CORRELATION BETWEEN MOTIVATION AND SPEAKING ABILITY OF FIRST GRADE STUDENTS OF SMA AL AZHAR 3 BANDAR LAMPUNG

(1)

ABSTRACT

CORRELATION BETWEEN MOTIVATION AND SPEAKING ABILITY OF FIRST GRADE STUDENTS OF SMA AL AZHAR 3 BANDAR LAMPUNG

EKA SETIAWAN

Since language is a means of communication, therefore the success of English learning is determined generally by the speaking ability. Nowadays, although learners have learned English for years, many of them are still incapable to use English orally. These may be caused by the limitation of opportunity to practice, lack of vocabulary, or psychological factors which more concern to the fear of making mistakes when speaking English. One of factors that make the students fail in learning English is because of having low motivation. As we know that motivation identifies as primarily with the learner’s orientation toward of learning a second language. The lowest motivation they have in uttering their own utterances the lowest chance to be successful in learning a foreign language especially in speaking will be.

This research is quantitative research. The design used in this research was expost-facto design. This research was conducted at SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung in the school year 20100/2011 and the subject was one of the classes of the first grade

(2)

that was class X5 and it consisted of 38 students. In collecting data, the writer applied the questionnaire for motivation and subjective test for speaking.

After doing normality test and homogeneity test, it was found that the data were normally distributed and also fulfilled the criteria of the equality of variance. The result of normality test showed the value of two-tailed significant 0.200 (0.200>0.05). The result of homogeneity test also showed the value of two-tailed significance 0.205 > 0.05. It means that H0was accepted. Furthermore, the result of this research showed that there is a significant correlation between motivation and students’ English speaking ability. At level of significance 0.01, the coefficient correlation is higher than the critical value of r-table (0.818>0.413), with the 2 tail significance p< 0.01 (p= .000). It was also found that coefficient correlation was 0.818 categorized as high or strong correlation. Moreover, the contribution value showed that motivation contributes 67% to their English speaking ability while 33% was influenced by other factors.

(3)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim…

Praise is always to THE MIGHTY ALLAH SWT for the gracious mercy and tremendous blessing that always guides the writer along his life. He believes that by the blessing and the grace of Allah SWT, he is able to accomplish this script, entitled “Correlation Between Motivation And Speaking Ability Of First Grade Students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung” as one of the prerequisites to finish the S1 degree at Language and Arts Department at Teacher Training and Education Faculty, University of Lampung.

His first appreciation goes to Prof. Dr. Patuan Raja, M.Pd., as my academic advisor for his guidance and motivation to do what should I do in dealing my study during in University of Lampung.

Furthermore, he owes the greatest debt to both of his advisors, Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A., and Drs. Sudirman, M.Pd., who had full of patience and some humor in guiding him to write this script. Although very busy with their routine as the lecture of Lampung University, they have been very generous with their time, comments, suggestions and corrections on every draft of his script. Without such guidance and assistance, he could not have finished his research and writing up this script on time.

His gratitude is also extended to Mr. Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A. Ph.D., as the examiner for patiently giving any suggestions, critics, input and advices to improve this script.

He would also like to express his gratitude to the headmaster of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung, Drs. H. Ma’rifuddin Mz., M.Pd.I., and the English Teacher, Mrs. Tien Yati Authon, SS., for giving the opportunity and time to conduct this research. Appreciation is also addressed to all students of SMA AL AZHAR 3 Bandar Lampung class X 5 for being good and sweet students.

Moreover, special indebtedness is dedicated to his beloved parents, his mother Ernayati and his father Iswandi, S.Ip., who always care, protect and support the writer the whole of life. He gained mental and physical strength from their prayers so that he could finish his S1 degree. His thankfulness is also dedicated to his whole family, especially to his brother, Indra Budi Wijaya.

He would also like to express his gratitude to his great woman Ariesta Prapti Pratiwi, S.Pd., for her patience and big love. For my entire classmate of English

(4)

06, i thank you for helping me so far. For All my best friends in PMII (Indonesian Muslim Students Movement), ESo (English Society) Lampung University, and BEM Lampung University, i would like to express my appreciation for giving any space of place and time in gathering much experience and network so far.

Last but not least, his thankfulness is also addressed to his best friends forever Erlan Heryanto, S.Pd., and Ahmad Sahlan. They also assisted him in clarifying important concepts and theories related to his research topic at the beginning of his research work.

