i
THE EFFECTIVE WAY OF ACTIVATING STUDENTS TO IMPROVE THEIR SPEAKING PROFICIENCY BY USING CROSS GROUP REPORTING
STRATEGY AT XI IPA OF MA AL-QASIMIYAH GUPPI MADELLO (Classroom Action Research)
A THESIS
Submitted to the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Makassar Muhammadiyah University in Part Fulfillment
of the Requirement for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
ASRULLAH 10535 5378 12
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
THE FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION MAKASSAR MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY
2016
xii TABLES
Table 1 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy ... 32
Table 2 The improvement of the students’ speaking fluency ... 35
Table 3 The improvement of the students’ speaking ability ... 37
Table 4 The Percentage of the Students’ Grammar in Speaking ... 39
Table 5 The Percentage of the Students’ vocabulary in Speaking ... 41
Table 6 The Percentage of the Students’ Pronunciation in Speaking. ... 44
Table 7 The Percentage of the Students’ Self-confidence in Speaking. .... 46
Table 8 The Percentage of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy ... 48
Table 9 The Percentage of the Students’ Speaking Fluency ... 50
Table 10 The observation result of the students’ activeness in learning process. ... 52
CHARTS Grafic 1 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy ... 34
Grafic 2 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Fluency ... 36
Grafic 3 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Ability ... 38
Grafic 4 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Grammar ... 40
Grafic 5 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Vocabulary... 42
Grafic 6 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Pronunciation ... 45
Grafic 7 The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Self-confidence ... 47
Grafic 8 The Percentage of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy ... 49
Grafic 9 The Percentage of the Students’ Speaking Fluency ... 51
Grafic 10 The Improvement of the Students’ Activeness ... 53
i
ii
iv
SURAT PERNYATAAN
Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:
Nama : ASRULLAH
NIM : 10535 5378 12
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Judul Skripsi : The Effective Way of Activating Students to Improve Their Speaking Proficiency by Using Cross Group Reporting Strategy at XI IPA of MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello
(A Classroom Action Research )
Skripsi yang saya ajukan di depan tim penguji adalah hasil karya saya sendiri bukan hasil ciplakan dan tidak dibuatkan oleh siapapun.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenar-benarnya dan bersedia menerima sanksi apabila pernyataan saya tidak benar.
Makassar, 2016 Yang membuat perjanjian
ASRULLAH
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Alhamdulillahi Robbil Alamin. The researcher expresses his highest gratitude to the almighty Allah SWT, who has given His guidance, blessing, and mercy to him in completing this thesis. Salam and Shalawat are addressed to the religious messenger, the prophet Muhammad S.A.W.
The writer realized that many hands has given their helps and useful suggestion for the completion of this thesis. Without the assistance of these people, this thesis would never have existed. Therefore, the researcher would like to express her appreciation and sincere thanks to all of them particularly:
1. Dr.H.Abd.Rahman Rahim,SE.,MM the Rector of the Muhammadiyah University of Makassar for his advices during the writer studies at the University.
2. Dr. A. Syukri Syamsuri, M. Hum, the dean of the FKIP Unismuh Makassar.
3. Erwin Akib, S.Pd, M.Pd., the head of English Education Department of FKIP UNISMUH Makassar, who gave her valuable authorities and suggestion in doing Thesis.
4. The Researcher high appreciation and great thankful are due to her first consultant Ummy Khaerati Syam,S.pd.,M.pd, and Nurdevi Bte Abdul.S.Pd.,M.pd as the second consultant who have given their valuable time and guidance to finish this Thesis.
vii
5. The Researcher heartful thank to all lecturers of the FKIP UNISMUH especially to the lecturers of English Department and all staffs of Makassar Muhammadiyah University.
6. The Researcher would like to express her deepest and affectionate thank to his beloved parents, Burhanuddin (father) and Nur Aeni (mother), his grand mother and grand father then his aunt and uncle for their prayers, unfailing love, sacrifice and continual understanding.
7. Special thanks to his best friend Anyta Silviana,S.pd, supriadi, Anto and Sudirman for their help along arranging this Thesis.
8. Special thanks to all her friends in H class of English Department 2012.
9. Finally, for all everybody that could not be mentioned one by one, may Allah almighty blesses us now and forever.
Billahi Fii Sabilil Haq Fastabiqul Khaerat
Makassar, October 2016
The Researcher
iv
SURAT PERJANJIAN
Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:
Nama : ASRULLAH
NIM : 10535 5378 12
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Judul Skripsi : The Effective Way of Activating Students to Improve Their Speaking Proficiency by Using Cross Group Reporting Strategy at XI IPA of MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello
(A Classroom Action Research )
Dengan ini menyatakan perjanjian sebagai berikut:
1. Mulai dari penyusunan proposal sampai dengan selesainya skripsi saya, saya akan menyusun sendiri skripsi saya, tidak dibuatkan oleh siapapun.
2. Dalam menyusun skripsi, saya akan selalu melakukan konsultasi dengan pembimbing.
3. Saya tidak akan melakukan penjiplakan (plagiat) dalam menyusun skripsi ini.
4. Apabila saya melanggar perjanjian saya seperti yang tertera pada butir 1,2 dan 3 maka saya bersedia menerima sanksi sesuai dengan aturan yang berlaku.
Demikian perjanjian ini saya buat dengan penuh kesadaran.
Makassar, 17 2016 Yang membuat perjanjian
ASRULLAH
“Reso pa temmangngingi namalomo naletei pammase dewata”
Artinya: ( Hanya bekerja dengan ikhlaslah maka akan mendapatkan kemudahkan/pertolongan
Allah S.w.t
I deeply dedicate this thesis to my Parents, My Siblings, My Family,
My Close Friends, and All English Students
vi ABSTRACT
ASRULLAH. 2016.The Effective Way of Activating Students to Improve Their Speaking Proficiency by Using Cross Group Reporting Strategy at XI IPA of MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello (A Classroom Action Research ), under the thesis of English Education Department, the Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Makassar Muhammadiyah University, guided by Ummi Khaerati syam and Nurdevi bte Abdul.
