IMPROVING LISTENING SKILL OF CLASS X5 IN SMAN 2 YOGYAKARTA THROUGH CONTENT-FOCUS ASSESSMENT
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Agnesia Febriani Student Number: 071214064
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
i
IMPROVING LISTENING SKILL OF CLASS X5 IN SMAN 2 YOGYAKARTA THROUGH CONTENT-FOCUS ASSESSMENT
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Agnesia Febriani Student Number: 071214064
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
ii A Thesis on
IMPROVING LISTENING SKILL OF CLASS X5 IN SMAN 2 YOGYAKARTA THROUGH CONTENT-FOCUS ASSESSMENT
By
Agnesia Febriani Student Number: 071214064
Approved by
Date
Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd. July 25, 2011
iv
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work
or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the
references, as a scientific paper should.
Yogyakarta, July 25, 2011
The Writer
v
ABSTRACT
Febriani, Agnesia. 2011. Improving Listening Skill of Class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta through Content-Focus Assessment. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University.
Listening is one important skill in learning English. However, students often find difficulty in listening class. They feel difficult in understanding what the native speakers said. Students of class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta also had problems in listening class. They found difficulty to catch the words spoken by the speakers and to understand the content of the recording. From researcher’s observations and the informal interview, it was found that they had difficulty in absorbing the content of the recording. They tended to focus on word per word, so they could not understand the whole content of the recording. It was because they used to do word-focus assessment. In this research, the researcher gave content-focus assessment as the solution to this problem.
This research was conducted to improve students’ listening skill in class
X5 of SMAN 2 Yogyakarta. The research method used in this research was classroom action research. The research participants were 32 students in class X5 of SMAN 2 Yogyakarta. The research instruments used were content-focus assessments, questionnaires, field notes, observation sheets, and interview.
Content-focus assessment helped them to change their focus from word per word to the whole content of the recording. Bit by bit, their listening skill in understanding the content of the recording improved. Hence, the goal of listening class, which is students understand what they listen to, is also achieved. More than half of students passed the passing grade. The number of students who passed the passing grade increased. Moreover, more than half of students rewrote equals or more than 50% of important information from the recording. The number of students who rewrote equals or more than 50% of important information from the recording increased. It is concluded that content-focus assessment helped them in improving their listening skill.
It is suggested that teachers use content-focus assessment to improve students’ listening skill so that students achieve the goal of listening class. Content-focus assessment helps students to understand more deeply and improve their listening skill. Students are also suggested to improve their own listening skill by focusing on the whole content of the recording. In other words, the use of content-focus assessment in listening class is highly recommended.
vi
ABSTRAK
Febriani, Agnesia. 2011. Improving Listening Skill of Class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta through Content-Focus Assessment. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Listening adalah keterampilan yang penting dalam pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Namun, para siswa sering mengalami kesulitan dalam kelas listening. Siswa kelas X5 di SMAN 2 Yogyakarta juga mengalami hal serupa. Mereka merasa sulit saat mencerna kata-kata yang diucapkan pembicara dan saat berusaha memahami konten dari rekaman listening. Sesuai dengan hasil obervasi peneliti dan wawancara informal, para siswa mengalami kesulitan dalam memahami konten rekaman. Mereka cenderung fokus ke kata per kata sehingga mereka tidak dapat memahami konten keseluruhan rekaman listening. Hal tersebut dikarenakan mereka terbiasa dengan penilaian yang terfokus pada kata. Dalam penelitian ini, peneliti memberikan penilaian yang terfokus pada konten rekaman sebagai solusi untuk masalah ini.
Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk meningkatkan keterampilan listening siswa kelas X5 di SMAN 2 Yogyakarta. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian tindakan kelas. Partisipan penelitian ini adalah 32 siswa kelas X5 di SMAN 2 Yogyakarta. Instrumen penelitian yang digunakan yaitu penilaian yang terfokus pada konten, kuesioner, catatan lapangan, lembar observasi, dan wawancara.
Penilaian yang terfokus pada konten membantu mengubah fokus mereka dari kata per kata ke keseluruhan konten rekaman. Sedikit demi sedikit kemampuan listening mereka meningkat. Jadi tujuan kelas listening, yakni siswa dapat mengerti apa yang mereka dengarkan, juga tercapai. Lebih dari setengah jumlah siswa mencapai Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal (KKM). Jumlah siswa yang mencapai KKM meningkat. Ditambah lagi, lebih dari setengah jumlah siswa menulis ulang sama dengan atau lebih dari 50% informasi penting dari rekaman. Jumlah siswa yang menulis sama dengan atau lebih dari 50% informasi penting dari rekaman juga meningkat. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa penilaian yang terfokus pada konten membantu dalam meningkatkan keterampilan listening mereka.
Disarankan bagi para guru untuk menggunakan penilaian yang terfokus pada konten untuk meningkatkan keterampilan listening para siswa sehingga tujuan dari kelas listening juga tercapai. Penilaian yang terfokus pada konten membantu para siswa untuk memahami lebih dalam dan meningkatkan keterampilan listening mereka. Para siswa juga disarankan untuk meningkatkan keterampilan listening mereka dengan mengubah fokus pada keseluruhan konten rekaman. Dengan kata lain, penggunaan penilaian yang terfokus pada konten dalam kelas listening sangat direkomendasikan.
vii
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama : Agnesia Febriani
Nomor Mahasiswa : 071214064
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul :
Improving Listening Skill of Class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta through
Content-Focus Assessment
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan,
mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan
data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau
media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya
maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya
sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal 24 Agustus 2011
Yang menyatakan
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I thank God because He has given the the best for me. He is everything for
me. I realized that without Him, I could not finish this thesis. He is the One that
gave me strength and capability in doing this thesis.