Bandar Lampung, January , 2012 The writer,

(5)

ADMITTED BY

1. Examination Committee

Chairperson : Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A. ………

Examiner : Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D. ………

Secretary : Drs. Sudirman, M.Pd. ………

2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

Dr. H. Bujang Rahman, M.Si. NIP 19600315 198503 1 003

(6)

Research Title : CORRELATION BETWEEN MOTIVATION AND

SPEAKING ABILITY OF FIRST GRADE

STUDENTS OF SMA AL AZHAR 3 BANDAR LAMPUNG

Student’s Name : Eka Setiawan Student’s Number : 0643042009

Department : Language and Arts Department Program : English Education Program Faculty : Teacher Training and Education

APPROVED BY

ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Co-Advisor Advisor

Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A. Drs. Sudirman, M.Pd.

NIP 19570406 1986 03 1 001 NIP 19550712 198603 1 001

The Head of

Language and Arts Education Department

Drs. Imam Rejana, M.Si. NIP 19480421 1978031 004

(7)

CORRELATION BETWEEN MOTIVATION AND SPEAKING ABILITY OF FIRST GRADE STUDENTS OF SMA AL AZHAR 3 BANDAR

LAMPUNG

By Eka Setiawan

A Script

Submitted in a Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for S-1 Degree

The Language and Arts Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY BANDAR LAMPUNG

(8)

CURRICULUM VITAE

The writer was born in Bandar Lampung, on October 28th, 1986. He is the oldest son of Moslem couple Iswandi, S.Ip., and Ernayati. He has one brother named Indra Budi wijaya. He went to a formal education institution for the first time at TK PTPN VII Bandar Lampung in 1991 and graduated in 1992.

He had his study in primary school at SD Al Azhar Bandar Lampung and graduated in 1998. Then, he continued to secondary school at SMPN 1 Bandar Lampung and accomplished it in 2001. After that, he joined a state senior high school at SMA Negeri 6 Bandar Lampung and graduated in 2004.

In the same year, 2004, he was registered as a student in Diploma 3 Informatics System Computer Program in Teknokrat University, and then in the end of August 2006 he was registered as student in S1 English Education Study Program in the Teacher Training and Education Faculty, University of Lampung. He graduated from University of Lampung on March 2012. At the beginning of February, 2010, he performed field practice program (PKL) at SMA AL AZHAR Bandar Lampung for two months and finished at the end of April, 2010.

(9)

CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT... i

ADVISOR APPROVAL... iii

ADMISSION ... iv

CURRICULUM VITAE ... v

DEDICATION ... vi

MOTTO ... vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS... x

LIST OF TABLES ... xii

LIST OF GRAPH... xiii

1. INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1. Background of the Problem ... 1

1.2. Formulation of the Problem ... 5

1.3. Objective of the Research ... 5

1.4. Uses of the Research ... 6

1.5. Scope of the Research ... 6

1.6. Definition of Terms... 7

2. FRAME OF THEORIES ... 8

2.1. Motivation in General ... 8

2.2. Types of Motivation... 14

2.3. Types of Motivation in Learning English as a Foreign Language... 15

2.4. Types of Motivation in Speaking English... 16

2.5. Notion of Speaking English ... 18

2.6. Types of Speaking Skill ... 21

2.7. Aspects of Speaking... 22

2.8. Evaluating Speaking Ability ... 24

2.9. Theoretical Assumption ... 26

2.10. Hypothesis... 27

3. RESEARCH METHODS ... 28

3.1. Research Design... 28

3.2. Population and Sample... 30

3.3. Research Instruments ... 31

3.3.1. Test of Motivation... 31

3.3.1.1. Table Specification of Motivation ... 33

(10)

3.3.2.1. Speaking Topics ... 35

3.2.2.2. Speaking Scoring System... 36

3.4. Reliability and Validity of the Instruments ... 38

3.4.1. Reliability of Instruments... 38

3.4.2. Validity of Instruments ... 40

3.5. Research Procedure... 41

3.6. Data Treatment... 42

3.7. Hypothesis Testing... 45

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ... 46

4.1. Result of the Research... 46

4.1.1. Result of Motivation Test ... 47

4.1.2. Result of English Speaking Test ... 50

4.1.3. Result of Normality Test ... 56

4.1.4. Result of Homogeneity Test ... 57

4.1.5. Correlation between Motivation and Students’ English Speaking Ability ... 57

4.1.6. Contribution of Students’ Motivation toward Students’ English Speaking Ability……….... 58

4.1.7. Hypothesis Testing………. 59

4.2.Discussions………... 60

5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS ... 72

5.1. Conclusion ... 72

5.2. Suggestions ... 74

REFERENCES... 76

(11)

DEDICATION

This script is dedicated to:

_{My parents (Iswandi, S.Ip., and Ernayati).}

My brother (Indra Budi Wijaya).

My wife to be (APP).