The objective of the research was to find out the improvement students’
speaking ability by Cross Group Reporting Strategy at XI IPA MA AL-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello.
This research used Classroom Action Research that consisted two cycles. The research population was XI IPA MA AL-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello academic year 2016/2017. The sample of this research consist of 15 students, 9 female and 6 male .The researcher obtained the data by using speaking test and observation sheet.
The findings indicated that speaking test in cycle I and cycle II had significantly different scores. There was a better increase of gains by students at the end action of second cycle. The research findings indicated that use of Cross Group Reporting Strategy as Method could increase the students’ speaking ability and after evaluation in cycles I and II, the mean score of the students’ speaking ability in cycle I was 6.55 and classified as fair. While the mean score in cycle II was 7.80 classified as good, the students’ improvement was 24.95%. It means that the students’ speaking ability improved significantly through cross group reporting strategy. In cycle II the improvement of the students’ activeness was up.
Where in the first meeting in cycle II the students’ activeness was 73.33% also 73.33% in the second meeting. In the third meeting became 75% then improved to 86.67% in the fourth meeting. So the mean score of the students’ activeness in cycle II was 77.08%.
Key words : Speaking, teaching strategy, and cross group reporting strategy.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITTLE PAGE ... i
APPROVAL SHEET ... ii
COUNSELING SHEET ... iii
SURAT PERNYATAAN ... iv
SURAT PERJANJIAN ... v
ABSTRACT ... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... viii
LIST OF TABLES ... ix
LIST OF CHARTS ... x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background ... 1
B. Research Questions ... 3
C. Objective of the Study ... ……..3
D. Significance of the Study ... 4
E. Scope of the Study ... 4
CHAPTER II: REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE A. Some Previous Related Research Findings... 5
B. Cross group reporting strategy ... 7
C. Speaking proficiency ... 10
D. Concept of Speaking ... 11
E. Conceptual Framework ... 17
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODELOGY A. Research Design ... 19
B. Research Procedure ... 19
viii
C. Research Variables and Indicators... 23
D. Research Location and Subject ... 24
E. Research Instrument ... 24
F. Procedure of Collection Data ... 25
G. Technique of Data Analysis... 30
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Findings ... 32
B. Discussions ... 55
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion... 59
B. Suggestion ... 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
CURRICULUM VITAE
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background
Language is an integral part human life it accompanies wherever and whatever a person is. It is used as a means of conveying ones idea in society (Brown, 1980:92) consequently feels about to the others. The kinds of language is oral, written, and gesture form. It must be acknowledged, that the most often used in communication is oral form in the classroom. It is not easy for the teachers to guide students to speak English since the students are not expressing themselves to speak, but they need an active interaction. English recently plays an important role in international life. Indonesia is a developing country that gets involved in the aspect of international life and it cannot be denied that the mastery of English is quite necessary for Indonesian people nowadays.
According to Stevick (1982: 103) speaking refers to the gap between linguistic expertise and teaching methodology. Linguistic expertise concerns with language structure and language content. Teaching speaking is not like listening, reading, and writing. It needs habit formation because it is a real communication. The speaking needs to be practiced as often as possible. It is not like writing and reading but speaking must be practiced directly in full expression. In teaching English for speaking skill, the English teachers must be creative to design many communication activities in the classroom that urge and motivate students to use the language actively and productively. For this, teachers have to be aware that the students are used to inhibit in the way of how many times and how much time
they speak in the classroom. In addition, the situation and condition in the classroom still less in normal active speaking. Domination will always go to the active students. That is to say that the teachers mostly focus on who is active.
Therefore, it is important to focus the teachers’ intention on the improvement to stimulate the students to speak. For this purpose, active learning will be demanded. This problem actually is a matter of teaching strategy that should be conducted by the teachers.
In teaching speaking, the teacher should use an appropriate strategy for student’s condition. The teacher should choose the best strategy depend on the difficulties that faced by students. In this case, the researcher will take at the students XI IPA of MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello. After doing observation in this class the researcher found some problems that students of XI IPA faced in speaking, besides the students had a little chance to speak in the classroom so that made the students did not active and accustomed in speaking, the students also had a limitation vocabulary, forming a good sentence, and the students shy to speak.
In this case, the researcher conducted a research dealing with teaching speaking using Cross Group Reporting strategy. The Cross Group Reporting which strategy concerns with increasing the student’s participation in speaking class, asking the question to the teacher, giving response/answer to the questions from other students or teacher, and not shy to speak related to the theme. The increasing of student’s participation shows that the students’ ability in speaking is improved. This strategy requires the students to be active and placed the students
not as an object but as a subject which involves in teaching learning process directly.
Relating to the case above, the researcher conducted a research under the title:
“The Effective Way of Activating Students To Improve Their Speaking Proficiency By Using Cross Group Reporting Strategy” .
B. Research Questions
Based on the background of study above, the researcher formulated the problem statement as follow:
1.How does Cross Group Reporting Strategy improve the students’ speaking proficiency in speaking accuracy in terms of grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary at XI IPA MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello?
2. How does Cross Group Reporting Strategy improve the students’ speaking proficiency in speaking fluency in term self confidence at XI IPA MA Al- Qasimiyah Guppi Madello?
C. Objectives of the Research
In general, the objective of this research was to improve the students’ speaking Proficiency. Specifically it aims to:
1. To find out the use of Cross Group Reporting Strategy in improving the students’ proficiency in speaking accuracy in terms of grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary at XI IPA MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello.