I am very much grateful to my sponsor, Made Frida Yulia, S.Pd., M.Pd.
for the time in reading my thesis, checking it, and giving me suggestions and
encouragement. I also thank Drs. J.B. Gunawan, M.A. as the academic counselor
in my class. His patience and encouragement are very sincere. My thankfulness
also goes to all lecturers for their knowledge and life shared to me. All of the
lessons and value they gave to me are very precious.
I give my gratitude to my Dad and Mom for the support and
encouragement. Both of them are the motivation for me. I also thank my
grandmother for the sincere prayer. My thankfulness goes to my aunt, Mrs.
Mulyani, who supported me since the beginning of the semester. I pray that God
will give her and her family abundance of blessings.
I am very grateful to the following persons for their help: Daniel Yanuar
Rusli, Erastus Rico Septian, Julianto, and Widya Beatrix Simorangkir. My
gratefulness is also for all my friends who support and motivate me all the time.
Lastly, I thank those who helped me directly or indirectly.
x
b. The Aim of Assessment ... 9
c. Assessment Focusing on Words ... 9
d. Assessment Focusing on the Content ... 9
3. Assessing Listening ... 10
B. Theoretical Framework ... 10
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY 13
A. Research Method ... 13
B. Research Participants ... 14
C. Research Instruments ... 15
D. Data Gathering Technique ... 17
E. Data Analysis Technique ... 18
F. Research Procedure ... 19
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 21
A. Research Findings in the First Cycle ... 21
B. Research Findings in the Second Cycle ... 30
C. The Improvement of Research Findings in the First and Second Cycle ... 42
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 49
A. Conclusions ... 49
B. Suggestions ... 49
REFERENCES ... 51
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
4.1 Students’ Scores in the First Cycle ... 23
4.2 The Result of Students’ Rewritings in the First Cycle ... 25
4.3 Students’ Scores in the Second Cycle ... 32
4.4 The Result of Students’ Rewritings in the Second Cycle ... 33
4.5 The Result of the Questionnaire Two ... 34
4.6 Students’ Scores in Cycle One and Two ... 43
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
4.1 The Improvement of Students’ Scores ... 44
xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 : Letters of Permission ... 54
Appendix 2 : Samples of the Assessments ... 57
Appendix 3 : Samples of Questionnaire 1 ... 76
Appendix 4 : Samples of Questionnaire 2 ... 79
Appendix 5 : Lesson Plans ... 82
Appendix 6 : The Observation Sheets ... 89
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, the researcher presents the research background, the
problem formulation, the problem limitation, the research objective, the research
benefits, and the definiton of terms in the research.
A. Research Background
Listening is one of the four skills learnt in English subject. Since English is
a foreign language for Indonesian learners, English is often assumed as a difficult
subject to learn. English learners in Indonesia are not accustomed to English,
especially the pronunciation. The way to pronounce letters and words in
Indonesian language is very different from the way to pronounce letters and words
in English.
Similar to most English learners in Indonesia, students of class X5 in
SMAN 2 Yogyakarta had difficulty in mastering listening skill. As what the
researcher observed, the students found difficulty in understanding the content of
the recording. The students felt difficult in understanding the exact words
pronounced in the recording. They looked confused and tried to find the answers
by looking at other friends‟ answers.
From the observation, the students focused on the words that they had to
answer. Most of them did not pay attention to all information in the recording,
when the listening recording was about recount and actually something funny
happened there, only few students understood the content and laughed. The rest
just asked their friends what made them laugh or still focused on the words they
had to answer. It changed the goal of listening class itself. Gary Buck (2001: 2)
stated, “The listener interprets that literal meaning in terms of the communicative
situation to understand what the speaker means.” Therefore, the important thing in
listening class is to understand what the students listen to.
Moreover, based on the basic competence of listening skill number 3.1. in
School-Based Curriculum (2006), students are able to respond to the meaning in
transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal conversation (to socialize)
formally and informally by using various verbal language accurately, fluently, and
acceptably in daily life context. When students need to respond, it means that thay
have to understand what they need to respond first. Therefore, content-focus
assessment helps them to achieve the indicators and the learning goal.
To ensure the problem, the researcher conducted an informal interview
with 32 students and the result of the interview was that twenty out of 32 students
said that the most difficult skill to master was listening skill. From the result of the
observation and the interview, the researcher analyzed that the students of class
X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta found difficulty in understanding the whole content of
the recording. They tend to focus on word per word.
Finding the problem faced by the students of class X5 in SMAN 2
Yogyakarta related to listening skill, the researcher would like to conduct a
recording by content-focus assessment. Grant Wiggins (1998: 7) explained the
purpose of assessment as the tools to see students‟ improvement in the process of
learning. Therefore, he emphasizes the assessment which is not merely easy to
make as the tool to see students‟ final achievement. Wiggins (1998: 7) stated,
“We sacrifice our aims and our children‟s intellectual needs when we test what is
easy to test rather than the complex and rich tasks that we value in our classrooms
and that are at the heart of our curriculum.” Making word-focus assessment in
listening class is easier than making content-focus assessment because teachers
just need to take out words from the complete dialogue. It makes students read the
text given and only focus on listening to the answers they have to fill in. However,
in making content-focus assessment, teachers need to understand the whole
content of the recording first. Then, they list guiding questions related to the
recording so that students are able to grasp the text spoken in the recording. It
needs a little hard work from the teacher, but it helps students listen to the whole
recording and understand the content of the recording.
