B. Research Results
2. Research Results in Cycle 1
In this phase, the researchers made an action plan based on the issues that faced by the students toward speaking skills. The researcher was designed a lesson plan according to learning material.
The researchers also prepared the student attendance list, a test, and observation sheet to know whether there was enhancement in students’ speaking ability.
b. Action
1) Meeting one
The first meeting in cycle I took place on Tuesday, 22 february 2022. Before involving students in the cooperative learning with time token arends strategy, the researcher acted as a
24. NKHDA 32
25. NKN 44
26. NKSD 50
27. NLNLS 81
28. OCR 38
29. PDC 38
30. RH 38
31. RUA 38
32. RHD 87
33. RA 25
34. TA 32
35. YS 50
36. ZPA 25
TOTAL 1554
AVERAGE 43
teacher and followed the lesson plans. The researcher started the lesson by greeting all students and asking the leader of the class to lead the prayer. The researcher checked the students' attendance and asked about their health. The researcher also asked several questions related to the material of the first meeting, and then the researcher explained new material about biographical recount text.
In this step, the researchers started the lesson by asking the students question about “historical recount" One of the students named Restu answered that a historical recount is telling about historical events. There was no student answered again. After that, the researcher explained the historical recount included definition, generic structure and the characteristic. After all the material has been explained, the researcher explained the strategy that will be implemented to the teaching and learning process, namely cooperative learning with time token arends strategy. The researcher explained more clearly and briefly about the strategy with an example. Furthermore, the researcher divided the students into 6 groups which consist of 6 students in each group. Te students began to discuss the topic that has been prepared by the researcher with their groups and tried to practice it directly by usingcooperative learning with time token arends strategy. After they finished discussing it, one student in each group came
forward in front of the class to present it individually with time token 1minutes that had been given by the researcher. After the time token is up, the other members will continue until finished.
Two students in each group give a conclusion. After all has done, the researcher closed the meeting. But before that, the researcher gave feedback to students and summarized the lesson and the last the researcher closed the meeting by saying assalamualikum and see you next meeting.
2) Meeting 2
The second meeting was conducted on Tuesday, 01 March 2022. The researcher opened the class by greeting and asked the students condition then the researcher checked the student attendance list. The researcher also reviewed the material in previous meeting and asked the students difficulties during the implementation cooperative learning with time token arends strategy. Furthermore, the researchers gave the students motivation and continue to the next activity.
In this section, the students are asked to stay with their groups that have been determined. Then the researcher gave a paper with new theme about the Battle of Surabaya and asked them to discuss it. After they finished discussing it, one student in each group came forward in front of the class to present it individually with time token 1minutes that had been given by the
researcher. After the time token is up, the other members will continue until finished. Two students in each group give a conclusion. The researcher walking around the class to stay controls the activity and guided the students if they feel confused.
After all groups were finished, the researcher asked the opinion of one of the students about their opinion about the strategy used.
The researcher gave feedback to the students and summarized the lesson together then gave them motivation. The last, the researcher informed to the students that the next meeting will be focus on test. After that the researchers closed the meeting by saying Assalamualikum and see you next meeting.
3) Meeting 3
The third meeting was conducted on Tuesday, 22 March 2022. The researchers opened the class by greeting, and checked the student attendance list. Besides, the researcher reminded and checked the students understanding about previous lesson. In this meeting, the students did the test of post-test in cycle 1. The test was held to know whether the student speaking skill improved or no after given some treatment. After the test has done the researchers gave motivation to the students and closed the meeting by saying Asalamualaikum and see you next meeting.
After the researcher did the treatment, the researcher calculated the student's score after did the test using a formula that
the researched used in pre-test. The students score in cycle 1 was 2344 with an average 65, while the students who passed classical mastery or KKM was 13 students from 36 students with the percentages was 36.1%. Which means the students speaking scores was improved from the pre-test but not achieved the indicator of success. Therefore, the researcher would continue to cycle 2.
