CHAPTER IV FINDING AND DISCUSSION
B. Discussion
1. The Effectiveness of Elicitation Technique toward the Students’
Speaking Achievement in Terms of Accuracy (Vocabulary)
Based on the data analysis from the students’ pre-test and post-test in speaking ability in terms of accuracy (vocabulary), there was development after treatment. In the pre-test, from 31 students only 8 (25.806%) students got the good score, 17 (54.838%) students got the fairly good score, 4 (12.903%) students got the fair score and 2 (6.451%) got poor. None of them got the excellent, very good and very poor score.
In pre-test, the students mostly needed more time to think about what they were going to say. Some of them were doing repetition. Sometimes they repeated the words twice or three times to finish their statement. A few students combined English and Bahasa to finish their statements. Then, very few students spent more time to speak and sometimes the researcher did not understand with their statements. Perhaps they knew the word that they were going to say but they were confuse about how to say the words in correct pronunciation so they were feeling afraid.
After implementing Elicitation Technique, the students vocabulary achievement was significantly improved. The researcher Elicit the students in various ways to find the vocabularies that students did not know. Then researcher
wrote on the board for the students. After that, researcher taught the students the way to pronounce the words and also the meaning.
In the post-test, the students’ score was significantly improved. It was proved by the fact that there were 8 (25.806%) students got the very good score, 13 (41.935%) students got the good score, 9 (29.032%) got fairly good score and 1 (3.225%) students got the fair score. None of them got the excellent, poor and very poor score.
The students speaking ability in the post-test were significantly improved.
Mostly students spoke fluenly eventhough sometimes they made repetition. Very few students were still doing repetition about the words that they were going to say.
Based on the data, we can see that rate percentage of the post-test is higher than the pre-test. It means that the students’ speaking ability in terms of accuracy (vocabulary) was significantly increased.
Based on the students’ mean score in the pre-test and post-test in terms of accuracy (vocabulary), the researcher saw that they were significantly different.
The mean score of students’ pre-test was 7.25 and post-test was 7.87. And then, the result of the t-test indicates that the t-test value 15 was higher than the t-table 2.042.
Hypothesis text if the t-test value was greater than the t-value at the level significance 0.05 and degree of freedom 31, then the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted and null hypothesis (H0) is rejected. If the t-test value is lower than t-
table at the level of significance 0.05 and degree freedom 31, then the alternative hypothesis would be rejected.
2. The Effectiveness of Elicitation Technique toward the Students’
Speaking Achievement in Terms of Accuracy (Grammar)
Based on the data analysis from the students’ pre-test and post-test in speaking ability in terms of accuracy (grammar), there was improvement after the treatment. In the pre-test, from 31 students 2 (6.451%) students got the good score, 21 (67.741%) students got the fairly good score, 5 (16.129%) students got the fair score and 3 (9.677%) students got poor score. None of them got the excellent, very good and very poor score.
In pre-test, mostly students did not know how to ask questions grammatically and how to answer the questions. Mostly students answer the question with really simple answers. Some of them repeated their statement to think about the right statement arrangament. Then, some other students spent long time to arrange to their statements.
The implementation of Elicitation Technique was really helpful the students to improve their grammar knowledge. By giving various questions, researcher found that in teaching grammar sometimes teacher must using local language to make sure that every single students understand about the material.
In the post-test, the students’ score was significantly increased. It was proved by the fact that there were 1 (3.225%) students got the very good score, 11 (35.483%) students got the good score, 14 (45.161%) students got fairly good score, 4 (12.903%) students got fair sore and 1 (3.225%) students got the poor
score. None of them got the excellent and very poor score. Based on the data above, we can see that rate percentage of the post-test is higher than the pre-test. It means that the students’ speaking ability in terms of accuracy (grammar) was significantly improved.
After implementing Elicitation Technique as the treatment, the students ability in speaking accuracy (grammar) was improved significantly. Most of the students spoke fluent with only few mistake in making correct grammatical statements. Very few of them needed long time and repetition to make correct grammatical statements.
Basedon the students’ mean score in the pre-test and post-test in terms of accuracy (grammar), the researcher saw that they were significantly different. The mean score of students’ pre-test is 6.69 and post-test is 7.63. And then, the result of the t-test indicates that the t-test value 10.142 is higher than the t-table 2.042.
