THE USE OF SCAFFOLDING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE THE
STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILL OF THE ELEVENTH
STUDENTS OF SMK N 1 TENGARAN IN ACADEMIC YEAR
2016/2017
A GRADUATING PAPER
Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Bachelor Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd)
English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education
Faculty
State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
By:
MILA HANIFAH
113 12 053
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
MOTTO
Kant-DEDICATION
This work is sincerely dedicate for:
My beloved parents (Mr. Sardi Yanto, and Mrs. Umi Muflikhah), my beloved elder sister
(Muftikhatul Karimah) and my young brothers (Zidni Ilman Nafi’an, and Ahmad Nadzif
Azmy).
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Assalamu’alaikum Wr. Wb.
In the name of Allah SWT, the most gracious and merciful. The king of universe and
space. Thank you Allah since the writer could complete this paper as of the requirement to
finish the study in the Teacher Training and Education Faculty of State Institute for Islamic
Studies (IAIN) Salatiga.
This research would not succeed without support, guidance, and help from individual
and institution. Therefore, I would like to express special and deepest thanks to:
1. Dr. Rahmat Hariyadi, M. Pd. As the Rector of State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN)
Salatiga.
2. Suwardi, M. Pd., as the Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of IAIN
Salatiga.
3. Noor Malihah, Ph. D., as the Head of English Education Department of State Institute
Studies (IAIN) Salatiga.
4. Setia Rini, M.Pd, as counselor who has brings up, give the researcher advices,
suggestions and recomendations for this graduating paper from begining until the end.
Thank you for your patience and care.
5. All lecturers in the English Education Department of IAIN Salatiga. Thank you for all
guidance, knowledge, and support.
6. All of the staff who have helped the researcher in processing of graduating paper
administration.
7. My beloved parent, Mr. Sardi Yanto, and Mrs. Umi Muflikhah, my beloved elder sister
and young brothers Muftikhatul Karimah, Zidni Ilman Nafi’an, and Ahmad Nadzif
8. My beloved family that can not mentioned one by one, thank you for everything.
9. My big family of LPM Dinamika. Thank you for your support, attention, and all the
knowledge that I got.
10. The big family of SMK N 1 Tengaran who allowed me to conduct the research there.
11. My wonderful friends are Ain, Azizka, Aya, Dini, Ratih, Kiki,Tri, Afifah and my
KKN mate Uut, thank you for your help, support and advices. Keep our friendship.
12. Slamet Budiono (mas Oyon), Eko Septian Hartanto (kak Eko) thankyou for help.
13. All of my friends who help me to finish this graduating paper.
Finally, this graduating paper is expected to be able to provide useful
knowledge and information to the readers.
Salatiga, March6th 2017
The Researcher
ix
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE………. xi
ABSTRACT………. xii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION……….... 1
A. Background of the Research……….. 1
B. Statement of the Problem Study………... 3
C. Objectives of the Study………. 4
D. Benefits of the Study………. 4
E. Definition of the key Terms……….. 5
F. Limitation of the Study……….. 6
CHAPTER II: THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK……….. 9
A. Speaking………. 9
1. Definition of Speaking Skill………. 9
2. Types of Speaking Performances………. 10
3. Elements of Speaking………... 11
4. Teaching Speaking Skill………... 13
5. Learning Speaking Skill……… 17
6. Classroom Speaking Activities………. 18
B. Scaffolding Strategy……… 22
x
2. Procedures of Scaffolding Strategy………. 25
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……… 27
A. Setting of Research………... 27
B. Subject of the Research………... 27
C. Evaluation Criteria………. 28
D. Description of Research Schedule………. 30
E. Research Instrument……….. 30
F. Research Methodology……….. 32
G. Technique of Collecting Data……… 34
H. Technique of Data Analysis………... 36
I. Procedures of The Research………... 38
J. Model of The Research……….. 39
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION……….. 41
A. Data Presentation……….. 41
B. Data Analysis……….... 46
C. Discussion………. 55
D. The improvement of cycle 1 and cycle 2……….... 68
CHAPTER V: CLOSURE……… 71
A. Conclusion……… 71
B. Suggestion……… 72
xi
LIST OF FIGURE AND TABLE
Figure 3.1 Model of The Research………39
Table 3.1 List of Tata Busana (TB) 1 Class………26
Table 3.2 Assesment Scale for Oral Ability………27
Table 3.3 Criteria of Students’ Achievment………...28
Table 3.4 Time Setting of The Research……….29
Table 3.5 Instrument of Test………30
Table 3.6 Students’ Observation Sheet………...30
Table 4.1 Result of Pre-test and Post-test 1……….41
Table 4.2 Students’ Observation Sheet………42
Table 4.3 Result of Pre-test and Post-test 2……….44
Table 4.4 Students’ Observation Sheet……….45
Table 4.5 Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Pre-test 1……….47
Table 4.6 Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Post-test 1………48
Table 4.7 Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Pre-TestII………51
Table 4.8 Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Post-TestII………..52
ABSTRACT
Hanifah, Mila. 2017. THE USE OF SCAFFOLDING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE THE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILL OF THE ELEVENTH STUDENTS OF SMK N 1 TENGARAN IN ACADEMIC YEAR 2016/2017. A Graduating Paper. English Education Department. Teacher Training and Education Faculty. State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) SALATIGA.
The research is about the use of scaffolding strategy to improve the students speaking skill of the eleventh students of SMK N 1 Tengaran in academic year 2016/2017. The objective of this research is to improve the students speaking skill through scaffolding strategy. Based on the observation of the researcher during teaching learning process, the students were difficult and less of confidence to speak in English. The methodology of this research was classroom action research which consists of two cycles. The number of the students in this research was 35 students. In completing the research, researcher used observation sheet, documentation and tests pre-test and post-pre-test as the instruments of collecting data. By conducting classroom action research, it was found that implementation of scaffolding strategy improved the students’ speaking skills. The result of this research showed that the finding cycle II was higher than the KKM (Minimum Mastery Criteria) of SMK N 1 Tengaran on score 70 in the academic year 2016/2017. The mean of score of post-test in cycle II was 80,85. Based on the result of this research, it could be concluded that the implementation of
scaffolding strategy improved the students’ speaking skills of the eleventh students of SMK N 1 Tengaran in academic year 2016/2017.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Language is generally described as a means of communication, but
in studying it, we consistently come up against the question of what it is to
be ‘competent’ in communicating. We communicate; but our
communication has no guarantee of success, and the feedback we get from
the words and actions of others often indicates that they have received
something different from what we thought we were transmitting. That is
why, language and communication is closely related each other. They
cannot be separated. People must know the language used for
communication (McArthur, 1983: 31).