TABLE 4.2
The Results of Post-Test in Cycle 1
No Students Score
1. AW 81
2. AV 81
3. AK 81
4. AK 50
5. A 69
6. BRDS 81
7. ERY 69
8. EAN 81
9. HAA 63
10. HUQ 81
11. H 69
12 ISI 63
13. IK 50
14. KJ 56
15. K 63
16. LIDP 44
17. LAR 50
18. LAS 81
19. LS 81
20. MSI 56
21. MAKA 63
22. MSJS 50
23. MA 44
24. NKHDA 63
25. NKN 56
26. NKSD 81
27. NLNLS 87
28. OCR 50
29. PDC 50
30. RH 44
31. RUA 69
32. RHD 87
33. RA 44
34. TA 44
35. YS 81
36. ZPA 81
TOTAL 2344
AVERAGE 65
c. Observing
During the implementation cooperative learning with time token arends strategyin the class, students still pay less attention to the teacher but the class atmosphere is a little fun. In addition, from all students, some students are still less cooperative and active in receiving learning materials, and also there is a lack of interaction between teachers and students. Furthermore, based on observation, the students thinking is not yet developed and they remain unfocused.
After that, the researcher would continue to cycle 2.The following is the table of teachers and students scores in cycle 1:
Table 4.3
Teachers Observation Sheet In Cycle 1
No. Activities Score
1 2 3 4
1. The teacher giving the topic of discussion √
and the teacher explained the material well; he speaks bahasa to make an easy understanding for the students
2. Using cooperative learning with time token arends strategy to teach speaking skills, the teacher gave the students example of how to apply the strategy in learning process.
√
3. The teacher gives more explanation about the materials and gave the example of historical recount text.
√
4. The teacher giving opportunity for asking the question and helping the students difficulties during learning process
√
5. The teacher divided the students into some groups, then asked the students to give opinion based on the material based on group discussion
√
6. The teacher walking around the class.
The teacher helps, guides, and monitoring the students
√
7. The teacher instructs all the group to present their discussion
√
8. The teacher recording every presentation √ 9. The teacher gives feedback and
motivation and then tells the conclusion of discussion
√
Total score 30
Percentages of activities 83%
Category Very good
Based on teacher observation worksheet above, the total score of teacher activities during treatment was 30 and with the percentage was 83%. Which means the teacher did the teaching learning process activities very good.
Table 4.4
Student Observation Sheet In Cycle 1
No. Activities Score
1 2 3 4
1. Students gives their attention when the teacher giving an explanation
√
2. Student gives a question when they did not understand well with the materials
√
3. The students being active during learning process
√
4. Students ask the teacher about the word that they do not understand
√
5. Students present their discussion √
6. Students pay attention when the teacher giving feedback
√
Total score 17
Percentage of activities 71%
Category Good
From the student worksheet above, the score was 17 with the percentage of activities was 71%. It can be concluded that, the students did not good activity during learning process.
d. Reflecting
During the treatment process in cycle 1, the researcher and the teacher discussed the conclusions from the implementation of the action. Then they try to adjust the measures so that 85% of the students in the class can pass the classical mastery or KKM. However, some student learning outcomes, such as activities in the classroom, still need to be improved. Students are still less involved in learning, and their involvement has not developed, so the next cycle must be carried out because both test results and observations do not fulfill the
classical mastery or KKM and indicators of success. Therefore, more efforts should be made to improve students' speaking talent using cooperative learning with time token arends strategy, it is needed in the next cycle.
3. Research Result in Cycle 2 a. Planning
In this step, the researchers prepared the student attendance list, spidol, prepared materials, a test, students scoring, and observation sheet of the students and teacher’s activities. In this phase, the researcher gave new materials. While, the difference is that in the cycle 2 there are several changes, such as the teacher having to give interesting explanations to students in class and only changing the teaching materials.
b. Action
1) Meeting 1
The first meeting of cycle 2 was conducted on Tuesday, 22 March 2022. The researcher opened the class by greeting and asked the students condition then the researcher checked the student attendance list. Furthermore, the researchers gave the students motivation and continue to the next activity. The main activity was held same as the first cycle. The researcher reviewed again the material in the previous meeting then she gave new material about biographical recount. The researcher explained the
definition until the example. After that, she gave the student time to ask the question. There were no students asked the question then students continued to the learning process.
As like usual, the students back to their group and discuss about the material that the researcher has been prepared. The students are asked to identify the generic structure of the text and memorize it. While waiting the students to present the result, the researcher walking around the class to controls the student. After all has done, the researcher asked the students to present it and they felt better and free to speak and the researcher saw that the improvement was greatly increased.
In the end of the class, the researchers gave some comment, feedback, and summarize the lesson together. She also gave the students information that next meeting would post-test section.
