose like agreeing and
disagreeing, expressing surprise, shock or approval.
19
d. Negotiation language
Effective speaking benefits from the negotiator language we
use to look for explanation and to display the structure of what we are
saying.
2. Types of Classroom Speaking Performance
Based on Brown (2001: 141) there are five types of classroom speaking
performance that students are expected to carry out in the classroom, here
they are:
a. Imitative
Imitative is the first type of speaking performance, this type
emphasizes on the ability to imitate a word or phrase or a possibly a
sentence.
b. Intensive
Production of short stretches of oral language designed to show
competence is a narrow band of grammatical, phrasal, lexical, or
phonological.
c. Responsive
It includes interaction and test understanding but at the
somewhat limited level of very short conversation, standard greeting
and small talk, simple request and comment, and the like.
20
d. Interactive
Interaction can take two forms of transactional language, which
has aim of exchanging specific information or interpersonal exchange ,
which has aim to keep social relationship.
e. Extensive (monologue)
It includes speeches, oral presentation, and storytelling, during
the occasion for oral interaction from listeners.
Speaking of foreign language, learner should be consistent in the process
of mastering the language (in this case English). It is not enough for the learners,
if they only have necessary knowledge to make thing meaningful however they
must use that knowledge too. Indeed, it is important to understand what learners
mean by the term active. Based on Hutchin and Waters (1987: 67) there are two
types of activity:
a. Psychomotor activity; that is the observable speech organ or limbs being
accordance with signals from the brain;
b. Language processing activity; that is organization of information in
meaningful network of knowledge, this activity is not observable.
3. Classroom speaking activities
Nowadays, many classroom speaking activities used by the teacher in
order to solve the students’ problem in speaking class. Harmer (2001: 88)
21
says that there are four types of speaking activities: information gap, surveys,
discussion and role-play.
a. Information gap (elementary/intermediate)
According to Harmer (2001: 88) information gap is one type of speaking
activity that engage two speakers which have different parts and information
creation a whole, it makes gap among them. The famous information gap
activity is “Describe and Draw”. In the first activity, student has one picture
which she or he must not show to her or his partner. All of the partner must
draw the picture without looking the original, so the others with the picture
will give guidance, and the “artist” will ask question.
b. Survey ( elementary )
Survey is the way of provoking and opinion exchange to get students to
carry out questionnaire and survey. If the students plan theses questionnaires
themselves, the activity will become more useful. Students can create, use
surveys, and fill questionnaire about any topic such as; smoking, TV watching,
feeling and emotion, transport, musical, preferences etc. Harmer (2001: 274)
adds about questionnaire as follow;
“Questionnaires are useful because, by being pre-planned, they ensured
that both questionnaire and respondent have something to say to each
other. Depending upon how tightly designed they are, they may well
encourage the natural use of certain repetitive language pattern-and thus
be situated in the middle of our communication continuum”.
22
c. Discussion ( intermediate/upperintermediate )
The important thing to remember in discussion is students need time to
prepare their thought before discussion occur, so the discussion session success
than teacher’s expectation. There are many potential of discussion, but the first
thing to remember is that the students need to be engage with the topic. Harmer
(2001: 275) adds about discussion as follow:
“Their success will depend upon our ability to prompt and
encourage, and, perhaps, to change our attitude to errors and mistake
from one minute and the next. Pre-planned discussion on the other hand,
depend for their success upon the way we ask students to approach the
task in hand. One of the best ways of encouraging discussion is provide
activities which force students to reach a decision or consensus, often as a
result of choosing between specific alternative”.
d. Role play
Harmer (2001: 275) said that role play is activity where the teacher asks
students to imagine if they are in the different situations. Two things that can
be added in role-play are enjoyable and not intricate. The teacher could build
the role-play become a whole-class activity by having all the students act out a
public meeting with many speakers. This might be enjoyable but would cut
down on the number of speaking time for individual. Not intricate means not
all role-play need to be so complicated. Role-play is effectives when they are
open-ended, so that different students have different views of what of result
should be, and agreement has to be reached.
23
4. Teaching Speaking
Teaching speaking is a very important part of second language
learning. The ability to communicate in a second language clearly and
efficiently contributes to the success of the learner in school and success
later in every step of life. Therefore, it is essential if language teachers’
pay great attention to teaching speaking, rather than leading students to
pure memorization, providing a rich environment where meaningful
communication takes place is desired. With those aim, various speaking
activities such as those listed above can contribute a great deal to students
in developing basic interactive skills necessary for life. These activities
make students more active in the learning process and at the same time
make their learning more meaningful and fun for them.
There are four components which generally recognized in the analyses
of the speech process:.
a. Pronunciation : The way in which a language is spoken.
b. Grammar : Itis rule for designing word and making sentence,
structural foundation of our ability to express ourselves.
c. Vocabulary : Total number of words that build a language.
d. Fluency : about the speech of conversation
5. The Principles for Teaching Speaking to Beginning Learners
Three principles which can influence and inform our decisions as we
teach speaking to beginning and false learners are (Bailey, 2005:36):
24
a. Provide something for learners to talk about.
When people choose to speak, it is usually about
something. They want something, or they find a topic or incident
interesting and want to comment on it. They wish to share ideas or
emotions. There is usually some communicative need that moves
people to talk.
b. Create opportunities.
Create opportunities for students to interact by using group
work can improve learners’ motivation and promote choice,
independence, creativity, and realism. Pair work and group work
also provide feedback to the learner from sources other than the
teacher. Pair work, as the name suggests, involves two students
working together to complete a task or exercise using the target
language. Group work is three or more students who work
together.
c. Manipulate physical arrangements to promote speaking practice.
Changing the physical environment can encourage speaking
activities, partly because it partially alters the power structure of
the traditional English classroom. Here are some ways with the
seating and other aspects of the environment to encourage
speaking. Firstly, the inside-outside circle is a technique for giving
students the chance to repeat a conversation or interview with
several new people. In order to build fluency and confidence.