One of the expressive language elements is speaking skill.
Speaking is the most common and important means of providing
communication among humans beings. Speaking is the primary situation
in which learners have an opportunity to use the target language, namely
English. Students or learners use the English for variety of different
purposes within the lesson, including interacting with the teacher and with
other learners and using language to negotiate and complete learning
activities and asigments (Richard, 2000: 193). Speaking is the most
opinions and ideas with other persons. To know whether learners speak, it
is necessary to get them to actually say something.
Speaking is one of the language skills that should be mastered by
language learners. To master this skill is not as easy as business because
there some language components as tools for mastering it. Among others
are grammar, vocabularies, spelling, pronunciation, fluency, and
confident. Therefore, one will be called skillful in speaking when they are
able to make use the component needed to share ideas, feelings and
thoughts. Brown and Yule (1983:25) state 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.”
Many of the learners in a speaking class are reluctant speakers. The
disability of the students to speak may lead them to be unable to express
their ideas, feelings, thoughts even in a simple form of conversation.
Based on the interview with Mrs. Afid as an English Teacher in XI
Tata Busana1 class in SMK N 1 Tengaran, the writer got an information
about the problems faced by students in speaking skill. She said that the
students low motivation to study English. Lack of vocabulary caused the
students feel lazy to speak English.
Based during observation in speaking class, the researcher found
some problems that exist. First, it related condition of students who have
low motivation to speak English. They think that English is very difficult
they worry if their friend will laugh at them. Second, the students’
capability in mastering grammar, vocabulary, and also pronounciation is
low. They have limited vocabulary, and incorrect in grammar. Third, in
speaking material. The teacher has translated all the sentences first before
explaining what kind of expression it. and the fourth, students did not
bring dictionary when they do not understand about the meaning of several
words.
According to whole explanation above, the reseacher interested in
doing research entitled THE USE SCAFFOLDING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE THE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILL OF THE ELEVENTH STUDENTS OF SMK N 1 TENGARAN IN ACADEMIC YEAR 2016/2017.
B. Statement of the Problems Study
1. Does “Scaffolding Strategy” can improve the students’ speaking skill
of the eleventh students of SMK N 1 Tengaran in academic year
2016/2017?
2. To What extent is the use of scaffolding strategy can improve the
students’ speaking skill of the eleventh students of SMK N 1 Tengaran
in the academic year 2016/2017?
C. Objectives of The Study
1. To find out whether the implementation of scaffolding strategy
improve the students’ speaking skill of the eleventh students of SMK
2. To find out to what extent is the use of scaffolding strategy in
improving the students’ speaking skill of the eleventh students of SMK
N 1 Tengaran in the academic year 2016/2017.
D. Benefits of The Study
1. For the researcher
This research can contribute and help the researcher to find out an
appropriate and the method for teaching speaking English for student.
Besides, it is also gets a valuable experience which can be used for
conducting a better action in the future
2. For the students
They are expected to have better communication by using English. It
means, they will be able to speak fluently using correct grammar,
vocabulary as well as promouncation. Besides, it can be useful for
them to find a better job in future.
3. For teacher
The result of this study can be used to give some feedback for the
teacher in providing and supporting the teaching material. It is hoped
that the varieties in teaching speaking will improve the quality of the
teaching and learning process.
E. Definition of the Key Terms
There are some key terms in this paper. The writer wants to explain the
meaning of the key terms in the title in order to make easy and understand
1. Improve
Improve in the oxford dictionary is the process of becoming or making
to the better (Oxford university press, 2003: 216)
2. Speaking skill
Definition from (Jeremy Harmer, 1988:269), Speaking skill is the
ability to speak fluently presupposes not only a knowledge of language
features, but also the ability to process information and language ‘on
the spot’.
3. Scaffolding strategy
Scaffolding is described as a support made available for students’
learning until the students can perform independently of that support
(Verhagen&Collis 1996).
4. Dialogue
Roger states that dialogue provides the means of contextualizing key
structures and illustrates in which structures might be used as well as
some cultural aspect of target language (2001: 59).
F. Limitation of The Study
In order to make focus in this research, the researcher will limited the
study as ollows:
1. The researcher is limited in the application of scaffolding strategy and
dialogue .
3. The researcher is limited in carried out to the students’ at the eleventh
year of SMK N 1 Tengaran in academic year 2016/2017.
G. Review of Related Research
In this paper the writer takes review of related literature from
another thesis as comparison of this research.
The first research conducted by Rahmawati, Tika (2010), a student
of State Institute of Islamic Studies Salatiga 2010. Her research title is
THE USE OF SCAFFOLDING TALK TECHNIQUE TO IMPROVE
STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILL (Classroom Action Research of the
Eighth Grade Students of MTs NegeriAndong in the Academic Year of
2013/2014). The writer used Classroom Action Research as method of
research technique. This research design consist of 2 cycle. The result of
this research is Scaffolding Talk technique is successful in improving the
students’ speaking skill. It can be seen from the development of students’
speaking skill. Students’ grammar, vocabulary better than before. They are
more confidence in conveying ideas. Students became more active and not
afraid to speak up in front of his friends.
The second research conducted by Ratna KurniaDewi (2011), a
student of Sebelas Maret University 2011. Her research is Improving
Students’ Speaking Skill Through Dialogue (An Action Research
Conducted at the Tenth Year Students of SMA N 1 TerasBoyolali of the
academic year 2010/2011). The Writer used Classroom Action Research
research is dialogue can be implemented effectively in the speaking class.
The students’ speaking skill is improved through the dialogue activities.
The students are encourage to speak and become more active during
teaching and learning process.
In this research, the researcher used classroom action research as
the methodology of the research. The research used scaffolding strategy as
the method to teach in the class. And use asking and giving dialogue as the
material.
H. Outlines of Graduating Paper
This Graduating paper will consist of five chapters. Each chapter
will be discussed as follow:
Chapter one is an introduction. It is explains of the background of
the study, statement of the problems, objectives of the study, purpose of
the study, benefit of the study, limitation of the study, and definition of
key terms.
