49 the observed and measured variables called the dependent variables. The speaking
accuracy and fluency were indicated by the students’ speaking tests. The second quantitative research method in this study was doing surveys
whose purpose was to discover what aspect of video recordings contributed to the improvement of the students’ speaking accuracy and fluency. Best 1970 as cited
in Cohen 2007 mentions that since surveys are descriptive, they may describe points of views, attitudes, and effects that are being felt. In line with Best,
Weisberg et al. 1996 as cited in Cohen 2007: 207 add that “surveys are useful for gathering factual information, data on attitudes and preferences, beliefs and
predictions, behavior and experiences – both past and present. In this study, the researcher would like to gather information from the students, particularly their
opinion and past experience in using video-recording in learning speaking, to figure out some aspects of video-recordings that contributed to the improvement
of the students’ speaking accuracy and fluency. The researcher did the survey by means of questionnaires. Cohen 2007 mentions that surveys in education often
use test results, self-completion questionnaires and attitude scales.
B. Data Gathering Techniques
In carrying out the study the researcher employed several data collection instruments. First of all, to obtain the evidence of the effectiveness of video-
recordings, the data were taken from both pre-tests and post-tests conducted in EG and CG. The pre-testfor EG happened on 11
th
and 14
th
March 2014, whereas the pre-test for CG was conducted on 18
th
and 21
st
March 2014. The post-test for EG was done on 30
th
May and 3
rd
June 2014, while the post-test for CG was on 2
nd
and 6
th
May 2014. The pre-test and post-test of each class took two days as time
50 constraint did not allow the researcher to interview 21 students at one time. The
CG had its post-test earlier than EG for the process of the experiment which applied the use of video-recordings in EG took longer than the conventional
teaching learning in CG. The pre-test and post-test scoreswere considered as the most crucial contributors for this experimental research.
The questions which occurred in the pre-test and post-test covered the topics used during the three-time implementations of the video-recordings See
Appendix 01. The scoring system was based on rubrics See Appendix 03. In the rubrics were speaking elements which were intended to be measured in this study,
accuracy grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation, and fluency, scores and their descriptors. The score range of every speaking element is 1 to 9. The rubric used
in this study is taken from IELTS speaking descriptors See Appendix 02. The main evaluator was the researcher’s colleague who was formerly trained how to
assess the students using the rubrics. The reason why the researcher worked with a collaborator as the researcher would like to obtain more objective pre- and post-
test scores. Second, to discover what aspects of video recordings contributed the
effectiveness of the use of video-recordings, the researcher distributed closed- form questionnaires on 20
th
June 2014 See Appendices 9a and 9b. Closed-form questionnaires are “questionnaire that call for short and check responses” Best,
1977: 158. The questionnaires consisted of thirty five closed questions and used Likert scale which has nominal data to indicate order from ‘strongly agree’ to
‘strongly disagree’. The researcher decided to use Likert scaling technique which assigns a scale value to each of the five responses. The consideration of using
51 closed-form questionnaire with Likert scale was because it is easily filled out
without taking too much time, keeps the respondents on the subject, and fairly easy to tabulate and analyze. The lowest score is for the negative answer strongly
disagree and the highest score is for the positive answer strongly agree. The phenomena gathering items or the statements in the questionnaire were made
positive. In other words, all statements favored the use of video-recording since it was to ease the analysis. The scores or scale values of the five responses are
illustrated in table 3.2.
Table 3.1 The Scale Value No.
Responses Scale Value
1. Strongly Agree 5
2. Agree 4
3. Undecided 3
4. Disagree 2
5. Strongly Disagree 1
To avoid imprecise data, the researcher initially made a blueprint, a detailed plan arranged by the researcher for making questionnaire items in order to answer
the second research questions relevantly and appropriately. The researcher made some indicators showing the aspects of video-recordings that might contribute to
the development of the students’ speaking accuracy and fluency. Afterwards, based on the indicators, the researcher constructed the questionnaire items. The
blueprint is described in the following Table 3.2. See Appendix 07 for more complete blueprint
Table 3.2 The Questionnaire Blueprint
INDICATORS QUESTIONNAIRE
ITEMS self-
correction Provides every individual with a
chance to watch and evaluate hisher own performance.
