CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. Findings
The findings of the data found that teaching speaking skills using learning community techniques can improve students' pronunciation and can also improve students' fluency. The following is a more detailed explanation of the data analysis:
1. The Improvement Students’ Speaking in terms of pronunciation The improvement of speaking skills in terms of students’
pronunciation in class VII SMP Unismuh Makassar as a result of student assessments in the Cycles I and II of the Diagnostic Test can be observed plainly as follows:
Tabel 4.1 The Improvement Speaking Skills in terms of Pronunciation Variable The Student’ Score Improvement
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
DT CI (%)
CI CII (%)
DT CII (%) Pronunciation 48.83 56.6 73.27 7.77% 16.67% 24.44%
The table above shows that students' speaking skills increased in terms of pronunciation from the Diagnostic Test to Cycle I and Cycle II. (48.83 < 56.6 < 73.27) where the Diagnostic Test students average achievement of speaking skills scores in terms of pronunciation was 48.83 after the evaluation in the first cycle of
speaking skills in terms of students' pronunciation becomes 56.6, so that the increase in the achievement of speaking skills in terms of students' pronunciation from the Diagnostic Test to the first cycle were 7.77%.
From cycle I to cycle II, there was a considerable improvement in students' speaking skills in terms of student pronunciation, with speaking skills in terms of student pronunciation in cycle I being 56.6 and in cycle II being 73.27. Thus, from cycle I to cycle II, the increase in speaking skills learning outcomes in terms of student pronunciation is 16.67%.
The table above shows that using learning community strategies in the Process of teaching and learning improved students' pronunciation following the actions taken in cycles I and II, with cycle II having the highest student learning achievement (73.27 > 56.6 >
48.83) and an increase in speaking skills in terms of students' pronunciation from the diagnostic test to the second cycle were 24.44%.
To clearly see the improvement of speaking skills in terms of students' pronunciation, the following graphic were presented:
This graph below illustrates that learners' pronunciation improved more in the second round. (73.27) than the first cycle (56.6) and the Diagnostic Test (48.83). (73.27>56.6>48.83). This also demonstrates that the Diagnostic-Test results represent the lowest average score. There was a considerable improvement in student pronunciation after cycle I and cycle II evaluations. This increase were clearly seen in the graph above, which were 24.44%.
2. The Improvement Speaking Skills in terms of Student Fluency The improvement of Speaking skills in terms of student fluency in class VII SMP Unismuh Makassar The following table shows the results of student evaluations of the Diagnostic Test cycle I and cycle II:
90
40 20 0
Graphic 1. The Improvement of speaking skills in term of students pronunciation
100 80 70 60
50 48.83 56.6
73.27 D - Test Cycle I Cycle II
30 24.44 Improvement
10
Improvement Pronunciation
Table 4.2. The Improvement of Speaking Skills in terms of student fluency Variable The Student’ Score Improvement
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
DT CI
%
CI CII
%
DT CII
% Fluency 48.66 56.2 75.2 7.54% 19% 26.54%
The table above shows that there were an increase in Speaking skills in terms of student fluency from Test-D to cycle I and cycle II (48.66 < 56.2 < 75.2), where in Test-D the achievement of speaking skills scores in terms of student fluency were 48.66. After the evaluation was carried out in the first cycle, the student's fluency were 56.2, so that the improvement in speaking skills achievement in terms of student fluency from D-Test to cycle I were 7.54%.
Speaking skills in terms of student fluency also experienced a significant increase In cycles I to second Cycle, student fluency improved from 56.2 in cycle I to 75.2 in cycle II. Thus, the increase in students' fluency achievement from cycle I to cycle II were 19%.
The table above illustrates that the use of learning community strategies resulted in a considerable increase in students' fluency after the activities conducted in cycles I and II. From the diagnostic test to the second cycle, pupils' fluency improved by 26.54 %.
To clearly see the percentage increased in students' fluency scores, the following graph is presented:
Graphic 2. The Improvement speaking skills in terms of student fluency
The graph above shows an increase in students' speaking skills.