Chapter two is theoretical framework. It consist about theory of
scaffolding strategy. Secondly it consist about speaking skill theory.
Chapter three is methodology of the research. It discusses approach
and method of research, the setting of research, procedure of research,
technique of collecting data, and technique of analysis data.
Chapter four is data analysis. It consist of writer present of field
Chapter five is the last part of closure. It consist of two parts, there
are conclusion and suggestion. Then, for the attachment there bibliography
CHAPTER II
THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Speaking
1. Definition of Speaking Skills
Speaking skill is an ability to orally express opinion, thought,
and feeling to other people both directly and directly. Speaking is an
interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing,
receiving and processing information (Brown, 1994; Burns & Joyce,
1997). It is an important part of everyday interaction and most often
the first impression of a person is based on his/her ability to speak
fluently and comprehensively. So, as teachers, we have a responsibility
to prepare the students as much as possible to be able to speak in
English in the real world outside the classroom (Hornby 1995: 37).
Speaking is the competence to express explain and convey thinking,
feeling, and idea.Speaking is using our voice to say, express our mind
or opinion or express what we see. Too most people, mastering the art
of speaking is the single most important aspect of learning a second or
a foreign language, and success is measured in term of the ability to
carry out conversation in the language (Fauziati 2005: 126). In
addition, she asserts that speaking is an interactive process of
constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving and
2. Types of Speaking Performances
Brown (2004: 140) describes five categories of speaking skill area.
Those Five categories are as follows:
a. Imitative
This category includes the ability to practice an intonation
and focusing on some particular elements of language form. That is
just imitating a word, phrase or sentence. The important thing here
is focusing on pronunciation. The teacher uses drilling in the
teaching learning process. The reason is by using drilling, students
get opportunity to listen and to orally repeat some words.
b. Intensive
This is the students’ speaking performance that is practicing
some phonological and grammatical aspects of language. It usually
places students doing the task in pairs (group work), for example,
reading aloud that includes reading paragraph, reading dialogue
with partner in turn etc.
c. Responsive
Interaction and test comprehension but at the somewhat
limited level very short conversation, standard greetings and small
talk, simple requests and comments, giving instructions and
d. Interactive
The length and complexity of the interaction which
sometimes includes multiple exchange and/or multiple participants.
e. Extensive
Teacher gives students extended monologues in the form of
oral reports, summaries, and storytelling and short speeches.
From the explanation above, the researcher used intiensive
category. Which the students read the dialogue then practiced with
their partner.
3. Elements of Speaking
The ability to speak fluently presuppose not only knowledge of language features, but also the ability to process information and language on the spot (Harmer, 2001 : 269).
a. Language features
Among the elements necessary for spoken production, are the following:
1) Connected speech: effective speakers of English need to able
not only to produce the individual phonemes of English. In
connected speech sounds are modified (assimilation), omitted,
(elision), added (linking), or weakned (through constractions
and stress patterning). It is for this reason that we should
involve students in activities designed specifically to improve
2) Expressive devices: native speaker of English change the pith
and stress of particular parts of utterances, vary volume and
speed, and show by other physical and non-verbal
(paralinguistic) means how they are feeling(especially in
face-to-face interactions).
3) Lexis and grammar: spontaneous speech id marked by the use
of a number of commons lexical phrases, especially in the
performance of certain language functions.
4) Negotiation language: effective speaking benefits from the
negotiator language we use to seek clarification and show the
structure of what we are saying. We often need to ask for
clarification when we are listening to someone else talks and it
is very crucial for students.
b. Mental/ social processing
Success of speaker’s productivity is also dependent upon the
rapid processing skills that talking necessitates.
1) Language processing : effective speakers need to able to process
language in their own heads and put it into coherent order so that
it comes out in forms that are not only comprehensible, but also
convey the meanings that are intended. Language processing
involves the retrieval of words and their assembly into
syntactically and propositionally appropriate sequences. One of
lessons is to help students develop habits of rapid language
processing in English.
2) Interacting with others: most speaking involves interaction with
one or more participants. This means that effective speaking also
involves a good deal of listening, an understanding of how the
other participants are feeling. And a knowledge of how
linguistically to take turns allow other to do.
3) (on the spot) information processing: quite apart from our
response other’s feelings, we also need to be able to process the
information they tell us the moment we get it.
4. Teaching Speaking Skill
This research is conducted to improve students’ speaking skill
using scaffolding strategy and dialogue. The methodology which the
researcher use in this research is Classroom Action Research, where
the researcher roles as a teacher and an observer. It means that this
research will involve teaching learning process. Therefore, the
following explanation relates to teaching and learning process,
especially in speaking skill.
As the researcher described in the background of the research,
there are several problems of speaking skill in the classroom according
to Penny Ur (1991: 121-122), those are:
a. Inhibition. In speaking class, learners are often inhibited about
about making mistakes, fearful of criticism or losing face, or
simply shy of the attention that their speech attracts.
b. Nothing to say. Sometimes learners feel that they have nothing to
say in their mind. They have no motive to express themselves
beyond the guilty feeling that they should be speaking.
c.Low or uneven participation. Only one participant can talk at a time
if he or she is to be heard, and in a large group this means that each
one will have only very little talking time. This problem is
compounded by the tendency of some learners to dominate, while
others speak very little or not all.
d. Mother tongue use. In classes where all or a number of the learners
share the same mother tongue, they may tend to use it to
communicate because it is easier. This can obstruct the process of
learning target language.
Based on the problems above, teacher as the most important
component of teaching learning process is demanded to be able to
figure the problems out. Penny Ur (1991: 122) states the following
ways are several actions that can be done by the teacher to solve the
problems above:
a. Use group work
By using group work, the students have more period of
time and also have lower inhibitions to speak in front of the
supervise all learner speech, so that not all utterances will be
correct, and learners may occasionally slip into their native
language; nevertheless, even taking into consideration occasional
mistakes and mother tongue use, the amount of time remaining for
positive, useful oral practice is still likely to be far more than in the
full class set up.
b. Base the activity on easy language
In general, the level of language needed for a discussion
should be lower than that used in intensive language learning
activities in the same class; it should be easily recalled and
produced by the participants so that they can speak fluently with
minimum hesitation.
c. Make a careful choice of topic and task to stimulate interest
On the whole, the clearer purpose of the discussion the
more motivatedparticipants will be.
d. Give some instruction or training in discussion skills
If the task is based on group discussion then include
instruction about participation when introducing it. For instance,
tell learners to make sure that everyone in the group contributes to
the discussion, appoint a chairperson to each group who will
regulate participation.