These datas shows that using Elicitation Technique to improve the students’
speaking ability effective.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter consists of two parts. The first part deals with the conclusion of the finding, and the second part deals with suggestion.
A. Conclusion
Based on the findings and discussion, the researcher concludes that:
1. The students’ speaking ability in terms of accuracy (vocabulary) of SMA Negeri 1 Tinggimoncong in academic year 2015/2016 is good before using Elicitation Technique. It is process by the mean score of the pre-test (7.25) then developed after treatment by using Elicitation Technique. Mean score of post-test (7.87), it means that the speaking ability at the second year students of SMA Negeri 1 Tinggimoncong developed about 8.55% after applying Elicitation Technique. While for the students’speaking ability in terms of accuracy (grammar) of SMA Negeri 1 Tinggimoncong in academic year 2014/2015 is fair before using Elicitation Technique. It is process by the mean score of the pre-test (6.69) then developed after treatment by using Elicitation Technique. Mean score of post-test (7.63), It means that the speaking ability at the second year students of SMA Negeri 1 Tinggimoncong developed about 14.05% after applying Elicitation Technique.
2. Using Elicitation Technique has significant role to develop speaking ability at the second year students of SMA Negeri 1 Tinggimoncong. It is
40
proved by comparing the result of the t-test and t-table. In terms of accuracy (vocabulary) the t-test value (15) which is bigger than the t-table value (2.042). While in terms of accuracy (grammar) the t-test value (10.142) which is bigger than the t-table value (2.042).
B. Suggestion
After concluding the research, the researcher would like to offer some suggestions:
1. Modifying any kind of technique to teach language in the classroom is needed. Especially for the speaking class. Modify technique or method to make an active class activities is a must as students mostly bored and feeling afraid to talk.
2. Giving as many opportunities as possible is needed to let the students practice and promote their cognitive development. The aims to know where the teacher should start to teach their students.
3. Mastering some kind of methods and techniques in teaching language probably will help much.
4. The researcher suggests to use Elicitation Technique to improve the students speaking abilty due to this technique will improve the students talking time and dicrease the teacher talking time. Teacher can make some modification to make the class more interactive.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbas, P. J. 2012. The Significance of Pronunciation in English Language Teaching. Canada. Canadian Center of Science and Education.
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/15940. (online), Vol 5(4).
[accessed 25/09/14]
Asy’ari A. 2012. Improve Students’ Speaking Ability through The Use of Holistic Method.Thesis. FKIP Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar.
Bull V. 2011.Oxford Learner’s Pocket Dictionary.New York. Oxford University Press
Brown, H. Doughlas. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Second Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.
. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. London: Longman.
Bygate M,. The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Case, A. 2009. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Eliciting in the EFL Classroom. (Online) at www.usingenglish.com
[accessed 31/05/14]
Coulthard, M. 1992. Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Routledge.
Darmawati. 2012. Improve the Students Speaking Ability Through Guidance Method in Speaking. Thesis. FKIP Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar.
Douglas. B, Stig. J, Geoffrey. L, Susan. C & Edward. F. 2002. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. United Kingdom. Cambridge University Press.
http://e-
resources.pnri.go.id:2056/docview/196371943/161CB5E2ED0841B9PQ/3
?accountid=25704 (online), Vol 38.
[accessed 25/09/14]
Fawcett, J., Downs, F. 1986. The Relationship Between Theory and Research.
Norwalk. Appleton Century Crofts
Gay L. R., Mills Geoffrey E & Airasian Peter. 1987. Educational Research Competences for Analysis and Application. New Jersey. Pearson Prentice Hall
Layman. 1972. Teaching Listening Comprehension. UK. Cambridge University Press
Harmer Jeremy. 1990. The Practice of English Language Teaching (Third Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
_____________. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Fourth Edition. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
. 2007. How to Teach English. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Heaton, J. B. 1988. Writing English Language Tests. New York: Longman inc New York Press.
Hornby, A. S. 1984. Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary of Current English.
Walton Street: Oxford University Press.
McGowan, H. M. 2011. Planning a Comparative Experiment in Education Setting.