My best friend (Erlan Heryanto, S.Pd., Ahmad Sahlan, Setio Agung W,

Jaka Dirgantara, M. Khadafi, Adi Suratman, Ferry Kurniawan, Yeni

Ratnasari, Lucy Rosiana, Eva Wijayanti, Zulpri, M. Karisma,

Noprisyah Hariyanto, Haris Tamzil, Achmad Yudi and to all may

classmate of English 06.

(12)

GRAPH

Graph Page

1. Estimated Marginal Means of Speaking………. 72

(13)

GRAPH

Graph Page

1. Estimated Marginal Means of Speaking………. 72

(14)

LIST OF TABLES Table

Pages

Table of Motivation Score ... 47

Table of Descriptive Statistics ... 48

Table of Total Score of Each Indicator in Motivation’s Questionnaire... 49

Table of Result of Students’ English Speaking Ability... 51

Tableof Frequency of the Students’ Score in Each Component of Speaking... 52

Table of Normality Test... 56

Table of Homogeneity Test... 57

Table of Value of Pearson Product Moment Correlation ... 58

(15)

I. INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the writer presents six topics which consist of background of the problem, formulation of the problem, objective of the research, uses of the research, scope of the research, and definition of terms, where each topic specifically explains why and where the research was held.

1.1 Background of the Problem

In this globalization era, at school English is taught as a foreign language in Indonesia. It has an important role in the world, in term of communication and interaction. As an international language, most countries in the world use English as medium of communication in entire aspects of life. Meanwhile, In Indonesia English is considered as a foreign language (EFL). It also has been introduced to educational institutions which are learnt from Elementary School up to university as compulsory subject. The ability to speak English has always become a very important goal for learners of this language both its natural and foreign setting. Although learning English without learning how to communicate in English is possible, today’s frequent transactions by means of the language have made the possession of the ability to speak in it become indispensable.

(16)

Since, English is taught as a foreign language in Indonesia. The government has already changed the education system with curriculum based on competence called CBC. It is adjusted with the demand of the world which already enters the globalization era. This system has standard competence and basic competence where each of them reinforces one another. In English subject, especially speaking skill at the first grade of senior high school, the standard competence is the students are able to express the meaning of short functional text and monologue text in form of recount, narrative, and procedure in daily context and in accessing the science. Whereas in basic competence, the students are hoped to be able to express the meaning of simple monologue text that uses language of popularly oral style accurately, fluently, and acceptably in form of recount, narrative, and procedure text. Based on those, simply, the students are hoped to be able to express their mind or idea using English in daily activity. However, more failures than successes have always marked the English teaching when attempts are made a particularly deal with ability to communicate. Many learners know about the language, but only some of them understand how to use it in daily social use correctly, not necessarily appropriately. As we know that English is already taught since they were in elementary school but the fact shows that they are still lack of ability in speaking English.

Based on the writer’s PPL experience in the first grade students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung, it was found that there was still limited interaction in speaking

(17)

class. Most students were unwilling to express their idea or opinion using English. They thought speaking is the most difficult part in learning English as a foreign language.It was also being supported by some students’ statement that said English is one of the difficult subjects to be studied. Therefore, they need a teacher who can motivate them so that it can increase their eagerness in learning English. In fact, mostly, at the first time the students were glad when they would like to face English as their school subject. They felt happy and curious to study English which is known as an International language. But, during the time to time, their motivation was lower than before. Most of them were getting bored to have this subject. Consequently, the aim of teaching English was far from the objective. Considering those statements, the writer realizes that it was because they had low motivation so that when they found difficulties they tend to be lazy in learning the language; consequently they were not able to speak in English.

The lowest motivation they have in uttering their own utterances the lowest chance to be successful in learning a foreign language especially in speaking will be. As Gardner and Lambert (1959) cited in Crookes and Schdmith (1991) identify motivation as primarily with the learner’s orientation toward of learning a second language. The theory means to imply that motivation is one of the determining factors in developing a second or foreign language. Without blaming who and why, this is the function of the pioneer of knowledge to return the students’ motivation or to encourage their confidence. Byrne (1982:2) says that our concern as language teacher

(18)

is not to inform our students about the language, but to develop their ability to use language.

Language is a means of communication (Allen and Widdowson, 1983:125). Therefore the writer realizes that one way to communicate with others is by speaking the same language. Since speaking is a productive skill, it is believed that more practice will make the students better than before. Therefore, the students need to practice in expressing their ideas in their speaking class. The purpose of English teaching is to develop in the students’ awareness of the ways in which the language system is used to express scientific facts and concepts (Setiyadi, 2006:143). Based on this idea, it is clear that the main teaching of English both for teacher and student is that they are able to use English as means of communication based on the context and the situation. But there are obstacles in motivating the students to build his/her utterances as Bygate (1987:Vii) states that one of the basic problem in foreign language is to prepare learners to be able to use the language. It is clear that psychological factor may give some contributions in successful learning especially English speaking. Moreover, the teacher has an important role in motivating the students to make them more active and brave to use their English orally, since the standard competence and basic competence in KTSP curriculum generally requires the students to be able to communicate in English. How this preparation is doing successfully depends very much on how we as the teacher understand the aim of teaching.