Keeping students speaking the target language will train them
to be habitually speaking target language, and it will help students’
learning process quickly (Ur, 1991:122).
Teaching learning process does not get out from the role of the
teacher. Therefore, there are three particular relevancies if we are
trying to get student to speak fluently (Harmer, 1984: 275-276):
a. Prompter: students sometimes get lost, cannot think of what to
say next or in some other way lose the fluency we expect of
them. We can leave them to struggle out of such situations on
their own and indeed sometimes this maybe the best option.
However we may be able to help them and the activity to
progress by offering discrete suggestions. If this can be done
supportively without disrupting the discussion, or forcing
students out of role it will stop the sense of frustration that
some students feel when they come to a ‘dead end’ of
languages or idea.
b. Participant: teachers should be good animators when students
produce language. Sometimes this can be achieved by setting
up an activity clearly and with enthusiasm.
c. Feedback provider: the vexed question of when and how to
give feedback in speaking activities is answered by considering
carefully the effect of possible different approaches. When the
inhibit them and take the communicativeness out of the
activity. On the other hand, helpful and gentle correction may
get students out of difficult misunderstanding and hesitation.
Everything is depends on the situations to givefeedback.
When students have completed an activity it is vital that we
allow them to assess what they have done and that we tell them
what,in our opinion, went well. We will respond to the content
of theactivity as well as the language used (Harmer, 1984:
276).
5. Learning Speaking Skill
The second important component of teaching learning process is
students. There are some characteristics of successful speaking activity
that may be done by the students/ learners of speaking, those are:
a. Learners talk a lot.
b. Participation is even. Classroom discussion is not dominated by a
minority of talkative participants: all get a chance to speak, and
contributions are fairly evenly distributed.
c. Motivation is high. The learner has high motivation to speak,
because they are interested in the topic and have something new to
say about it, or because they want to contribute to achieving a task
d. Language is of an acceptable. Learners express themselves in
utterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other and
of an acceptable of language fluency (Ur, 1991: 120).
On the other hand, there are also some rules in learning spokenlanguage, such as:
a. To learn to speak the language correctly, you must speak it aloud.
b. To learn to speak a language fluently, you must think in that
language.
c. The more you speak the language aloud, the more quickly you
willlearn to speak fluently.
d. You must never make a mistake when you are speaking
(Lundquist:13-15).
6. Classroom Speaking Activities
Teaching speaking should be taught in attractive and
communicative activities. There are many types of classroom speaking
activities. Harmer (2001: 271-274) states six classroom speaking
activities. They are acting from script, communication games,
discussion, prepared talks, questionnaires, simulation, and role play.
a. Acting from script
Playing scripts and acting out the dialogues are two kinds
of acting scripts that should be considered by the teacher in the
teaching and learning process. In the playing scripts, it is important
this activity is as theatre directors, drawing attention to appropriate
stress, intonation, and speed. This means that the lines they speak
will have real meaning. By giving students practice in these things
before they give their final performances, the teacher ensures that
acting out is both a learning and language producing activity. In
acting the dialogue, the students will be very helped if they are
given time to rehearse their dialogues before the performance. The
students will gain much more from the whole experience in the
process.
b. Communication games
Games are designed to provoke communication between
students. The games are made based on the principle of the
information gap so that one student has to talk to a partner in order
to solve a puzzle, draw a picture, put a thing in the right order, or
find similarities and differences between pictures. Television and
radio games, imported into the classroom, often provide good
fluency activities.
c. Discussion
Discussion is probably the most commonly used activity in
the oral skills class. Here, the students are allowed to express their
real opinions. According to Harmer (2001:272) discussion range is
divided into several stages from highly formal, whole-group staged
groups that can be used for a whole range of discussion. For
example, students are expected to predict the content of a reading
text, or talk about their reactions after reading the text. The second
is instant comments which can train students to respond fluently
and immediately is to insert ‘instant comment’ mini activities into
lessons. This involves showing them photographs or introducing
topics at any stage of a lesson and nominating students to say the
first thing that comes into their head. The last is formal debates.
Students prepare arguments in favour or against various
propositions. The debate will be started when those who are
appointed as ‘panel speaker’ produce well-rehearsed ‘writing like’
arguments whereas others, the audience, pitch in as the debate
progresses with their own thoughts on the subject.
From the explanation above, the researcher used acting
from script activity. The students learned from their dialogue, then
they practiced in front of class with their partner.
d. Prepared talks
Students make a presentation on a topic of their own
choice. Such talks are not designed for informal spontaneous
conversations because they are prepared and more ‘writing like’.
However, if possible students should speak from notes rather than
e. Questionnaires
Questionnaires are very useful because they ensure that
both questioner and respondent have something to say to each
other. Students can design questionnaires on any topic that is
appropriate. As they do so the teacher can act as a resource,
helping them in the design process. The results obtained from
questionnaires can then form the basis for written work,
discussions, or prepared talks.
f. Simulation and Role play
Simulation and role play can be used to encourage general
oral fluency, or to train students for specific situations. Students
can act out simulation as them or take on the role of completely
different character and express thoughts and feelings as they doing
in the real world. Those activities can be used by teachers to teach
speaking. Teachers can choose an activity that related to the topic
and objective of the lesson. Besides, they must consider the
situation, condition of the students and materials that will be
taught. For example, they use simulation and role play activities
when they teach expressions. Teachers can ask them to write some
dialogues and after that they have to act them out in front of the
class. It may be used by the teachers in using acting from script. In
discussion, teachers can use some pictures or maybe videos in a
measure how far students can speak, say and express their feeling
in English.
B. Scaffolding Strategy
1. Definition of Scaffolding Strategy
Scaffolding strategy is a recent view of teaching new skills,
concepts and higher levels of understanding. It is a more mature
educational and psychological view of the teachers' support and
intervention in the learners' learning. Many efforts have been made to
explore this view, its concepts, types and techniques, and to develop
guidelines and cautions for using scaffolding in classrooms.