25
Secondly, tango seating is simple seating arrangement designed to
force people to use oral communication during information gap
tasks that involve drawing, pictures, following maps, or creating
designs or structure from verbal descriptions. Thirdly, the cocktail
party technique is a quick way to get students talking to new
partners and to break up the routine of sitting during language
lessons.
In 1961 the American linguist William Moulton, in a report prepared for
the 9th International Congress of Linguistics, proclaimed the linguistic principles
on which language teaching methodology should be past: (1) language is speech,
not writing, (2) A language is a set of habits, (3) teach the language, not about the
language. (4) a language is what its native speakers say. No what someone think
they ought to say (Richard and Rodgers, 1984: 49)
26
BAB III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. The Setting of the Research
1. General Situation of IAIN Salatiga
State Institute For Islamic Studies or IAIN Salatiga is the State
Islamic University in Salatiga, Central Java province, Indonesia. Based on
the Regulation of the President of the Republic of Indonesia No. 143 of
2014 dated October 17, 2014 on the Amendment of State Islamic Institute
become State Institure For Islamic Studies in Salatiga.
Since its establishment until today, IAIN Salatiga has gone through
a long history, and has experienced several institutional changes. The
establishment of these institutions, starting from the ideals of the Islamic
community Salatiga to have Islamic Universities. Therefore established
the Faculty of Education (FIP) Institute of Teacher Training and Education
(Teachers' Training College) "NU" in Salatiga. This institution occupies a
building owned by the Foundation "Boarding of Sublime", which is
located at Jalan Diponegoro No. 64 Salatiga. The institute is established
thanks to the support of all parties, especially the scholars and
administrators NU Central Java.
27
2. Faculties of IAIN Salatiga
Education Faculty and Science Teaching functions to organize
academic and professional education, whose aim is to establish a Bachelor
of Islamic Education, which has expertise in the field of education and
teaching of Islam with special expertise in the field of study Islamic
education, Arabic, and English as well as in authority as a teacher or
teaching in field of study. As he received a bachelor's degree for alumni of
Strata one is S.Pd.I. There are many faculties in IAIN Salatiga, consist of:
a. Tarbiyah Faculty and Science Teacher, such as:
A) Education of Religion Teaching
B) English Department
C) Arabic of Department
D) Education of Madrasah Ibtidaiyah Teaching
E) Education of Raudhatul Atfal Teaching
F) Education of Mathematic
G) Education of Science
b. Ushuludin Faculty
c. Syariah Faculty, such as (study of Islamic, study of Law Economic
Syariah, study of Law of country)
d. Economic and Bussiness of Islamic Faculty
28
Tabel 3.1 The List of Facilities and Tools
NO. Facilities Total Condition
1. Gedung A 6 Ruang Good
2. Gedung B 6 Ruang Good
3. Gedung C 7 Ruang Good
4. Gedung D 5 Ruang Good
5. Gedung E 8 Ruang Good
6. Perpustakaan 1 Ruang Good
7. Gedung Sekretariat 1 Ruang Good
8. Gedung A Kampus 2 9 Ruang Good
9. Gedung B Kampus 2 6 Ruang Good
10. Gedung C Kampus 2 9 Ruang Good
11. Gedung Lab. Kampus 2 5 Ruang Good
12. Gedung P3M 1 Ruang Good
13. Gedung PKM 1 1 Ruang Good
14. Gedung PKM 2 1 Ruang Good
15. Lapangan Bulu Tangkis 1 Unit Good
16. Tenis Meja 4 Unit Good
17. Tenis Lapangan 2 Unit Good
18. Lapangan Bola Voli 1 Unit Good
19. Lapangan Sepak Bola 1 Unit Good
20. Aula 1 Unit Good
29
21. Kantor Himpunan
Mahasiswa
1 Unit Good
22. Kantor Senat Mahasiswa 1 Unit Good
23. Kantor Kegiatan Pramuka 1 Unit Good
24. Kantor Menwa 1 Unit Good
25. Koperasi Mahasiswa 1 Unit Good
26. Kantor Teater 1 Unit Good
27. Kantor Musik (SMC) 1 Unit Good
28. Kantor CEC 1 Unit Good
28. Mitapasa 1 Unit Good
30. Kantor Dinamika 1 Unit Good
Table 3.2 The List of English Education Department Lecture IAIN
Salatiga
NO NAMA NIP BARU GOL PANGKAT JAB.FUNGSIONAL
1 Dr. H. M. Zulfa, M. Ag.
19520430
197703 1 001 IV/c
Pembina
Utama Muda Lektor Kepala
2 Dr. H. Sa`adi, M. Ag.
19630420
199203 1 003 IV/c
Pembina
Utama Muda Lektor Kepala
3
Dr. H. Muh. Saerozi, M.
Ag.
19660215
199103 1 001 IV/c
Pembina
Utama Muda Lektor Kepala
4
Dr.H. Rahmat Hariyadi,
M. Pd.
19670112
199203 1 005 IV/b Pembina Tk. I Lektor Kepala
5 Drs. H. Alfred L, M. SI.
19621028
199103 1 003 IV/a Pembina Lektor Kepala
6 Drs. Bahroni, M.Pd.
19640818
199403 1 004 IV/a Pembina Lektor Kepala
7
Dr. Winarno, S. Si.,
M.Pd.
19730526
199903 1 004 IV/a Pembina Lektor Kepala
30
8 Ruwandi, S. Pd. M.A.
19661225
200003 1 002 IV/a Pembina Lektor Kepala
9
Norwanto, S.Pd.,
M.Hum.
19751015
200212 1 006 IV/a Pembina Lektor Kepala
10 Suwardi, S.Pd., M. Pd.
19670121
199903 1 002 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor Kepala
11 Drs. Djoko Sutopo
19560603
198703 1 002 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
12
Dra. Siti Muhtamiroh,
M.SI
19681229
199303 2 001 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
13 Drs. Juz`an, M. Hum.
19611024
198903 1 002 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
14
Drs. Ahmad Sultoni,
M.Pd
19681104
199803 1 003 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
15 Muna Erawati, S. Psi.,
M.Si.