(19)

In the light of considerations above, the writer was attracted to investigate whether there is a correlation between students’ speaking ability andstudents’motivation. So far, people believe that the more motivation the students have is the more ability in speaking students have. But this sentence should be proven by giving any kind of data. Furthermore, the writer also has a willingness to find out how far the motivation can contribute to students’ speaking ability.

1.2 Formulation of the Problem

Based on the background above, the problem was formulated as follow:

1. Is there any significant correlation between motivation and speaking ability at first year students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung?

2. How far does motivation contribute to students’ speaking ability at the first year of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung?

1.3 Objective of the Research

Based on the formulation of the problem above, the objective of this research was to investigate:

1. Whether there is significant correlation between motivation and speaking ability at first year students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung.

2. To find out the contribution of motivation toward students’ speaking ability at first year students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung.

(20)

1.4 Uses of the Research

It was hoped that the result of the research can be used as:

1) Information for English teachers, especially at SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung to motivate the students in learning English so that the students have a high motivation in speaking English.

2) A contribution for the school to improve and increase English teaching learning process especially in speaking class.

3) Practically, it may be used to inform the readers about contribution of the motivation toward students’ awareness in speaking English.

1.5 Scope of the Research

This research was a quantitative because the writer had willingness to interpret a numeric data and the data were quantified statistically (Seliger and Shohami, 1990:117). The research was conducted in SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung at first grade students in year 2010/2011. Since, Garner and Lambert in Littlewood (1991) divided motivation in learning the language into two parts; integrated motivation and instrumental motivation. The writer looked for how far the integrated motivation and the instrumental motivation interrelated with students speaking ability in English.

(21)

1.6 Definition of Terms

In order to avoid misunderstanding, the writer clarified some definition of key terms as stated below:

a. Co relational study in the present study means statistical description for determining relationship between two variables.

b. Motivation in this study refers to changing the students’ attitude or behavior toward their speaking class to be more interested and interactive. While motivation is an inner power reinforcing someone to do something (Oxford & Shearin, 1994:12)

c. Speakingin this study means an activity of interacting and communicating among people in social life. Lado (1960) defines speaking is the ability to express oneself in life situation, or the ability to converse, or to express a sequence of ideas fluently (dialogue speaking).

d. English speaking ability in this research refers to as an ability or skill which the learners have in communicating, conveying the meaning, and using a meaningful conversation in English that cover pronunciation, idea, grammar, fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary.

(22)

III . RESEARCH METHODS

The writer elaborates this chapter into seven topics and sub topics. They are research design, population and sample, research instruments, reliability and validity of the instruments, research procedure, data treatment, and hypothesis testing. Each of them is explained in specific way so that the reader can comprehend easily how the writer collected the data, calculated the data, prepared the test, and how reliable and valid the data were.

3.1 Research Design

Since, this research is correlation study where the writer investigated correlation between motivation and speaking ability of first grade students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung. Therefore, the writer categorized this research as quantitative research where it belongs to pre-experiment. The writer was interested in measuring how far the relationship between those two variables. The design used in this research was expost-facto design. The writer did not need control classes and experiment classes but the writer only collected the data at the present moment from one class chosen as the sample of this research.

(23)

The design was presented as follow:

X Y

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:27)

Where:

X = Motivation test (independent variable)

Y = Speaking test (dependent variable)

In other words, motivation is independent variable (X) that was tested by using Likert Measurement Technique (Likert Scale) where the result was students’ motivation data. While speaking ability as dependent variable (Y) is one of the language skills that was tested by responsive speaking and the result was students’ English speaking ability.

To process the data so that the writer can see the coefficient correlation between motivation and speaking ability, the writer applied Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. While, to find how far the contribution of motivation to students’ English ability is, the writer implemented regression technique

(24)

3.2 Population and Sample

The population of this research was the first grade students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung in the first semester. This research was conducted after mid semester because the writer intended to investigate their motivation in speaking class after they had studied English before having semester. There were eight classes of the first grade of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung in the academic year of 2010/2011. They were X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, and X8. Furthermore, the writer chose one of them through purposive sampling where every class had probability to be chosen as a sample. Finally, the writer found one class X5 with total number 38 students as the sample. The writer believed that this method can fulfill the external validity aspect and to get normal distribution data. There procedure was as follows:

•The writer collected the data based on the absent to the teacher, there were eight classes of first grade students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung.