Mukhtar. A, Elfattah. A. E. 2013. The Effect of Using Communicative Approach on Developing Pronunciation Sub-Skills. (online), Vol 4(3).
http://interesjournals.org/er/march-2013-vol-4-issue-3/the-effect-of-using- communicative-approach-on-developing-pronunciation-sub-skills
[accessed 25/09/14]
Nathan, M. J. Kim, S. 2007. Regulation of Teacher Elicitation and the Impact on Student Participation and Cognition.
Nathaya, B. 2012. Factors Affecting Vocabulary Learning Strategies: A Synthesized Study. Naresuan University Journal.
http://www.nupress.grad.nu.ac.th/journal/index.php/NUJournal/article/dow nload/6/7 (online), Vol 20(2).
[accessed 25/09/14]
Nunan, D. 1993. Research Methods in Language Learning. New York”
Cambridge University Press.
Pollard L. 2008. Teaching Englih a Book to Help You Through Your First Two Years in Teaching.
Rudney, H. 2000. Introduction to the Grammar of English. United Kingdom.
Cambridge University Press. (Online)
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=irXAKZSHc38C&printsec=frontcover
&dq=Introduction+to+the+Grammar+of+English.&hl=id&sa=X&ei=nfwj VILABZCfugTl54DADQ&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Introdu ction%20to%20the%20Grammar%20of%20English.&f=false
[accessed 25/09/14]
Sugiyono. 2010. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung.
Alfabetta
Zhiqin Wang. 2014. Developing Accuracy and Fluency in Spoken English of Chinese EFL Learners. Canada. Canadian Center of Science and Education
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/33275. (online), Vol 7(2)
[accessed 25/09/14]
Yule, George. 2006. The Study of Language (Third Edition). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
1 1.000 3.078 6.314 12.706 31,821 63.657
2 0.816 1.886 2.920 4.303 6.965 9.926
3 0.765 1.638 2.353 3.183 4.541 5.841
4 0.741 1.533 2.132 2.776 3.747 4.604
5 0.727 1.476 2.015 2.571 3.365 4.032
6 0.718 1.440 1.943 2.447 2.143 3.707
7 0.711 1.451 1.895 2.365 2.998 3.499
8 0.706 1.397 1.860 2.306 2.896 3.355
9 0. 703 1.383 1.833 2.262 2.821 3.250
10 0.700 1.372 1.812 2.226 2.764 3.169
11 0.697 1.363 1.769 2.201 2.718 3.106
12 0.695 1.356 1.782 2.179 2.681 3.055
13 0.694 1.350 1.771 2.160 2.650 3.120
14 0.692 1.345 1.761 2.143 2.624 2.977
15 0.691 1.341 1.753 2.331 2.604 2.947
16 0.690 1.337 1.746 2.120 2.583 2.921
17 0.689 1.333 1.740 2.110 2.567 2.898
18 0.688 1.330 1.734 2.101 2.552 2.878
19 0.688 1.328 1.729 2.093 2.539 2.861
20 0.687 1.325 1.725 2.086 2.528 2.845
21 0.686 1.323 1.721 2.080 2.518 2.831
22 0.686 1.321 1.717 2.074 2.505 2.819
23 0.685 1.319 1.714 2.690 2.500 2.807
24 0.685 1.318 1.711 2.640 2.492 2.797
25 0.684 1.316 1.708 2.060 2.485 2.787
26 0.684 1.315 1.706 2.056 2.479 2.779
27 0.684 1.314 1.703 2.052 2.473 2.771
28 0.683 1.313 1.701 2.048 2.467 2.763
29 0.683 1.311 1.699 2.045 2.462 2.756
30 0.683 1.310 1.697 2.042 2.457 2.750
40 0.681 1.303 1.684 2.021 2.423 2.704
60 0.679 1.296 1.671 2.000 2.390 2.660
120 0.677 1.289 1.658 2.890 2.358 2.617
0.674 1.282 1.645 1.960 2.326 2.576
3 AFN 5 5,8 0,8 0,64
4 AHS 8,3 9,1 0,8 0,64
5 DWS 5 6,7 1,7 2,89
6 HRN 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
7 HSM 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
8 INT 8,3 9,1 0,8 0,64
9 ISK 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
10 KBL 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
11 MRW 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
12 MRN 5,9 6,7 0,8 0,64
13 MFA 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
14 NIA 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
15 NAP 8,3 9,1 0,8 0,64
16 NRA 8,3 9,1 0,8 0,64
17 NAN 6,6 7,5 0,9 0,81
18 NAD 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