2. To find the use of Cross Group Reporting Strategy in improving the students’
proficiency in speaking fluency in term self confidence at XI IPA MA Al- Qasimiyah Guppi Madello.
D. Significances of the Research
The researcher was expected to have both Theoretically and practical contributions.
1. Theoretically, to help teacher/ researcher to find out the alternative way of teaching Speaking and to produce the relevant and valid knowledge for their class to improve their teaching.
2. Practically, it can be used as a issue to improve the students’ ability in speaking and it may guide, help and encourage students to express their ideas, opinion, and thought on to practice.
E. Scope of the Study
This research limited on the use of Cross Group Reporting Strategy to improve the students’ speaking Proficiency. It is focused on the students’
speaking accuracy that covers grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary and fluency that covers self confidence. These items are chosen because those are very important to be identified by the researcher in motivating and overcoming the students’ problems in learning speaking in English language.
5 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Previous Related Reseach Findings
Many researchers had reported to expose the identification of the students’ and interest in learning English to make the teaching and learning process more effective, especially in teaching of speaking, some of the researches’ finding are cited concisely below:
1. Kurnianingsi.(2008). Thesis. Improving English Speaking Ability Through Retelling Short Story at the Second Year of SMAN 1 Bajeng Kab. Gowa.
She reported that it is an effective way to increase the students’ speaking ability because the students who have low spirit is interested in studying English through retelling short story. He found that 75.5 % of the students were interested in studying English and 72 % of the students were improving their English through retelling short story.
2. Amin.(2004). Thesis. Speaking Performance Through Cooperative Learning found that the cooperative learning developed the students speaking accuracy in the sense of acceptable pronunciation, correct grammar, and appropriate word choice. The teaching strategy works on five components as the foundations to have technical teaching, namely:
class presentation, working in a team, having quiz, improving individual score, and team recognition. Extraordinarily, working in a peer-tutoring and a teacher who adhered to this kind of teaching are enchanting the students to learn best in speaking skill especially speaking accuracy.
3. Karim.(1995). Thesis. Stimulating Students to Speak English Through Problem Solving Activities in The Classroom Interaction found that: (1) if the students have positive attitude to work classroom activities they will be stimulated to learn in the classroom. (2) if the teachers use interesting and varies technique, the students will be encouraged to learn more easily.
4. Wahidah.(2012). Thesis. Improving The Students’ Reading Comprehension In Narrative Text Through Cross Group Reporting Strategy found that the application of Cross Group Reporting Strategy is significant in improving the students’ reading comprehension in narrative text in terms of literal comprehension and interpretive comprehension.
Looking to all findings above describe that by using interest topic, good strategy in teaching make students be motivated, and by grouping students the learning process is more effective because it increases students participation in teaching process. The similarity of this research to the previous research above is overcome students’ problems in speaking by following the principle of cooperative learning which grouping students to increase the students participation in learning process where the centre of teaching process focus on students as subject not as object anymore. This research will overcome the students’ problems in speaking accuracy and fluency. The differentiation this research to previous findings above is the level or the grade of students which the grade is the second years of MA AL-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello. Besides, the strategy that the researcher will use to activate students’ participation to improve the student speaking proficiency also different which the strategy that the researcher will use is cross group reporting strategy.
B. Cross Group Reporting Strategy
Cross Group Reporting Strategy as cooperative learning is a learning strategy with amount of students as the member of small group which has different ability. In doing their group assignment, each student as the member of the group have to work together and help together to understand teaching material. Besides, cross group reporting strategy will enable students to more active because each student has to say something what they know .
1. Definition of Cross Group Reporting Strategy
Another style in language teaching is the shift in emphasize from teaching to learning. Some research shows that learning is most effective in small groups as opposed to large groups or individually. Many of the teacher’s notes for particular exercise in starting strategies include suggestion for pair work, group work and cross group reporting (Freebairn, 1977: 6).
According to Freebairn (1977: 6) Cross group reporting is a strategy in teaching and learning process to report information to the other member of group.
Cross group reporting strategy is one of the strategies which is used by teacher to improve the students’ motivation in teaching and learning process especially in speaking. In addition, cross group reporting strategy also a strategy where the students can be shared knowledge and idea one another.
From the statement above, the researcher finds definition to understand that cross group reporting strategy is one of strategy that can be used by the teacher to improve the student participation, comprehend, and motivation in learning process especially in speaking. It can be used as a follow-up of a section that has been
taught recently in the course. In another hand, cross group reporting is the way a teacher to make the students’ active in learning process.
2.The Advantages of Cross Group Reporting
According to Freebairn (1977: 8) cross group reporting strategy has several advantages, they are:
a. Each student carries the individual responsibility of reporting the original group’s deliberation and therefore must be an active listener and note-takers as well as a speaker.
b. Everyone must say something in the cross group reporting session.
c. The arrangement enables students to get more than one or two peoples in the class and know more than one information or idea.
Based on the statement above, we can define that the advantages of cross group reporting strategy as follows:
a. Make the students be active in teaching and learning process because they have a duty to give their friend certain information about something/subject.
b. Improve the students’ motivation in speaking and self confidence in the class.
c. Build up the students’ good relation in teaching and learning process.
d. Enable students to convey their ideas based on their knowledge.
3.The Procedure of Cross Group Reporting
Freebairn (1977: 6) states that cross group reporting can be illustrated as follow:
Take class of 15 students. The class is divided into three groups of five to work on some group activity. Each student in each of the three groups is given a letter A, B, C, D, and E. when the group activity is completed, the groups re-form.