Scaffolding Theory was introduced in the late 1950s by Jerome
Bruner, a cognitive psychologist. He used the term to describe
children's oral language acquisition that was helped by their parents
when they first begins to speak. Scaffolding as a teaching strategy
originates from Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and his concept
of the zone of proximal development (1978) represents the relationship
of the learner with the teacher support in learning with assistance or
support until the learning is mastered and becomes independent of
support. “The zone of proximal development is the distance between
what children can do by themselves and the next learning that they can
be helped to achieve with competent assistance” (Raymond, 2000:
Concerning the definition of scaffolding talk above I want to
unfold the characteristic of scaffolding talk according to Bruner in
Cameron (2001 : 8) there are six characteristics of scaffolding strategy :
a. Provides clear direction and reduces students’ confusion –
Educators anticipate problems that students might encounter and
then develop step by step instructions, which explain what a student
must do to meet expectations,
b. Keeps students on task – By providing structure, scaffolding lesson
or research project, provides pathways for the learners. The student
can make decisions about which path to choose or what things to
explore along the path but they cannot wander off of the path, which
is the designated task.
c. Giving hints: providing clues or suggestions but deliberately does
not include the full solution.
d. Controlling the students frustrating during the task
e. Pointing out what was important to do or showing other way to
solve,
f. Demonstrating an idealized version of the task given.
The expert functions as a facilitator who is knowledgeable in the
skills, strategies and processes required for effective learning. The
expert not only helps motivate the learner by providing just enough
support to enable him or her to accomplish the goal, but also provides
task, and providing hints and questions that might help the learner to
reflect. In this view, the adult’s role includes perceptual, cognitive and
affective components (Van Lier, 2004).
Scaffolding as a teaching strategy originates from Lev
Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and his concept of the zone of proximal
development (1978) represents the relationship of the learner with the
teacher support in learning with assistance or support until the learning
is mastered and becomes independent of support. “The zone of
proximal development is the distance between what children can do by themselves and the next learning that they can be helped to achieve with competent assistance” (Raymond, 2000: 176).
Inherent in scaffolding from Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) idea of
Zone of proximal development vygotsky suggests that there are two
part of learner’s developmental level. 1. The actual developmental
level; the zone of proximal development is “the distance between the
actual developmental level as determined by independent problem
solving. It is the differences between the students actual development
level determined by their capability to master the task independently 2.
The potential developmental level; as determined through problem
solving under the help of teacher, adult guidance or in collaboration
with more capable peers (Jauhar 2011: 39). The ability to learn through
instruction and help adults make students can understand and do a lot of
The reseacrher can conclude that scaffolding strategy is
teachers’ method to help the students understanding material. But, in
scaffolding, teacher just give an instruction and task to students. The
teacher give support to the students in the beginning of the learning and
then give opportunity for students to take responsibility independently.
2. Procedures of Scaffolding Stratgey
The procedure of scaffolding strategy according Vygotsky and
Bruner in Corder (2000 : 10) are:
1. Ask a question,
2. Teacher explain the materials,
3. Giving example of the task to the students related with the
materials,
4. Modeling, showing students examples of work produce by teacher,
provide assistance, guide, giving clues which provoke the students
toward independent learning,
5. Demonstrating, illustrating the procedures from the teacher through
work product, supporting the students as they learn and practice
procedures,
6. Encourage the students to learn complete their task independently. From the explanation above, the researcher conlclude that the
research of using scaffolding strategy in speaking skill used
prepared talks and acting from script type of speaking skill. Before
giving dialogue that they made in home. Then, they learn from
their own dialogue before practiced. So, they practiced by prepare
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. The Setting of Research
The research was conducted in Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan
(SMK) Negeri 1 Tengaran. SMK N 1 Tengaran is located in Karangduren,
Tengaran, street Darun Na’im 50775, phone number (0298) 3405144.
SMK N 1 Tengaran located near the traditional market named Kembang
Sari market.
B. The Subject of the Research
The researcher choose SMK N 1 Tengaran as object of the study
especially eleventh grade of Tata Busana (TB) 1 class. There were 35
students in Tata Busana 1 class. They were:
TABLE 3.1
List of Tata Busana (TB) 1 Class of SMK N 1 Tengaran in the Academic Year of 2016/2017
No Name of Students 1 Ade Shaila Ananda
13 Dita Wahyu Aryani
Assesment Scale for Oral Ability Aspects Score
25 Easy to understand pronunciation and have a native accent
20 Easy to understand though with a certain accent Pronunciation
10 It is difficult to understand because of pronunciation problems, often asked to repeat
5 A serious pronunciation problems that cannot be understood
25 No or few grammatical error
20 Occasionally makes grammatical errors but does not affect the meaning
15 There is a problem of pronunciation that make the listener must concentrate fully and sometimes there are misunderstandings 10 It is difficult to understand because of pronunciation problems,
often asked to repeat Grammar
5 A serious pronunciation problems that cannot be understood
25 Using the vocabulary words and phrases such as native speakers 20 Sometimes uses inappropriate vocabulary
15 Frequent use of inappropriate vocabulary, conversation is limited due to limited vocabulary
10 Using the wrong vocabulary and vocabulary is limited so it is difficult to understand
Vocabulary
5 A very limited vocabulary so that the conversation is not possible
25 Easy to express ideas although there is repeating in certain part 20 Sometimes difficult to express ideas due to limited vocabulary 15 Little difficult to express ideas verbally and a lot of repeating 10 Difficult to express ideas searching for vocabulary does not
complete utterances Content/Idea
5 Limited to express ideas communication difficult although in simple dialogue
Table 3.3
Criteria of Students’ Achievement
No Total Score Grade
2 80 – 89 Very Good
3 70 – 79 Good
4 60 – 69 Fair
5 50 – 59 Poor
6 Less than 50 Very Poor
D. Description of Research Schedule
The research was conducted in January. Here the writer as the
teacher and the collaborator is Azizka Nabilatul Qonita an observer in
teaching learning process. The table below will show the schedule of the
research:
TABLE 3.4
Time setting of the Research
No Date and Time Activities
1. January 9th 2017 Observation in the school and interview to the teacher
2. January 9th 2017 Permit the application
3. January 11th 2017 Consultation of the research schedule and observation in
the class
4. January 18th 2017 CycleI (first meeting) Pre-test I
5 January 20th 2017 Cycle I (second meeting) Treatment I
6. January 25th 2017 Cycle I (third meeting) Post-test I
7. January 27th 2017 Cycle II (first meeting) Pre-test II
8. February 1st 2017 Cycle II (second meeting) Treatment II
E. Research Instrument
The instrument used to collect the data is observation sheets and test.