19 NSM 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
20 NAW 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
21 NHS 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
22 PNK 8,3 9,1 0,8 0,64
23 RNF 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
24 RST 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
25 SAN 5,9 8,3 2,4 5,76
26 SFA 8,3 9.1 0,8 0,64
27 SMA 8,3 9,1 0,8 0,64
28 USR 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
29 WNY 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
30 WDJ 7,5 9,1 1,6 2,56
31 YLT 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
∑X 225 244 28,1 29,15
X 7,25 7,87 0,90 0,94
15 06 . 0
90 . 0
004 . 0
90 . 0
930 68 . 3
90 . 0
930 47 . 25 15 . 29
90 . 0
) 30 ( 31
31 61 . 15 789 . 29
90 . 0
) 1 31 ( 31
31 1 . 15 28 . 29
90 . 0 90 . 0
31 1 . 28
) 1 (
2 2 2
t t t t t t t D D
n D D
n n
n D D
2. t-Table
For level of significance (D) = 0.05 Degree of freedom (df) = n-1
df = 31-1 df = 30 t-table = 2.042
1 N
31 225
1
25 , 7
1
2. Mean score of the Students’ Posttest N
X
2
31 244
2
87 , 7
2
The Rate Percentage of Score in Pre-test in terms of accuracy (vocabulary)
a. n = 8 N = 31
% = 100
% = 8
31 100
% = 25.806
b. n = 17 N = 31
% = 100
% =17
31 100
% = 54.838
c. n = 4 N = 31
% = 100
% = 4
31 100
% = 2
31 100
% = 6.451
The rate percentage of score in post-test in terms of accuracy (vocabulary)
a. n = 8 N = 31
% = 100
% = 8
31 100
% = 25.806
b. n = 13 N =31
% = 100
% =13
31 100
% = 41.935
c. n = 9 N =31
% = 100
% = 9
31 100
% = 29.032
d. n = 1 N =31
% = 100
% = 1
31 100
% = 3.225
2 ARN 7,5 7,5 0 0
3 AFN 5 5,8 0,8 0,64
4 AHS 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
5 DWS 4 5,8 1,8 3,24
6 HRN 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
7 HSM 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
8 INT 7,5 7,8 0,3 0,09
9 ISK 6,7 8,3 1,6 2,56
10 KBL 6,6 7,6 0,9 0,81
11 MRW 5,9 6,7 0,8 0,64
12 MRN 5 5,8 0,8 0,64
13 MFA 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
14 NIA 5 5,8 0,8 0,64
15 NAP 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
16 NRA 8,3 8,3 0 0
17 NAN 5,9 6,7 0,8 0,64
18 NAD 6,6 7,5 0,9 0,81
19 NSM 6,7 6,7 0 0
20 NAW 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
21 NHS 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
22 PNK 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
23 RNF 6,7 6,7 0 0
24 RST 7,5 7,5 0 0
25 SAN 5,9 6,7 0,8 0,64
26 SFA 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
27 SMA 8,3 9 0,8 0,64
28 USR 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
29 WNY 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
30 WDJ 7,5 8,3 0,8 0,64
31 YLT 6,7 7,5 0,8 0,64
∑X 207,6 230,1 22,3 20.95
X 6,69 7,63 0,71 0.67
142 . 10
07 . 0
71 . 0
005 . 0
71 . 0
930 91 . 4
71 . 0
930 04 . 16 95 . 20
71 . 0
) 30 ( 31
31 29 . 95 497 . 20
71 . 0
) 1 31 ( 31
31 3 . 95 22 . 20
71 . 0 71 . 0
31 3 . 22
) 1 (
2 2 2
t t t t t t t D D
n D D
n n
n D D
2. t-Table
For level of significance (D) = 0.05 Degree of freedom (df) = n-1
df = 31-1 df = 30 t-table = 2.042
1 N
31 207.6
1
69 . 6
1
2. Mean score of the Students’ Posttest N
X
2
31 230.1
2
63 . 7
2
The Rate Percentage of Score in Pre-test in terms of accuracy (grammar)
a. n = 2 N = 31
% = 100
% = 2
31 100
% = 6.451
b. n = 21 N = 31
% = 100
% =21
31 100
% = 67.741
c. n = 5 N = 31
% = 100
% = 5
31 100
% = 16.129
31 100
% = 9.677
The rate percentage of score in post-test in terms of accuracy (grammar)
a. n = 1 N = 31
% = 100
% = 1
31 100
% = 3.225
b. n = 11 N =31
% = 100
% =11
31 100
% = 35.483
c. n = 14 N =31
% = 100
% =14
31 100
% = 45.161
d. n = 4 N =31
% = 100
% = 4
31 100
% = 12.903
e. n = 1 N =31
% = 100
Conversation
Putri : Hi Hany. How are you?
