Instrument of Research - RESEARCH METHOD - improving the students' speaking skil by using direc

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

H. Instrument of Research

The researcher uses the instrument of collecting data to get the data by using observation and tests. The explanation is as follows:

a. Observation sheet

The researcher would collect the data using observation sheets, which contain a list of activities that may occur throughout the treatment.

Observation sheets would be utilized to keep track of the teacher’s and students’ activities during the teaching-learning process. The activities are listed as follows:

Table 3.1

Teachers’ observation checklist

No Activities

Score 1 2 3 4 1. Teacher Giving apperception related to the

material will be given

2. Teacher Manage the class well 3. Teacher explained the direct method 4. Teacher and students discussed the material

that students have not understood 5.

Teacher responds to students' questions about the material that has not been understood

6. Teacher asked students to prepare to do the

exercise

7. Teacher and students conclude the subject

material together

Total score

Percentage of activities

Category

Note:

Score 4: Excellent Score 3: Good Score 2: Sufficient Score 1: Less

To gain the final score, the total score of each student and teacher’s activities would be times by 100 and divided by the maximum score.

Percentage of Activities: Total Score x 100%

Score max

Category:

100% - 75% (Excellent) 74% - 50% (Good) 49% - 25% (Sufficient)

24% - 0% (Less/Not Implemented) b. Test

The test is a based on the picture used to measure the achievement or capability of the individual or group in cognitive aspect. For instance, measure students’ competence, knowledge, intelligent and their ability in speaking. There are two kinds of test: pre-test and post-test. Pre-test conducted before teaching process and post-test conducted after teaching learning process. The test is oral test and researcher choose pre-test and post-test because can measure students’ speaking ability before apply the direct method and researcher could see the progress of students learning after the implementation method of direct method easily.

Students’ Rubric Speaking Score

Table 3.7 No

.. Students Aspects

SS C Pron Flue Conf Pres Total

4. Etc.

Points of Category³³

Note:

Pron : Pronunciation Flue : Fluency Conf : Confidence Pres : Presentation SS : Students Score C : Category.

Then, to calculate the score, researcher used the formula bellow;

1). Students score

X = Individual score X 100 Maximum score 2). Students score average

M= ^∑𝑋_𝑛 Note :

X = value M = Average

∑x = Sum x value / Result of whole students’ score n = Total students.

The researcher would compare the result with the indicator of success. Then, if the individual score is 70 % means the class is success, but if the score of individuals less than 70 % means the class is unsuccess.

I. Data analysis and reflection

In analyzing data, this research used the qualitative and quantitative data. In this research, data observation is analyzed by qualitative data. Also use the students score in analyzed the quantitative data. In knowing whether

33 Ibid.,

Initial Category Score VG Very good 71-100

G Good 51-70

F Fair 31-50

P Poor 10-30

promoting or not students’ speaking skill, the researcher use the steps above in analyzing the student improvement in speaking skill. This research will be finished when 80% of students get average score of KKM (70). To know whether the action increase or not in students when use direct method.

J. The Indicator of Success

The researcher decide that this research can be showed achieve the indicator of success if there is an improvement in students’ speaking skill or the students able to achieve the score 70% in minimum based on the KKM (Kriteria Ketuntasan Minimal) that have been decided by the English teacher.

The researcher expected that were at least 80% of the students who passed the passing grade.

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISSCUSSION

This chapter presents the research findings and discussions on the implementation of Direct method to improve the student’s speaking skill at the second-grade students of the MAN 3 Mataram. This research was conducted in two cycles: cycle I and cycle II. Each cycle consisted of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting with quantitative and qualitative data to collect the students’ scores during the research process. The researcher analyzed the students’

ability when applying the Direct Method in the learning process.

A. Research Findings

In this case, the researcher presented the finding of the research. As stated in the previous chapter, the research method used was action research in cycle 1 and cycle 2 with planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. Every cycle would be reflected to know the result of the action. A whole step in this research would be elaborated as follows:

1. Cycle 1 a. Planning

In this step, the researcher makes a plan to carry out actions based on the problems faced by students in speaking ability. In this case, the researcher developed a lesson plan based on the teaching materials. In addition, the researcher also prepared post-test 1 to determine the students'

abilities and whether the students' scores had progressed or not from the tests in cycle 1 to cycle 2.

b. Acting

This cyclical action was carried out on every 4^th, 7^th, 11^th, 14^th, 18^th, 21th 2022. In this step the researcher acted as a teacher based on the lesson plans while the English teacher acted as an observer who observed the activities of teachers and students during the teaching and learning process. The full explanation of this cycle will be described as follows:

1) First Meeting

The first meeting was started by giving them a pre-test to know their speaking ability. After that, the researcher began to explain about the Direct method techniques and procedures, which will be used to learn the next meeting. In this step, the researcher built excellent interaction and communication with the students to make them feel enjoy and build their background understanding. Then, the researcher allowed the student to ask questions related to the Direct method that they had not understood.

