THE EFFECT OF COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING
ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT
IN SPEAKING SKILL
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
ABSTRACT
Nashroh, Siti Khairin. 2015. 2113121066.The Effect of Community Language Learning on Students’ Achievement in Speaking Skill. A Thesis. English Department. Faculty of Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.
This study aims at investigating the effect of Community Language Learning on students’ achievement in speaking skill. It was conducted by using experimental research design. The population of this research was the eleventh (XI) grade students of SMKN 2 Tebing Tinggi. In this study the sample was 40 students, 20 of which were taken as the experimental group and 20 as control group. The experimental group was taught by using Community Language Learning method. The data of this study was collected by oral test. To obtain the reliability of the test, the writer used the Pearson’s’ Product Moment Formula. The result of the study showed that the reliability of the test was 0.73. The data were analyzed by using t-test formula, the analysis showed that the mean score of students in the experimental group was higher than the score of students in the control group at the level of significance 0.05 with the degree of freedom (df) 38; the t-observed is 5.07 while the t-table is 1.686. Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) is reIected and the hypothesis alternative (Ha) is accepted.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The writer would like to acknowledge her countless thanks to the most gracious and merciful, the almighty God, Allah SWT andalso Prophet Muhammad SAWfor the love and blessing so the writer has finally completed this thesis. This thesis is submitted to the English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for earning the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan.
During the process of completing this thesis the researcher has worked with a great number of people. To whom she would like to extend her sincere gratitude for their guidance, suggestions, and comments for:
Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Si.,the Rector of State University of Medan. Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum.,the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty. Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., the Head of English Department, who
took the role of being her Examiner.
Nora Ronita Dewi, S,Pd., S.S., M.Hum., the Head of English Education Study Program.
Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed.,her Thesis Advisor I. Indra Hartoyo, S.Pd., M. Hum.,her Thesis Advisor II.
Isli Iriani Indiah Br. Pane, S.Pd., M. Hum.,her Academic Advisor. Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd.,her Thesis Examiner.
All lecturerswho have taught her in this English Department.
Euis Sri Wahyuningsih, S.Pd., M.Pd., the Staff Administration of English Department.
Eri Susanto, S.Pd.,the Principal of SMK Negeri 2 Tebing Tinggi. Legimin, S.Pdthe Vice Principal of SMK Negeri 2 Tebing Tinggi. Siti Zakia, S.Pd.,the English Teachers of SMK N 2 Tebing Tinggi.
sister, Siti Mardiah, her younger brothers M. Fadlul Azmi andAlm. M. Mulkan Hariz who supported the writer to be hard working to finish her study in Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan.
Her beloved friends, Widya Putri Amelia, S.Pd., Diah Khoirunnisa Harahap, S.Pd., Intan Nilam Sari, S.Pd., Indah Pratama Prida, S.Pd., Vika Chairani Lubis, S.Pd., Novia, S.Pd., Nuridha Yanti, S.Pd., Lilis Aldila, S.Pd., Khoiriah Harahap, S.Pd., Wira Octorenny, S.Pd., Rony PM, S.Pd., Phupuh Citra Dewi, S.Pd., and also the Regular C Family 2011 and PPLT SMAN 4 Kisaran Family for always being there when she needed their support and motivation and all people who cannot be mentioned one by one, she says thank you.
Last but not least, the researcher realizes that her thesis still has some weaknesses and mistakes. Thus, she would be grateful to accept any suggestion and correction from anyone for the better writing.
Medan, Desember 2015 The Researcher,
TABLE OF CONTENT
A. The Background of the Study... 1
B. The Problem of the Study... 4
C. The Objective of the Study... 4
D. The Scope of the Study...4
E. The Significance of the Study... 5
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW...6
A. Theoretical Framework...6
B. Students’ Achievement in Speaking Skills...6
C. Speaking Skills...7
1. The Elements of Speaking... 8
D. Assessment of Speaking... 11
E. Agreeing and Disagreeing an Opinion...14
F. Community Language Learning...16
1. Community Language Learning Design...17
2. Teacher’s Role in CLL...18
3. Learners’ Role in CLL...19
4. The Principles of CLL... 20
5. Advantages and Disadvantages of CLL...23
G. Relevant Studies... 24
H. Conceptual Framework...25
I. Hypothesis...26
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHOD...27
A. Research Design... 27
B. Population and Sample... 28
C. Instrument for Collecting Data... 28
D. Procedure for Collecting Data... 29
1. Pre-test... 29
3. Post-test...31
E. Scoring of the Test... 31
F. Validity and Reliability of the Test... 31
