52 and Gilson 1994:44-45. In the second model, the planner describes specific
functions that students should be able to perform within specific content areas. In the third model, the planner might use proficiency criteria in two ways: using
certain guidelines to establish a performance level to be attained or using certain proficiency principle.
B. Relevant Studies
Improving students’ speaking skills could be done through many ways. One of them is by using the communicative language teaching methodology which
emphasizes the use of the pre-communicative and communicative activities. There are many researches
—both action and experimental research—that had been conducted proved the positive effect of using this methodology and its activities.
Several of them will be described in the following paragraphs Faradila 2012 applied CLT methodology
to improve her students’ speaking skills. Her action research consisted of three cycles. Her subject was the 29
students of MAN Tengaran. Her instruments were observation and test. In the end of every cycle she conducted test to know the students’ progress. The results were
the means of two progress test scores and a post-test score which were 48,60 in Cycle 1, 62,06 in Cycle 2 and 73,10 in Cycle 3. However, she described less of
the processes and emphasized more on the results of the action. In line with Faradila, Efrizal 2012 applied
CLT to overcome students’ speaking problems. His subject was the 25 students of MTS Ja-alhaq in Bengkulu.
He conducted his research in four cycles. Almost the same with the first
53 researcher mentioned, he mostly described the quantitative results of the study.
However, what worth noting was his finding in the end of his study. He found out that this method could improve students’ self-confidence, learning motivation,
and fluency. It also minimized students’ problems in speaking English such as low motivation to speak, inability to speak to express their idea, and being shy. In
short he concluded that this method was effective to teaching speaking and able to improve students’ speaking achievement in his case.
Slightly different with the earlier, Nurhayati 2011 conducted an experiment studie
on improving students’ speaking skills. Her research subjects were two classes of the first grade students in MA Pembangunan UIN Jakarta in
the 20102011 academic year which were class A as the experiment group and class B as the control group. She treated class A with CLT methodology while
class B with Grammar Translation Methodology. At the end of her study, an effective improvement was gained by the experiment group which at
that time, got a mean score of 81. It outnumbered the score gained by the control group which was 73. Her concluding remark was that CLT was improving
students’ speaking skill in communicating effectively. More specifically, more researchers conducted some classroom action
research to improve students’ speaking skills using communicative activities.
Hidayat 2009 implemented these activities to his subjects of the research consisting of 28 students of SMP Kristen 4 Mongonsidi Surakarta 20082009. His
study consisted of 2 cycles. He used several techniques for collecting the data such as journal, observation, field notes, and recording. He mixed the qualitative
54 and quantitative techniques in analysing the data. In his research, he conducted
several actions: 1 providing the students question and answer activity; 2 practicing dialogues using a role-playsimulation; 3 practicing pronunciation
using pictures; 4 translating English texts; 5 conducting interlude activities; 6 giving credit point to the active students; 7 using teaching media. He conducted
those actions in both cycle except action number 2 because he found out that it took a lot of time and ineffective. At the end of the research, he assigned that the
actions were able to result improvement and got good responses from the students. Some changes in terms of students’ behaviour and speaking skills also
appeared. The students got more motivated as well as their fluency and accuracy improved.
Fauziah 2013 held more information gap activities and games as the main action in
her research. They were ‗helping my class mate activity’, ‗giving me a favour activity’, ‗serving the customer activity’, ‗search game activity’, and
‗survey game’. She also conducted some actions in preparing students to do those activities such as using classroom English, communicating the objective of the
lessons to the students, conducting pre-communicative activities, giving feedback, giving hand-outs, asking the students to bring dictionaries, using media in the
teaching and learning processes, and giving rewards to the students. The result of her research showed that the
students’ achievement improved in terms of their responsiveness, fluency, accuracy, self-confidence, and cooperation. The learning
atmosphere also comforted the students because they got a lot of chance to speak up by the role of the accompanying activities. This was also experienced by
55 Jaelani 2014. In his research, he found that those supportive activities could
prepare the students to perform the communicative activities. Wiratsih 2011, after her second cycle found out that pictures helped the
students in doing communicative activities. The students were assigned as being enjoyed in the teaching and learning processes, attracted to join the activities,
responsive to the teacher ’s questions and instructions, and accustomed to use
classroom English. Pratiwi 2013 used the group activities in performing the research.
Moreover, Ilmi 2012 emphasized on cooperative learning in conducting the pre- communicative and communicative activities. This model was proved to be
effective to be applied in a large classroom because the students could help each other in performing the activities. It helped the students to build their confidence.
It also improved the students’ understanding of the materials and the teacher’s classroom management.
C. Conceptual Framework