Content-focus assessment is seen as the solution for students so that they
do not focus on word per word. Content-focus assessment helps students to grasp
and to understand the whole content of the recording. The focus of content-focus
assessment is not word per word. Students are guided to know and to understand
the whole content of the recording. By looking at this kind of assessment, the
researcher chose content focus assessment as the way to solve the problem of
students in class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta. The students felt difficult in
of the recording. By content focus assessment, the students would be guided to
understand and to know the context of the recording so that they would know the
words used in the recording. Hence, their listening skill would improve through
the use of content focus assessment.
B. Problem Formulation
Based on the research background, the problem formulation in this
research is:
- How does content-focus assessment improve students‟ listening skill in class
X5 of SMAN 2 Yogyakarta academic year 2010/2011?
C. Problem Limitation
The research is limited to the way in improving listening skill of class X5
in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta academic year 2010/2011. Although in listening class
other skills are also needed, in this research the researcher will only focus on their
improvement in understanding the whole content of the recording. The problem of
the students in class X5 was on the difficulty in identifying the words used in the
recording, so the researcher used content-focus assessment to improve their
listening skill in understanding the whole content so that they knew the words
used in the recording.
D. Research Objective
students‟ listening skill in class X5 of SMAN 2 Yogyakarta academic year
2010/2011.
E. Research Benefits
The benefit of the research is for the students in class X5 themselves so
that they can improve their listening skill. Moreover, the English teacher of class
X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta also obtains benefits. She can apply the solution in
listening class whose problem is similar to the problem in class X5. Other English
teachers can also apply the solution in their classes.
F. Definition of Terms
To have unambiguous terms and to have the same perception, in this part
the researcher defined the terms of listening skill, content-focus assessment, and
students of class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta.
1. Listening skill
Listening skill is an important skill in learning English. Learning language
needs mastery in listening skill because people learn from what they hear.
Naizhao Guo and Robin Wills quoted Thomlison‟s (1984: 2), “Listening includes
„active listening,‟ which goes beyond comprehending as understanding the
message content, to comprehension as an act of empathetic understanding of the
speaker.” Therefore, the comprehension seen as the mastery of listening skill is
the mastery of the message content. Related to the research, the researcher would
year 2010/2011 in mastering the message content through the use of content-focus
assessment.
2. Content-focus assessment
The second term defined is content-focus assessment. The content-focus
assessment is the assessment in listening class in which the focus is the whole
content of the recording. H. Douglas Brown (2004: 119) explained that through
understanding the content of the message and the context of it, we could
determine the words used in the text. The listener needs to see the context of the
recording so that the message of the recording can be caught. Looking at the
purpose and the form of it, the researcher used content-focus assessment to help
and to guide students of class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta to understand the
context and the content of the recording.
3. Students of class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta
SMAN 2 Yogyakarta is located in Bener street, Tegalrejo, Yogyakarta.
The students of class X5 in this school academic year 2010/2011 consists of 32
students. Seventeen of them were girls and fifteen of them were boys. They were
in the odd semester academic year 2010/2011.
The students in class X5 were actually active. They responded the teacher
well. Nevertheless, they still found difficulty when they did listening exercises.
They looked confused and tried to find the answers from other friends. Moreover,
most of them focused on the words they had to fill in, so that they did not catch
the whole content of the recording.
7
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
In this chapter, the researcher presented the theoretical description and
theoretical framework of this research.
A. Theoretical Description
There are three main topics which are discussed here. The first one is
about listening, the second one is assessment, and the third one is assessing
listening.
1. Listening
In this part, the researcher presented the definiton and kinds of listening,
and views in learning listening.
a. Definition of Listening
Rivers (1981: 136) explained that listening is one of the linguistic
competences which is very important in the language performance to
communicate with each other. Communication does not only speak to each other,
but also listens to each other. Moreover, Rivers (1981: 136) stated, “Through the
normal course of a day, listening is used nearly twice as much as speaking and
four to five times as much as reading and writing.” It shows that listening
comprehension is very important because listening is done even much more than
b. Kinds of Listening
Gary Buck (2001: 1) explained different types of knowledge in listening.
The first one is linguistic knowledge and the second one is non-linguistic
knowledge. He defines linguistic knowledge as knowledge which focuses on
phonology, lexis, syntax, semantics, and discourse structure. Non-linguistic
knowledge is defined as knowledge related to topic, context, and general
knowledge.
c. Views in Learning Listening
Related to different types of knowledge in listening, the view in learning
listening skill is also different. They are bottom-up view and top-down view.
Buck (2001: 2) explained that bottom-up view focused on the linguistic aspect
first. Hence, the linguistic aspect, such as definition of words, is the focus first,
then later the learning process can go up to the higher stage. However, top-down
view focuses on the understanding of the content. It focuses on the general
understanding from the topic first, then general information in the recording, then
goes to more specific information.
2. Assessment
There are four points presented here. They are the definition and aim of
assessment, assessment focusing on words and assessment focusing on the
content.
a. Definition of Assessment
which measures some aspect of a student’s education. Therefore, it does not only
relate to test. Assessment can be anything which measures students’
comprehension.
b. The Aim of Assessment
R.N. Deale (1975: 13) explained that the aim of assessment was to
discover the mastery of the topic from the students, so that they could continue to
the next level. Hence, the assessment is used to measure the comprehension of the
students so that the teacher knows whether they have understood and mastered the
topic or not. After students pass one level, then they may continue to the next
level.
c. Assessment Focusing on Words
Gary Buck (2001: 2) explained that in assessment which focused on
words, students needed to identify individual words. Moreover, students analyzed
the linguistic aspects, such as phonology, lexis, syntax, semantics, and discourse
structure. Therefore, the students’ focus is word per word. It is the assessment
which teachers usually use in listening class.
d. Assessment Focusing on the Content
Theresa Butori (2010: 2) stated, “Assessment planning may focus content
on topics that have significant impact on and linkages to student learning.” The
National Strategies (2011: 3) explained, “Progression in response is characterized
in terms of pupils’ increasing depth of comprehension and the quality of their
interaction with speakers and other audio sources.” The assessment focusing on
comprehension can be measured by content-focus assessment.