All A’s go to one group, all B’s to another and so on, until there are five new groups of three students each. The role of each student in new cross-group is to report to the other members of his group the findings of his original group. The following diagram illustrates the arrangement more clearly below:
Figure 2.1.The Procedure of Cross Group Geporting A B
C D E A B
C D E
A B C D E
AA A BB B CC C DD D EE E First
Group Working
Cross Group
C. Speaking Proficiency
1. The Definition of Speaking proficiency
Speaking is a kind of bridge for learners between classroom and the world outside (Hadfield, 1996:7). It is vehicle par excellence of social solidarity, of social ranking, of professional advancement and business. It is also a medium through which much language is learnt, (Bygate, 1997: vii). To know the language learners can speak, it is necessary to get them to actually, say something.
To do this they must act on knowledge of grammar and vocabulary. The application of this knowledge can be realized by speaking practice. According to Syakur (1987:5), speaking is a complex skill because at least it is concerned with components of pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary and fluency. Speaking is an act that is done naturally by people in their life. Sometimes they share their problem to someone they believe in. They have a freedom to express what they want to say.
When we are talking about speaking, it is dealing with proficiency. According to Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, proficiency is a good standard of ability and skill. In harmony with that, Oxford Advanced learner’s Dictionary says proficient means doing or able to do something in a skilled or an expert way because of training and practice.
D . Concept of Speaking 1. The Definition of Speaking
According to Widdowson (1979: 57) speaking is an oral communication that gives information involves two elements, they are: speaker who gives the message and the listener who receipt the message.
Speaking however particularly in English is not easy to do. According to Widdowson (1979: 57) who states that when two people talked to each other, it means that the speaker makes a define decision to address someone. Speaking forced on him in some way probably but still can say that they want or intend to speak or he will keep silent. He has some communicative purpose namely speaker say things because they what something to happen of what they say. He select from his language store. The teacher has an alternative capacity to create new sentences if he is a native speaker. Widdowson, (1979 : 57) states that speaking means of oral communication in giving impormation which involves two elements, namely the speaker is someone who gives the message and the listener is someone who receives the message. in other word, the communication involves the productive skill of listening.
Widdowson, (1979: 58) states that an act of communication through speaking is commonly performed in face to face intraction and occurs as part of dialogue or rather from or verbal exchange. Therefore it is depends on an understanding of what else has been said in the interaction. Furthermore, Byrne, (1976 : 8) states that speaking is a means of oral communication in giving ideas or impormation to others. It is the most essential way in which the speaker can express himself through the language.
Relating to the explanation above, the researcher concludes that speaking is process between speaker and listener giving information each other and both listener and speaker are active during the oral communication takes place.The act of speaking involves not only the production of the sound but also the use of gesture, the movement of the muscles of face, and indeed of the whole body. All of these non vocal of speaking as a communication activity are transmitted through the visual medium.
2. Kinds of Speaking.
a. Speaking Performance.
Manser (1991:306) states that performance is the person’s process or manner of flay. Therefore, we may conclude that the speaking performance is the way of one’s manner in speaking,
b. Speaking Competency
Manser (1991:80) defines that competency has ability, skill, and knowledge to do something. Then, through this basic definition, we also may conclude that speaking competency is one’s ability to speak which is supported with adequate skill and knowledge and it is not assessed by how is delivered.
For further information, we are somewhat confused. Therefore, we have differentiated between competency and performance. The differentiation between competency and performance as the overt manifestation of the ability competence is what one day-only performance can be developed, maintained and evaluated.
3. The Elements of Speaking
In speaking, there are some specific elements that have strong correlation with this skill. They are:
a. Accuracy
Based on Webster Dictionary (1986:15), accuracy is the quality of being accurate, while in oxford dictionary (1991:20) accuracy is degree of being correct.
Accuracy in speaking is a way of people speaks by using an appropriate vocabulary, pronunciation and grammar. As explained in oxford advance learner’s dictionary (1995: 9). Accuracy is the state of being correct or exact and without error, especially as result of careful afford.
According to Harmer (2001:15), aspect of speaking can be divided as follows:
1) Pronunciation
Pronunciation is an act or result of production the sound of speech including articulation vowel formation, accent and inflection. Often with reference to some standard of contents or accept ability. The concept of
“pronunciation” may be said to include:
a) The sound of the language
One their own the sound of language may well meaningless. If you said /t/
(the line show that this is phonetic script) a few times, e.g. /t/, it will not mean very much English. Neither will be sounds /k/, /a/, or /s/ but if we put all these are sound together a certain order we and up the word catch and does mean something.
b) Stress
Native speaker of language unconsciously know about the stress and how it works, they know which syllables of words are stressed and they know how to use stress, to change the meaning of phrase, sentences and question.
c) Intonation
Intonation is clearly important item and component user of language recognize what meaning it has and can change the meaning of word they through using it in different ways, when we taught English language, student’s need it use rhythms and stress correctly if they are to be understood.
2) Vocabulary
a) What is vocabulary?
According to Webster’s near world print dictionary (Webster: 1986:2946), vocabularies are list of word etc as dictionary or glossary and all of words used a language or by a person group etc.
According to Longman dictionary of contemporary English (Longman 1995:240) vocabularies are all words someone knows, learners or user the words in particularly language a list of words with explanation of their meaning, in a book for learning foreign language.
b) Types of vocabulary
Harmer (2001:10) distinguishes two types of vocabulary namely active vocabulary and passive vocabulary. According to him active vocabulary is that the students have learned and which they are expected to be able to use. On the other hand, passive vocabulary refers to words which the students will
recognize when they met but will probably not be divided in to four kinds as follows:
1. Oral vocabulary consists of words actively used in speech. These are the words that come readily to one’s conversation. The more often a person utters words the words the more readily it will come to his tongue.