The researchers closed the meeting by saying Assalamualaikum and see you next meeting.
2) Meeting 2
The second meeting conducted on Tuesday, 12 April 2022.
The researcher came to the class and opened the class by greeting the students. She also checked the student attendance list. Besides, the researcher reminded and checked the students understanding about previous materials. This meeting was focused on conducting the test of post-test in cycle 2. After all the students
did a test, the researcher closed the meeting by saying Assalamualaikum and thank you.
Table 4.5
The Results of Post-Test in Cycle 2
No Students Score
1. AW 88
2. AV 88
3. AK 88
4. AK 81
5. A 81
6. BRDS 94
7. ERY 88
8. EAN 94
9. HAA 81
10. HUQ 81
11. H 81
12 ISI 88
13. IK 81
14. KJ 81
15. K 81
16. LIDP 75
17. LAR 81
18. LAS 88
19. LS 88
20. MSI 88
21. MAKA 81
22. MSJS 81
23. MA 75
24. NKHDA 81
25. NKN 81
26. NKSD 88
27. NLNLS 94
28. OCR 81
29. PDC 81
30. RH 75
31. RUA 88
32. RHD 94
33. RA 75
34. TA 88
35. YS 88
36. ZPA 88
TOTAL 3035
AVERAGE 84
Based on the table above, the researcher was calculated the score of student post-test using the previous formula as mentioned in data analysis. The students score in cycle 2 was 3035 with an average 84, while the students who passed the classical Mastery or KKM was 32 students from 36 students with the percentages was 88%. Which means the students speaking scores was greatly improved from the pre-test and post-test cycle 1 and the researchers finished in this cycle.
c. Observing
In cycle II, the classroom situation in the learning process was better than cycle I. Students who can concentrate and pay attention to the teacher’s explanations and learn to talk. Furthermore, as proven by observations, most students can build on their views once they begin talking and can effectively communicate the topic. The majority of them get more engaged in the discussion as a result. Teacher-student communication is also good in those activities, resulting in positive feedback from students who communicate their views and teachers who assist students in understanding the materials.
The following is the table of teachers and students scores in cycle 1:
Table 4.6
Teachers Observation Sheet in Cycle 1
No. Activities Score
1 2 3 4
1. The teacher giving the topic of discussion and the teacher explained the material well; he speaks bahasa to make an easy understanding for the students
√
2. Using cooperative learning with time token arends strategyto teach speaking skills, the teacher gave the students example of how to apply the strategy in learning process.
√
3. The teacher gives more explanation about the materials and gave the example of biographical recount text.
√
4. The teacher giving opportunity for asking the question and helping the students difficulties during learning process
√
5. The teacher divided the students into some groups, then asked the students to give opinion based on the material based on group discussion
√
6. The teacher walking around the class.
The teacher helps, guides, and monitoring the students
√
7. The teacher instructs all the group to present their discussion
√
8. The teacher records every presentation √
9. The teacher gives feedback and motivation and then tells the conclusion of discussion
√
Total score 35
Percentages of activities 97%
Category Very good
Based on teacher observation worksheet above, the total score of teacher activities during treatment was 35 and with the percentage was 97%. Which means the teacher did the teaching learning process of speaking activities very good.
Table 4.7
Student Observation Sheet in Cycle 2
No. Activities Score
1 2 3 4
1. Students gives their attention when the teacher giving an explanation
√
2. Student gives a question when they did not understand well with the materials
√
3. The students being active during learning process
√
4. Students ask the teacher about the word that they do not understand
√
5. Students present their discussion √
6. Students pay attention when the teacher giving feedback
√
Total score 21
Percentage of activities 88%
Category Very Good
From the student worksheet above, the score was 21 with the percentage of activities was 88%. It can be concluded that, the students did the learning process of speaking very good during the activities.
d. Reflecting
Following the results of observation and posttest 2, a reflection on classroom action research (CAR) is conducted, with the goal of
improving student learning outcomes, such as classroom activity.
Students become more active than before, increasing their learning involvement, and the cycle can be stopped since both test results and observations meet the KKM or indicator of success. The findings of researchers' and teachers' attempts to improve students' speaking skills were positive. The two pupils' posttest results were higher than the classical mastery or KKM. Meet the success criteria that 85 percent of students must achieve a score higher than the classical mastery or KKM. As a result, researchers and teachers have agreed to put an end to classroom action research.