3. Assessing Listening
Assessing listening is different from assessing other skills. H. Douglas
Brown (2004: 120) explained four types of listening performance that can be
assessed in listening class. Here are the four types of listening performances.
- Intensive
This performance assesses students to listen for perception of the components,
such as phonemes, words, intonation, etc).
- Responsive
This performance assesses students to listen to a relatively short stretch of
language, such as a greeting, question, command, comprehension check, etc.
- Selective
This performance assesses students to process stretches of discourse to scan for
certain information.
- Extensive
This performance assesses students to develop a top-down, global
understanding of spoken language.
B. Theoretical Framework
In this part the researcher would relate the theory with this research. As
what Rivers (1981) defined, this research was conducted because of the
importance of listening. Listening is used more than speaking even in the
need listening skill to understand.
From the explanation of Gary Buck (2001) about different types of
knowledge in listening, this research would use the second type, i.e. non-linguistic
knowledge. The researcher looked into the participants’ understanding on the
information from the recording. Therefore, other things related to linguistic
knowledge would not be the focus in this research. The students’ problem was
about the focus in listening class. Students focused more on word per word so that
they could not understand the whole content of the recording that they heard. The
focus of listening from word per word should be changed into focusing to the
whole content of the recording.
This research used top-down view. The information was understood from
the top. The students understood the recording from the topic first. Then they
went to more detailed information. The focus was that students understood what
they heard.
The researcher used content-focus assessment to replace word-focus
assessment which teachers usually used in listening class. It aims to achieve the
objective of this research, which is changing students’ focus from word per word
to the content. As what Theresa Butori (2010) explained about the significance
impact from content-focus assessment, the researcher found that content-focus
assessment could be the solution to research participants’ problem. It would
change students’ focus to the content, so that the goal of listening itself would be
achieved.
research is the extensive one. The researcher limited the research to see students’
perfomance related to their understanding of the spoken language from the
recording. Therefore, the researcher used content-focus assessment to improve
this performance.
The materials used in this research were chosen based on the topic listed in
the syllabus of English subject. From the topic listed, the researcher looked for the
recordings in the online website. Therefore, the materials used were related to the
curriculum.
The National Strategies explanation about deeper comprehension that
students can obtain is another advantage of content-focus assessment. Students’
understanding of the recording could be measured when they did content-focus
assessment. Hence, students’ listening skill would also improve, from listening
and focusing on word per word to listening and focusing on the whole content of
13
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the researcher presents the research method, research
participants, research instruments, data gathering technique, data anaysis
technique, and research procedure.
A. Research Method
The methodology used in this research is Classroom Action Research
(CAR). Classroom Action Research is a method to improve the teaching learning
process in the classroom. Gwynn Mettetal (2003: 5) defined, “CAR is a way for
instructors to discover what works best in their own classroom situation, thus
allowing informed decisions about teaching.” It is related to the objective of this research, which is to improve students’ listening skill in class X5 of SMAN 2 Yogyakarta.
In CAR, the research is started with question. Then, the researcher needed
to analyze the problem and to find a solution, what works best to solve the
problem. This research was conducted to see the problem in class X5 and to solve
it.
According to Gwynn Mettetal (2003: 6), there are seven steps in CAR.
Step 1: The researcher identified the problem occurring in the classroom and then
formed a problem formulation. The problem was found by observing the activity
Step 2: After identifying a question, the researcher looked for information related
to the research from the literature.
Step 3: From the literature review, the researcher planned a research strategy,
everything that would be conducted in the research.
Step 4: After a fixed plan was constructed, the researcher conducted the plan and
started collecting the data based on the plan.
Step 5: The next step after collecting data was analyzing data. In this step, the
researcher analyzed the data to know the result.
Step 6: After analyzing the data and finding the result, the researcher took action
based on the result. If the result showed that the solution improved the teaching
learning process, the researcher would do the same solution for the second cycle.
If the result showed that the solution did not improve the teaching learning
process, the researcher would improve the solution by analyzing more what to
improve.
Step 7: The last cycle was sharing the findings in the form of thesis.
Those were the steps which were conducted by the researcher to improve
students’ listening skill in class X5 of SMAN 2 Yogyakarta.
B. Research Participants
The participants in this research were students of class X5 in SMAN 2
Yogyakarta. The number of the students was 32 students. Seventeen of them were
girls and fifteen of them were boys. They were in the odd semester academic year
The students in class X5 were actually active. Nevertheless, they still
found difficulty when they did listening exercises. Therefore, the researcher chose
this class to improve students’ listening skill.
C. Research Instruments
The research instruments would be divided into two parts, the research
instruments before the implementation and the research instruments during the
implementation.
1. The Research Instruments before the Implementation
The instruments used before the implementation are field notes, informal
interview, and word-focus assessment.
a. Field Notes
Field notes aimed to see the students’ condition while they were learning
English before the research was going on. It helped the researcher analyze
students’ problem. b. Informal Interview
Informal interview aimed to know more students’ problems from their own opinion. It ensured the researcher about the problems faced by the students.
Informal interview was conducted to all students in class X5 of SMAN 2
Yogyakarta.
c. Word-Focus Assessment
Word-focus assessment was the base-line of the research. It was taken
class. Therefore, the researcher constructed word-focus assessment to obtain the
base-line from the students.