The writer use pre-test and post-test.
TABLE 3.5 Instrument of Test
Pre-test I Practice asking and giving suggestion dialogue in front of class with your partner
Post-test I Practice asking and giving suggestion dialogue with theme Holiday
Pre-test II Practice asking and giving suggestion dialogue in front of class with your partner
Post-test II Practice asking and giving suggestion dialogue with theme Holiday
TABLE 3.6
Students’ Observation Sheet
Object No Name of Students
A B C D
14 Diyah Usfatun Chasanah
A: Pay attention : 12 B: Activeness in asking questions : 8 C: Activeness in responding questions : 5 D: Enthusiasm in doing test : 10
F. Research Methodology
In this research the researcher used classroom action
research(CAR). The definition of CAR according to Arikunto (2010:130)
methodology of this research stands from three words, classroom, action
and research. So there are three term can be explained.
Research is activities to observe object of research that use a way
and a methodology together information or data to boost quality of
thing which is very interesting and important for teacher.
2. Action
Action is a point to an activity which is done to special purpose.
3. A Classroom
A classroom is not limited just one room of class, but in term that
more specific. A classroom is a group of student in same time that
already to catch same material from same teacher.
The seconddefinition of classroom action research according Iraís,
Tlaxcala in (Anne Burns 2009: 16 ) Classroom Action research is
carried out by teachers in their context, in their classrooms. Teachers
identify a problem or an area they wish to improve and based on
theory or experience or a hypothesis they think of an intervention.
They document the intervention and results of it. If the results are
positive they could lead to the dissemination of the information. If
not, the cycle may be started again.
The last definition is according to Ebbutt in Hopkins (1993:45),
action research is about the systematic study to attempts to improve
educational practice by groups of participants by means of their own
practical actions and by means of their own reflection upon the
According to Arikunto (2009:6-9) there are some principles of
action research as follows:
a. The real activities in routine situation
b. The awareness for recondition work ability
c. SWOT as research foundation
SWOT is summary of Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and
Threat. Strength and weakness are used to identify researcher and
it is subject. The opportunity and threat are identified out of the
teacher or researcher and students.
d. Empiric and systematic endeavor
e. Using SMART principle in planning
The meaning of SMART is:
S = Specific
M = Manageable
A = Acceptable or Achievable
R = Realistic
T = Time-bound
The classroom action research conducted in SMK N 1 Tengaran
which aims to the implementation of using Scaffolding Strategy and
Dialogue to improve students’ speaking skills.
G. Technique of Collecting Data
First conducted before getting data, the writer uses pre-test
andpost-test. Pre-test is given to students before the teacher uses
hermethod in teaching and learning process, then post-test is given
afterstudents receiving the method from teacher. Pre and post-test are
toknowing the differences of the students ability before and after
theteacher use the method.
According to Arikunto (2010: 193) test is series of the questions or
exercises and other tools used to measure the skills, knowledge,
intelligence, ability or talent possesed by individuals or groups. From
the target or object to evacuated. Then divided the several kinds of test
and other measuring instrument, such as personality test, aptitude test,
intelligent test, attitude test, and achievement test.
According Arikunto (2010:226) test is used to measure the basic
capabilities and achievements. Especially for learning achievement,
tests commonly used in schools can be divided into two general
categories:
a. Tests Created by Teacher
Tests made by the teacher with a particular procedure, but no
trials have repeatedly then is not yet known features and
benefits.
b. Standardized Test
Tests that usually already provided in the testing agencies,
Testtrials has experienced repeatedly so it can be said to be
good.
Researcher prefers tests made by teachers. Because teacher can
measures students difficulties in learning English, especially in
speaking skill. The writer uses pre-test and post-test. Pre-test is given
to students at the very beginning of teaching and learning process then
post-test is given after students receiving the method from teacher. Pre
and post-test are to knowing the differences of the students ability
before and after the teacher use the method.
1. Observation
In the observation method is the most effective way to
complete the format or list of observations as instruments
(Arikunto: 2010:272).
In this research, the researcher observes the learning process,
notices all the activities related with learning process use check
list.
2. Document
According to Arikunto (2010: 274), documentation is an
activity to look for variable like notes, transcribes, books,
newspapers, magazines, etc. In this method, researcher holds a
check- list to look for the variable that had been decided.
After collecting the data, the writer will calculate the result of the
students’ score before, and after applied the method. This is used to
know the students’ score of speaking in each cycle.
1. Mean
Mean is formula to know the average of the students’ score.
The formula is:
M = ∑𝑋
𝑁
Explanation:
M = Mean of the student’s score
ΣX = the sum of student’s score
N = the total number of students
2. SD (Standard Deviation)
SD =
∑
D2
N -
(
∑
DN
)
2
Explanation:
SD = Standard Deviation
D = difference between pre test and post test
N = Total number of student
3. T- test Calculation
T-testis formula to know the significant differencesbetween pre
To
=
(
∑𝐷𝑋)
𝑆𝐷 𝑁 ‒1
Explanation:
To = T- test for different of pre-test and post-test
SD = Standard deviation for one sample t-test
D = Difference between pre test and post test
N = Total number of students
3. Procedures of The Research
This research used classroom action research. Those phases
included planning, acting, observing, reflecting (Hopkins, 2008: 51).
The research was conducted until two cycles. In order to make it clear,
the following steps would be conducted by the researcher. The
procedures are follows:
a. Planning
The activities in the planning were:
1. Preparing materials, making lesson plan, and designing steps
indoing the action.
2. Preparing list of students’ name and scoring.
3. Preparing teaching aids
4. Preparing sheets for classroom observation (to know the class
situation, and students attitudes when the method or teaching
5. Preparing a test (to know whether the students’ achievement in
speaking skill improve or not), with standard of scoring is 75.
b. Acting
After doing the planning, the researcher would act as below:
1. Doing pre-test.
2. The students were given motivation by the researcher.
3. Teaching English class using Scaffolding Stategy and dialogue.
4. Given occasion to students to ask any problems of difficulties.
5. Doing Post-test.
c. Observing
Observation was the activity of monitoring (data collecting) to
determine how much the effect of action had reached the target.