19751218
199903 2 002 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
16 M. Gufron, M. Ag.
19720814
200312 1 001 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
17
Mashlihatul Umami, S.
PdI., MA.
19800513
200312 2 003 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
18
Hanung Triyoko, S.S.,
M.Hum.,M.Ed.
19730815
199903 1 003 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
19
Ari Setiawan, S. Pd.,
MM.
19751004
200312 1 002 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
20 Evi Ariyani, S.H., M.H.
19731117
200003 2 002 III/d Penata Tk.I Lektor
21
Noor Malihah, S.Pd.,
M.Hum.Ph.D
19771128
200604 2 002 III/c Penata Lektor
22 Setia Rini, S.Pd., M.Pd.
19750518
200312 2 002 III/c Penata Lektor
23
Faizal Risdianto, S.S.
M.Hum.
19750917
200801 1 015 III/c Penata Lektor
24
Imam Mas Arum, S.
Pd., M. Pd.
19790507
201101 1 008 III/c Penata Lektor
25
Rr. Dewi Wahyu M,
S.S., M. Pd.
19790821
201101 2 007 III/c Penata Lektor
26
Sari Famularsih, S.Pd.I.,
M.A.
19810911
201101 2 004 III/c Penata Lektor
27
Rifqi Aulia Erlangga,
S.Fil,M.Hum
19830507
200901 1 010 III/b
Penata Muda
Tk. I Asissten Ahli
28 Eva Palupi, S.Psi
19771028
200312 2 003 III/a Penata Muda Cados
31
Table 3. 3 The List of STAFF in IAIN Salatiga, are:
NO NIP BARU NAMA GOL UNIT TUGAS
1 19641108 199103 1 001 Ferimeldi, Ph.D IV/b Kepala Biro AUAK
2 19630725 199303 1 002 Drs. Jumadi IV/a
Kepala Bagian
Perencanaan dan
Keuangan
3 195806241993031002 Sudiyanto, S.H. III/d
Kasubbag. Administrasi
Umum dan Keuangan
Fakultas Dakwah
4 19730813 199803 2 001 Diyah Rochati, S.E. III/d Kepala Bagian Umum
5 19620209 199102 1 001 Muzayin, S. Ag. III/d
Kepala Bagian TU
Fakultas Ekonomi dan
Bisnis Islam
6 197204071998032001 Umi Sahil, S.E III/d Kasubbag. Administrasi
Akademik
7 19660215 198601 1 001 H. Kardjan, S. Pd.,
M.M. III/d
Kepala Bagian TU
Fakultas Tarbiyah dan
Ilmu Keguruan
8 19690923 200003 1 001 Supardi, S. Si., S. IPI. III/c Staf UPT Perpustakaan
9 19750531 200112 1 005 Mujib Sahli, S. Ag. III/c
Kepala Subbag. Tata
Usaha Lembaga
Penjaminan Mutu
(LPM)
10 19770430 200312 2 001 Nidaul Hasanah, S.T. III/c
Kasubbag. Akademik ,
Kemahasiswaan dan
Alumni Fak. Tarbiyah
dan Ilmu Keguruan
11 19771027 200312 1 001 Heru Heriyanto, S.E. III/c Kasubbag. Keuangan
dan BMN
12 1967071120050120001 Dra. Astuti Sakdiyah,
M. Pd. III/c
Kasubbag.
Kemahasiswaan,
Alumni dan Kerja Sama
13 19750531 200501 2 003 Tatik Nurhasanah,
S.E. III/c
Kasubbag. Akademik,
Kemahasiswaan dan
AlumniFak. Dakwah
14 19760625 200003 1 003 M. Abdul Haq, S. Ag.,
M.SI. III/c
Kasubbag. Administrasi
Umum dan Keuangan
Fakultas Syari'ah
15 19650315 199403 1 003 Hadi, S.H. III/c
Kasubbag. Administrasi
Umum dan Keuangan
Fakultas Tarbiyah dan
32
Ilmu Keguruan
16 19750213 200012 1 001 Muh. Amin, S. Ag. III/c
Staf Subbag. Organisasi
Kepegawaian dan
Penyusunan Peraturan
17 19730714 200501 1 002 Wiji Suwarno, M. Hum. III/c Kepala UPT
Perpustakaan
18 19721214 200212 1 002 Kusmono Yudha
Saputro, S.E. III/c
Kasubbag. Akademik,
Kemahasiswaan dan
Alumni Fak.Ekonomi
dan Bisnis Islam
19 19680419 200212 1 001 Tejo, S.E. III/c
Kasubbag. TU,
Hubungan Masyarakat
dan Rumah Tangga
20 19790120 200312 2 003 Ifonilla Yenianti, S.
