1
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
This chapters will give an introduction to the study. It begins with the elaboration on the background why this study is undertaken and followed by the formulation of the research questions, the purpose, and the significance of the study. The limitation of the research is also stated in this chapter before it is ended by describing how this study report is organized.
1.1 The Background of the Research Problem
No one can deny the universality of English. In Indonesia, as in many outside English-speaking countries, English has become a compulsory component of education. At many schools and universities, English is chosen as an obligatory subject for students as English is considered to be a useful tool to access the world knowledge. The importance of English language teaching is more significant in Indonesian vocational schools – which prepare their graduates to work – since the English ability has become a very significant factor in winning the very tight competition of getting a job in this globalization era.
2
consider speaking as the most important skill they can acquire, and they assess their progress in terms of their accomplishments in spoken communication. Nunan (2000:39) writes, "To most people, mastering the art of speaking, is the single most important aspect of learning a second or foreign language, and success is measured in term of the ability to carry out a conversation in the language."
Speaking is a language skill that needs a lot of practices, such as how to pronounce the words correctly, how to produce grammatically correct, create logically connected sentences, and so on. In this sense, Thornbury (2006:6) describes that “Speaking is like another skill, such as driving or playing a musical instrument: the more practice you get, the more likely it is you will be able to speak.” Most of the students and almost all English teachers actually know that speaking skill needs to be developed by doing a lot of practices. Yet in fact, many EFL teachers often find it is difficult to ask their students to practice speaking English.
3
Dealing with this case in Indonesia context, some researches have touched on this problem. Lengkanawati (2004) states that even though many people now (since the reform movement) are not hesitant to speak up, this kind of behavior has not fully been reflected in the classroom interaction yet. Putra (2004) has investigated the attitude of six students of Vocational High School of Telecommunication in Banjarbaru South Kalimantan in performing public speaking of English as a foreign language through English debate competition. Some of his “extensive findings” have identified that the students had got mental problems such a fright of making mistakes during the competition. Warliah (2004) has done another research at SMU N 8 Bandung about students’ reluctance to raise question in the classroom. And she has also found that most of the students do not raise questions in English classes because of being afraid of making mistakes. Fitri (2005) has found other obstacles faced by the third-year students of English Department of UPI following the English speaking group work, they are; the lack of self-confidence and the lack of vocabulary.
4
Indeed, it has been many times that the teaching of speaking in Batam Polytechnic faces the students’ low motivation. The class interaction is very minimum, since most of the students do not give active participations. The students’ passiveness and unwillingness to speak English often almost foil the lecturers’ attempts to use English in the classroom. It is supposed that the students should transfer what they have learned in class to outside the classroom so that the knowledge and skills the students acquire in their classrooms can be reinforced and retained. However, it seems too idealistic to prod the students to speak English outside the classrooms since even in the English classes most of them still get reluctant to practice speaking English and remain using Indonesian instead.
Owing to this fact, the researcher was eager to seek what obstacles that have hindered Batam Polytechnic students from practicing speaking English. The researcher believed that there must be serious problems behind this reluctance. Finding the obstacles behind the students’ reluctance to practice speaking English would provide the lecturers a hint for improving the teaching of speaking in the campus in the future.
1.2 Research Questions
Based on what has been described above, the research questions are formulated as follows:
5
2 What are the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English from the lecturers’ point of view?
3 What are the possible solutions to those obstacles?
1.3 The Purpose of the Study
As it is reflected in the research questions above, the purposes of the studies are stated as follows:
1. To find out the obstacles that hinder the students from practicing speaking English.
2. To find the English lecturers’ opinions about those obstacles. 3. To find the possible solutions to those obstacles.
1.4 The Significance of the Study
6
thus, the findings of this research will give the lecturers the apposite information for taking proper solutions to the students’ reluctance in practicing speaking English.