2. The Research Instruments during the Implementation
The research instruments used during the implementation are
content-focus assessment, observation sheet, questionnaire, field notes, and
semi-structured interview.
a. Content-Focus Assessment
Content-focus assessment aimed to improve students’ listening skill. It helped and guided students to grasp the information in the recording.
b. Observation Sheet
The observation sheet aimed to have feedback from the teaching learning
process in the classroom. The English teacher of class X5 was the observer in this
research. Besides, the researcher was also the observer of this research.
c. Questionnaires
The researcher gave two questionnaires to 32 students of class X5 in
SMAN 2 Yogyakarta. Questionnaire One was given in the first cycle. It was an
open questionnaire. Questionnaire Two was given in the second cycle. These
questionnaires aimed to obtain the information from the students and to deepen
the result of the research. Hence, the proof of the research success was not only
based on the scores of the assessments, but also based on students’ opinions. The questionnaires guided students to realize the type of assessment that helped them
d. Field Notes
Field notes aimed to know everything happening in the classroom during
the teaching learning process. The field notes were based on what the researcher
saw in the classroom.
e. Semi-Structured Interview
The semi-structured interview aimed to check whether students realized
the improvement in their listening skill. There were six open-ended questions in
the interview. The researcher interviewed eleven participants to know deeper
about what they felt and realized during the research. The researcher chose the
participants randomly. There was no certain reason in choosing the participants to
interview.
D. Data Gathering Technique
The researcher used the assessments to obtain the scores from the students.
The researcher would measure the improvements from the students meeting by
meeting. It aimed to answer whether students have any improvement from the
assessments used.
The second instrument, observation sheet, was used to know what was
going on during the class and to obtain feedback so that the researcher could
improve the teaching learning activity in the following meeting. The researcher
gave the observation sheet to the English teacher of class X5 to have feedback
from her. The observation sheet format was the same in every cycle. The
assessment used by the researcher, and also the situation during the class.
The researcher used questionnaires to obtain information from the students
about the use of content-focus assessment. The questionnaires would be given to
32 students of class X5. Then, from the students’ answers, the researcher would analyze the information. From the analysis, the result would show whether the
students realized the improvement in their listening skill after they had
content-focus assessment.
The researcher used the field notes to describe what happened in the
classroom during the teaching learning process. These field notes were used to
ensure the improvement of students not only by looking at their result from the
assessments, but also by observing their responses during the class.
The interview was conducted to eleven participants. The participants were
chosen randomly, so that it would be fairer. From the interview, the researcher
obtained more information about what students achieved, felt, and realized after
they had content-focus assessment in listening class.
E. Data Analysis Technique
The first instrument was the content-focus assessment. The researcher
distributed the assessments on October 18, 2010 and November 1, 2010. The
researcher chose that date because the students had just finished their mid-term
test. The next meeting was on November 1, 2010. The problem occurring on those
dates was that there was one student who was absent. However, the researcher
not influence the result.
From the assessments, the researcher would check the answers and list the
scores of all students. Then the researcher would write the five scores in the form
of table to see the improvement of the students. Then the researcher would
measure the percentage of the students who improved in their listening skill.
From the assessment of rewriting, the researcher would list the amount of
the information written by the students. Then, the researcher would compare it
with the amount of the whole information in the recording. Then, the researcher
would make percentage of it. From the five assessments, the researcher would
write the five percentages into a table to see the improvement of the students.
The research would be ended when the criteria of success were reached.
There were four criteria of success in this research.
- More than half of students passed the passing grade of English subject in
SMAN 2 Yogyakarta, which is 71.
- The number of students who passed the passing grade increased.
- More than half of students rewrote equal or more than 50% of important
information from the recording.
- The number of students who rewrote equal or more than 50% of important
information from the recording increased.
F. Research Procedure
There are seven steps which were conducted by the researcher.
The researcher observed class X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta on July 19th,
July 20th, and July 26th, 2010. The researcher was non-participant in these
observations.
2. Planning the research
After observing and analyzing the result of the observations, the researcher
planned the research strategy which would be conducted.
3. Asking permission from Dinas Perijinan
After planning the research, the researcher asked permission from Dinas Perijinan on September 6, 2010.
4. Preparing the instruments
Then, the researcher prepared all instruments which would be used in the
research.
5. Collecting the data
The researcher collected the data on October 18, 2010 and on November 1,
2010. The researcher taught the class and collected the data by distributing the
assessments and the questionnaire and also conducting interview.
6. Analyzing the data
The next step was analyzing the data. From the data collected, the
researcher analyzed and interpreted them to obtain the result.
7. Reporting
After analyzing the data and obtaining the result of the research, the
21
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The research was conducted in two cycles. They were conducted on
October 18, 2010 and November 1, 2010. In both cycles, some students did not
join the class. One student was absent in the first cycle because she was sick. In
the second cycle, two students did not join the class because they joined a
competition at school. However, the students who were absent did not influence
the result of the research because the researcher analyzed the data from those who
attended the class. The researcher presented the research findings and discussion
in three parts, research findings in the first cycle, research findings in the second
cycle, and the improvement of research findings in the first and second cycles.
A.Research Findings in the First Cycle
In the first cycle, the researcher chose a topic of expressing happiness. At
the beginning of the class, the students were very busy with their own activities. It
was because in the previous period, there was no teacher who taught in that class.
The researcher asked their attention first. However, after several minutes, a few
students were still busy with themselves.
The researcher showed a picture of ketupat and asked about their feeling when they celebrated Idul Fitri. Most students answered the question actively. Then, the researcher asked them about the expressions they used in expressing
some expressions in expressing feeling, the researcher wrote the expressions on
the whiteboard. The students were very enthusiastic and active in answering the
questions.