2. Writing vocabulary is the words that come readily to one’s finger vocabulary
3. Listening vocabulary is the stock of words to which one responds with meaning and understood in speaking of other
4. Reading vocabulary is the words that one response in writing of others.
3) Grammar
Grammar whose subject matter is the organization of words in to variables communication, often representing many layers of structure, such as phrase sentences, and complete utterance (Ba’dulu, 2001:15). As the fame work to find sentences productively needed. The fact however shows that the learners’
mastery or English structure is skill less as found out by some previous researches.
b. Fluency
Fluency refers to able to speak to write smoothly, easy reading, to an easy flow is word or able communication with base is suggested the flow an accomplished speaker and writer, it is usually a term of commendation. Marcel (1978: 12) states that fluency is someone’s way of speaking dealing with how to procedure words in certain period of tones without missing any main words on their speech.
Fluency is the state of being able to speak a language smoothly and easily (oxford learner pocket dictionary, 1995:10) and students are to communicate easily to others friends.
Brown, (1980:255) fluency is ready and expressive use of language. It is probably best achieved by allowing the “stream” of speech to “flow” then, assume of this speech spills over beyond comprehensibility to river bank of instruction or same details of phonology, grammar and discourse explained that fluency defined as the ability to across communicative intent without to much hesitation and to many pause or breakdown in communication. It refers to how well you communicate in a natural manner.
1. Self Confidence
Self confidence is feeling sure that about one’s ability as he states of feeling sure when people or students are able to think well. It is clear that is confidence is the ways we feel about what we are going to and also our perception how effectively we deal with other.
D. Conceptual Framework
Figure 2.2. Conceptual Frame Work
The conceptual framework above shows the interrelations among the variables. The cross group reporting strategy is independent variable that can influence dependent variable which is placed by students’ fluency and accuracy in speaking ability. Cross group reporting strategy not only develops students’
Speaking
Accuracy : - Grammar - Pronounciation - Vocabulary
Fluency : Self-confidence Using cross group reporting strategy
The Improvement of Students’ Speaking Proficiency
speaking skill but also fosters the students’ creative thinking process and speaking grammatically.
Students’ fluency and accuracy in speaking ability measured from their ability in speaking creatively based on grammatical, proper pronunciation and appropriate vocabularies and their activeness and participation in the classroom speaking activity.
19 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODELOGY
A. Research Design
This research followed the principal working of Classroom Action Research (CAR). The type of the classroom action research which used was experimental.
According to Kemmis and McTaggart (1988) in Burns (1999:32) who state that action research occurs through a dynamic and complementary process which consists of four fundamental steps in a spiraling process, they were: Planning, Implementation of Action, Observation, and Reflection. This research held around two cycles. They were first and second cycle then each cycle was the series of activities which close relation. Where, the realization of the second continued and repaired from the first cycle.
B. Research Procedure
According to Kemmis and McTaggart (1988) in Burns (1999:32), in classroom action research divides into two cycles and each cycle consists of planning, action, observation, and reflection.
1. Cycle I a. Planning
The activities are done in this stage as follows:
1). Preparing lesson plan for material that would be thought
2). Preparing teaching material that would be thought 3). Preparing test for the students.
b. Action
This action was held in four meetings. The steps were as follows:
1). Explaining the material and activities in the class.
2). Dividing student into some groups, and researcher gave them a different topic/material of each group for discussing.
3). The researcher gave a different letter for each member of the group depend on the number member of the group, such as A,B,C and so on, then asking the student to discuss the topic/material.
4). After the discussion was done, the researcher regrouped the student based on the letter, the student who had same letter would make a new group (cross group).
5). After the students made cross group, the researcher asked each member of the group to share information about the topic which they had discussed at their first group.
6). The researcher asked each member of cross group to present material/topic that they had discussed in their first group working to the new group mates and all students.
7). The researcher controlled and checked the students’ mistakes when students was speaking and the researcher recorded it.
8). The researcher gave feedback and correction to the students’
speaking mistake during the activities.
c. Observation
In this phase, the researcher observed the application of Cross Group Reporting Strategy to the students’ activities in teaching learning process using observation sheet and speaking test at the end of first cycle. The researcher evaluated the students’ achievement in speaking English and measured the effect of Cross Group Reporting Strategy.
d. Reflection
Analyzing all of the data which had been collected from observation, to assess the teaching program’s achievement after giving an action at the first cycle. The result was a basic to formulate the next repairing lesson plan. If the first cycle was less successful, the researcher would continue to the second cycle.
2. Cycle II
Cycle II was done after cycle I. The researcher seen the students’
result of their speaking ability and absolutely in different ways to get improvement of the students’ proficiency in speaking.
a. Re- Planning
The activities that did in this stage as follows:
1. Evaluating the result of reflection, discussing and finding the improvement to be applied for the next learning process.
2. Designing the lesson planning of cycle II.
3. Repairing the weakness of the action in the first cycle.
4. Preparing a test for the students.
b. Action
The researcher used the cross group reporting strategy.
There steps were as follow:
1). Explaining the material and activities in the class.
2). Dividing student into some groups, and the researcher gave them a different topic/material of each group for discussing.
3). The researcher gave a different letter for each member of the group depend on the number of member of group, such as A,B,C and so on, then asked the student to discuss the topic/material.
4). After the discussion was done, the researcher regrouped the student based on the letter, the student who had same letter would be made a new group (cross group).
5). After the students made cross group, the researcher asked each member of the group to share information about the topic which they had discussed at their first group.
6). The researcher invited each member of cross group to explain material/topic that they had discussed in each their first group working to the new group mates and all students.
7). The researcher controlled and checked the students’ mistakes when students was speaking and the researcher recorded it.