2) The second meeting

At the second meeting, the researcher began to apply the Direct method in teaching. Some principles of the Direct method is applied in the class. The most principle that researcher apply is always use full English in the class and never use Bahasa Indonesia. If the students did not know the English of one word, the researcher did

not translate it directly to the English, but, demonstrate it. By doing this, it would stimulate the students to speak in English and it also make their ears are usual to the English. During the teaching and learning process, the teacher made observations to determine the students' abilities and difficulties in discovering speaking and the important points of learning with the direct method. In this case, the researcher acts as a teacher during learning while the teacher acts as an observer. When the teaching and learning process has been carried out, the researcher checks the observations made by the teacher.

Finally, at this meeting the researcher reminded the students to prepare for the exam at the next meeting based on the material that had been taught previously.

3) The third meeting

At the last meeting of cycle one, the researcher conducted a post test. In this test is shown to the students and the students are asked to describe or explain the picture. The picture which is shown is same with in the pre-test, a photo of the third president of Republic of Indonesia, Professor Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie.

c. Observation

During this stage, the English teacher of the MAN 3 Mataram serves as an observer who observes the activities inside the classroom during the teaching and learning process. To monitor the students’ and teacher activities, the observer used an observation checklist prepared

beforehand. The observer only needs to give a mark (√) based on the actual situation in the classroom. The following is the outcome of cycle one’s observation checklist:

1) Observation Checklist:

a) Teacher Activities

Table 4.1

Teachers’ observation checklist

No Activities

Score 1 2 3 4 1. Teacher giving apperception related to the

material would be given 

2. Teacher manage the class well  3. Teacher explain the direct method  4. Teacher and students discuss the material

that students have not understood  5.

Teacher responds to students' questions about the material that has not been understood



6. Teacher asks students to prepare to do the

exercise 

7. Teacher and students conclude the subject

material together 

Total score 18

Maximum 28

Percentage of activities 64,28

Category Good

Note :

Score 4 : Excellent Score 3 : Good Score 2 : Sufficient Score 1 : Less

To gain the final score, the total score of each student and teacher’s activities would be times by 100 and divided by the maximum score.

Percentage of Activities: Total Score x 100%

Score max Category:

100% - 75% (Excellent) 74% - 50% (Good) 49% - 25% (Sufficient)

24% - 0% (Less/Not Implemented)

Mean = _{Max Score}^{T Score} × 100

= ¹⁸₂₈× 100

= 64,28

From the observations of teacher activities above, the results show that the average score of teachers was 64,28, which means that teachers teach good. However, there are several aspects that need to be improved.

b) Students’ activity

Table 4.2

Students’ observation checklist

No Activities

Score 1 2 3 4 1. Students attention to the explanation about

direct method 

2. Students follow the teacher instruction and

pay attention 

3. Students pay attention to the lesson  4. Students being active in following the

learning process well 

Students enthusiatics in asking the question related to teacher’s explanation about direct method



6. Students follow the teacher’s guide to

describe the object that has been given  7. Students listen to the teacher feedback 

Total score 19

Maximum 28

Percentage of activities 67.85

Category Good

Note:

Score 4: Excellent Score 3: Good Score 2: Sufficient Score 1: Less

To gain the final score, the total score of each student’s and teacher’s activities would be times by 100 and divided by the maximum score.

Percentage of Activities: Total Score x 100%

Score max Category:

100% - 75% (Excellent) 74% - 50% (Good) 49% - 25% (Sufficient)

24% - 0% (Less/Not Implemented) Mean = _{Max Score}^{T Score} × 100

= ¹⁹₂₈× 100

= 67,85

The observation of students’ activities above showed that students’ percentage score was 67.85, which meant that the students’ participation was good. Yet, there are some aspects that need to be improved.

c) Students’ Score a. Pre-cycle

Table 4.3

The Students’ Score in Pre-Test No Initial

Name

Aspect Total

score

Final score

Pro Gr Vo Flu Com

1 ADM 2 1 2 1 2 8 32

2 BFZ 1 1 2 2 1 7 28

3 DMS 2 5 4 4 4 19 76

4 FAT 1 1 2 2 3 9 36

5 HH 4 3 4 3 4 18 72

6 HDS 3 3 3 3 4 16 64

7 IR 1 1 2 1 3 8 32

8 IDY 3 2 4 3 4 16 64

9 IF 4 4 3 2 4 17 68

10 LNJ 1 1 2 2 1 7 28

11 LS 2 1 3 1 2 9 36

12 MRR 2 1 2 2 2 9 36

13 MH 4 3 4 4 4 19 76

14 MRA 1 1 2 2 2 8 32

15 NR 4 2 4 3 4 18 72

Total Score 188 752

Means 50.13

Pro = pronunciation Gr = Grammar Vo = Vocabulary Flu = Fluency

Com = Comprehension

To know the mean score of test the researcher calculated as followed :

M = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟

M = ⁷⁵²₁₅ M = 50.13

The mean score was taken from the result of students’ total score, which was divided by the number of students. The mean score was 50.13.

