commit to user
IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PRONUNCIATION SKILL BY USING ORAL PEER FEEDBACK
(A Classroom Action Research at the First Grade Students of English Department of Galuh University Ciamis in the Academic Year of 2013/2014)
COVER
THESIS
By
DIDIH FARIDAH S891202012
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GRADUATE SCHOOL
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSITY
commit to user ii
commit to user iii APPROVAL
IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PRONUNCIATION SKILL BY USING ORAL PEER FEEDBACK
(A Classroom Action Research at the First Grade Students of English Department of Galuh University Ciamis in the Academic Year of 2013/2014)
Name : Didih Faridah NIM : S891202012
This thesis has been approved by the advisors to be examined by the board of Examiners of English Education Department of Graduate School of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sebelas Maret University on ……….2016
Consultant I
Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M.Pd. NIP. 19610124 198702 1001
Consultant II
Dr. Ngadiso, M.Pd. NIP. 19621231 198803 1009
Approved by:
The Head of the English Education Department of Graduate School of Sebelas Maret University
Dr. Ngadiso, M.Pd. NIP. 19621231 198803 1009
commit to user iv ABSTRACT
Didih Faridah. S891202012. 2015. IMPROVING STUDENTS’
PRONUNCIATION SKILL BY USING ORAL PEER FEEDBACK. (A
Classroom Action Research at the First Grade Students of English Department of Galuh University Ciamis in the Academic Year of 2013/2014). A Thesis. Advisor1: Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M. Pd., Advisor 2: Dr. Ngadiso, M. Pd. Surakarta: English Education Department, Graduate School, Teacher Training and Education Faculty, Sebelas Maret University.
The present study investigated the effects of oral peer feedback on students‘ improvements in pronunciation skill and class situation. It is underpinned by a premise that peer feedback gives students chances to share evaluative comments with peers to improve pronunciation skill.
The study took place in English Education Program of Galuh University, involving the subjects of 22 students. A three-cycle CAR study was intended to discover how oral peer feedback can improve students‘ pronunciation skill. This problem was then broken down into five more specific sub-questions. To get the data, achievement tests, classroom observation, interview, and questionnaire were conducted and administered. Data from achievement test were analyzed quantitatively by calculating the mean score of each test result. Meanwhile, data from observation, questionnaire, and interview were analyzed qualitatively by reducing and transforming the data, displaying the data, and drawing conclusion and verification.
The results showed that students became more active as the cycle progressed. They practiced dialogues in pairs, taking turns giving feedback to each other when mistakes were noticed. Corrective feedback was used to correct the errors made by their peers. This activity finally led to the improvement in the pronunciation skills. Oral peer feedback not only gave positive impact, but was also received positive responses from the pupils. Peer feedback motivated them to have better pronunciation, and they became more focused on practicing pronunciation because the teacher did not correct their mistakes directly. Playing a role as feedback providers made them more critical. Gradual improvements of students‘ achievements were evident especially in the four features. Of the four pronunciation features taught, minimal pair sound and word stress were the most easily increased features. Meanwhile, the most difficult ones were linking sound and intonation. During the provision of oral peer feedback, teacher must play roles as teacher, controller, and sometimes a feedback provider because some students felt unsure with their own feedback.
commit to user v
ABSTRAK
Didih Faridah. S891202012. 2015. IMPROVING STUDENTS’
PRONUNCIATION SKILL BY USING ORAL PEER FEEDBACK. (A
Classroom Action Research at the First Grade Students of English Department of Galuh University Ciamis in the Academic Year of 2013/2014). A Thesis. Pembimbing 1: Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M. Pd., Pembimbing 2: Dr. Ngadiso, M. Pd. Surakarta: Prodi Magister Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta.
Penelitian ini mengkaji tentang pengaruh oral peer feedback terhadap peningkatan kemampuan cara pelafalan (pronunciation) siswa. Hal ini didasari oleh asumsi bahwa feedback memberikan siswa kesempatan untuk berbagi komentar untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pelafalan mereka.