The findings will also give benefits to the students. Most of the students who are reluctant to practice speaking English do not really know what problems that hinder them from doing it. They never ask themselves seriously about it, and nobody else does either. By knowing their real obstacles, a path that leads to a solution will be opened.
Likewise, the institution will also know what facilities have to be prepared to help the English lectures and the students to overcome the difficulties. Thus, the institution, the English lectures and the students can be bound to work together to give the solution to the obstacles.
1.5 Research Limitation
This study is done in the context and situation of Batam Polytechnic, therefore the transferability of its findings would be limited to those locations that have necessary distinctiveness comparable to the context of Batam Polytechnic.
1.6 Organization of the Reports
7
Chapter 2 presents the underlying theories which include relevant researches and publications concerning the students’ difficulties is speaking English. In addition, this chapter also discusses what makes a good speaking teaching as well as on what makes a good speaking learner.
Chapter 3 deals with the research method and explains how the data were collected and analyzed in the light of theories presented in chapter 2.
In chapter 4, the findings are presented in summary tables to show the kinds of the obstacles that hinder the students to practice speaking English. The tables also show the quantification of each kind of obstacles in the form of percentage. These findings are then interpreted and discussed by relating and comparing them to the relevant studies discussed in chapter 2. This chapter is ended by proposing some possible solutions to the obstacles found.
38
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY
This chapter begins with the discussion on the research method followed by the choice of the research site and the participant. Further more, it talks about the techniques of collecting as well as the validity of the data. This chapter finally ends with an elaboration on the techniques of the data analysis.
3.1 The Research Method
This study is descriptive and qualitative in nature since it focuses on observing, interpreting, and understanding the collected data to find the real obstacles that hinder the students from practicing speaking English. Qualitative study in nature is conducted inductively, meaning that the study begins from data collected from the field and analyzed (Cresswell, 1984). Descriptive method, because this method characterized by attempting to describe characteristics and events that exist (Kamil, 1985). The researcher decided to use this method since his intension was to obtain a thick description about the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English.
39
tries to describe and analyze some entities in qualitative, complex and comprehensive terms not infrequently as it, unfolds over a period of time.
3.2 The Research Site
The study was conducted at Batam Polytechnic. The researcher chose this university because it is one of the favorite universities is Batam and it is easy to access since the researcher has been working there for years.
3.3 The Participants and the Samples
The participants were the second semester of Batam Polytechnic students consisting of 270 students. Those students were divided into nine classes – those were thirty students in each class, based on their English ability level. The students’ English ability was leveled by using TOEIC model test.
English was only taught in the first until to the third semester in Batam Polytechnic. Hence, in the even period semester in which the data was taken, it was only the second semester classes which were taking English course. The fourth and the sixth semesters had no more English course. The other reason why the second semester students were chosen was because the fourth semester students have already got attachment program, while the sixth semester students have got busy with their final project.
40
the samples (Fraenkel, 2001). Since the purpose of the research was to find out the obstacles in practicing speaking English, with the help of the English lecturers, the researcher chose the ten least active students in practicing speaking English from each of the nine classes. Hence, from those 270 participants, ninety students (33.3%) were selected to become the respondents of the research.
3.4 The Techniques of Collecting Data
In qualitative research the trustworthiness and authenticity of the data collection play a very important role (Guba, 1981; Lincoln & Guba 1985 as cited in Musthafa, 2000). Hence, in collecting the data the researcher applied questionnaires and interviews.
The questionnaires were distributed to the ten least active students in practicing speaking English from each class to browse in and elicit their ideas and reasons why they get reluctant to do the practice. To get a more comprehensive data, the English lecturers were then interviewed to get their perception about the student’s obstacles as well as to search out their opinion about how overcome the obstacles.
3.5 Validity
41
class in order to elicit the obstacles that hinder them from doing the practice. After that, to get a more valid data, the English lecturers were also interviewed to get their perception about the student’s obstacles in the absence of the students.