PdI., S.IPI. III/b Staf UPT Perpustakaan
21 19780409 200312 2 005 Siti Nur Rohmawati,
S.E. III/b
Kasubbag. Administrasi
Umum dan Keuangan
Fak. Ekonomi dan
Bisnis Islam
22 19791203 200312 2 004 Siti Mukaromah
Fikriyah, S. PdI. III/b Staf Fakultas Syari'ah
23 19751004 200501 2 002 Rina Wahyu Andari,
S. PdI. III/b
Kasubbag. Akademik ,
Kemahasiswaan dan
Alumni Fakultas
Syari'ah
B. Subject of Research
The subject of the study is the speaking 1 at the first semester of IAIN
Salatiga. The total numbers of students are 40 students . The students’ list
is presented in detail below:
33
Table 3.4 Students List
NO NAME NO NAME
1. Mohammad Annas S 21. Arifah Wulandari
2. Yuniar Dewi D 22. Roisa Indriani
3. Fatia Putri Hasna 23. Siti fatimah
4. Nurul Imamah 24. Ulfah Rahmawati
5. Lailatul Hidayah 25. Munasifah
6. Sinta Dewi P 26. Rifqi Amal F
7. Queenadya D 27. Fizani Fadilah
8. Dian Amalia 28. Farida Qurota A
9. Nur Kayati 29. Nova Fatkhiyana
10. Irma Innayati F 30. Tyas Puji A
11. Nur Hamidah S 31. Honang Adi R
12. Dian Indra R 32. Titik Muarivah
13. Siti Mubarokah 33. Wahyu Adi N
14. Utami Rahayu 34. Indah Rahayu
15. Yeni Suci W 35. Restu Ayu P
16. Hayyu Nafi’atul F 36. Siti Aliatun
17. Mir’atus Sa’adah 37. Mustafidatul M
18. Lina Nurul H 38. Darus Salam
19. Tika Lutfia N 39. Yeni Wulansari
20. Budi Setyaningsih 40. Muhammad S
34
C. Research Design
There are a number of research methodologies can be used in
education research an experiment design, such one group pretest posttest
design, static group comparison, etc. considering the objectives and the
problem in this study, the writer decided to use one group pretest posttest
design. “one group pretest posttest design differs from the other design that
the questionnaire is administered twice: once as a pretest (O1) before
students start writing with the word processor (X) and again as a posttest
(O2) after students have used the words processor, one could argue that
design 2 is superior to design 1 because the instructor can compare
students pretest posttest attitudes to see if three has been an improvement
(Crowl, 1996:290).
The one group pretest and posttest design could be illustrated as follow:
O1 = Pretest score (before giving the treatment)
O2 = Posttest score (after giving the treatment).
In using one group pretest posttest design, the writer formed a study
group which each group consisted of ten (10) students so there are four groups
in class. The total number was 40 students. The writer used pretest as the first
tested to analyzed the students speaking ability before giving a treatment and
O1XO2
35
posttest given to analyzed the students speaking ability after given the
treatment.
D. Research Method
In this research the writer used the quantitative research where the
study design to test hypothesis through the use of objective instruments
and statistical analysis.
Quantitative research methods are used to examine question that can
base the answered by collecting statistically analyzing data that are in
numerical form. (Crowl, 1991:10).
E. Research Procedure
a. Population and Samples
Population English Education Department of first semester is
chosen as the site of the research. The samples of the research are 20
students’ control group and 20 students’ experiment group in speaking 1 at
the first semester.
b. Research Instrument
The writer used the kinds of test as the instrument of the research;
documentation in this research and interview also pretest which was given
to the students before the writer gave the treatment and posttest which was
given after the students got the treatment.
36
c. Pretest and Posttest
Both of the pretest and posttest that was given to the students had
the same problem. Pretest score was taken by Midterm Test and Postest
score was taken by Final examination.
d. Questionnaire
A questionnaire is a research instruments consisting of a series of
questions and other prompts the purpose of gathering information from
respondents. Although they are often designed for statistical analysis of
the responses, this is not always the case. The questionnaire is given to the
students after treatment to get additional data for authentic assessment.
e. Data Collections
The data were taken from the result of the tests (pretest and
postest) that have been given to the students before and after teaching the
students. The data were taken collected to be analyzed.
f. Data Analysis
In analyzing the collected data the writer used ttest formula with
significant level at 5% (Crowl,1996:388)
T-test Formula:
X1= mean of pretest
37
X2= mean of postest
S1 = standar deviation of pretest
S2 = standar deviation of protest
F. Data Collection Technique
To collect the data of this research, the writer used one group pretest
design, the pretest was conducted 7th April 2014. The posttest took on 7th
December 2014 at class speaking 1 of STAIN Salatiga. The following are the
results of the pretest and posttest score.
And for the data values each students speaking skills of observation,
researcher enter into the grading scale listed in the table below. It is
implemented so that researcher can draw conclusions about the level of
success or level of students’ skills in speaking and learning outcomes of
students in English language teaching by implementing problem-solving
activities. According (http://aguswuryanto.wordpress.com) The following is a
table of its scale:
Table 3.5 Rating Scale for Each Student
Rating Scale Category
00-59 Poor
60-79 Good
80-100 Excelent
38
CHAPTER IV
THE RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
In this research findings, the researcher using quantitative research where
the study design to test hypothesis through the use of objective instruments and
statistical analysis. Quantitative research methods are used to examine question
that can base the answered by collecting statistically analyzing data that are in
numerical form. (Crowl, 1991:10).
The researcher using pretest which was given to the students before the
writer gave the treatment, and posttest which was given after the students got the
treatment and questionnaire to collect the data. Data collection After getting the
data, writer used the achievement test in the process of collecting the data. The
writer test to both the experiment group and the control group. The result of the
test consists of pretest and posttest. In the pre-test, writer checks the equivalence
of the experimental group and the control group. The pre-test of data analysis can
be used to investigate the achievement of both groups after the treatment. In the
post test, the data analysis does not need to check normal distribution and
homogeneity of variances. Therefore the matched t-test directly used. The steps
used it as in the pretest data analysis.