After that, the researcher gave them one word-focus assessment as the
second baseline and one content-focus assessment. The first baseline was taken
before the implementation. The recordings played in the first cycle were related to
expressing feeling. The researcher used different recordings with the same level of
difficulty and the same length of time.
When the students did the first assessment, word-focus assessment, they
looked panic at the first time. However, after the researcher played the recording
for the second time, they could adapt well. It was because they used to have such
assessment. The recording was played five times.
The reaction was really different in the second assessment, content-focus
assessment. The assessment was answering questions. The questions guided them
to understand the content of the recording. When the students did the second
assessment, they looked more panic. It was because they were not accustomed to
doing content-focus assessment. They used to do word-focus assessment. Usually
they just needed to listen to the missing words that they had to answer.
However, content-focus assessment was really different. They needed to
listen and really understand the recording first, so that later they could answer the
questions. The recording was played until five times, the same as the previous
the students’ result from the first and the second assessment.
In the first assessment, word-focus assessment, only one out of 31 students
who passed the passing grade of the school. The passing grade of English subject
Student #. Word-Focus
Table 4.1: Students’ Scores in the First Cycle
passing grade. It was really bad. Mostly, students could not spell well as what can
be seen in Appendix 2 Part A Number 1. They could not spell word ’walkie
-talkie’ correctly. Another example was the word ‘chimney’ as the researcher
presented in Appendix 2 Part A Number 5. The core reason of this problem was
that their vocabulary mastery was poor.
In the second assessment, the percentage of participants who passed the
passing grade increased. Six out of 31 participants passed the passing grade. It
meant that 19.4% of participants achieved well in content-focus assessment.
Looking at the result, the participants had higher scores in content-focus
assessment.
After they did the assessment, they were asked to rewrite both texts that
they heard from the recordings. Hence, their understanding about the information
in the recording was really important, so that they could rewrite the texts well.
From their rewriting, the researcher could analyze whether they understood the
content of the recording or not.
The researcher analyzed students’ rewritings by listing important information from the recording, checking students’ rewriting, and counting how
many important information that they wrote. The important information was listed
by 5W+1H questions. The important information is anything in the recording
which answered what, who, when, where, which, and how. Table 4.2 shows the
result of students’ rewritings.
When the students rewrote the texts, 35.48% of them rewrote equal or
32.26% of them rewrote equal or more than 50% information from the recording
in content-focus assessment. The result was not in accordance with the result
when they answered the questions. However, the researcher kept using
content-focus assessment to improve students’ listening skill in class X5 of SMAN 2
Yogyakarta.
After collecting the rewriting from the students, the researcher distributed
Questionnaire 1 to them. There were three open questions in the questionnaire.
Here is the list of the questions.
1. How did you feel when you did the first assessment (filling in the gap
dialogue)? Was it difficult or easy? Why was it so?
2. How did you feel when you did the second assessment (answering
questions)? Was it more difficult or easier than the first assessment? Why
was it so?
3. When you rewrote both texts, which one is easier for you to rewrite, the
first assessment (filling in the gap dialogue) or the second assessment
(answering questions)? Why do you think so?
This open questionnaire aimed to know participants’ opinion about word-focus assessment and content-focus assessment in the first cycle after they knew what
content-focus assessment was.
From the first question of the open questionnaire, 26 out of 31 participants
answered that the first assessment was difficult for them. It meant that 83.87% of
the participants felt difficult in doing word-focus assessment. However, five
participants said that word-focus assessment was not too difficult. It meant that
There was a variety of reasons related to their answers. Most of those who
answered that word-focus assessment was difficult said that the problem was
about the recording. The speed was too fast and the pronunciation was not clear.
However, the researcher had changed the speed into the slow one. Some of them
said that the difficulty was that they had to answer and write the words exactly the
same as what the speakers said. The rest said that their vocabulary mastery was
poor, so that they did not know the answers and the information in the recording.
The participants who answered that word-focus assessment was not
difficult said that they could easily understand the topic of the recording. They did
not give further explanation about this. Nevertheless, the researcher analyzed that
the words they had to fill in the gap dialogue helped them to understand the topic.
For the second questions of the open questionnaire, 17 out of 31
participants answered that content-focus assessment was easier than word-focus
assessment. It meant that 54.84% of the participants felt that they could do better
in content-focus assessment. However, the rest of participants, 45.16% of all
participants answered that content-focus was more difficult than word-focus
assessment.
The same as the first question, the participants also gave reasons to their
answers in the second question. Some of them said that the content-focus
assessment was easier because the recording was clearer and slower than the first
one. Nevertheless, the researcher had made them balance. The speed of both
recordings was the same. Moreover, the level of difficulty was also the same.
second recording. Another reason given by some of the participants was that in
content-focus assessment they did not need to answer exactly the same as what
the speakers said. They could conclude and use their own words as the answers.
Then, for those who answered that content-focus assessment was more
difficult than word-focus assessment, some of them gave reason related to the
quality of the recording, such as the speed, pronunciation, and accent in the
recording. However, most of them said that they needed to really understand what
the recording was about, so that they could answer the questions. Looking at the
purpose of listening class itself, it was actually the goal of learning. They had to
listen and understand the content of the recording. When they did word-focus
assessment, they just needed to fill in the gap dialogue. Therefore, they tended to
focus on the words they had to write without paying attention to the whole
information of the recording.
From the third question of the open questionnaire, the researcher analyzed
that 17 out of 31 participants thought that word-focus assessment helped them to
understand the recording. When they rewrote, it was easier for them to recall their
memory about the text. It meant that 54.84% of the participants felt that
word-focus assessment helped them to improve their listening skill. The rest of
participants, 45.16% said that content-focus assessment helped them more in
rewriting the text.