3.6 The Techniques of Data Analysis
In analyzing the collected data, the researcher took the followings the steps: Firstly, the analysis was done by identifying the students’ opinion about their obstacles in practicing speaking English from their answers to the questionnaire questions.
Secondly, after collecting the findings, categorization was made based on the source of the obstacles. There were three categories of obstacles that explain the Batam Polytechnic students’ reluctance to practice speaking English; obstacles related to the students themselves, obstacles related to lecturer, and obstacles related to environment. However, some of the obstacles were overlapping since some students had more than one barrier in practicing speaking English.
Thirdly, the quantification was made. This was done by quantifying the frequencies of each obstacle, obstacles subcategories, and obstacles categories in the form of percentage.
42
After that, the data about obstacles from the students’ point of view and from the lecturers’ point of vies were compared in which they were the same and different. Both the students and the lecturers had the same opinion about the students’ limitations in vocabulary and grammar as the main obstacles for the student to practice speaking English. They also had the same opinion about the obstacles related to environment. Yet, they had different opinion about the students’ limitation in pronunciation and about the obstacles related to the lecturer.
Next, each of the obstacles was analyzed using the theories presented in chapter 2 to see how it hindered the students from practicing speaking English.
97
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
Based on the research findings, the study comes to the following conclusions: Firstly, the study found three categories of obstacles that explain the Batam Polytechnic students’ reluctance to practice speaking English from the students’s point of view: the obstacles related to the students themselves (98.89%), the obstacles related to the lecturers (10.00%), and the obstacles related to the environment (2.22%).
Secondly, The study found also found the same categories of obstacles from the lecturers’ point of view; obstacles related to the students themselves (100%), obstacles related to lecturers (66.67%), and obstacles related to environment (33.33%).
98
making mistakes. It made them anxious and shy to be laugh. And because they did not want to take this risk, they finally stopped practicing speaking English and just kept silent or remained speaking Indonesian instead.
The students and the lecturers also had different opinion about the obstacles related to the lecturer. The students felt that the lecturers didn’t give them enough time to practice speaking English and that the the lecturers should not teach them fully in English. Yet, the lecturers thought that the allotted time for English class was limited while the class was too big. They insisted on using fully English since they wanted to give the model to the students.
The students and the lecturers had the same opinion again in viewing the obstacles related to the environment. The students complained about the fully Indonesian speaking environment and the lack of the partner to practice speaking English. The lectures said that it was the easiness of the students to give up speaking English that caused these two problems.
99
significance of speaking English is stressed and the permissible condition of when to use Indonesian is clarified.
The findings shows that, in general, the lecturers have done their role quite well, yet they still need to keep encouraging the students practice speaking English and to teach them more on vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation for communicative purposes.
5.2 Recommendation
5.2.1 For the English Lecturers
100 5.2.2 For Further Research
Table of Contents
1.1The Background of the Research Problem………... 1
1.2Research Questions……….. 4
1.3The Purpose of the Study………. 5
1.4The Significance of the Study……….. 5
1.5Research Limitation ……… 6
1.6Organization of the Report………... 6
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE………... 8
2.1 The Concept and the Elements of Speaking ………... 8
2.2 What a Speaker Does ……….. 10
2.3 What Makes Speaking Difficult………... 12
2.4 Shyness and Anxiety in Speaking……… 13
2.5 What Makes a Good Speaking Teaching………. 16
2.5.1 Using a Communicative Approach………. 16
2.5.2 Teaching Vocabulary for a Communicative Purpose………. 18
2.5.3 Teaching Grammar a Communicative Purpose……….. 21
2.5.4 Teaching Pronunciation a Communicative Purpose………... 24
2.5.5 Playing the Teacher Roles Well..……… 30
2.5.7 Handling The Students’ Use of Mother Tongue…….………. …….. 33
2.5.8 Increasing Students’ Self Confidence ……… 35