1. Validity of the Test... 31
2. Reliability of the Test...37
G. The Technique for Data Analysis... 39
H. Statistical Hypothesis...39
CHAPTER IV. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDING...40
A. Data Analysis...40
1. Testing the Reliability of the Test... 41
2. Analyzing the Data by using t-test formula...41
3. Testing Hypothesis... 42
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS...44
A. Conclusion...44
B. Suggestions...44
REFERENCES...46
LIST OF APPENOICES
APPENDIX A. Pre-Test and Post-Test of Experimental and Control Group...48
APPENDIX B. The Score of Pre-Test of Experimental and Control Group...49
APPENDIX C. The Score of Post-Test of Experimental and Control Group.... 51
APPENDIX D. The Total Score of Pre-Test and Post-Test of Experimental and Control Group... 53
APPENDIX E. The Calculation of the t-test...55
APPENDIX F. The Statistical Analysis for Reliability of the test... 57
APPENDIX G. The Calculation of Reliability of the test... 58
APPENDIX H. Percentage Points of the T Distribution...60
APPENDIX I. Lesson Plan of Experimental Group... 61
APPENDIX J. Lesson Plan of Control Group... 76
APPENDIX K. The Data Transcription of Speaking in Experimental Group....93
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Students’ Score of Speaking Competence... n
Table n.1 Assessment in Speaking Test...11
Table n.n Expression of Agreeing and Disagreeing with an Opinion ...15
Table 3.1 Experimental Research Design... n7
Table 3.n Treatment in Experimental and Control Group... n9
Table 3.3 Assessment in Speaking Test...31
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of The Study
Communocatoon on a uanguage os carroed out through two basoc human
actovotoes, nameuy speakong and uostenong. Speakong os a basoc skouu whoch takes
partocuuar roue to communocate and to express the odeas or feeuongs on human
actovotoes. Speakong os auso a toou of communocatoon for students to communocate
woth the teachers and cuassmates. Through speakong the teacher can convey the
uessons and the students can expand theor knowuedge. The students can convey
what they do not understand about the uesson. That os why the speakong skouu os
reauuy needed on teachong and uearnong Enguosh.
However, speakong skouu os stouu a probuem to many students. Based on the
wroter’s observatoon on SMK N 2 Tebong Tonggo on March 2015, many students
couud not speak Enguosh fuuentuy. From some ontervoews woth the students
concernong how they become so poor on speakong Enguosh, the wroter found that ot
was because of the uecturong method whoch os auways appuoed by the teacher. The
students were asked to memoroze the conversatoon stated on the text book, then
practoced ot on front of the cuass. Therefore, ot dodn’t gove the chance for students to
express theor own odeas and auso dod not encourage them to be confodent on
speakong Enguosh weuu eother. It can be seen from the students’ uow score on
2
Tabue. 1.1 Students’ Score of Speakong Competence
Semester Score Students Percentage Mean
1stsemester
2014/2015 <70≥70 22 students10 students 68,75 %31,25 % 57,19
Source of evidence: Students’ accumulation score of Grade XI students at SMK N 2 Tebing Tinggi academic year 2014/2015
One more reason causong theor uow abouoty on speakong Enguosh os that they
frequentuy used Bahasa Indonesoa on the Enguosh cuass as theor own mother tongue
to communocate, even the teacher auso frequentuy appuoed Bahasa Indonesoa on the
cuass. They feut anxoous when they had to speak on Enguosh. As the resuut the
students became comfortabue doong so, as stated by Harmer, J. (2011)
However, a uot wouu depend on when students use theor L1. If on the other hand, they are doong an orau fuuency actovoty, the use of a uanguage other than Enguosh makes the actovoty essentoauuy poontuess. Furthermore, as teachers we wouu want to promote as much Enguosh use as possobue. So we wouu try and onsost on the use of Enguosh on uanguage study and orau productoon actovotoes, but be more reuaxed about ot on other pedagogoc sotuatoons, though we wouu contonue to encourage students to try to use ot as often as possobue. (Harmer, 2011 : 132)
Therefore teachers are better to speak Enguosh as much as possobue on the
3
materoaus and odeas because they can share and braonstorm together than on
ondovoduau cuass (Wouuos, 2007).
One of the methods on teachong speakong Enguosh that os reuevant to these
students’ need os Communoty Language Learnong (CLL). Communoty Language
Learnong promotes effectove communocatoon between group members. Each
member of the group os responsobue not onuy for oncreasong theor own
understandong and the omprovement of theor thonkong but for those of theor feuuow
group members as weuu (Meagher & Devone, 1993:157). Thos concept then needs a
good teamwork and provodes such a communocatoon wothon the group and auso
woth the cuass members.
In CLL method, the students are auuowed to use theor natove uanguages on
theor groups, then the teacher heups to transuate that onto Enguosh (target uanguage).
Thos can be seen on the CLL desogn whoch os the Transuatoon desogn that can heup
students to feeu comfortabue and not afraod to deuover message on Enguosh, because
the teacher wouu auways heup for theor transuatoon need.