There were some interesting reasons from the participants. From those
who thought that content-focus helped them in rewriting the text, the reason was
recording. Another one said that they could answer the questions not exactly the
same as what the speaker of the recording said. It meant that they could use other
words based on their understanding. It showed that the level of their
understanding increased. When people just imitated the words from the speaker, it
did not really show whether they really understood or not. However, when they
could present their answers in other words, which were different from the
speakers’ words, it showed that they had reached the next level of understanding.
Another reason from the participants was that content-focus assessment helped
them to grab the information from the recording so that they could remember the
detailed information from the recording. A bit similar to the previous reason, one
of the participants said that the questions in content-focus assessment guided to
understand the recording.
The opposite side from the participants who thought that word-focus was
easier for them to rewrite the text said that in word-focus assessment they did not
need to think twice. In other words, word-focus assessment made them focus on
the words they had to fill in the gap dialogue. It meant that they did not need to
know what the text about and the plot of the story in the recording. However, in
listening skill, the important thing is that students can listen and understand well
about the recording they listen to.
In the first and second cycles of this research, the English teacher of class
X5 in SMAN 2 Yogyakarta observed and wrote the result on observation sheet.
The things had to be improved in the first cycle was that the researcher did not
class. Moreover, few students were passive during the teaching learning process.
However, the researcher had done some things well, but some things still
did not work well. The thing that worked well was that the learners did the
researcher’s instruction, in this case as the teacher. The learners also responded actively to the teacher’s questions. Related to the learning activity, the learning steps were in accordance with the lesson plan, the process of learning was
manageable, and the learning achieved the learning goals. The researcher needed
to more pay attention to learners, such as checking whether they were ready or
not, covering all students, and also managing the class better. The observer said
that the students themselves did not panic when they did the assessment. It meant
that the use of content-focus assessment helped them not to be panic.
B.The Research Finding in the Second Cycle
The second cycle was on November 1, 2010. In the second cycle, the
researcher gave two content-focus assessments, a questionnaire, and an interview
to the participants. However, the interview was conducted in different meeting.
The topic given in the second cycle was recount. The researcher firstly
asked students about the genre of text. Most of them responded actively. Then, the
researcher focused on recount. The students responded enthusiastically. The
researcher gave them two content-focus assessments. Both assessments have
different recordings. The assessments were answering comprehension questions
and true-false statements. Answering question was like the previous one.
focus on the content so they will understand the content of the recording.
From the reaction of the students themselves, they were panic when they
did the first assessment on that day. However, it was just at the first time they
heard the recording. After the second and third time, they were not panic
anymore. It was different when they did the second assessment. They were not
panic from the beginning. It meant that they had been accustomed to have
content-focus assessment. Moreover, they could answer the whole questions in the
second time when the researcher played the recording. It showed that their
listening skill improved more.
The result from the second cycle increased a lot from the result in the first
cycle. Table 4.3 showed the students’ score from two content-focus assessments in the second cycle. From the result, 53.3% of participants passed the passing
grade in the first assessment on that day. It increased again into 56.7% in the
second assessment. It achieved the first and second indicators. More than half of
students passed the passing grade. The number of students who passed the passing
grade increased.
After the students did the assessments, they rewrote what they knew from
both recordings. Table 4.4 showed the result of students’ rewriting. The percentage of students who rewrote equal or more than 50% information from the
first recording was 74.07%. The percentage increased in the second rewriting. The
percentage of students who rewrote equal or more than 50% information from the
second recording was 75.86%. It showed that the third and fourth indicators of
equal or more than 50% important information of the recording. Moreover, the
number of students who rewrote equal or more than 50% important information
from the recording increased.
Student #. 1st assessment 2nd assessment
In the second cycle, the researcher distributed Questionnaire Two. The
form of Questionnaire Two was different from the first one. The purpose of
Questionnaire Two was to recheck participants’ opinion about content-focus assessment after they went through two cycles.
Student #. 1st rewriting (%) 2nd rewriting (%)
Students who understood ≥50% information from the recording
74.07% 75.86%
Table 4.5: The Result of Questionnaire Two
mengenai soal ‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
12.9% 54.8% 29% 3.3%
2. Bagaimana pendapat Anda
mengenai soal ‘Answering questions’?
12.9% 48.4% 38.7% 0%
3. Apa yang Anda rasakan saat menulis ulang cerita dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
`13.8% 62.1% 24.1% 0%
mengerjakan soal ‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
3. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
12.9% 22.6% 54.8% 9.7%
4. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
6.5% 58% 35.5% 0% saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Filling in the gap dialogue’?
6.5% 38.7% 51.6% 3.2%
4. Bagaimana reaksi Anda saat menulis ulang teks dari soal
‘Answering questions’?
Table 4.5 showed the result of Questionnaire 2. The percentage showed
the number of participants who chose the answer comparing to the total number of
all participants. The researcher divided the aspects into three, cognitive aspect,
behaviour aspect, and affective aspect. The cognitive aspect aimed to know
participants’ opinion related to their competence in doing the assessments. The
behaviour aspect aimed to know participants’ response in doing the assessments
related to their physical response. The affective aspect aimed to know students’
motivation in doing the assessments. There were two parts in each aspect. One of
them was related to the way the participants did the assessments both word-focus
assessment and content-focus assessment. The other one was related to the way
they rewrote the texts both the one which formed word-focus assessment and the
other one which formed content-focus assessment.