39
A. Pretest Score
Pretest score was taken from midterm test in which 40 respondents
(students) which 20 students in control group and 20 students in expeiment
group were on participation. The pretest of control group is represented by X1
and the experiment group represented by Y1. The result of the pretest score
can be seen in table 4.1
Table 4.1 Pretest Score
No. Name X1 X12
No Name Y1 Y12
1. M. Annas S 60 3600 21. Arifah W 68 4624
2. Yuniar Dewi 63 3969 22. Roisa Indriani 70 4900
3. Fatia Putri H 60 3600 23. Siti fatimah 70 4900
4. Nurul Imamah 60 3600 24. Ulfah R 70 4900
5. Lailatul H 64 4096 25. Munasifah 71 5041
6. Sinta Dewi P 66 4356 26. Rifqi Amal F 73 5329
7. Queenadya D 63 3969 27. Fizani Fadilah 75 5625
8. Dian Amalia 61 3721 28. Farida Qurota 71 5041
9. Nur Kayati 62 3844 29. Nova F 72 5184
10. Irma Innayati F 60 3600 30. Tyas Puji A 72 5184
11. Nur Hamidah S 61 3721 31. Honang Adi 70 4900
12. Dian Indra R 62 3844 32. Titik M 72 5184
40
13. Siti Mubarokah 0 0 33. Wahyu Adi N 70 4900
14. Utami Rahayu 66 4356 34. Indah Rahayu 73 5329
15. Yeni Suci W 68 4624 35. Restu Ayu P 70 4900
16. Hayyu N 65 4225 36. Siti Aliatun 71 5041
17. Mir’atus S 67 4489 37. Mustafidatul 72 5184
18. Lina Nurul H 65 4225 38. Darus Salam 71 5041
19. Tika Lutfia N 69 4761 39. Yeni W 71 5041
20. Budi S 0 0 40. Muhammad S 70 4900
Total ∑X1
1142
∑ X12
72600
Total ∑Y1
1422
∑Y12
101148
Average ∑X1 57. 1 Average ∑Y1 71. 1
1. Mean of Control Group
So, the mean of control group in the pretest value is 57. 1
2. Standar Deviation of Control Group
41
And the standar deviation of control group is 19. 2
3. Mean of Experiment Group
The mean of experiment group is 71. 1
4. Standar Deviation of Experiment Group
42
And the standar deviation of control group is 1. 48
From the data of pretest score, the result shows that the Mean of control
group is 57. 1 , standart deviation 19. 2 and the Mean of experiment group is 71. 1
standar deviation of experiment group is 1. 48
B. Postest Score
The researcher using postest which was given to the students after the
writer gave the treatment. Postest score was taken from final test in which 20
respondents (students) in control group and 20 students in expriment group
were on participation. The postest of control group is represented by X2 and
the experiment group represented by Y2. The result of the pretest score can be
seen in table 4.2
43
Table 4.2 Postest Score
No. N X2 X22
No. N Y2 Y22
1. M. Annas S 88 7744 21. Arifah W 81 6561
2. Yuniar Dewi 85 7225 22. Roisa Indriani 85 7225
3. Fatia Putri H 70 4900 23. Siti fatimah 83 6889
4. Nurul I 80 6400 24. Ulfah R 84 7056
5. Lailatul H 78 6084 25. Munasifah 85 7225
6. Sinta Dewi P 89 7921 26. Rifqi Amal F 85 7225
7. Queenadya D 82 6724 27. Fizani Fadilah 87 7569
8. Dian Amalia 81 6561 28. Farida Qurota 83 6889
9. Nur Kayati 80 6400 29. Nova F 81 6561
10. Irma Innayati 83 6889 30. Tyas Puji A 86 7396
11. Nur Hamidah 81 6561 31. Honang Adi R 84 7056
12. Dian Indra R 80 6400 32. Titik Muarivah 83 6889
13. Siti M 0 0 33. Wahyu Adi N 86 7396
14. Utami R 85 7225 34. Indah Rahayu 84 7056
15. Yeni Suci W 84 7056 35. Restu Ayu P 86 7396
16. Hayyu Nafi’at 71 5041 36. Siti Aliatun 85 7225
17. Mir’atus S 80 6400 37. Mustafidatul M 75 5625
18. Lina Nurul H 84 7056 38. Darus Salam 83 6889
19. Tika Lutfia N 83 6889 39. Yeni Wulansari 84 7056
20. Budi S 0 0 40. Muhammad S 82 6724
44
Total ∑ X2
1464
∑ X22
119476
Total ∑Y2
1672
∑Y22
139908
Average ∑ X2 73. 2 Average ∑Y2 83.6
1. Mean
So, the mean of control group of the postest value is 73. 2
2. Standart Deviation
45
And the standard deviation ofcontrol group is 24. 8
3. Mean
So, the mean of experiment group of the postest value is 83. 6
4. Standart Deviation
And the standard deviation of experiment group is 2. 54
46
5. The Degrees of Freedom
The critical value of t-table at the 0,05 level of significance for this degree of
freedom 5%.
Df= n-1
Df= 20-1
Df= 19
The writer gained t-table 5% from 19 was 0. 95
While using SPSS aplication the analysis will be as follow:
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 Control 73.2000 20 25.45502 5.69191
Experiment 83.6000 20 2.60364 .58219
Paired Samples Correlations
N Correlation Sig.
Pair 1 control & experiment 20 -.040 .867
47
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences
t df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Pair 1 control - experiment -
1.04000E
1
2.56913E
1
5.74475E
0
-
2.24239E
1
1.62389E
0 -1.810 19 .086
The SPSS data analysis shows that:
The experiment group of the students’ English speaking abilities was
significantly higher than the control group after the employing the problem
solving activities. M (Mean) of control group and experiment group is 1. 04 and S
(Standar Deviasi) of control group and experiment is 2. 56 also To= 1. 81. The
critical value with degree of freedom (df) = 20-1= 19 and the level of significant
5% = 0. 95
Based on the data analysis above, the writer concluded that the alternative
hypothesis was accepted because the tobs was higher than the ttable (1. 81 > 0. 95 ).
It also meant that learn English with problem-solving method can improve the
students speaking ability.
The postest of mean control group was 73. 2 and the mean score of
experiment group was 83. 6. The students’ English speaking abilities after using
the problem solving activities were significantly higher than the prior to their use.
48
The students’ attitude towards teaching English speaking using the problem
solving activities was rated as good.
Characteristics of the activities may have encouraged interaction among
the students in the language classroom. This could afford opportunity for language
practice. The teacher arranged for language functions such as asking for
directions, ordering food and beverages, talking on the telephone, and making an
appointment with doctors. These types of activities can afford students experience
using the language for real communication. This idea was consistent with where
they proposed that the learner should know the purpose of speaking, what to
speak, with whom, and where to speak, and how to use appropriate language. In
this study, the contents of the language through the problem solving activities
were carefully selected to suit the syllabus, the learners’ age and language level,
and to create challenges for the learners to gain experience.