Penelitian ini dilakukan pada 22 orang mahasiswa Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Galuh. Sebuah Penelitian Tindakan Kelas (PTK) 3 siklus dilakukan untuk menemukan bagaimana oral peer feedback bisa meningkatkan kemampuan pelafalan siswa. Permasalahan ini kemudian diperluas ke dalam lima buah pertanyaan yang lebih spesifik. Untuk memperoleh data, beberapa instrumen digunakan termasuk tes pelafalan, observasi kelas, wawancara, dan angket. Data dari hasil test dianalisa secara kuantitatif dengan menghitung nilai rata-rata tiap test. Sementara data dari observasi, kuesioner, dan wawancara dianalisa dengan mereduksi, dan mentranskripsi data, menampilkan data, dan merumuskan kesimpulan dan verifikasi.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa mahasiswa secara bertahap menjadi lebih aktif dalam kegiatan pemberian feedback. Mereka melakukan dialog berpasangan, dan saling memberi feedback satu sama lain ketika terjadi kesalahan pelafalan. Corrective feedback mereka gunakan untuk memperbaiki kesalahan pasangan mereka. Aktivitas ini pada akhirnya membuat peningkatan secara bertahap dalam kemampuan pelafalan mahasiswa. Pemberian oral peer feedback secara intensif ternyata tidak hanya berdampak positif tetapi juga mendapatkan respon yang baik dari mahasiswa. Peer feedback memotivasi mereka untuk menguasai pelafalan yang benar, dan mereka menjadi lebih terfokus pada mempraktekkan pelafalan karena dosen tidak memberi feedback secara langsung. Selain itu, menjadi seorang pemberi feedback juga membuat mereka lebih kritis. Oleh sebab itu, peningkatan secara bertahap bisa terlihat dalam semua fitur pelafalan yang diajarkan. Dari keempat fitur yang diajarkan, miminal pair dan word stress adalah dua fitur yang paling mudah ditingkatkan melalui penerapan oral peer feedback. Sementara itu, yang paling sulit ditingkatkan adalah fitur linking sound dan intonation. Selama penerapan oral peer feedback di kelas, dosen juga berperan sebagai pengontrol, pemberi motivasi, dan juga pemberi feedback ketika mahasiswa merasa kurang yakin dengan feedback mereka.
commit to user vi
Kata kunci: umpan balik, kolaborasi, situasi kelas.
PRONOUNCEMENT
This is to declare that I myself write thesis, entitled ―Improving Students‘ Pronunciation Skill by Using Oral Peer Feedback (A Classroom Action Research at the First Grade Students of English Department of Galuh University Ciamis in the Academic Year of 2013/2014)‖. It is not plagiarism or made by others. Anything related to others‘ work is written in quotation and the source of which is listed on bibliography.
If then this pronouncement proves incorrect, I am ready to accept any academic punishment incuding the withdrawal or cancellation of my academic degree.
Surakarta, 2016
commit to user vii MOTTO
commit to user viii DEDICATION
I dedicate this thesis to: my beloved family, my beloved parents,
my colleagues,
commit to user ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Praise be to Allah for His blessing and Mercy that I can completely finish this thesis as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Graduate Degree of English Education Department of Graduate School of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sebelas Maret University Surakarta. I also would like to express my deepest gratitude to all people who have made this thesis possible to be finished and published:
1. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sebelas Maret University.
2. The Head of the English Department of Graduate Program of Sebelas Maret University.
3. Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M. Pd., the first advisor for his guidance and patience.
4. Dr. Ngadiso, M. Pd., the second advisor for his valuable correction, suggestion, and guidance.
5. Etika Rachmawati, M. Pd., the Head of English Department of Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Sciences of Galuh University and all colleagues.
6. Asep Dudi Kurnia, M. Pd., and Iskhak Said, Drs. M.M., M. Pd. the collaborator and proofreader in the research.
7. My beloved husband and son for their unconditionally love and support. 8. My parents for their non-stop blessing and prayers.
9. The first grade students 1E of English Department of FKIP Galuh University academic year 2013/2014.
10. My roommates, Anita, Hywang, and Dewi, for their supports and kindness. At last, I would like to welcome comments and suggestions for more improvement.