•Then, the writer wrote eight names of the classes in the rolled papers and put it into a glass

•The glass was shaken and poured until one rolled of the paper came out then it was selected as the sample.

•Furthermore, the writer asked the absent of this class to the teacher where based on the absent there were 38 students which belong to this class, therefore automatically, these students were as the samples of this research.

(25)

3.3 Research Instruments

In collecting the data of variables X and Y (motivation and speaking ability), the writer used questionnaire applying Likert measurement technique (Likert scale) to measure students’ motivation (variable X), while for measuring students’ ability in speaking the writer applied a test where it was a set of questions and problems in form of subjective test (variable Y). And for the technique, the writer implemented pair work technique.

3.3.1 Test of Motivation

As mentioned previously, the measurement of motivation (X) was carried out through questionnaire. This questionnaire consisted of 25 items where each of them refered to integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. Actually, for the questionnaire, the writer applied Likert Scale where each item has mainly four alternative answers that is A, B, C, and D. By this the students were supposed to give their answers as factual and real information about themselves or the information that was close to the fact as provided in the 4 alternative answers.

Each of the alternatives is scored as the following: A = 4; for the very high motivation answer B = 3; for the high motivation answer C = 2; for the middle motivation answer D = 1; for the low motivation answer

(26)

Except items number 6, 16, 20 are the inverse answers which are scored as following: A = 1; for the low motivation answer

B = 2; for the middle motivation answer C = 3; for the high motivation answer D = 4; for the very high motivation answer

In addition to the indicator of motivation the writer takes the indicators from Makmun, (1983, p: 33-34) as reference as follows:

1. The duration of students in learning English; How long is the ability of students to use time in doing activity of learning

2. The frequency of students’ activity in learning English e.g., how often does the activity take place?

3. The persistence of students in learning English; How functual in doing activity; How strong his/her tenacity is.

4. The toughness or endurance of students in solving the difficulties of learning English and facing its problems or obstacles.

5. The aspiration of the students, for instance: purpose target etc.

6. The qualification level of students’ achievement in learning English

7. The devotion of students to get the objective of learning English, for instance: though, time, money, effort.

(27)

8. The students’ attitude to the purposes of learning English.

 Durasi kegiatan, (berapa lama kemampuan penggunaan waktu dalam melakukan kegiatan)

 Frekwensi kegiatan (seberapa sering kegiatan itu dilakukan dalam periode tertentu)

 Persistensinya (ketepatannya dan keuletannya pada tujuan kegiatan)

 Ketabahan, keuletan, dan kemampuan dalam menghadapi rintangan untuk mencapai tujuan.

 Tingkat aspirasinya (maksud, rencana, cita-cita sasaran atau target idolanya yang hendak dicapai dengan kegiatan yang dilakukan.

 Tingkat kwalifikasinya dari prestasi atau produk atau out put yang dicapai dari kegiatannya (berapa banyak memadai serta memuaskan atau tidak).

 Devosi atau pengabdian dan pengorbanan untuk mencapai.

 Arah sikap terhadap sasaran kegiatan

(Abin Samsudin Makmun, 1983, p: 33-34, Psikologi Pendidikan)

3.3.1.1 Table Specification of Motivation

No Category Item Numbers Total Item

1. The duration of students in learning English; How long is the ability of students to use time in doing activity of learning

1, 2, 25 3

2. The frequency of students’ activity in learning English e.g., how often does the activity take place?

3, 6, 23 3

3. The persistence of students in learning English; How functual in doing activity; How strong his/her tenacity is.

4, 8, 24 3

4. The toughness or endurance of students in solving the difficulties of learning English and facing its problems or obstacles.

11, 17, 22 3

5. The aspiration of the students, for instance: purpose target etc.

(28)

6. The qualification level of students’ achievement in learning English

5, 19, 20 3

7. The devotion of students to get the objective of learning English, for instance: though, time, money, effort.

11, 12, 21 3

8. The students’ attitude to the purposes of learning English.

7, 13, 15, 16 4

Note:

Items number 6, 16, 20 are inverse answers which answer D is scored 4 while A is scored 1

3.3.2 Speaking Test

In gathering students’ speaking data, the writer matched the test with the syllabus of the first year of SMA student based on school based curriculum or KTSP (an English operational curriculum which is arranged and applied by each education unit) which the newest curriculum used by the School. The writer conducted speaking test, which last for 90 minutes. In conducting the test the learners were provided a topic and guided to make a short dialogue in pair. The test was done orally, and directly the teacher called the group one by one in front of the class to perform the dialogue.