Fluency in the second cycle is higher (75.2) than in the first cycle (56.2)as well as D-test (48.66).Also it demonstrates that D-Test The outcome is the lowest level of success. (48.66<56.2<75.2). There was a considerable increase in students' speaking abilities, fluency, which were clearly indicated on the graph after taking action in the cycle through community learning technique, which were 26.54% following cycle I and cycle II evaluations.
3. The Improvement students' speaking skills
The improvement of students' speaking skills focused on pronunciation and fluency of subjects in class VII SMP Unismuh
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
75.2 48.66 56.2
26.54
D - Test Cycle I Cycle II Improvement
Improvement Intonation
Makassar as a result of student assessments in the Cycles I and II The results of the Diagnostic Test are easily evident. The provided in table:
Table 4.3. The improvement student’s speaking skills No Variable The Student’ Score Improvement
D-Test Cycle I Cycle II
DT CI
%
CI CII
%
DT CII
% 1 Pronunciation 48.83 56.6 73.27 7.77% 16.67% 24.44%
2 Fluency 48.66 56.2 75.2 7.54% 19% 26.54%
∑ 97.49 112.8 148.47 15.31 37.67% 52.98%
X
48.74 56.4 74.23 7.66% 17.83% 25.49%The table above demonstrates that students' Speaking skills improved from Test-D to cycle I and cycle II, with the average score of students' Speaking skills achievement in Test-D being 48.74. The students' speaking abilities were assessed in the first cycle, and they scored 56.4. As a result, there was a 7.66 % increase in speaking skills attainment from Test-D to cycle I.
There was also a considerable rise in students' speaking skills from cycle I to cycle II, with students' speaking skills in cycle I being 56.4 and in cycle II being 74.23, representing a 17.83% increase in students' speaking skills achievement.
The table above shows that incorporating learning community strategies into the teaching and learning process helped students improve their skills. Speaking skills after taking action in cycles I and II, with cycle II having the highest student learning achievement (74.23> 56.4> 48.74) and a 25.49% increase in From diagnostic exams to cycle II, students' speaking abilities were assessed. The following graph shows how pupils' speaking skills have improved over time:
Graphic 3. The improvement of the students' speaking skills This chart below illustrates that students' speaking skills improved more in the second round. (74.23) than in the first cycle (56.4) and D-test (48.74). (74.23 > 56.4 > 48.74). This also demonstrates that the Diagnostic -Test result was the lowest. Students' speaking abilities improved significantly after cycle I and cycle II
90
40 20 0 100 80 70 60
50 48.74 56.4
74.23 D - Test Cycle I Cycle II
30 25.49 Improvement
10
Speaking Skills
evaluations. This rise may be seen in the graph above, which shows a 25.49% gain.
4. Results of Student Participation in the Teaching and Learning Process
The results of observations of student participation in the usage of the learning community technique in developing students' speaking skills is being taught and learned in class VII SMP Unismuh Makassar which were carried out in 2 cycles. The following table indicates this clearly:
Table 4.4 Percentage of Student Participation in the Teaching and Learning Process Cycle I.
NO Classification Score
Cycle I Frequency %
1 Very Good 85-100 0 0%
2 Good 70-84 2 7%
3 Enough 60-69 28 93%
4 Low 50-59 0 0%
5. Very Low 0-49 0 0%
Total 30 100%
Table 4.4 shows that of the 30 students who participated in Cycle I, 0 (0%) student participation was very low, 0 (0%) student participation was low, 28 (93%) student participation was moderated, 2 (7%) student participation was good and 0 (0%) student participation was very good. This means that student participation in
the first cycle is still low because 93% student participation were sufficient.
Table 4.5 Percentage of Student Participation in the Teaching and Learning Process Cycle II
NO Classification Score
Cycle II
Frequency %
1 Very Good 85-100 0 0%
2 Good 70-84 26 86.7%
3 Enough 60-69 4 13.3%
4 Low 50-59 0 0%
5. Very Low 0-49 0 0%
Total 30 100%
Table 4.5 shows that of the 30 students who followed Cycle II 0 (0%) student participation was very low, 0 (0%) student participation was low 4 (13.3%) student participation was moderated, 26 (86.7%) student participation was good and 0 (0%) student participation was very good. This means that student participation in the second cycle were good because 86.7% of Involvement of students in the teachers and students with the question and answer relationship strategy was good.