It means the score is low and needs improvement to make the result better.

Then to know the percentage of score the researcher calculated as followed:

P = ^R_T× 100%

P1 = ₁₅⁴ × 100%

P = 26.66%

P2 = ¹¹₁₅× 100%

P2 = 44%

Table 4.4

Table of students’ criteria

P Criteria Total of students Precentages

P1 Pass 4 26.66%

P2 Fail 11 44%

Total 15 100%

Based on the table above in cycle 1, the mean of the students was 50.13, and the students categorize still in poor level, and the number who were competent in calculated by applying the following formula:

P =^𝑅_𝑇 x 100%

Where:

P = the percentage of students who get the point (70) R = the percentage of students who get point up to (70) T = the total number of the students who do the test So the percentage of students was:

P1 = ₁₄⁰ x 100% = 0%

P2 = ¹⁴₁₄ x 100% = 100%

b. Test

Table 4.5

The Students’ Score in Post-Test 1 cycle 1 No Initial

Name

Aspect Total

score

Final score

Pro Gr Vo Flu Com

1 ADM 3 2 3 3 3 14 56

2 BFZ 2 2 3 3 3 13 52

3 DMS 3 4 5 4 4 20 80

4 FAT 3 2 3 3 4 15 60

5 HH 4 4 5 3 4 20 80

6 HDS 4 3 4 3 4 18 72

7 IR 3 3 3 3 4 16 64

8 IDY 4 3 4 3 4 18 72

9 IF 4 4 3 4 4 19 76

10 LNJ 2 2 3 3 3 13 52

11 LS 3 2 3 3 3 14 56

12 MRR 2 1 3 2 3 11 44

13 MH 4 3 5 4 4 20 80

14 MRA 2 2 3 3 3 13 52

15 NR 5 3 4 3 5 20 80

Total Score 244 976

Means 65.06

From the table of post-test cycle 1, the total score of the students was 976 and the number of students who completed the test was 15 students. To see the mean of the students in this test, the researcher applied the following formula:

X = ^∑x_𝑁 Where:

X = the mean of students’ score

∑𝑥= the total score

N = the number of the students So the mean of the students were:

X= ⁹⁷⁶₁₅ = 65.06

The mean of the conversion was divided by the number of students and 65.06. It meant the students’ scores had not reached the average score of KKM, which was 70. And to reach the average score of KKM, the researcher should do the next cycle and test 2 to know the students’ scores.

Table 4.6

The Percentage of The students' Score in Post-Test 1

P Criteria Total of students Presentages

P1 Pass 7 46.66%

P2 Fail 8 53.33%

Total 15 100%

The above analysis revealed that students’ speaking skill got enhanced. The mean of the students was 65.06 and included fair level, and the number of the students who were competent in calculated by applying the following formula:

P =^𝑅

𝑇 x 100%

Where:

P = the percentage of students who get the point (70) R = the percentage of students who get point up to (70) T = the total number of the students who do the test So the percentage of students was:

P1 = ₁₅⁷ x 100% = 46.66%

P2 = ₁₅⁸ x 100% = 53.33%

From the analysis above, knew that students reading comprehension got enhanced. The mean of students was 65.06 From the score which got > 70 were 7 students, or it was 46.66%, and 8 students got a score < 70 or it were 53.33%, it could be conducted that the students got higher in post-test 1 in cycle 1 than in pre-test. However, the students’ achievement in the post-test of cycle 1 was unsuccessful. Because the percentage of the students who passed the passing grade was only 46.66%, the researcher wanted the percentage of students who passed the passing grade to be> 80%.

d. Reflecting

In this stage, the researcher evaluated the implementation of direct method in the teaching and learning process. Based on the observation checklist of students’ and teacher activities, there are still many weaknesses. The students do not pay attention to the teacher explanation etc. Therefore, from the reflection above, there should be more efforts to enhance the students’ speaking skill by using direct method in cycle 2, like giving interesting teaching strategies and giving more motivation.