2.7 What Makes a Good Speaking Learner….……….. 36
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ………. 38
3.1 The Method Research ………. 38
3.2 The Research Site ……… 39
3.3 The Participants .……….. 39
3.4 The Techniques of Collecting Data ………. 40
3.5 Validity ….………... 40
3.6 The Techniques of Data Analysis ………... 41
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS... 43
4.1 The Students’ Obstacles in Practicing Speaking English from The Students’ and The Lecturers’ Point of View………....……… 43
4.1.1 Obstacles Related to Students Themselves………..………... 45
4.1.1.1 Lack of English Competences ……… 46
4.1.1.1.1 Lack of Vocabulary Competence ……… 48
4.1.1.1.2 Lack of Grammar Competence……… 50
4.1.1.1.3 Lack of Pronunciation Competence………. 52
4.1.1.2 Inability to Manage Emotion……….. 54
4.1.1.2.1 Nervousness ……… 56
4.1.1.2.2 Anxiety………. 57
4.1.1.2.3 Lack of Self Confidence……….. 59
4.1.1.2.4 Shyness………. 60
4.1.1.2.5 Laziness/Lack of Motivation……… 61
4.1.1.2.6 Boredom………... 63
4.1.2 Obstacles Related to the Lecturer………..………. 64
4.1.2.1 Limited Time to Practice………. 66
4.1.2.2 Fully English Teaching………... 69
4.1.3.1 Limited English Input……… 73
4.1.3.2 Lack of Partner to Practice ………... 74
4.2 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles……….... 75
4.2.1 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles Related to Self……….. 75
4.2.1.2 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Vocabulary……... 76
4.2.1.2 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Grammar……….. 81
4.2.1.3 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Pronunciation….. 84
4.2.1.4 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Inability to Manage Their Emotion... 89
4.2.2 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles Related to the Lecturer ………… 91
4.2.3 The Possible Solution to Obstacles Related to the Environment ……….. 95
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ………. 97
5.1 Conclusions ………. 97
5.2 Recommendations ……….. 99
5.2.1 For the English Lecturers……… 99
5.2.2 For the Further Research……… 100
List of Tables
Page Table 4.1
The Distribution of Respondents' Obstacles Categories
from the Students’ Point of View ……….………. 44
Table 4.2
The Distribution of Respondents' Obstacles Categories
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……….………... 44
Table 4.3
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Students Themselves
from the Students’ Point of View ……….………. 45
Table 4.4
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Students Themselves
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……….………... 46
Table 4.5
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Feeling of
Lacking of English Ability from the Students’ Point of View ……….………. 47
Table 4.6
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Feeling of
Lacking of English Ability from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……….…….. 47
Table 4.7
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Inability to
Manage Emotion from the Students’ Point of View ……….……… 55
Table 4.8
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Inability to
Manage Emotion from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……….……... 55
Table 4.9
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Lecturer
Table 4.10
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Lecturer
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……….……….………. 65
Table 4.11
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Environment
from the Students’ Point of View ……….……….……….. 72
Table 4.12
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Environment
List of Appendices
Appendix I:
Sample of Student Questionnaire
Appendix II:
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Atkinson, D. (1987). “The Mother Tongue in the Classroom: A Neglected Resources?” EFL Journal. 41, (4),37-52.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles – An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Castillo, L. (1990). “L2 Pronunciation Pedagogy: Where have We been? Where are We Headed? The Language Teacher . 14, (10), 3-7.
Celce-Muria, M. (1987) Teaching Pronunciation as Communication. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.
Cohen, A. (1977) “Redundancy as a Tool in Listening Comprehension”. TESOL Quarterly , 16, (1), 71-77.
Cresswell, J. W. (1984). Research Desining: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches. London: SAGE Publications
Crystal, D. (1995). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Doyon, P. (2000). Shyness in the Japanese EFL class: Why It is a Problem, What It is, what Causes It, and What to Do. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2000/01/doyon. [February 2009].
Eldridge, J. (1996). “Code-Switching in a Turkish Secondary School”. ELT Journal. 50, (4), 25-39.