Hany : Hello Putri. I am fine thank you, and you?
Putri : I m fine too thank you. Do you have planning for study next year after we pass from senior high school?
Hany : Idon’t have. Do you have suggestion?
Putri : How about University of Indonesia?
Hany : University of Indonesia? What what do you think about University of Indonesia?and why I should stdy there?
Putri : eee because University of Indonesia is a prestigious university and in my opinion university of Indonesia is the best university in Indonesia.
Hany : woww, thats amazing.
Putri : yeah, of course.
Hany : I have a family house at Jakarta. Would you like to stay with there with me? And we can and we can study in the same university too.
Putri : Yes, why not. Why don’t we go to the cafe for dinner and talk more about it?
Hany : That’s a good idea, Let’s go.
Monologue
St. Marjan Ahsani Ardan
Assalamu Alaikum Wrahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. My name is Sitti Marjan Ahsani Arda and you can call me Hani. I hope five years later I will bacome a smart girl in math subject because I love Math.
Putri Nur Kaimuddin
My name is Putri Nur Kaimuddin. My hope for five years later is I can be a success accounting or success architect because I love picture.
Second Pair Conversation
Lili : Usram, I think if you wanna success you should study at University of Indonesia.
Usram : Why you say that? Give me your opinion.
Lili : I think you are smart boy and all of all of people in Indonesia if you are is the best of the best university than another university in Indonesia
Usram : of course. And let’s go the lunch, let’s go we lunch and talking about that.
Lili : okay Monologue Kimberly
My name is Kimberly eee I stand I stand up here ask you about my hope. I I hope eee five years later I will be a doctor because I think if I doctor, I can around around the world and be eeee dut woman eee and if I will be a doctor, I must study hard, eee second I must eee I must I must can speak English can speak English. If I will be eee if I take a doctor eee Wassalamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh.
Usram
Assalamu Alaikum Wrahmatullahi Wabarakatuh.. My name is Usram you can call me Usram. I in five years later I will be a good friend and and be a doctor because doctor is my aspiration.
Third Pair Conversation Dinda : Hello Intan Intan : Hello Dinda
Dinda : What are you doing?
Intan : I thinking about what I thinking about where I will continue university lecture
Dinda : I think you should study in University of Indonesia Intan : Why you say like that?
Dinda : Because in my opinion, University of Indonesia is the most famous university becasue it’s achievement and may be there can more competitive again.
Intan : You’re right. If we there, we can get many friend and competitor. Do you want to stay in my family house in Jakarta and why don’t we study in the same university?
Dinda : Nice idea. There we can study together. Could we go for dinner to talk more about studying because becasue in Jakarta?
Intan : Yes, we could. What time?
Dinda : It is 7 pm. Don’t late Intan : see you tonight Dinda : see you
because I want to sharing that knowledge with other people.
Intan
Eee my name is Intan. I hope I be have I will have new car and I hope I hope be a doctro because I will eee help eee people and aaa I hope eee me and all my friends eee meet here eee meet eee different situation because me and the fer all my friends eee eee become eee amazing people. Thanks
Fourth Pair Conversation
Nindy : Hi Tika. How are you?
Tika : Hi Nindy. I am fine thank you and you?
Nindy : I am fine too, thank you. By the way where you will lecture?