From the questionnaire, it showed that there was fluctuation in the
participants’ answers. The analysis was divided into two parts, the participants’
answers related to the assessment and the participants’ answers related to the
rewriting. When they did the assessment, they might not feel the effect of it. For
example, they did not realize that by doing content-focus assessment, they
understood more information. However, when they rewrote what they heard, they
would realize the effect of the assessments.
The percentage of students who said that word-focus assessment was very
difficult was 12.9%. The same as the percentage in word-focus assessment, 12.9%
of the students also said that content-focus assessment was very difficult.
students who said that word-focus assessment was difficult was 54.8%. The
percentage of participants who thought that content-focus assessment was difficult
was 48.4%. Hence, the percentage decreased 6.4%. It meant that the students who
thought that content-focus assessment was difficult were less than ones who
thought that word-focus assessment was difficult. The next result ensured that
content-focus assessment was easier for them. Twenty nine percent of the
participants said that word-focus assessment was easy. The percentage increased
9.7% in content-focus assessment. The percentage of students who said that
word-focus assessment was very easy was 3.3%. No one said that content-word-focus
assessment was very easy. Related to the open questionnaire they filled in before,
the reason was that they needed to think more in doing the content-focus
assessment.
Looking at behaviour aspect in doing the assessment, 3.5% of participants
were very panic. The percentage decreased 0.1% in content-focus assessment.
Only 3.4% of them were very panic. However, the result was different in the next
level of difficulty. The percentage of participants who were panic in doing
content-focus assessment increased from ones in doing word-focus assessment.
When they did word-focus assessment, 17.2% of them were panic. It increased
13.9% in content-focus assessment. When they did content-focus assessment,
31.1% of them were panic. It seemed that content-focus assessment made them
panic. The same analysis, the percentage of participants who were calm in doing
the word-focus and content-focus assessment decreased 10.4% from 69% into
assessment and content-focus assessment also decreased 3.4% from 10.3% into
6.9%. It was because they seldom had content-focus assessment. They were
accustomed to have word-focus assessment, which only filled in the gap dialogue.
Therefore, when they were forced to really understand the information from the
recording so that they were able to answer the questions, they had to listen and
think hard. Hence, they were panic.
Looking from the affective aspect, the percentage of participants who were
very enthusiastic in doing word-focus and content-focus assessment were the
same, 6.5%. However, it increased 9.7% from participants’ answers that they were
enthusiastic in doing content-focus assessment. The percentage of students who
were not enthusiastic in doing the assessments decreased 12.9% from the ones in
word-focus assessment to the ones in content-focus assessment. Nevertheless, the
percentage of participants who were not very enthusiastic increased 3.2% in
content-focus assessment. However, from all percentages, the researcher analyzed
that they had more motivation in doing content-focus assessment.
The second part was about participants’ opinion when they rewrote the
texts from the recording. In cognitive aspect, the percentage of participants who
said that when they rewrote text from content-focus assessment was very difficult
was more 3.4% than the ones in word-focus assessment. Nevertheless, the result
was very different in the other levels of difficulty. The percentage of participants
who said that when they rewrote text from content-focus assessment was difficult
was less 34.5% than the ones in word-focus assessment. The percentage of
was easy increased 31.1% from the ones who said word-focus assessment was
easy. No one said that both rewriting texts from word-focus assessment and
content-focus assessment were easy. The result showed that content-focus
assessment helped them to rewrite text more easily than word-focus assessment.
When they were able to rewrite text meant that they understood the content of the
recording. It was confirmed by the explanation from H. Douglas Brown (2004:
119) that through understanding the content of the message and the context of it,
we could determine the type of speech event. Hence, the students felt that
content-focus assessment helped them to rewrite the text.
The result in behaviour aspect added more confirmation that content-focus
assessment helped them to understand the information in the recording. The
percentage of participants who were very panic in rewriting text from
content-focus assessment was less 6.4% than the ones in word-content-focus assessment. Those
who were panic in rewriting text from content-focus assessment also decreased
3.3% from those in word-focus assessment. The percentage of participants who
were calm in rewriting text from content-focus assessment increased 12.9% from
those in word-focus assessment. A little bit different from the previous result, the
percentage of participants who were very calm in rewriting text from
content-focus assessment decreased 3.2% from those in word-content-focus assessment. However,
from the whole percentage related to behavior aspect, most students were calm
and not panic in doing content-focus assessment. It was because when they did
content-focus assessment, they had understood the whole content. Therefore,
In affective aspect, the percentage of students who were very enthusiastic
in rewriting text from content-focus assessment decreased 0.3% from those in
word-focus assessment. Nevertheless, the result was different in two other levels
of difficulty. The percentage of students who were enthusiastic in rewriting text
from content-focus assessment increased 17.6% from those in word-focus
assessment. It was confirmed also by the result in the percentage of students who
were not enthusiastic in rewriting text from content-focus assessment. It decreased
26.6% from those in word-focus assessment. However, the result of students’ answer that they were not very enthusiastic was a bit different. It increased 9.3%
from those in word-focus assessment. Overall, the researcher analyzed that the
increasing percentage of students who were enthusiastic and the decreasing
percentage of students who were not enthusiastic in rewriting text from
content-focus assessment was higher than the decreasing percentage of students who were
very enthusiastic and the increasing percentage of participants who were not very
enthusiastic. Therefore, the researcher analyzed that students’ motivation was higher in rewriting text from content-focus assessment.
The result of the second observation sheet in the second cycle was more or
less the same as the one in the first cycle. The most obvious thing that was
different was that the students were panic in the second cycle. It was because in
the meeting, the class period was only 50 minutes, so that the researcher needed to
manage time well to cover all activities. Therefore, the students looked panic.
On November 26, 2010, the researcher conducted interview to eleven