English Club. Com. (2009). English Speaking. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www. englishclub.com/speaking/language-skills.htm [February 2009].
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Franenkel, J. R. and Norman E. W. (2001). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Education. New York: Hill Inc.
Fraser, H. (1999). “ESL pronunciation teaching: could it be more effective?” Australian Language Matters, 7 (4). [Online]. Retrieved http://www-personal,une.edu.au/~hfraser/docs/HFLanguageMatters.pdf [April 2009].
Gilbert, J. (1995). Pronunciation Practices as an Aid to Listening Comprehension. San Diego: Dominic Press.
Harbord, J. (1992). “The Use of Mother Tongue in the Classroom”. ELT Journal. 46, (4), 67-78.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex: Longman.
Highland Council Education. 2009. What makes a good teacher? [Online]. Laroy, C. (1995). Pronunciation. New York: OUP
Lengkanawati, N. S. (2004). “How Learners from Different Cultural Backgrounds Learn a Foreign Language”. Asian EFL Journal. 6. [Online]. Retrieved: http://Asian-efl-journal.com [February 2009].
Lynch, L. M. (2005). Grammar Teaching: Implicit or Explicit?. [Online]. Retrieved: http://ezinearticles.com/?Grammar-Teaching:-Implicit-or-Explicit?&id=89342 [July 2009].
Maniruzzaman. M. (2009). Teaching Efl Pronunciation: Why, What and How?. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.streetdirectory.com/ [July 2009].
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An interactive Approach. New Delhi: SAGE Publication.
McKenzie, J. (2007). The Wired Classroom [Online]. Retrieved: http://members. shaw.ca/priscillatheroux/teacherrole.html [February 2009].
Merriam, S. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A qualitative Approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Morgan, R. (2002). Developing Teaching Style. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.creativeteachingsite.com/teach3.htm. [February 2009].
Morley, J. (1991). “The Pronunciation Component in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Language”. TESOL Quarterly 25, (1), 51-74.
Musthafa, B. (2000). Judging Qualitative Educational Research: Some Essential Criteria. Unpublished paper. Postgraduate Program of Indonesian University of Educational. Noteboom, S. (1983) Is speech production controlled by speech perception?
Dordrecht: Foris.
Pennington, M. (1989). “Teaching Pronunciation from the Top Down”. RELC Journal, 20, (1), 21-38.
Purcell, E. and Suter, R. (1980). “Predictors of pronunciation accuracy: A Reexamination”. Language Learning. 30, (2), 271-87.
Putra, C. D. (2004). Performing Public Speaking Skill: A Case Study of Six Students of Vocational High School of Telecommunication in Banjarbaru South Kalimantan. Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished thesis).
Richards, J., C. and Lockhart, C. (1999). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., C. and Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching:an anthology of current practice. New York: Cambridge.
Scarcella, R. and Oxford, R. L. (1994). “Second Language Pronunciation: State of the Art in Instruction”. System. 22, (2), 221-230.
Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Suter, R. (1976) “Predicators of Pronunciation Accuracy in Second Language Learning”. Language Learning. 26, 233-53.
Thanasoulas, D. (2002). Motivation and Motivating in EFL. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.englishclub.com/tefl-articles/motivation-motivating-efl.htm
[February 2009].
The University of Texas at Dallas. (2007). Self-Help: Overcoming Social Anxiety. [online]. Retrieved: http://www.utdallas.edu/counseling/selfhelp/social-anxiety.html [February 2009].
University of Central Florida. (2007). Diversity & Atmosphere. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.fctl.ucf.edu/teachingandlearningresources/classroommanagement/di versityandatmosphere/index.php [February 2009].
Walker, R. (2001). “Pronunciation for international intelligibility.” English Teaching Professional, 21, 19-26.
Warliah, E. (2004). Students Reluctance to Raise Question in the Classroom (A Case Study at SMU N 8 Bandung). Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished thesis). Wilkins, D.A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Arnold.