The basoc procedure of CLL can be seen as deroved from the
counseuor-cuoents reuatoonshop. The students’ utterance whoch os provoded by the teacher or
the knower os recorded to be anauyzed uater. There os often refuectoon perood durong
whoch students comment frankuy on how they feeu about the actovoty. In auu of
these cases teachers heup students achoeve what they want, offer heup and counseu
to the communoty of the cuass. The Hob for teacher here os to facouotate rather than
4
From the expuanatoon above, the researcher beuoeves that auu of the students
on the cuass wouu be more actove on teachong and uearnong process by usong
Communoty Language Learnong. It auso can oncrease the motovatoon and
achoevement of students on speakong skouu. In uone woth the doscussoon, the wroter
chooses “The Effect of Communoty Language Learnong on Students’
Achoevement on Speakong Skouu” as the totue of her study.
B. The Problem of The Study
In reuatoon to the background of the study, the probuem of thos study os
formuuated as “Is students’ achoevement on speakong skouu taught by Communoty
Language Learnong hogher than that taught by usong uecturong method?”
C. The Objective of The Study
The scope of thos study os to onvestogate whether the students’ achoevement
on speakong skouu taught by Communoty Language Learnong os hogher than that
5
E. The Significance of The Study
The resuut of thos study os expected to be usefuu for:
1) Enguosh teachers as an auternatove teachong method to omprove theor
students’ speakong abouoty.
2) Students of Enguosh as a technoque to heup them become fuuent on speakong
Enguosh.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusion
The means of experimental and control group in the post-test scores are
50.9 and 45.85.The number of the samples for each group is 20. It means that the
mean score of experimental group is higher than those of control group.
The result of calculation t-test shows that the value of t-observe (5.07) >
the score of t-table (2.000). It means that the alternative hypothesis (Ho) is
rejected. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis (Ha) which is formulated as “the
students’ achievement in speaking skill taught by using Community Language
Learning is higher than that taught by using Lecturing method” is true in this
research. In other words, it is concluded that Community Language Learning
method significantly affects the students’ achievement in speaking skill rather
than lecturing method.
B. Suggestions
Based on the conclusion above, the researcher gives suggestions as
45
3. It is suggested that teacher should stimulate and motivate students to make
the activity of speaking as a pleasure while applying Community Language
REFERENCES
Arikunto, Suharsimin 2002n Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi
Aksaran
Ary, Donaldn 2002n Introduction to Research in Education isixth edition). USA: Wordsworth Thomson Learningn
Azam, Ismuln 2014n The Effect of Community Language Learning on Students’
Speaking Achievement.Thesisn 2edan: State University of 2edann
Best, Jn Wn & Khan, Jn Vn 2002n Research in Education 7th Editionn New Delhi:
Prentice Hall
Bloom, Bn Sn 2004n Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domainn
New York: David 2cKayn
Brown, Hn Dn Douglasn 2004n Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom
Practice.New York: Longman
Brown, Hn Douglasn 2004n Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom
Practicesn San Fransisco: Pearson Educationn
Brown, Hn 2007n Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy.Third Editionn San Francisco: Pearson Educationn
Fulcher, Gn (2003)nTesting Second Language Speaking.UK: Longman
Gillies, Rn 2010nThe Teacher’s Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the
Classroom.Switzerland: Swiss Federal Institute of Technologyn
Harmer, Jn 2011n The Practice of English Language Teaching i3rd Edition). UK: Cambridge University Pressn
Hughes, An 2002n Testing for Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
47
2ukminatien, Nurn 2000n The Advantages of Using an Analytic Scoring
Procedure in Speaking Assessment.TEFLIN Journal, Voln XI
Pandiyan 2013nRubrics on Scoring English Test for Four Language Skills.Ragam Jurnal Pengembangan Humanioran Vol 13: 43-49n
Panjaitan, Lindasarin 2011n The Effect of Community Language Learning iCLL)
on the Students’ Speaking Achievement.Thesisn 2edan: State University
of 2edann
Parker, Rayn 1991n Two Case Studies of Community Language Learning with
Possible Implication for the Natural Order Hypothesisn Revista Elicantina
de Estudios Inglenesn Vol 1: 103-123n
Richard, J & Rodgers, Tn 2001nApproaches and Methods in Language Teachingn UK: Cambridge University Pressn
Setiyadi, An 2006n Teaching English as A Foreign Language. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmun
Sinulingga, Lia Sn 2014n Improving the Students’ Speaking Achievement by
Applying Time Token Technique. Thesisn 2edan: State University of
2edann
Tangkas, In 2005n Research Methodology in Social and Education. 2edan:
Unimed Pressn
BBCn 2011n Fact or Opinion. (online)n
(http://wwwnbbcnconuk/skillswise/factsheet/en06opin-l1-f-what-is-fact-and-opinion accessed on 2ay, 22nd2015 time 10n41 A2)
2onalisan 2012n The Use of Community Language Learning Method to Improve
Speaking Ability of the First Year Students at Islamic Vocational High
School of Batu. (Online)n
(http://wwwninfodiknasncom/the-use-of- community-language-learning-method-to-improve-speaking-ability-of-the-first-year-students-at-islamic-vocational-high-school-of-batunhtml accesed on February, 22nd 2015 time 10n59 A2)
Riyani, Septin Student- initiated Community Language Building to Implement
Community Language Learning iCLL): The Experiment outside the
Classroom. (Online)n
