CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
D. Instrumentation
Instrumentation is the tool for gathering the data. In this research, the researcher collected three kinds of data; they were students‘ speaking learning strategies, students‘ speaking motivation and students‘ speaking skill. The data of students‘ speaking learning strategies and students‘ speaking motivation were collected by using questionnaires. While, students‘ speaking skill data was collected by using test.
1. Types of instrument a. Questionnaire
Brown in Dornyei (2010:3) argues that ―questionnaires are any written instruments that present respondents with a series of questions or statements to which they are to react either by writing out their answers or
selecting from among existing answer.‖ Questionnaire consisted of some statements that were given to the students. The materials of the questionnaire were taken from the materials stated in the review of related literature. It was used to know the students‘ speaking learning strategies and students‘ speaking motivation. The questionnaires were constructed by the researcher in bahasa Indonesia. It was done, in order not to make the students confuse in understanding the items. The questionnaires were constructed by closed items. The questionnaires were arranged by using Likert Scale model consisting of the students‘ speaking learning strategies and their motivation in speaking skill. Sugiyono (2010:93) states that
―Likert Scale is used to measure attitude, opinion, and someone or group perception about the education and social phenomena.‖
b. Test
Gay (2009:154) defines that ―test is designed to provide information about how well the test takers have learned what they have been taught‖.
Test was used for knowing students‘ speaking skill. Here, researcher focused on only one competence in order to get the more reliable score. The instruments were arranged in reference with validity, reliability and comprehensibility in order to get accurate data. Test was used to explore students‘ speaking skill in learning English. The material was taken from material which is appropriate with syllabus of speaking V (speech). The topics for speaking skill testing were farewell speech, convince speech, report speech, and introducing a speaker speech. The test was given in oral production (speech).
The students‘ speaking skills especially those related to speaking test were rated by using the criteria used related to having test. The criteria were used based on those proposed by experts that are stated in review of related literature, namely, fluency, grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, content, introduction, non verbal communication (eye contact, gestures), voice quality, and conclusion of speech.
2. Indicators, Arrangement of Instruments, and Scoring
Based on the review of the related literature, there were some indicators used to arrange the instruments. It can be seen in the table below:
Table 6
List of Trying Out Students’ Speaking LS Questionnaire Indicators Variables Indicators Sub Indicators Number
Direct Strategies
Memory
Creating mental linkages 1 (+) Applying images and sounds 46 (+)
Reviewing well 3 (+)
Cognitive
Practicing 9 (+), 5 (+), 6
(+), 7 (+), 8 (+) Receiving and sending Message 4 (-)
Analyzing and reasoning 10 (+), 11 (-), 19 (-)
Compensation
Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing
13 (+), 34 (+), 14 (+), 15 (-), 16 (-), 17 (+), 18 (+), 12 (+)
Indirect Strategies
Metacognitive
Centering your learning 37 (+), 21 (+), 22 (-)
Arranging and Planning your learning
23 (+), 38 (+), 25 (+), 27 (-), 26 (+), 28 (+) Evaluating your learning 29 (+), 30 (+)
Affective
Lowering your anxiety 31 (+), 43 (+), 33 (-)
Encouraging your self 24 (+), 36 (+), 35 (+)
Taking emotional temperature 20 (-), 39 (+), 40 (+), 41(+) Social
Asking question 42 (+)
Cooperating with others 32 (+), 44 (+) Empathizing with others 45 (+), 2 (+)
Table 7
List of Trying Out Students’ Speaking Motivation Questionnaire Indicators
Variables Indicators Number
Intrinsic Motivation
Criterion measures (related to intended effort)
2 (+), 17 (+), 33 (+), 38 (+), 45 (+)
Ideal L2 self 1 (+), 3 (+), 18
(+), 34 (+), 39 (+) Linguistic self-confidence 7 (+), 23 (+) Attitude toward learning English 43 (+), 24 (+), 8
(+)
Interest in the English language 44 (+), 28 (+), 12 (+)
English anxiety 13(-), 29 (-), 36 (-)
Attitudes toward L2 community 16 (+), 32 (+)
High aspiration 46 (+), 48 (+)
Extrinsic Motivation
Ought-to L2 self 19 (+), 40 (-)
Parental encouragement 4 (+), 20 (+), 35 (+), 41
Instrumentality-promotion 5 (+), 21 (+), 42 (+)
Instrumentality-prevention 6 (+), 22 (+)
Travel orientation 9 (+), 25 (+)