The learners were asked to speak clearly since their voice was recorded during the test. The material of the test was taken from person to person book which was appropriate for the students in the first grade. The form of the test was subjective test since there were no exact answers. The score of the students’ speaking ability was given based on the oral rating sheet provided. Since, this research applied Heaton (1991) as a guidance in measuring students’ speaking ability, the teacher and the

(29)

writer assessed the students concerned on 3 aspects namely pronunciation, fluency, and comprehension. As stated previously, in this test inter rater was applied; the first rater was the writer himself and the English teacher as the second rater.

3.3.2.1 Speaking Topics

As stated at the previous page, the writer took the material that was considered matching with the syllabus so that the students already had the background knowledge about its topics before. It also can be considered that students who have good motivation will not forget the material they have learnt before because the writer believes that they will use it in their daily activity with their friends, while students that have low motivation will forget it soon.

Pair work technique was used to assess English speaking ability of the students. The writer asked the students to work in pairs so that they can learn several things when working with a partner. Students learnt to clarify, confirm, and comprehend information; students learnt to assist each other in language learning and pronounce words correctly; and students learnt what they need to work on the most.

The students played role as the citizen census committee and the citizen in one section. After the test covered asking and giving personal information, for example name, date of birth, hobbies address, etc. Moreover, the writer recorded their conversation by using recording tools while they were speaking. The result of this test was considered as the data of students’ English ability.

(30)

3.3.2.2 Speaking Scoring System

The writer applied the oral ability scale proposed by Heaton (1991) as guidance for scoring the students’ speaking test that implements holistic scoring which covers accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility. Therefore, the writer scored those aspects collectively. Since, the writer applied pair work technique in testing the students’ speaking ability and the materials were dialogue, therefore the writer divides 38 students into a pair where one pair consists of 2 students so that there were 19 pairs. Each pair had 3 minutes to speak. During the speaking test the writer recorded the students’ conversation in the recording tools (hand phone) so that it can be transferred into compact disk while the teacher saw the process. The writer gave the copy of data that had been transferred into compact disk to the teacher in order that data can be measured by her. Furthermore, the recorded data was scored to measure the English speaking ability of the students individually then the writer accumulated the result of the test with the English teacher to fulfill the reliability of the test.

Range Pronunciation Fluency Comprehensibility

90-100 Pronunciation only very slightly

influenced by mother-tongue.

Speak without too great an effort with a fairly wide range of expression. Search for words

occasionally but only one or two unnatural pauses.

Easy for listener to understand the speakers’ intention and general meaning

80-89 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tongue with errors causing a breakdown in

communication.

Has to make an effort at times to search for words. Neverthless smooth very delivery on the whole and only a few unnatural pauses.

The speaker’s

intention and general meaning are fairly clear. A few interruptions by listener for the sake

(31)

of clarification are necessary.

70-79 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tongue but no serious

phonological errors.

Although she/he has made an effort and search for words, there aren’t too many unnatural pauses. Fairly smooth delivery mostly.

Most of the speakers say is easy to follow. His/her intention is always clear but several interruptions are necessary to help him to convey the message or to see the clarification

60-69 Pronunciation is influenced by the mother tongue but only a few serious phonological errors

Has to make an effort for much of the time. Often has to look for the desired meaning. Rather halting delivery and fragmentary.

The listener can understand a lot of things being said. But he/she must constantly seek clarification. Cannot understand many of the speakers’ more complex or longer sentences

40-59 Pronunciation is influenced by the mother tongue with errors causing a breakdown in

communication/global errors

Long pauses while he/she searches for the desired meaning. Frequently halting delivery and fragmentary almost gives up for making the effort at times.

Only a little bit (usually short sentences and phrases) can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone who is used to listening to the speaker. 30-49 Serious pronunciation

errors. No evidence of having mastered any of the language skills and areas practiced in course.

Full of long and unnatural pauses. Very halting and fragmentary delivery. At times gives up making the effort

Hardly anything of what being said can be understood. Even when the listener makes a great effort or interrupts the speaker is unable to clarify anything being said.

(32)

3.4 Reliability and Validity of the Instruments

Every research including social science and language research always use the reliable and valid instrument in order for the result to be more meaningful and believable. Therefore, the writer tried to define the definition of reliability, and validity as well as what kinds of tests that can be said valid and reliable.

3.4.1 Reliability of the Instruments

Even tough, reliability is only supporting data, but reliability aspect is really important. The instrument which has low reliability will mean invalid instrument. Shohamy (1985:70) states that reliability refers to the extent to which the test is consistent in its score, and it gives an indication of how accurate the test score. It means that the test score is dependable, stable and consistent when given to different situation or different people; in order words, the score of odd and even numbers have no high differences. To make sure whether the instruments were reliable or not the writer used the Cronbach’s Alpha. It was count based on the motivation scale and the range of 0 to 1. The higher Alpha is the more reliable the questioner will be (Setiyadi, 2006: 190-191).