2. Cycle 2 a. Planning

After knowing the result of students’ scores in post-test of cycle one, the students were good enough in speaking skill using direct method, to meet the success standard, the researcher opted to undertake cycle two. The researcher prepared the lesson plan with the same modification in the first cycle. In addition, the researcher created an activity observation checklist for students and teachers. The researcher then created a post-test 2 to determine the students’ results.

b. Acting

1) First Meeting

In the first meeting in the first cycle, the researcher asked the students about what they had not understood about direct method and the difficulties they found when learning to speak teaching. The procedure of this cycle is the same as the previous

cycle, the researcher explained the material related to direct method and the example of direct method. Finally, at this meeting remind students to prepare for the test at the next meeting based on the material that has been taught previously

2) Second Meeting

In this meeting, the researcher conducted post-test 2 to get the students' scores. Before doing the test, the researcher reviewed the students' understanding of the direct method to remind students' abilities. Then tell them about the test. The researcher gave tests to students and gave directions on how to answer the test.

c. Observation

1) Teacher activities Table 4.7

Teachers’ observation checklist

No Activities

Score 1 2 3 4 1. Teacher giving apperception related to the

material would be given 

2. Teacher manage the class well  3. Teacher explained the direct method  4. Teacher and students discuss the material

that students have not understood  5.

The teacher responds to students' questions about the material that has not been

understood



6. Teacher asks students to prepare to do the

exercise 

7. Teacher and students conclude the subject

material together 

Total score 25

Maximum 28

Percentage of activities 89.28

Category Excellent

Note :

Score 4 : Excellent Score 3 : Good Score 2 : Sufficient Score 1 : Less

To gain the final score, the total score of each students and teacher’s activities would be times by 100 and divided by the maximum score.

Percentage of Activities: Total Score x 100%

Score max Category:

100% - 75% (Excellent) 74% - 50% (Good) 49% - 25% (Sufficient)

24% - 0% (Less/Not Implemented)

Mean = _{Max Score}^{T Score} × 100

= ²⁵₂₈× 100

= 89.28

From the observations of teacher activities above, the results show that the average score of teachers was 89.28, which means that teachers teach excellent. However, there are several aspects that need to be improved.

2) Students’ activity Table 4.8

Students’ observation checklist

No Activities

Score 1 2 3 4 1. Students attention to the explanation about

direct method 

2. Students follow the teacher instruction and

pay attention 

3. Students pay attention to the lesson  4. Students being active in following the

learning process well 

Students enthusiatics in asking the question related to teacher’s explanation about direct method



6. Students follow the teacher’s guide to

describe the object that has been given  7. Students listen to the teacher feedback 

Total score 27

Maximum 28

Percentage of activities 96.42

Category Excellent

Note:

Score 4: Excellent Score 3: Good Score 2: Sufficient Score 1: Less

To gain the final score, the total score of each student’s and teacher’s activities would be times by 100 and divided by the maximum score.

Percentage of Activities: Total Score x 100%

Score max Category:

100% - 75% (Excellent) 74% - 50% (Good) 49% - 25% (Sufficient)

24% - 0% (Less/Not Implemented) Mean = _{Max Score}^{T Score} × 100

= ²⁷₂₈× 100

= 96.42

The observation of students’ activities above showed that students’ percentage score was 96.42%. It means the students' activities when following the teaching and learning process were enhanced from cycle 1 and obtained excellent category, which means the students’ participation was very well or good. This was the last observation of students’ activities because the students’

participation was excellent.

3) Test

Table 4.9

The Students’ Score in Post-Test cycle 2 No Initial

Name

Aspect Total

score

Final score

Pro Gr Vo Flu Com

1 ADM 5 3 4 4 4 20 80

2 BFZ 4 4 4 4 5 21 84

3 DMS 3 4 5 4 4 20 80

4 FAT 4 3 4 4 4 19 76

5 HH 4 4 5 3 4 20 80

6 HDS 4 3 3 3 4 17 68

7 IR 3 3 4 4 4 18 72

8 IDY 4 3 4 3 4 18 72

9 IF 4 4 3 4 4 19 76

10 LNJ 4 3 3 4 4 18 72

11 LS 4 3 4 4 4 19 76

12 MRR 4 3 3 4 4 18 72

13 MH 4 3 5 4 4 20 80

14 MRA 4 4 4 3 3 18 72

15 NR 5 3 4 3 5 20 80

Total Score 286 1.140

Means 76

From the table of post-test cycle 2, the total score of the students was 1.144 and the number of students who completed the

test was 15 students. To see the mean of the students in this test, the researcher applied the following formula:

X = ^∑x_𝑁 Where:

X = the mean of students’ score

∑𝑥= the total score

N = the number of the students So the mean of the students were:

X= ^1.140₁₅ = 76

The mean of the conversion was divided by the number of students and 76. It meant the students’ scores had reached the average score of KKM, which was 70. And to reach the average score of KKM. it meant the post-test in cycle two was a success.

Then to know the precentage of students improved will be calculated as follow:

P = ^R_T× 100%

P 1= ¹⁴₁₅× 100%

P1 = 93.33%

P2 = ₁₅¹ × 100%

Dalam dokumen improving the students' speaking skil by using direct (Halaman 51-58)