Fear of assimilation 51 (-), 52 (-), 10 (- )
Ethnocentrism 27 (+), 11 (-)
Integrativeness 30 (+), 14 (+)
Cultural interest 15 (+), 31 (+), 37 (+)
Failure and penalties 53 (+), 49 (-) Success and rewards 47 (+), 50 (+), 26
(+), 54 (+), 55(+)
Table 8
List of Students’ Speaking LS Questionnaire Indicators Variables Indicators Sub Indicators Number
Direct Strategies
Memory
Creating mental linkages 1 (+) Applying images and sounds 34 (+)
Reviewing well 7 (+)
Cognitive
Practicing 2 (+), 33 (+),
8 (+), 24 (+) Receiving and sending Message 21 (-)
Analyzing and reasoning 14 (+), 17 (-), 19 (-)
Compensation
Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing
3 (+), 32 (+), 9 (+), 25
Indirect Strategies
Metacognitive
Centering your learning 4 (+), 31 (-) Arranging and Planning your
learning
10 (+), 26 (+), 22 (+), 20 (-), 13 (+), 18 (+) Evaluating your learning 15 (+), 16 (+)
Affective
Lowering your anxiety 5 (+) Encouraging your self 30 (+)
Taking emotional temperature 11 (+), 27 (+), 23 (+)
Social
Asking question 6 (+)
Cooperating with others 29 (+)
Empathizing with others 12 (+), 28 (+)
Table 9
List of Students’ Speaking Motivation Questionnaire Indicators
Variables Indicators Number
Intrinsic Motivation
Criterion measures (related to intended effort)
1 (+), 42 (+), 20 (+), 27 (+), 25 (+)
Ideal L2 self 2 (+), 41 (+), 21
(+), 26 (+) Linguistic self-confidence 3 (+), 40 (+) Attitude toward learning English 4 (+), 39 (+), 22
(+)
Interest in the English language 5 (+), 38 (+), 23 (+)
English anxiety 6 (-), 37 (-)
Attitudes toward L2 community 7 (+), 36 (+)
High aspiration 8 (+), 35 (+)
Extrinsic Motivation
Ought-to L2 self 9 (+)
Parental encouragement 10 (+), 34 (+) Instrumentality-promotion 11 (+), 33 (+),
24 (+)
Instrumentality-prevention 12 (+), 32 (+)
Travel orientation 13 (+), 31 (+)
Fear of assimilation 14 (-), 30 (-)
Ethnocentrism 15 (+)
Integrativeness 16 (+), 29 (+)
Cultural interest 17 (+), 28 (+)
Failure and penalties 18 (+)
Success and rewards 19 (+), 43 (+)
Based on variable and indicators of speaking learning strategies and motivation above, researcher proposed the scoring system for questionnaires, namely, the scoring system for students‘ speaking learning strategies and motivation were given as follows: score 4 was given to the student who chooses always/strongly agree, 3 for often/agree, 2 for rarely/disagree and 1 for never/strongly disagree which were for positive statement. While, the scoring system for negative statement of students‘ speaking learning strategies and motivation were given as follows: score 1 was given to the student who chooses always/strongly agree, 2 for often/agree, 3 for rarely/disagree and 4 for never/strongly disagree.
The intensity level of scoring speaking learning strategies and speaking motivation could be seen as in the table follows:
Table 10
The Intensity of English Speaking Learning Strategies and Speaking Motivation Used by Students
Criteria Frequency Score
Very high High Low Very low
Always/strongly agree Often/agree
Rarely/disagree
Never/strongly disagree
3.00 – 4.00 2.00 – 2.99 1.00 – 1.99 0.00 – 0.99
Instrument items consisted of 34 statements for students‘ speaking learning strategies as seen on the indicators above. They consisted of 15 statements for direct strategies and 19 statements for indirect strategies. While, instrument items consisted of 43 statements for students‘ speaking motivation as seen on the indicators above. They consisted of 23 intrinsic motivation and 20 statements for extrinsic motivation.
Furthermore, test was used to measure students‘ speaking skill in oral production (speech). It was arranged based on the indicators of speaking for convince, report, farewell, and introducing a speaker speech as follow:
Table 11
List of Students’ Speaking Skill Indicators
Variables Indicators
Speaking Skill (Speech: report,
farewell, convince, and
introducing a speaker)
Pronunciation refers to how well the students pronoun English word
Structure refers to the form of English sentences that used by students when they have spoken English Vocabulary refers to whether the students can use the suitable vocabulary or diction in speaking
Fluency refers to how fluent the students speak Content refers to how far the students can explain the content or information of their speech in detail
Introduction refers to how the students to develop and consider the speaking situation
Voice quality refers to how the students to control their voice
Non verbal communication (gestures and eye contact) refers to how the students can control and manage their non verbal communication effectively
Conclusion refers to how the students make the conclusion in order to the audience understanding about their talking about.