8). The researcher gave feedback and correction to the students’ speaking mistake during the activities.
c. Observation
In this phase, the researcher observed the situation of teaching learning and the students’ activities in teaching learning process using observation sheet and speaking test gave at the end of second cycle. The researcher evaluated the students’ achievement in speaking English and measure the effect of cross group reporting strategy.
d. Reflection
Reflection was done to see the whole second cycle action process.
The researcher analyzes second action as consideration matter whether cycle had reached success criteria bases on test result and observation. In the second cycle, the researcher made the conclusion about implementation of Cross Group Reporting Strategy in improving students’ accuracy and fluency in speaking at XI IPA of MA Al- Qasimiyah Guppi Madello.
C. Research Variables and Indicators 1. Research Variables
There were two variables in this research namely independent variable and dependent variable. The dependent variable of this research was the use of cross group reporting strategy in learning speaking. The independent variable of this research was the improvement of students’ Proficiency in speaking (fluency and accuracy).
a. Indicators
The indicator of research was the students’ speaking accuracy (grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary) and fluency (self-confidence) could be improved.
D. Research Location and Subject
The subject of research was the students of MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello particularly at class XI IPA which consist of 15 students. It was located at Latimpa, madello village (Barru Regency).
E. Research Instrument
There were two instruments used:
1. Observation sheet
Observation sheet aimed to find out the students’ data about their presence and activeness in learning process. The data of the students’ activeness was collected based on the following table:
No The students’ active Participation
Score Indicator
1. Very Active 4 Students respond the material
very active
2. Active 3 Students respond the material
actively
3. Fairly Active 2 Students respond the material once or twice
4. Not Active 1 Students just sit down during
the activity without doing something
(Gay 1981:130)
2. Oral Test
Oral Test aimed to get information about students’ speaking improvement after teaching and learning process by cross group reporting strategy. In this test the researcher used phone to record what the students presented.
F. Procedure of Collecting Data
In collecting the data, the researcher used two instruments, they were:
Observation sheet and Oral test.
1. Observation Sheet
The researcher observed the students’ activities in following teaching and learning process in the class to find out the students’ data about their presence and activeness in teaching learning process.
2. Oral Test
The researcher gave speaking test to the students in order to know their improvement. The type of speaking test that used in this research was presentation form. The researcher divided the students into group and asking each student to present their knowledge about the material that they had discussed. In this test, the students’ presentation recorded by using phone.
In scoring the result of students’ test evaluated based on two aspects speaking below:
1) The assessment of speaking accuracy consists of grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary.
Table 1 : The assessment of Grammar
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 6
A few minor grammatical and lexical errors but most utterances are correct.
Very Good
5 Make few noticeable errors of grammar and word order.
Good
4
Occasionally makes grammatical of word order errors which do not, however obscure meaning.
Average 3
Makes frequent errors of grammar and word order which occasionally obscure meaning.
Poor
2
Grammar and word order errors make comprehension difficult. Must often rephrase sentence or restrict him to basic pattern.
Very poor 1
Errors in grammar and word order as severe as to make speech virtually unintelligible.
(Heaton, 2011:37)
Table 2: The assessment of Pronunciation
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 6
Pronunciation is only very slightly influenced by mother tongue. Two or three grammatical and lexical errors.
Very Good 5
Pronunciation is lightly influenced by mother tongue. A few minor grammatical and lexical errors but most utterances are correct.
Good 4
Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by mother tongue but no serious phonological errors. A few grammatical and lexical errors but only one or two major error causing confusion.
Average
3
Pronunciation influenced by the mother tongue but only a few serious phonological errors. Several grammatical and lexical errors, some of which cause confusion.
Poor 2
Pronunciation seriously influenced by mother tongue with errors causing a breakdown.
Many “basic” grammatical and lexical errors.
Very poor 1
Serious pronunciation errors as well as many
”basic” grammatical and lexical errors. No evidence of having mastered any of the language skills and areas practiced in the course.
(Heaton , 2011:37)
Table 3: The assessment of Vocabulary
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent
6
Speak without too great an effort with a fairly wide range of expression. Searches for words occasionally but only one or two unnatural pauses.
Very Good 5
Has to make an effort at time to search fro words. Nevertheless, smooth delivery on the whole and only a few unnatural.
Good 4
Although he has to make an effort and search for words, there re not too many unnatural pauses. Fairly smooth delivery mostly.
Occasionally fragmentary but succeeds in conveying the general meaning. Fair range of expression.
Average
3
Has to make an effort for much of the time.
Often has to search for the desired meaning.
Rather halting delivery and fragmentary. Range of expression often limited.
Poor
2
Long pauses while he searched for the desired meaning. Frequently and halting delivery.
Almost gives up making the effort at times limited range of expression.
Very poor
1
Full of long and unnatural pauses. Very halting and fragmentary delivery. At times gives up making the effort. Very limited range of expression.
(Heaton , 2011:37)
Table 4 : The assessment of speaking fluency involves self confidence .
Classification Score Criteria
Excellent 6
Easy to the listener to understand the speaker’s intention and general meaning. Very few interruption or clarification required.
Very Good 5
The speaker’s intention and general meaning are fair clear. A few interruption by the listener for the sake of clarification are necessary
Good 4
Most of what the speaker says is easy to follow. His attention is always clear but several interruptions are necessary to help him to convey the message or seek clarification
Average 3
The listener can understand a lot of what is said, but he must constantly seek clarification. He cannot understand and then with considerable effort by someone who is used to listening to the speaker.
Poor 2
Only small bits (usually short sentence and phrase) can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone who is used to listening to the speaker hardly anything of what is said can be understood
Very poor 1
Even the listener make a great effort interrupts, the speaker is unable to clarify anything he seems to have said.