Teaching English speaking skills using the problem solving activities is a
learning method focusing on the learner-centered. Students work in large groups
divided by their language proficiency, i.e., high, medium and low levels. Using
this technique, students can have an opportunity to work together providing help
to others while performing the activity. The atmosphere in working in groups can
lessen their fear in making mistakes when speaking English.
Students in the group can support others in the team who need help. They
can express themselves successfully while working in groups. This can lead to
self monitoring, more confidence in speaking, enjoyment and encourage them to
49
participate more in learning. The results of this study supported the effectiveness
of these three communicative activities in developing English speaking skills.
Moreover, it can be seen from the current study that division into large
groups (groups of ten) promoted that students’ confidence in producing the
language as a result of their language proficiency. Students have been trained in
using the language functions appropriately. Therefore, they could successfully
develop themselves using problem solving activities. In conducting a problem
solving activities, the context should be focused on meaning not the form. While
the students are involved in an activity, there should be no teacher intervention.
Students can practice using the language among their group members.
Teaching English speaking skills using the problem solving activities was
rated as good. This may result from providing adequate language functions in
situations that occur in real communication leading to their confidence in
speaking. They felt satisfied with their speaking English when using these
problem solving activities. The process of teaching and learning helped creating
enjoyment in speaking English in groups discussion. The feelings of success in
learning to speak English through the problem solving activities establish their
motivation to learn the language.
C. Questionnaires Analysis
The researcher using scale Likert in questionnaire analyse. Likert
scales are a common ratings format for surveys. Respondents rank quality
from high to low or best to worst using five or seven levels.
50
Likert scales were developed in 1932 as the familiar five-point bipolar
response that most people are familiar with today. These scales range from a
group of categories least to most asking students to indicate how much this
method good or poor, very good or very poor, or believe to be fair or good.
There’s really no wrong way to build a Likert scale. The most important
consideration is to include at least five response categories.
In analysis of questionnaires, the researcher uses 33 respondent (students)
of 40 population in class. There are 6 questions for students and there are 5 level
(score) of criteria. The researcher concluded the data of questionnaires, the list
below:
4.3 Table of Questionnaires Score
Score/
Question
Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 Score 4 Score 5
Question 1 0 3 1 24 5
Question 2 0 1 0 20 12
Question 3 1 0 4 19 9
Question 4 0 2 3 24 4
Question 5 0 1 3 14 15
Question 6 0 1 5 15 12
51
The score are classified as follows :
Table 4.4 Score Classification
Score 5 Very Good
Score 4 Good
Score 3 Fair
Score 2 Poor
Score 1 Very Poor
Tabel 4.5 Graphic Data of Question 1
Based on the graphic, question number 1 ask about the problem solving
activities very interested in language teaching especially in speaking skill. This
statement was rated as Good because there are 33 respondent which answering
there are 29 students answering Very Good and Good Score. So, the result is
mayority of the students agree with using problem solving activities very
0
5
10
15
20
25
Question 1
Score 1
Score 2
Score 3
Score 4
Score 5
52
interesting in speaking skill. Interval of data also can analyze from accounting
total answering score based on scoring each the answer from respondent. Based
on score that constant can accounted by:
1. Total score of 5 students answering Very Good = 5 x 5 = 25
2. Total score of 24 students answering Good = 24 x 4= 96
3. Total score of 1 students answering Fair = 1 x 3 = 3
4. Total score of 3 students answering Poor = 3 x 2 = 6
5. There is no students answering Very Poor = 0 x 1 = 0
Total = 130
1. Total ideal score (higher score) all answer Very Good = 5 x 33= 165
2. Total bad score (lower score) there is no answer Very Poor = 0
Table 4.6 Presentage of Question 1
Scale Total Presentage (%)
Very Good 5 15, 15%
Good 24 72, 72%
Fair 1 3, 03%
Poor 3 9, 09%
Very Poor 0 0%
Total 33 100%
53
From the table above, total students who provided good 72, 72% and very
good 15, 15%. It means the problem solving activities is very interesting to the
students. Also data degree of aggrement students toward using problem
solving was interested = (130:165) x 100% = 78, 8% from expected by 100%.
Tabel 4.7 Graphic Data of Question 2
Based on the graphic, question number 2 ask about the problem solving
activities very profitable in language teaching especially in speaking skill. This
statement was rated as Good because there are 33 respondent which answering
there are 32 students answering Very Good and Good Score. So, the result is
mayority of the students agree with using problem solving activities very
profitable in speaking skill. Interval of data also can analyze from accounting total
answering score based on scoring each the answer from respondent. Based on
score that constant can accounted by:
0
5
10
15
20
Question 2
Score 1
Score 2
Score 3
Score 4
Score 5
54
1. Total score of 12 students answering Very Good = 12 x 5= 60
2. Total score of 20 students answering Good = 20 x 4= 80
3. There is no students answering Fair = 0 x 3 = 0
4. Total score of 1 students answering Poor = 1 x 2 = 2
5. There is no students answering Very Poor = 0 x 1 = 0
Total = 142
1. Total ideal score (higher score) all answer Very Good = 5 x 33= 165
2. Total bad score (lower score) there is no answer Very Poor = 0
Table 4.8 Presentage of Question 2
Scale Total Presentage (%)
Very Good 12 36, 36%
Good 20 60, 6%
Fair 0 0%
Poor 1 3, 03%
Very Poor 0 0%
Total 33 100%
From the table above, total students who provided good 60, 6% and very
good 36, 36%. It means the problem solving activities is very interesting to the
students. Also data degree of aggrement students toward using problem
55
solving is very profitable = (142:165)x 100% = 86, 06% from expected by
100%.