Based on variable and indicators above, researcher proposed rubric for assessing speaking especially oral production (speech) as follows:
Table 12
Rubric of Assessing Speaking Skill
(Adapted from Brown, Hughes, and Knight)
Focus/Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6
Accent or Pronunciation
Student's pronunciation was incomprehensible
Student's pronunciation made understanding
very difficult
Student's pronunciation was understandable but
mostly made understanding
Difficult
Student's pronunciation was mostly understandable
with some error
Student's pronunciation was understandable with some
acceptable error
Student's pronunciation was understandable with almost no error
Grammar
Student was difficult to understand and had a
hard time communicating
their ideas and responses because of grammar
mistakes
Constant errors showing control of very few
major patters and frequently preventing communication
Frequent errors showing some major patterns uncontrolled and causing
occasional irritation and Misunderstanding
Student was able to express their ideas and responses
adequately but often displayed inconsistencies with their sentence structure
and tenses
Student was able to express their ideas and responses fairly
well but makes mistakes with their tenses, however is able
to correct themselves
Student was able to express their ideas and responses with ease in proper sentence structure and tenses
Vocabulary
Student had inadequate vocabulary words to
express his/her ideas properly,
which hindered the students in responding
Vocabulary limited to basic personal and survival
areas
Choice of words sometimes inaccurate, limitations of
vocabulary prevent discussion of some common professional and social
topics
Student was able to use broad vocabulary words but
was lacking, making him/her
repetitive and cannot expand on his/her ideas
Student utilized the words learned in class, in an accurate manner for the
situation given
Rich, precise and impressive usage of vocabulary words learned in and beyond of class
Fluency Student was unable to speak
Student took a long time to speak
Students were able to communicate with
difficulty
Students were able to communicate with some
difficulty
Students were able to communicate clearly with
little difficulty
Student was able to communicate clearly with almost no difficulty
Introduction
students are very poor to develop and consider thespeaking
situation
students are poor to develop and consider the speaking situation
students are fair to develop and consider the
speaking situation
students are average to develop and consider the
speaking situation
students are good to develop and consider the speaking
Situation
students are very good to develop and consider the speaking situation
Content
students cannot explain clearly the content or
information of their speech in detail
students are very difficult to explain the content
or information of their
speech in detail
students are mostly difficult to explain the content or
information of their speech in detail
students have some difficulty to explain the
content or information of their speech in detail
students have a little difficulty to explain the content or information of
their speech in detail
students can explain clearly the content or information of their speech in detail
Voice quality
students are very poor to control and manage their voice
quality
students are poor to control and manage their voice
quality
students are fair to control and manage their voice quality
students are average to control and manage their voice
quality
students are good to control and manage their voice quality
students are very good to control and
manage their voice quality
Non Verbal Com
students are very poor to control and
manage gestures
students are poor to control and manage their gestures
students are fair to control and manage their gestures
students are average to control and manage their gestures
students are good to control and manage their gestures
students are very good to control and manage their gestures
Eye Contact
Student reads all of report with no eye contact
Student occasionally uses eye contact, but still reads most of
report
Student occasionally uses eye contact, but still reads some of report
Student occasionally uses eye contact, but still reads a little of
report
Student maintains eye contact most of the time but frequently returns to notes
Student maintains eye contact with audience, seldom returning to notes
Concluding
Audience cannot understand presentation because
there is no sequence of
information
Audience has very difficulty following presentation because student jumps around
Audience has mostly difficulty following presentation
because student jumps around
Audience has some difficulty following presentation
because student jumps around
Student presents information in logical sequence which
audience can follow
Student presents information in logical, interesting sequence which audience can follow
Each student was tested in aspects for speaking skill, especially in oral test. The test was constructed in oral test with 10 options. They were constructed based on the rubric scoring. The scoring was done as follows:
score one (1) was given for very poor, two (2) for poor, three (3) for fair, four (4) for average, five (5) for good and six (6) for very good. It means that the lowest score was one and the highest score six. To make easy in next processing the score was conversed to the scale of 1 to 100 based on the percentage system. It means that if a student had 6 point, his/her mark would be 10 and if a student had 60 point, his/her mark would be 100. This was done by using the following formula:
Score = P+G+V+F+I+Cont+VQ+NVC+EC+Conc Where:
P = students‘ score in pronunciation G = students‘ score in grammar V = students‘ score in vocabulary F = students‘ score in fluency I = students‘ score in introduction Cont = students‘ score in content VQ = students‘ score in voice quality
NVC = students‘ score in non-verbal communication EC = students‘ score in eye contact
Conc = students‘ score in conclusion
To know the real score of the students, the writer used the following formula:
x 100%
Where:
RS = real score of each student
TS = total score of the indicator of speaking (sum P+…….+ Conc) 60 = the maximum score (10 indicators of speaking x 6 kinds of score)
After that the researcher categorized the students based on score with the three achievements categorize which were supported by Sudijono (2005:176), namely: high, average, and low. It could be seen in the table below:
Table 13
Score Students’ Speaking Skill
Range of the Real Scores Categories Levels
51-60 Very good High Ability
41-50 Good
Average Ability
31-40 Average
21-30 Fair
Low Ability
11-20 Poor
0-10 Very Poor
The amount of the students involve in this research were obtained after grouping all students from three classes into high, average, and low achievement based on the speaking test. Then, the students‘ speaking learning strategies, motivation, and speaking skill of the three groups of students were analyzed.