The researcher planed this observation flexible and wrote
phenomenon that occurred in the classroom during the action
implemented. In this observation, the researcher would observe the
learning process concentrated on the student capability, especially
in speaking skill and also observed the students when they were
practicing to speak English.
d. Reflecting
In this step, the researcher would evaluate all learning process;
formulated and identified the problems occurred during teaching
learning process. Besides, the researcher also would analyze the
alternative decision to solve the problem. Then the next cycle
could be decided or designed.
4. Model of the Research
The model which is used in implementation of this research as follow:
Figure 3.1 Model of The Research
CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. Data Presentation 1. Cycle 1
a. The result of students’ score of pre-test and post-test can be seen in
the table as follows:
Table 4.1
Result of Pre-test and Post-test 1
No Name of Students Pre-test
1 Ade Shaila Ananda 40 55 15 225 2 Anggita Dwi Rahmawati 40 50 10 100 3 Anisatul Fitriyah 45 55 10 100 4 Aprilia Ika Saputri 50 60 10 100 5 Aprilia Indah Susanti 50 65 15 225 6 Anggun Nur Rohmah 30 50 20 400 7 Ari Febriyana Yulianti 40 55 15 225
8 Ayu Susilawati 45 50 15 225
9 Desi Listiana 45 55 10 100
10 Devi Anggraini 35 50 15 225
11 Dewi Cahyani 40 55 15 225
12 Dinda Novia Puspita Sari 30 50 20 400 13 Dita Wahyu Aryani 40 55 15 225 14 Diyah Usfatun Chasanah 30 50 20 400
15 Dwi Asriani 35 50 15 225
16 Iin Rismawati 40 50 10 100
17 Indah Sundari 40 50 10 100
21 Lina Fitria Yulianti 50 60 10 100
22 Mariyati 60 65 5 25
23 Melinda Safitri 45 55 10 100 24 Meilisa Dwi Ningsih 40 55 15 225
25 Nur Fitryani 40 45 5 25
26 Nurul Indayah 35 50 15 225
27 Saryanti Mugiawati 30 50 20 400
28 Shinta Hidayah 50 50 -
-29 Siti Koriyah 40 55 15 225
30 Siti Magfiroh 45 55 10 100
31 Siti Rejeki 30 45 15 225
32 Siti Salbiyatun Robiah 40 55 15 225 33 Sri DiaShufani 40 60 20 400
34 Susi Marwati 45 60 15 225
35 Tiya Nur Wulandari 30 50 20 400
Σ 1410 1870 470 7050
b. The students’ involvement during the lesson can be seen on the
table below :
TABLE 4.2
Students’ Observation Sheet
Object No Name of Students
A B C D
Note
1 Ade Shaila Ananda √ 2 Anggita Dwi Rahmawati √ 3 Anisatul Fitriyah √ 4 Aprilia Ika Saputri √ 5 Aprilia Indah Susanti √ 6 Anggun Nur Rohmah √
7 Ari FebriyanaYulianti √
8 Ayu Susilawati √
9 Desi Listiana √
10 Devi Anggraini √
12 Dinda Novia Puspita Sari √
13 Dita Wahyu Aryani √
14 Diyah Usfatun Chasanah √
15 Dwi Asriani √
16 Iin Rismawati √ 17 Indah Sundari √
18 Istna Novia Rahmawati √ 19 Jihan Gita Rahayu √ 20 Lailatur Rohmah √ 21 Lina Fitria Yulianti √
22 Mariyati √
23 Melinda Safitri √
24 Meilisa Dwi Ningsih √
25 Nur Fitryani √
32 Siti Salbiyatun Robiah √ 33 Sri Dia Shufani √
34 Susi Marwati √
35 TiyaNurWulandari √
Σ 12 8 5 10
Explanation :
A: Pay attention : 12
B: Activeness in asking questions : 8
C: Activeness in responding questions : 5
D: Enthusiasm in doing test : 10
2. Cycle 2
TABLE 4.3
Result of Pre-test and Post-test 2
No Name of Students Pre-test
1 Ade Shaila Ananda 75 80 15 225 2 Anggita Dwi Rahmawati 70 85 15 335 3 Anisatul Fitriyah 75 85 10 100 4 Aprilia Ika Saputri 75 90 15 225 5 Aprilia Indah Susanti 70 85 15 225 6 Anggun Nur Rohmah 70 80 10 100 7 Ari Febriyana Yulianti 75 90 15 225
8 Ayu Susilawati 60 80 20 400
9 Desi Listiana 65 85 20 400
10 Devi Anggraini 70 80 10 100
11 Dewi Cahyani 65 85 20 400
12 Dinda Novia Puspita Sari 60 80 20 400 13 Dita Wahyu Aryani 70 85 15 225 14 Diyah Usfatun Chasanah 65 80 15 225
15 Dwi Asriani 65 85 20 400
16 Iin Rismawati 70 75 5 25
17 Indah Sundari 65 80 15 225
18 Istna Novia Rahmawati 60 80 20 400 19 Jihan Gita Rahayu 70 75 5 25 20 Lailatur Rohmah 65 80 15 225 21 Lina Fitria Yulianti 75 80 15 225
22 Mariyati 75 85 10 100
23 Melinda Safitri 60 75 15 225 24 Meilisa Dwi Ningsih 65 70 15 225
25 Nur Fitryani 60 80 20 400
26 Nurul Indayah 60 75 15 225
27 Saryanti Mugiawati 65 80 15 225 28 Shinta Hidayah 65 75 10 100
29 Siti Koriyah 70 75 5 25
30 Siti Magfiroh 60 80 20 400
31 Siti Rejeki 70 75 5 25
34 Susi Marwati 70 85 15 225 35 Tiya Nur Wulandari 75 90 15 225
Σ 2365 2830 500 8010
b. The students’ involvement during the lesson can be seen on the table below :
TABLE 4.4
Students’ Observation Sheet
Object No Name of Students
A B C D
Note
1 Ade Shaila Ananda √ 2 Anggita Dwi Rahmawati √ 3 Anisatul Fitriyah √ 4 Aprilia Ika Saputri √ 5 Aprilia Indah Susanti √ 6 Anggun Nur Rohmah √ 7 Ari FebriyanaYulianti √
8 Ayu Susilawati √
9 Desi Listiana √
10 Devi Anggraini √ 11 Dewi Cahyani √ 12 Dinda Novia Puspita Sari √ 13 Dita Wahyu Aryani √ 14 Diyah Usfatun Chasanah √
15 Dwi Asriani √
16 Iin Rismawati √
17 Indah Sundari √
18 Istna Novia Rahmawati √
19 Jihan Gita Rahayu √ 20 Lailatur Rohmah √
21 Lina Fitria Yulianti √
22 Mariyati √
23 Melinda Safitri √ 24 Meilisa Dwi Ningsih √
25 Nur Fitryani √
26 Nurul Indayah √
28 Shinta Hidayah √ 29 Siti Koriyah √
30 Siti Magfiroh √
31 Siti Rejeki √
32 Siti Salbiyatun Robiah √ 33 Sri Dia Shufani √
34 Susi Marwati √
35 Tiya Nur Wulandari √
Σ 11 10 6 8
Explanation :
A: Pay attention : 11
B: Activeness in asking questions : 10
C: Activeness in responding questions : 6
D: Enthusiasm in doing test : 8
B. Data Analysis 1. Cycle 1
Moreover, the researcher would like to analyze students’ improvement
in speaking skill by calculate the mean of the students score of pre test.
