CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4. Cycle 3
58
good and 10% students were very good category. The data also shows that the average of students‟ speaking score was 66. The highest score is 80 and the lowest score was 50. Due the result above, the mean of students‟
speaking skills was low. But, the average of students test result increased 15,67. It was from 50,33 to be 66,00. The researcher concluded that the students‟ speaking skills improved, but the result of students score in cycle 2 not satisfied to KKM (70). So the researcher conducted the next cycle with some improvement for the best result.
However, there were some additional strategic actions, such as giving more individual task in each meeting and making different seating arrangement in group discussion.
There were some differences between Cycle II and Cycle III. In Cycle II, the researcher was given individual task rarely, while in Cycle III the researcher was given more individual task in each meeting to increase the students‟ involvement. The researcher also made different seating arrangement in the group discussion. These actions were expected to maximize the students to discuss in their group seriously and to make each group‟s ability equal.
Each group consisted of three to four students. Then, there were class discussion and presentation by the students. After that, they did discussion with me to summarize the results of their discussion. To increase students‟ involvement, there would be an individual task after they had group work. They should answer questions related to the grammatical on family introduction text about singular and plural. In the last meeting, there was an individual test in the form of speaking performance. But, there would be different seating arrangement in each group.
In this cycle, giving participation points were still used to increase students‟ enthusiasm in the teaching and learning process since it was success in Cycle I and Cycle II.
60
b. Action
In this cycle the topic was about asking and giving things.
There were 30 students. There were no absent that day. In this cycle, the researcher still used speaking performance as interesting activity in speaking learning process. The speaking performance in cycle I and cycle II was success in increasing students‟ involvement, interest, and confidence in speaking learning process, so the researcher still used it as interesting activity. The difference was in the properties in which related to the topic about asking and giving things in every meeting when there was speaking performance.
In the first meeting when doing speaking performance, the students were given warm-up toward the material. The researcher was given some dialogue to the students to be performed with their friends in front of the class. The students performed in pair in front of the class. From the observation, the students had no difficulty in practicing the dialogue. Their confidence and pronunciation were better than in cycle I and cycle II. It was the result of the frequency of their performance that is over and over.
c. Observing
In cycle 3, the teacher observed the students‟ conditions when students applied PPS method. The teacher also was helped by the collaborator. In this case, the students were still enthusiasm. The students‟ has more explanation for teacher. The students‟ can practice
the PPS method well and they can answer the question from teacher.
After doing the technique, teacher conducted test. The form of test is oral test and the teacher asked to the students to in pairs.
d. Reflecting
Based on the reflection, the researcher and the collaborator agreed that the implementation of PPS method in speaking learning process and its accompanying actions in Cycle III were successful. The effort to increase the students‟ enthusiasm in speaking learning process was successful. The actions by giving rewards were very effective to interest the students in the teaching and learning process. They felt happy when they got points. The implementation of individual task was also success in increasing students‟ involvement toward the learning process.
The use of PPS method as interesting method in speaking learning process was successful in getting students‟ interest toward the material. The students enjoyed learning the material through the PPS method. The students also felt relaxed and not bored when learning speaking. It could minimize the students‟ boredom.
The implementation of speaking performance as an interesting activity was effective in increasing students‟ interest and involvement in speaking learning process. The students said that the activity was interesting because they got both knowledge and pleasure. Moreover,
62
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
76.67%
23.33%
0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Excellent Good Average Poor Very Poor
they could practice their skill in speaking. Some of them also stated that it made them challenged when doing speaking performance.
However, after the researcher used PPS method to improve students‟ ability in speaking, the researcher gave test to the students.
The result of the first cycle can be seen in the figure below:
Figure 4.4
Students’ Speaking Score Distribution on Cycle 3
Based on the figure 4.4, it showed the result of cycle 3 showed that the students‟ speaking skill consisted of none of the student got very poor, poor, and average categories. It is increased up to 76,67% students were good and 23,33% students were very good category. The data also shows that the average of students‟ speaking score was 73.33. The highest score is 90 and the lowest score was 70. Due to the result above, the mean of students‟ speaking skills was high. The average of students test result increased 7,33. It was from 66,00 to be 73.33. The researcher concluded
those students‟ speaking skills improved and satisfied to KKM (70). So the researcher decided to stop in this cycle. The teacher and researcher concluded that the improvement of speaking skill more significant after being given treatment using PPS method since the first cycle until the third cycle.
The above data shows that the improvement of speaking skill more significant after being given treatment using PPS method since the first cycle until the third cycle. Regarding the finding of cycle 3 that all actions were successful in increasing the students‟ involvement and enthusiasm especially in speaking and the objectives of the research were achieved, the researcher and the collaborator agreed to end this research in this cycle.