Tika : I am don’t know. I am confuse.
Nindy : eee I think I think you can study in University of Indonesia Tika : What do you think about University of Indonesia?
Nindy : eee In my opinion, eee University of Indonesia is the best university of Indonesia and have eee and have aaii A predicate.
Tika : are you sure? Wooww Okay I will study in University of Indonesia. Eee by the way where do you stay in Jakarta?
Nindy : hahaha I dont have house in Jakarta
Tika : how pity you are Nindy. Would you like to stay in my family house in Jakarta and study in the same university?
Nindy : Yes, I would. Thank you very much Tika. I feel I will eat. Could we go for dinner and talk more about studying in Jakarta?
Tika : Nice idea . Let’s go Monologue
Atika Hardiyanti Syam
My name is Atik Hardiyanti Syam. You can call me Tika. Eee in five years later, I I hope English Teacher and I hope to be eee a camerawoman but my mother say eee I must, I must to be a midwife. If become a midwife can make my mother happy, Insya Allah I can get it. And the last, I I hope I will make orange house, and I always I always pray Allah SWT.
Nindy Alesha Prengkuan
Eee Assalamu Alaikum Wrahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. eee my name is Nindy Alesha Parengkuan. You can call me nindy eee my hope iii my hope is I am
Conversation
Nisa : Hi Sifa. Why do you look so confuse?
Sifa : I am still confused eee in choo in choosing university.
Nisa : mmm I think study you should study in the University of Indonesia Sifa : Why do you think I should study there?
Nisa : mmm Because I think university of Indonesia is one of the university of quality eee in Indonesia
Sifa : Great. Would you like to stay in my family house in jakarta and study in the same university?
Nisa : Yes, I would. Would you go for dinner with me to talk about that about?
Sifa : I am very sorry. I have to work Nisa : mmm okay bye bye.
Monologue
Nur Annisa Wulandari
My name is Nur Annisa Wulandari. Eee I hope eee for the next five year eee that I could wear toga head and make money to build eee house eee a house in the villge of my world Tana Toraja and I want meet with my cousin from my mother bacause I never eee seee they see them. Thanks
St. Fatimah Az Zahrah
My anme is Sitti Fatimah Az Zahrah. I hope to be animators because I like I like watching animation film and I like watching eh I like making animation. Thank you.
Sixth Pair Conversation
Irma : Hello. Where will you continue your study?
Daya : I don’t know because I have not found eee eee I have not found the best medical college faculty.
Irma : eee why you don’t register in University of Indonesia?
Daya : University of Indonesia... what do you think about the university?
Irma : eee I think the university is very good especilly the medical faculty eee and and one of best faculty of medical.
about the study in Jakarta?
Daya : Yes, I would eee what time?
Irma : Maybe 8 o’clock.
Daya : Yes, Thank you. Eee see you tonight.
Irma : See you too.
Monologue
Nurhidayah Syarifuddin
Assalamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. I am very like English Language so I hope eee feive years later aiii I have a free course for eee e especially for the street children because I believe eee English Language will be very useful for their for their for their live in the future. Wassalamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh.
Irma Suriani K
Emm Assalamu Alaikum Wrahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. My name is Irma Suriani eee you can call me Irma eee I stay in here eee eee because I I will I will eee introduce to you my hope eee I hope I hope in five years later eee I will to be the law scholar and scout relation eee and if if I if I will the last scholar eee I eee first I must to lear with good eee then I I must enter in unniversity in University of Law Dpaartment and finally I I can I can I can I can eehh I will ee and finally I will I will to be the la scholar yeah thanks.
Seventh Pair Conversation
Rola : Hi Fadil. What are you doing here?
Fadil : Hi Rola. I went searching good university eee for continue my study Rola : eee How about how about you study there University of Indonesia?
Fadil : Why you very support me for study there?
Rola : I think study there is good because many people beautiful.
Fadil : mmm I think I think so. How about you study there with me and stay in my uncle house?
Rola : Yes. It’s good idea
Fadil : Why we don’t go to dinner together for to talk more more study in University of Indonesia?
Rola : Yes. what time?
Fadil : Maybe at 8 8 pm.
Rola : eeee yes okay. See you