The average of the students’ score was calculated as follow:
a. Mean of Pre-test Score in Cycle 1
M = ∑𝑋𝑁
M =141035
TABLE 4.5
Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Pre-Test I No Total Score Grade Number of Student
1 90 – 100 Excellent
-2 80 – 89 Very Good
-3 70 – 79 Good
-4 60 – 69 Fair 1
5 50 – 59 Poor 4
6 Less than 50 Very Poor 30
Total 35
40,28 is the result of pre-test mean. 1410 is total of pre-test and 35 is
total students.
From table above, it can be seen there are no students that passed
the minimum grade criteria (KKM) 70. Almost students was failed.
There are 1 students got fair level, 4 students got poor level, and 30
students got very poor level. From the result above, it shows that the
mean of pre-test was 40,28. It was not passed the minimum grade
criteria score, there are many students was still got low in speaking
skills.
b. Mean of Post-test Score in Cycle 1
M = ∑𝑋𝑁
M=187035
TABLE 4.6
Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Post-Test I No Total Score Grade Number of Student
1 90 – 100 Excellent
-2 80 – 89 Very Good
-3 70 – 79 Good
-4 60 – 69 Fair 1
5 50 – 59 Poor 4
6 Less than 50 Very Poor 30
Total 35
c. SD of pre test and post test
From the data above, the teacher calculates SD pre test and post
test as follows:
d. Calculated of T-test Values
After calculating deviations standard, then the researcher
o
The value of t-table with level of significant 0,05 % is 2,75
f. Comparing t-test with t-table
T-calculation is 16.8
T-table < T-calculation = 2.75<16.8
In the cycle 1, the result of pre-test and post-test can be seen
that the average score of students increased from 40,48 to 53,42. It
means that applying scaffolding strategy is successful in improving
T-calculation also shows that there is significant influence of
scaffolding strategy in improving students’ speaking skills. The
T-table with 5% significance of degree of freedom is 2.75. The result
is that T-calculation is 16.8 while T-table is 2.75. It means that
there is considerable influence in cycle 1 because T-calculation is
bigger than T-table. It can be concluded that use of scaffolding
strategy did not improve students’ speaking skills on cycle 1.
Based on the result, it means that there is significant difference
between pre test and post test.
After applying first cycle, the researcher concluded that was
very important to continue the research to the next cycle in order to
increase the students’ speaking skills. The implementation of
scaffolding strategy in teaching speaking skills did not show the
good achievement. In the result of cycle 1 there were many
students who got minimum score or did not pass the Standardized
of Minimum Score (KKM). So, that the researcher decided
continue the research in the next cycle.
The researcher needed to explain the material in detail in order
make the students understand well. She must guide the students to
discuss and present the material in front of the class. Besides, the
students must be more active to ask the teacher when they did not
media to teach speaking with same topic for the next cycle to get
better result.
2. Cycle 2
The average of the students’ score in cycle 2 was calculated as follow:
a. Mean of pre test 2
M = ∑𝑋𝑁
M = 236535
M = 67,57
TABLE 4.7
Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Pre-Test II No Total Score Grade Number of Student
1 90 – 100 Excellent
-2 80 – 89 Very Good
-3 70 – 79 Good 18
4 60 – 69 Fair 17
5 50 – 59 Poor
-6 Less than 50 Very Poor
-Total 35
b. Mean of post-test 2
M = ∑𝑋𝑁
M = 283035
M = 80,85
Criteria of Students’ Achievement of Post-Test II No Total Score Grade Number of Student
1 90 – 100 Excellent 3
speaking skills between pre-test II (before the action) and the post test
II (after the action). It can be seems that there is no students got fair
and poor level. The students almost got very good level. The
researcher can conclude that using scaffolding strategy can improve
SD = 228,85‒203,92
SD = 24,93
SD = 4,99
d. Calculated of T-test Values
After calculating deviations standard, then the researcher
counted t-test (t0) calculation using the formula below:
o
The value of t-table with level of significant 0,05% is 2,75
T-calculation is 16,98
T-table < t-calculation = 2,75< 16,98
In the cycle II, the result of pre-test and post-test can be seen
that the average score of students increased from 60,57 to 80,85.
Based on this result, it means that applying scaffolding strategy is
successful in improving the students’ speaking skills.
The T-calculation also shows that there is significant influence
of scaffolding strategy is successful in improving the students’
speaking skills. The T-table with 5% significance of degree of freedom
is 2.75. The result is that T-calculation is 16,98 while T-table is 2.75.
It means that there is considerable influence in cycle II because
T-calculation is bigger than T-table. It can be concluded that the use of
scaffolding strategy is successful in improving the students’ speaking
skills on cycle II.
Furthermore, the implementation of scaffolding strategy in
improving the students’ speaking skills shows a good achievement. In
the result of cycle II all of students could passed the Standardized of
Minimum Score (KKM). It means that 100% students pass the KKM.
So that the researcher decided to did not continue the research
C. Discussion