According to Arikunto (1998: 260), the standard of reliability of the instrument can be described as follows:

1. 0.80–1.0 : very high reliability 2. 0.60–0.79 : high reliability

(33)

3. 0.40–0.59 : medium reliability 4. 0.20–0.39 : low reliability 5. 0.0–0.19 : very low reliability

As stated before, to measure whether the test was reliable or not the writer used Cronbach Alpha. Every item in motivation questioner was analyzed to make sure that the items consist of good unity. Motivation questioner was made up of 25 items that refer to integrative and instrumental motivation rated on four point Likert type scale from one to four, ranging from very high motivation, high motivation, middle motivation, and low motivation.

From the calculation of reliability analysis, alpha is 0.731. It means that the questionnaire has high reliability. It can be interpreted that the questionnaire is proper to be used for a research. The analysis of each item showed that if an item deleted, it would make alpha lower. For example, VAR00001 on if item deleted column (see Appendix 3), the alpha is 0.729. By considering this, it can be said that if item number 1 was deleted, Alpha would be lower than 0.731 whereas the higher Alpha is the better the questionnaire is. It also happened if VAR00002 on if item deleted column (see Appendix 3), the alpha is 0.721. It also did not make the alpha coefficient reliability 0.731. Therefore, with alpha 0.731, the writer believed that the questionnaire had high reliability and reliable to be administered. It also fulfilled the criteria of standard of reliability which is proposed by Arikunto (1998: 260). The

(34)

alpha score was 0.731, it means that the reliability of the instrument can be categorized as high reliability.

For speaking test, to ensure the reliability of scores and to keep away from the subjectivity of the research, the writer used inter-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability is used when scores of the test are independently estimated by two or more judges or raters. It means that there will be another person who gives score besides the writer himself. She was Mrs. Tien Yati Authon, SS., as the English teacher at SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung.

The writer considered that one inter rater was qualified to measure the learners’ speaking ability since she had a lot of experiences in teaching English and had much experiences in teaching speaking class at LIA. Moreover, she had graduated from university (minimally S1) in English major.

3.4.2. Validity of the Instruments

In this research, to measure whether the test has good validity or not, the writer analyzed from content and construct validity. Content validity means that the test is a good reflection of what has been taught and the knowledge which the teacher wants the students to know (Shohamy, 1985:74). It means that the items of the test should represent the material being discussed. While construct validity focuses on the kind of test that is used to measure the ability.

(35)

To get the content validity, the test is adapted from Likert Scale which was developed by Uniroh (1990, p. 91-97). In this test, the writer will give 25 questions which each item had the purposed to measure students’ motivation in learning English. It was believed that this questionnaire had content validity since this test had been already applied many times by other researchers who had the same intention.

For the speaking test, the writer adapted the topic that had been discussed in the class. It was about interpersonal text where the students gave some information about their self whether about their biography and also family in form of dialogue. The material taken from persons to person book and also adjust it so that relevance on the English curriculum. The writer also applied the oral ability scale proposed by Heaton (1991) as guidance for scoring the students’ speaking test that implemented holistic scoring which covers accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility.

3.5 Research Procedure

In conducting this research, the writer used the steps as follows:

1. Administrating Motivation Test

The writer provided a questionnaire of motivation to the students.

2. Administrating English Speaking Test

The writer conducted English speaking test by recording the result. The recorded result was rated by two raters.

(36)

3. Collecting Data

The writer gathered those data after the test by giving score. 4. Analyzing the Data

The data was analyzed by using SPSS software to observe whether there is any significant correlation or not and to analyze whether there is also influence or not.

3.6 Data Treatment

Since this research was a correlation study, the writer divided these variables into two variables. They were dependent variable and independent variable. The writer categorized speaking skill as a dependent variable since this ability is influenced by motivation while motivation was as an independent variable. The writer assumed that motivation has an influence toward the language achievement.

According to Setiyadi (2006:168-169), before analyzing correlation there are some assumptions that should be fulfilled. They are as follows:

a. The data should come from the same sample

b. The data should be interval or ratio

c. The data is distributed normally

(37)

Therefore before testing the hypothesis using Pearson Product Moment Correlation, it was necessary to find out whether the data in the samples are normally distributed and homogenous or not. This study applied these following procedures:

1. Normality Test

The purpose of computing the normality test was to find out whether the data was distributed normally or not. In this research, the significant level of 0.05 was used to determine the normality of the data. The hypothesis of normal distribution can be described as follows:

H0: the distribution of the data is normal

H1: the distribution of the data is not normal.