Accuracy Fluency
1, 4, 6, 10
16, 17, 20
52 peer-
feedback Provides each individual to receive
peer feedback on hisher speaking performance.
Accuracy Fluency
3, 8, 15 18, 21, 23
one-to-one teacher
evaluation Provides every student to have a
one-to-one personal evaluation with the teacher.
Accuracy Fluency
2, 5, 11, 12
7, 9, 13, 14 visual and
auditory feedback
immediacy and
feedback preciseness
or exactness Provides immediate feedback
through the screen visual and auditory feedback
Provides immediate feedback without any teacher’s interruption
during real mid-flow Accuracy
Fluency
22, 24, 27
25, 28, 30 Provides the opportunity to see the
exact part where errors are located and to decide which areas should be
improved. repetition
refinement Provides an opportunity to re-video
taping to get a better result of speaking performance.
Provides an opportunity for learners to watch the video several times for
intensive learning. Accuracy
Fluency
29 32
flexibility Provides an opportunity to re-video
taping refining to get a better result of speaking performance
Provides an opportunity for learners to have a repetitive speaking
practice while making the videos. 26, 31, 34
video display Provides the students an opportunity to present the best result of their
video and watch the other students’ speaking performances.
19, 33, 35
After the questionnaire items had been gathered, the researcher had her colleagues proofread them and piloted the questionnaires to the respondents. Its
purpose was to eliminate ambiguous questionnaire statements which might result in the respondents’ confusion. Cohen 2007 argues that if closed items are used
in the questionnaires, they may lack coverage or authenticity. Also, questionnaires present problems to people who have limited literacy. Furthermore, questionnaires
are often filled in hurriedly. Therefore, it is essential to pilot questionnaires and
53 refine their contents, wording, length, etc. as appropriate for the sample being
targeted. The third instrument is interviews. The interviews were conducted after the
questionnaires were distributed. This interview was intended to follow up and verify the questions in the questionnaire to gain further information. The interview
was in the form of semi structured interview. The researcher had the guidelines as seen in the Appendix 10, but there might be any possible and unpredictable
questions which occur to dig out more information from the interviewees. Besides, the interviews were given not for all students. Instead, the researcher
only chose certain students based on the purposive sampling. The researcher took two respondents from the EG who were a higher achiever and low achiever. The
advantage of having interviews is that the researcher could have deeper information about the respondents which could not be found through
questionnaires. The interviews could also act as a means to verify and clarify the answers from the questionnaires.
The use of multiple data gathering instruments is notably known as triangulation. Neuman 2006: 149 defines triangulation as “the idea that looking
at something from multiple points of view improves accuracy.” This triangulation in this study is called methodological triangulation since the researcher used
different methods on the same object of study. The researcher used more than one data instrument for the researcher would be able to crosscheck the result collected
from one data instrument with the results gathered from the other data instruments. Greene, Caracelli, and Graham 1989 as cited in Creswell 2003
54 argue that the results from one method can help develop or inform the other
method. The data collection was certainly done in different time. As it has been
previously explained, the first data were taken from pre-test. Since EG and CG had a parallel schedule and the one who had to interview the students was the
researcher herself, the pre-test was firstly carried out for the EG. The following week was for the CG. The different schedule for post-test also happened for EG
and CG since the process of learning using video-recordings in EG took longer than the process of learning without using video-recordings in CG. After the post-
test administered in EG, the questionnaires were distributed. Then, the interview was finally done after the scores of pre-test and post-test were completely
analyzed since the samples for the interviews were taken based on the scores the students gained.
C. Setting and Participants of the Study