(Heaton, 2011:37)
Students’ gain score
Score = x 10 Maximun Score
G. Technique of Data Analysis
In assessing the students’ progression during learning speaking material through cross group reporting strategy, the researcher used speaking assessment of speaking accuracy. The assessment divided in two categories; they were the assessment of students’ accuracy and fluency in speaking. Each assessment had different criteria. These assessments considered being very important in speaking skill due to quite complex with other skills.
The data on the students’ speaking proficiency in terms of accuracy and fluency were analyzed in the following procedures:
1. To calculate the percentage of the students’ score, the formula which is used as follows:
Notation : P : Rate Percentage
F : Frequency of the students’ score N : The total number of the score
(Sudjana , 2011:26)
2. To find out the mean score of the students’ test, the researcher used the formula:
∑ = Mean Score ∑ = Total Score
= The number of students
(Gay, 1981:298).
3. After collecting the data of the students, the researcher classified the score of the students. The researcher classified the score of the students into the following criteria :
a. 9.6 – 10 as excellent b. 8.6 – 9.5 as very good c. 7.6 – 8.5 as good d. 6.6 – 7.5 as fair e. 5.6 – 6.5 as poor
f. 3.6 – 5.5 as very poor
(Depdikbud , 2011:31).
4. To calculate the percentage of the students’ activeness in learning process the formula which is used as follows:
Notation :
P : Rate Percentage Fq : Frequency of the item N : Total sample
(Sudjana , 2011:26).
5. To know the percentage of the students’ improvement by applying the following formula:
P = × 100%
Notation: P = Percentage X1 = 1st Cycle
X2 = 2nd Cycle
(Sudjana, 2011:26)
32 CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of findings of the research and it is discussion. The findings of the research present the result of the improvement of the students’
speaking ability that covers the students’ speaking accuracy and the students’
speaking fluency, and the discussion of the research covers further explanation of the findings.
A. The Findings
1. The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy
The application of cross group reporting strategy in improving the students’
speaking accuracy deals with pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary. The improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy dealing with pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary can be seen clearly in the following table:
Table 1: The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy
Indicators
The Student’ Score Improvement %
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II DT CI CI CII DT CII Grammar
5.34 6.12 7.77 14.60 26.96 45.50
Vocabulary
5.23 6.57 7.87 25.62 19.79 50.48
Pronunciation
5.11 6.95 7.77 36.01 11.78 52.05
∑ 15.68 19.64 23.41 76.23 58.53 148.03
X
5.23 6.55 7.80 25.41 19.51 49.34
The table above indicated that there was improvement of the students’
speaking accuracy from Diagnostic-Test to cycle I and cycle II (Diagnostic -Test
< cycle I < cycle II) which in Diagnostic-Test of the students’ mean score achievement in speaking accuracy was 5.23 after evaluation in cycle I, the students’ speaking accuracy became 6.55 so the improvement of the students’
speaking accuracy achievement from Diagnostic-Test to cycle I is 25.41%.
There is also significant improvement of the students' speaking accuracy from cycle I to cycle II where the students’ speaking accuracy in cycle I was 6.5 and in cycle II is 7.80. So the improvement of students’ speaking accuracy achievement from cycle I to cycle II is 19.51%.
In the table above also indicates that the indicators of students’ speaking accuracy improve significantly in which Diagnostic-Test, The students’ grammar achievement also improves from Diagnostic-test to cycle I namely 5.34 to 6.12 and in cycle II was 7.77. The students’ vocabulary achievement improved from Diagnostic-test to cycle I namely 5.23 to 6.57 and in cycle II was 7.87. The students’ pronunciation achievement was 5.11. After evaluation in cycle I, the students’ achievement in pronunciation becomes 6.95 and in cycle II becomes 7.77. The table above proved that the use of cross group reporting strategy in teaching and learning process was able to improve of students’ speaking accuracy after taking action in cycle I and cycle II in which the students’ achievement in cycle II was the highest (Cycle II > Cycle I > Diagnostic- test) and the improvement of students’ speaking accuracy from diagnostic – test to cycle II was 49.34%.
To see clearly the improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy, the following chart is presented:
Figure 1: The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Accuracy
The chart above shows the improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy which in D- test to cycle II was higher (49.34%) than cycle I to cycle II (19.51%) and Diagnostic -Test to cycle I (25.41%). It also showed that the result of Diagnostic-Test was the lowest mean score achievement. The students’
achievement in D- test is categorized as poor. After evaluation in cycle I and cycle II, there is significant improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy where the result of cycle I was categorized as fair and cycle II categorized as fairly good.
2. The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Fluency
The application of cross group reporting strategy in improving the students’
speaking fluency. The improvement of the students’ speaking fluency dealing
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
25.41%
19.51%
49.34%
D- TEST TO CYCLE II
CYCLE I TO CYCLE II
D-TEST TO CYCLE I
with self confidence at the second year students’ of XI IPA MA Al-Qasimiyah Guppi Madello can be seen clearly in the following table:
Table 2: The improvement of the students’ speaking fluency
Indicators
The Student’ Score Improvement %
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II DT CI CI CII DT CII
Self-Confident 5.45 6.12 7.98 12.29 30.39 46.42
X
5.45 6.12 7.98 12.29 30.39 46.42The table above indicated that there was improvement of the students’
speaking fluency from D-Test to cycle I and cycle II, which in D-Test the students’ score achievement in speaking fluency was 5.45. After evaluation in cycle I the students’ speaking fluency became 6.12. So the improvement of students’ speaking fluency achievement from D-Test to cycle I was 12.29%.
There was also significant improvement of students speaking fluency from cycle I to cycle II where the students’ speaking fluency in cycle I was 6.12 and in cycle II was 7.98. So the improvement of students’ speaking fluency achievement from cycle I to cycle II was 30.39%.