Surakarta, Agustus 2016 Didih Faridah
commit to user x TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER ... 1 LEGITIMASI ... ii APPROVAL ... iii ABSTRACT ... iv ABSTRAK ... v PRONOUNCEMENT ... vi MOTTO ... vii DEDICATION ... viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x LIST OF TABLES ... xv
LIST OF FIGURES ... xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xvii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1
A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Problem Statements ... 12
C. Objectives of the Study... 12
D. Significance of the Study ... 13
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ... 13
A. Theoretical Description ... 13
1. Pronunciation ... 13
1) The Definition of Pronunciation ... 13
2)The Features of Pronunciation ... 14
1. Supra segmental features... 15
2. Segmental features ... 16
3. The Factors Influencing Pronunciation Mastery ... 18
4. The Importance of Pronunciation in Language Learning ... 19
commit to user xi
2. Oral Peer Feedback ... 21
1. The Definition of Feedback ... 21
2. Teaching Steps in Giving Oral Peer Feedback ... 22
3. The Advantages of Oral Peer Feedback ... 22
4. The Disadvantages of Oral Peer Feedback ... 24
3. Participatory Pedagogy and Classroom Atmosphere ... 24
4. Classroom Interaction during Peer Feedback Activity ... 25
B. Review of Relevant Researches ... 26
C. Rationale ... 29
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 31
A. Research Setting ... 31
1. Research Location ... 31
2. Research Timeline ... 32
3. Research Subject ... 32
B. Research Design ... 33
C. Technique of Collecting the Data ... 37
1. Quantitative Data ... 37
2. Qualitative Data ... 38
a. Interview ... 38
b. Observation ... 38
c. Questionnaire... 38
D. Technique of Analyzing the Data ... 38
1. Quantitative Data ... 38
2. Qualitative Data ... 39
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 40
A. Research Findings ... 40
1. Prior Situation of the Research ... 40
2. Implementation of the Research in Cycle 1 ... 44
a. Planning ... 44
b. Implementing ... 45
commit to user xii a) Opening ... 45 b) Main Activity ... 46 c) Closing ... 48 2) Meeting II ... 48 a) Opening ... 48 b) Main Activity ... 49 c) Closing ... 50 3) Meeting III ... 50 a) Opening ... 50 b) Main Activity ... 51 c) Closing ... 52 c. Observing ... 52 1) Meeting I ... 53 2) Meeting II ... 56 3) Meeting III ... 58
4) A summary of observation in cycle 1 ... 60
d. Reflecting ... 63
3. Implementation of the Research in Cycle 2 ... 66
a. Replanning ... 66 b. Implementing ... 66 1) Meeting I ... 67 a) Opening ... 67 b) Main Activity ... 67 c) Closing ... 69 2) Meeting II ... 70 a) Opening ... 70 b) Main Activity ... 70 3) Meeting III ... 71 1) Opening ... 71 2) Main Activity ... 72 3) Closing ... 73
commit to user xiii c. Observing ... 73 1) Meeting I ... 74 2) Meeting II ... 75 3) Meeting III ... 77
4) A summary of observation in cycle 2 ... 79
d. Reflecting ... 83
4. Implementation of the Research in Cycle 3 ... 86
a. Replanning ... 86 b. Implementing ... 86 1) Meeting I ... 87 a) Opening ... 87 b) Main Activity ... 87 c) Closing ... 90 2) Meeting II ... 90 a) Opening ... 90 b) Main Activity ... 91 c) Closing ... 93 3. Meeting III ... 93 a) Opening ... 93 b) Main Activity ... 94 c) Closing ... 95 c. Observing ... 95 d. Reflecting ... 107 B. Discussion ... 109
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION, AND SUGGESTION ... 116
A. Conclusions ... 116
B. Implications ... 118
C. Suggestions ... 119
REFERENCES ... 121
commit to user xiv
commit to user xv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. 1. The Result of Pre-test ... 3
Table 3. 1. The Schedule of Research and Research Writing ... 32
Table 4. 1. The Result of Pre-Test ... 41
Table 4. 2. Students‘ Pronunciation Improvement in Cycle 1 ... 62
Table 4. 3. Students‘ Pronunciation Improvement in Cycle 2 ... 82
Table 4. 4. Summary of Reflection in Cycle 2 ... 86
Table 4. 5. The Result of Post Questionnaire... 101
commit to user xvi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. 1. Result of students‘ interview on the aspects of pronunciation. ... 8 Figure 1. 2. Result of students‘ interview on the importance of feedback... 9 Figure 2. 1. Features of English Pronunciation (Adopted from Burns, 2003) ... 14 Figure 3. 1. Cyclical Action Research based on Kemmis and Mc.Taggart (1988)35
commit to user xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Blue print of Pretest post test ... 126
Appendix 2. Blue Print of Pre Questionnaire ... 128
Appendix 3. Blue Print of Pre Interview ... 130
Appendix 4. Pronunciation Pre-test and Post-test ... 131
Appendix 5. Scoring Rubric of Pronunciation ... 132
Appendix 6. Students‘ Feedback Sheet ... 133
Appendix 7. Pre-Questionnaire ... 134
Appendix 8. Result of Pre-Questionnaire ... 137
Appendix 9. Post Questionnaire ... 139
Appendix 10. Percentage of Post-Questionnaire ... 141
Appendix 11. Pre-Interview ... 143
Appendix 12. Transcript of students‘ pre interview... 145
Appendix 13. Post-Interview ... 153
Appendix 14. Transcript of post-interview ... 154
Appendix 15. Observation sheet ... 156
Appendix 16. Lesson Plan cycle I ... 163
Appendix 17. Lesson Plan cycle II ... 182
Appendix 18. Lesson Plan cycle III ... 199
Appendix 19. Result of Pre test... 216
Appendix 20. Result of Post Test Cycle 1 ... 217
Appendix 21. Result of Post Test Cycle 2 ... 218
Appendix 22. Result of post test cycle 3 ... 219
Appendix 23. Pictures of Teaching and Learning Pronunciation by using Oral Peer Feedback ... 221