Table 4.9 Graphic Data of Question 3
Based on the graphic, question number 3 ask about the problem solving
activities can improve achivement in language teaching especially in speaking
skill. This statement was rated as Good because there are 33 respondent which
answering there are 28 students answering Very Good and Good Score. So, the
result is mayority of the students agree with using problem solving activities can
improve achievement in speaking skill. Interval of data also can analyze from
accounting total answering score based on scoring each the answer from
respondent. Based on score that constant can accounted by:
1. Total score of 9 students answering Very Good = 9 x 5 = 45
2. Total score of 19 students answering Good = 19 x 4= 76
3. Total score of 4 students answering Fair = 4 x 3 = 12
0
5
10
15
20
Question 3
Score 1
Score 2
Score 3
Score 4
Score 5
56
4. There is no students answering Poor = 0 x 2 = 0
5. Total score of 1 students answering Very Poor = 1 x 1 = 1
Total = 134
1. Total ideal score (higher score) all answer Very Good = 5 x 33= 165
2. Total bad score (lower score) there is no answer Very Poor = 1x1=1
Table 4.10 Presentage of Question 3
Scale Total Presentage (%)
Very Good 9 27, 27%
Good 19 57, 57%
Fair 4 12, 12%
Poor 0 0%
Very Poor 1 3, 03%
Total 33 100%
From the table above, total students who provided good 57, 57% and very
good 27, 27%. It means the problem solving activities is very interesting to the
students. Also data degree of aggrement students toward using problem
solving can improve achievement in speaking skill = (134:165) x 100% = 81,
21% from expected by 100%.
57
Table 4.11 Graphic Data of Question 4
Based on the graphic, question number 4 ask about the problem solving
activities is very easy to use in language teaching especially in speaking skill. This
statement was rated as Good because there are 33 respondent which answering
there are 28 students answering Very Good and Good Score. So, the result is
mayority of the students agree with using problem solving activities very easy to
use in speaking skill. Interval of data also can analyze from accounting total
answering score based on scoring each the answer from respondent. Based on
score that constant can accounted by:
1. Total score of 4 students answering Very Good = 4 x 5 = 20
2. Total score of 24 students answering Good = 24 x 4= 96
3. Total score of 3 students answering Fair = 3 x 3 = 9
4. Total score of 1 students answering Poor = 2 x 2 = 4
5. There is no students answering Very Poor = 0 x 1 = 0
Total = 129
0
5
10
15
20
25
Question 4
Score 1
Score 2
Score 3
Score 4
Score 5
58
1. Total ideal score (higher score) all answer Very Good = 5 x 33= 165
2. Total bad score (lower score) there is no answer Very Poor = 0
Table 4.12 Presentage of Question 4
Scale Total Presentage (%)
Very Good 4 12, 12%
Good 24 72, 72%
Fair 3 9, 09%
Poor 2 6, 06%
Very Poor 0 0 %
Total 33 100%
From the table above, total students who provided good 72, 72% and very
good 12, 12%. It means the problem solving activities is very interesting to the
students. data degree of aggrement students toward using problem solving is
easy in language teaching especially in speaking skill = (129:165)x 100% =
78, 18% from expected by 100%.
59
Table 4.13 Graphic Data of Question 5
Based on the graphic, question number 5 ask about the problem solving
activities are requiring in language teaching especially in speaking skill. This
statement was rated as Good because there are 33 respondent which answering
there are 29 students answering Very Good and Good Score. So, the result is
mayority of the students agree with using problem solving activities are requiring
in speaking skill. Interval of data also can analyze from accounting total
answering score based on scoring each the answer from respondent. Based on
score that constant can accounted by:
1. Total score of 15 students answering Very Good = 15 x 5= 75
2. Total score of 14 students answering Good = 14 x 4= 56
3. Total score of 3 students answering Fair = 3 x 3 = 9
4. Total score of 1 students answering Poor = 1 x 2 = 2
5. There is no students answering Very Poor = 0 x 1 = 0
Total = 142
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Question 5
Score 1
Score 2
Score 3
Score 4
Score 5
60
1. Total ideal score (higher score) all answer Very Good = 5 x 33= 165
2. Total bad score (lower score) there is no answer Very Poor = 0
Table 4.14 Presentage of Question 5
Scale Total Presentage (%)
Very Good 15 45, 45%
Good 14 42, 42%
Fair 3 9, 09%
Poor 1 3, 03%
Very Poor 0 0 %
Total 33 100%
From the table above, total students who provided good 42, 42% and very
good 45, 45%. It means the problem solving activities is very interesting to the
students. ata degree of aggrement students toward using problem solving are
requiring in language teaching especially in speaking skill = (142:165)x 100%
= 86, 06% from expected by 100%.
61
Table 4.15 Graphic Data of Question 6
Based on the graphic, question number 6 ask about the problem solving
activities very important to suistanable in language teaching especially in
speaking skill. This statement was rated as Good because there are 33 respondent
which answering there are 27 students answering Very Good and Good Score. So,
the result is mayority of the students agree with using problem solving activities
very importan to suistanable in speaking skill. Interval of data also can analyze
from accounting total answering score based on scoring each the answer from
respondent. Based on score that constant can accounted by:
1. Total score of 12 students answering Very Good = 12 x 5= 60
2. Total score of 15 students answering Good = 15 x 4= 60
3. Total score of 5 students answering Fair = 5 x 3 = 15
4. Total score of 1 students answering Poor = 1 x 2 = 2
5. There is no students answering Very Poor = 0 x 1 = 0
Total = 137
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Question 6
Score 1
Score 2
Score 3
Score 4
Score 5
62
1. Total ideal score (higher score) all answer Very Good = 5 x 33= 165
2. Total bad score (lower score) there is no answer Very Poor = 0
Table 4.16 Presentage of Question 6
Scale Total Presentage (%)
Very Good 12 36, 36%
Good 15 45, 45%
Fair 5 15, 15%
Poor 1 3, 03%
Very Poor 0 0%
Total 33 100%
From the table above, total students who provided good 45, 45% and very
good 36, 36%. It means the problem solving activities is very interesting to the
students. Also data degree of aggrement students toward using problem
solving very important to suistanable in speaking skill = (137:165)x 100% =
83, 03% from expected by 100%.