In the table above also indicated that the indicators of students’ speaking fluency improve significantly which in D-Test, the students’ self-confident achievement was 5.45. After evaluation in cycle I, the students’ achievement in self-confident becomes 6.12 and cycle II became 7.98. The table above shows that there is significant improvement of students’ speaking fluency after taking action
in cycle I and cycle II through the application of cross group reporting strategy.
The improvement of students’ speaking fluency from diagnostic – test to cycle II is 46.42%.
To see clearly the improvement of the students’ speaking fluency, following chart is presented:
Figure 2: The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Fluency
The chart above showed the improvement of the students’ speaking fluency in D- test to cycle II was higher (52%) than in D-test to cycle I (26.7%) and D-Test to cycle I (20%). It also showed that the result of D-Test is the lowest achievement. (D-Test < Cycle I < Cycle II). After evaluation in cycle I and cycle II, there is significant improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy that shown clearly in the chart after taking an action in cycle through cross group reporting strategy.
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
12.29% 30.39% 46.42%
D- TEST TO CYCLE II CYCLE I TO CYCLE II D-TEST TO CYCLE I
3.The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Ability
The application of cross group reporting strategy in improving the students’
speaking ability deals with speaking accuracy and speaking fluency. The improvement of the students’ speaking ability that dealing with accuracy and fluency can be seen clearly in the following table:
Table 3: The improvement of the students’ speaking ability
Indicators
The Student’ Score Improvement %
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II DT CI CI CII DT CII Accuracy
5.23 6.55 7.80 25.41 19.51 49.34
Fluency 5.45 6.12 7.98 12.29 30.39 46.42
∑ 10.68 12.67 15.78 37.7 49.9 95.76
X
5.34 6.33 7.89 18.85 24.95 47.88The table above indicated that there was improvement of the students’
speaking ability from D-Test to cycle I and cycle II, which in D-Test the students’
mean score achievement in speaking ability was 5.34. It is categorized as poor achievement. After evaluation in cycle I the students’ speaking ability becamed 6.33. It categorized as fair. So the improvement of students’ speaking ability achievement from D-Test to cycle I was 18.85%. There is also significant improvement of students speaking ability from cycle I to cycle II where the students’ speaking ability in cycle I was 6.33 and in cycle II is 7.89. The students’
achievement in cycle II is categorized as fairly good, so the improvement of students’ speaking ability achievement from cycle I to cycle II is 24.95%.
The table above proved that the use of cross group reporting strategy in teaching and learning process was able to improvement of students’ speaking ability after taking action in cycle I and cycle II where the students’ achievement in cycle II is the highest (Cycle II > Cycle I > Diagnostic- test) and the improvement of students’ speaking ability from diagnostic – test to cycle II was 47.88%.
To see clearly the improvement of the students’ speaking ability, following chart is presented:
Figure 3: The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Ability
The chart above showed the improvement of the students’ speaking ability in D- test to cycle II is higher (47.88%) than cycle I to cycle II (24.95%) and D-Test to cycle I (18.85%). It also shows that the result of D-Test is the lowest achievement (Cycle II > Cycle I > Diagnostic - Test). It also showed that the result of Diagnostic -Test is the lowest achievement.
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
18.85% 24.95% 47.88%
D- TEST TO CYCLE II CYCLE I TO CYCLE II D-TEST TO CYCLE I
4. The Percentage of the students’ speaking accuracy dealing with, grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation
a. Grammar
The application of cross group reporting strategy in improving the students’
speaking accuracy in terms of grammar can be seen the difference by considering the result of the students’ Diagnostic- Test and the students’ achievement after taking action in cycles through the application of cross group reporting strategy in teaching and learning process.
Table 4: The Percentage of the Students’ Grammar in Speaking
No Classification Score
Non CGR The Application of CGR D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
Freq % Freq % Freq %
1 Excellent 9.6-10 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 Very good 8.6-9.5 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 Good 7.6-8.5 0 0 2 13.33 10 66.67
4 Fairly good 6.6-7.5 0 0 8 53.33 5 33.33
5 Fair 5.6-6.5 5 33.33 0 0 0 0
6 Poor 3.6-5.5 8 53.33 5 33.33 0 0
7 Very Poor 0.0-3.5 2 13.33 0 0 0 0
Total 15 100 15 100 15 100
The table above showed the percentage of the students’ grammar achievement in Diagnostic Test indicates that 5 students (33.33%) got fairly good, 8 students (53.33%) got poor, 2 students (13.33%) got very poor, and none of students for the other classification. After taking action in cycle I by using cross group
reporting strategy, the percentage of the students’ grammar achievement improves where 2 student got good, 8 students (53.33%) got fairly good, 5 students (33.33%) got poor. In cycle II, the percentage of the students’ achievement in grammar is higher than cycle I where 10 student (66.67%) got good, 5 students (33.3.%) got fairly good and none of the students for the other classification.
To see the percentage of the improvement of the students’ grammar in speaking accuracy clearly, the following chart is presented:
Figure 4: The percentage of the improvement of the students’ grammar
The chart above showed that the result of the students’ speaking accuracy in terms of grammar was improved by using Cross group reporting strategy in cycle I and cycle II, the result of students’ achievement improves significantly.
The result of students’ grammar in cycle II was higher than Diagnostic-Test and cycle I (Cycle II > Cycle I > Diagnostic test) where the students’ grammar achievement in cycle II is 66.67% categorized as good and 33.33% as fairly good while in cycle I was lower than cycle II where the students’ grammar
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
DIAGNOSTIC
TEST TEST OF CYCLE
I TEST OF CYCLE
II 13.33%
66.67%
33.33%
53.33%
33.33%
53.33%
33.33%
13.33%
GOOD FAIRLY.G POOR VERY.P