Based on the results of the Questionnaires, the writer concludes that:
the achievement of students in participating of the learning speaking skill used
problem-solving activities is high as much as 87, 87%, it could also help the
students become more willing to argue, with ideas and make students speaking
better.
63
Also relevancies of the methods used to study the actions and views of
the needs of students in his special English lessons for improving speaking
skill are relevant. It can be seen from the percentage of questionnaire data
analysis in which question 1 as 78, 8% as good, question 2 as 86, 06% as
good, question 3 as 81, 21% as good, question 4 as 78, 18% as good, question
5 as 86, 06% as good and the question 6 as 83, 03% as good score.
Finally the writer can conclude that this method is very good for
teaching and learning process especially on speaking subject.
64
BAB V
CLOSURE
A. Conclusions
Based on the analysis above can be summarized as follow:
1. To find out the use Problem Solving Activities improve students’
speaking skills. It can be seen from the results of tobs is greater than the
t-table is the value (1. 81 > 0. 90)
2. Speaking skills by using the problem solving activities work and can
improve speaking skills competency. This can be seen from the results
of tobs is greater than the t-table is the value (1. 81 > 0. 90) and
questionnaire data analysis value. It can be seen from the percentage of
questionnaire data analysis in which question 1 as 78, 8% as good,
question 2 as 86, 06% as good, question 3 as 81, 21% as good, question
4 as 78, 18% as good, question 5 as 86, 06% as good and the question 6
as 83, 03% as good score.
B. Suggestions
The successful of teaching is not only depended on the lesson
programs but also important to know how the teacher present lesson and
use various technique to manage the class more enjoyable. Regarding to
teaching speaking by using Problem Solving Activities, the writer gives
some suggestion for the teacher, students and the upcoming researchers:
65
1. Teacher
To all the English teachers all over the area who teach in Senior
High School, these research results can be relevant source to mix in your
daily teaching learning process. And Application of problemsolving
activities need to be enriched with a more real case studies for learning
would be more attractive. Besides the use of appropriate methods of
teachers must also considers factors other support so thatstudents are
skilled to speak, for example, determine the extent of the problem is
tiered according to student’s ability or situation and the current state of
learning.
Teacher should construct a variation of English speaking
activities which motivate the students to learn. Teacher roles should be
changed as a provider, anassistant, a consultant to increase effectiveness
in the learning environment.
2. Student
Students should be more active in teaching learning process and
do not afraid of English lesson. When the teacher explains the material,
students pay attention to the explanation, so if the teacher gives question
they can answer well.
Students have to try to answer teacher’s question by English and do
conversation in English with their friends. They also must increase their
66
self confidence to speak in front of the class. Moreover, they should not
to be shy to speak up.
3. Upcoming researchers
It has been known from the result of the study that using Problem
Solving Activities can improve the students’ speaking skill. The writer
would like to suggest upcoming researcher, the result of the study can
use as additional reference for further research with the different sample
and occasion.
REFERENCES
Crowl, Thomas K. 1996. Fundamental of Educational Research. London: Brown
and Bench Mark Production
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. How to Teach English. England: Longman
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. England:
Longman
Hopkins, David. 2008. A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research. 4th edition.
New York: Open University Press .
Hornby. 1974. Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary Of Current English. New
York: Oxford university press.
Hutcinson, torn alan waters. 1987. English for specific purpose.new York.
Cambridge University Press.
http://www.freeonline.dictionary.com
http://rumahdesakoe.blogspot.com
http://unr.edu/homepage/hayriyek
Iskandarwassid, Prof.,Dr., M.Pd. 2008. Strategi Pembelajaran Bahasa. PT
Remaja Rosdakarya
International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 2, No. 6, November
2012
Klippel, Friederike. 1990. Keep Talking Communicative Fluency Activities for
Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press
Manser H, Martin. 1991.Oxford Learner’s Pocket Dictionary, New York: Oxford
University Press
Nunan, David. 2003. Practical English Language Teaching. New York: Mc
Grew-Hill.
Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. New York: Prentice Hall
International English Language Teaching
Olii, Helena. 2008. Public Speaking. Jakarta: PT.Indeks
Putro Widoyoko, Eko, Prof. Dr. 2013. Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen Penelitian.
Jakarta: PT. Indeks.
Pty Ltd Engineering Subject Centre. 2012. Problems and Problem Solving.
[online] available at: http//www.engsc.ac.uk/er/theory/problemsolving.
asp. [01 August 2015] Sudirman. (1978). Metode Problem-Solving.
[online]. Available at: http//repository.upi.edu/operator/upload/s_c0151_
0603356_chapter2.pdf/2012 [August, 05 2015].
Richard, Jack. C. et.all. 2001. Approches and Methods in Language Teaching. 2nd
edition. New York: Cambridge University Press
Scrivener, Jim. 1994. Learning Teaching. Jordan Hill: A Division of Heinemann
Publishers.
Siregar, Syofian, Ir., M.M. 2010. Statistika Deskriptip Untuk Penelitian. Jakarta:
PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Simpson IS. 1990. Cara Menafsirkan Data Statistik. ITB Bandung
Trianto. 2009. Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif: Konsep,
Landasan, dan
Implementasinya Pada Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP).
Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group
Wadsworth, Yoland. 1984. Do It Yourself Social Research. Australia: Impact
Printing (Vic)
Yule, George. 1996. Analisa Wacana. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Umum
Questionnaires
No. Questions 1 2 3 4 5
Very
Poor
Poor Fair Good Very
Good
1. Do you think English
lessons using the
Problem-Solving
very interesting?
2. Do you think the
methods Problem-
Solving profitable
and help learning
English, especially
speaking?
3. Do you think the
problem-solving
method can improve
achievement in
English lessons?
4. What do you think
after using the
Problem-Solving
English lessons so is
easy?
5. Do you think
Problem-Solving
method required in
teaching English,
especially speaking?
6. Do you think the
methods Problem-
Solving important
when used on
sustainable?
DOCUMENTATION