The hypothesis is accepted if the result of the normality test is higher than 0.05 (sign > α). In this case,the level of significance of 0.05 is used.

2. Homogeneity Test

The test was used to determine whether the data fulfill the criteria of the quality of variances. The hypothesis for the homogeneity test of two variables is as follows:

H0: there is no significant different in the level of ability (equal)

(38)

The criterion for the hypothesis is: H0 is accepted if the result of homogeneity test of pre-test is higher than 0.05 (Sign > α).

Furthermore, after fulfilling the criteria of normality and homogeneity test, the writer correlated the variables by using Pearson Product Moment Correlation in order to process whether there is correlation between motivation and speaking ability.

The formula is as follows:

(Hatch & Farhady, 1982 : 198) Note:

r : the coefficient correlation x : motivation score

y : speaking ability score

∑ x : the sum of scores in X-distribution ∑y : the sum of scores in Y-distribution

∑xy : the sum of products of paired X and Y distribution ∑x2 : the sum of the squared scores in X distribution ∑y2 : the sum of the squared scores in Y distribution N : the number of paired X and Y scores

For the next is Simple Regression was done to find how far the contribution of motivation to their English speaking ability. The formulation is as follow:

( )(

)

( )

] [

( )

[

∑

]

∑

−

=

2 2 2 2

y

N

x

N

y

x

y

x

N

r

_xy

(39)

R =

r

Note:

R : Regression

r : coefficient correlation

3.7 Hypothesis Testing

As well as coefficient correlation, the writer must also find out the criterion of the hypothesis acceptance to show whether the first hypothesis was accepted or rejected, the writer applied a critical value table for Pearson Correlation Coefficient, the following criterion acceptance is used:

H

= r

value

< r

table

H

= r

value

> r

table

With the explanation as follows:

a. H0 : there is no significant correlation between motivation and students’ English speaking ability. We could accept this hypothesis if

r

_valueis lower than

r

_table.

b. H1 : there is a significant correlation between motivation and students’ English speaking ability. We could accept this hypothesis if

r

_valueis higher than

(40)

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

In this chapter, the writer comes to the conclusion and suggestions of this research. In the conclusion, the writer divides four points of view, while for suggestion the writer gives five points of view.

5.1 Conclusion

As stated by some experts that motivation is a factor that can influence human activity; students’ motivation in learning English can also influence their speaking ability. It means that the teacher as the pioneer of education as well as parents should motivate the students in learning English so that the purpose of learning English as means of communication can be achieved.

Based on the result of data analysis and discussion, there is significant correlation between motivation and English speaking ability, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. The average score of students’ motivation is 72. 2 where it is in normal category. It means that mostly students have good motivation in learning English. It just

(41)

✁

depends on the teacher to maintain their motivation so that the students have good willingness in practicing their English.

2. The average score of students in speaking English is 82. 8. It means that the students have high ability in speaking. The data show that students good in pronunciation, fluency, and comprehensibility. Since, they were good in pronunciation and fluently in delivering their questions and answers, the teacher and the writer were easy to understand their intention and general meanings of the conversation. It means that when they were good in pronunciation and fluency, the conversation would be comprehensible as well.

3. There is a close correlation between motivation and English speaking ability. The statistical analysis of motivation and English speaking ability showed that the value of coefficient correlation (r)= 0,818

4. For the contribution value, it was found that the coefficient influences value is 0,670 at the significant level 0.05. It means that motivation (variable X) contributes 67% to their English speaking ability (variable Y) at first grade students of SMA AL AZHAR 3 Bandar Lampung.

(42)

✂ ✄

5.2 Suggestions

Derived from the conclusion above, the writer proposes some suggestions concerning the research findings as follow:

1. For the teacher, it is important for them to maintain the students’ motivation. Besides giving an interesting material, they should also use methods in teaching English that can magnetize the students to practice a lot in speaking English. Therefore, the goal of teaching English can be achieved as what the teachers expect and also match with the curriculum deals with.

2. The teacher also must be aware to the students’ psychological factor that influences on the students development. Because, the students who are still in the first grade of senior high school have changeable attitude toward English subject. But, if the teacher can utilize the students’ curiosity and direct this feeling to the positive attitude in learning English. The students will be happy in learning English and their motivation will be more and more increase.

3. Since practice is the best way in learning the language, therefore the teacher must build the situation that can involve the teacher and the students and the student to the student communicatively speak in English.

4. For students, they must have good confidence in speaking English. By having good confidence they will be brave to produce words in English without feeling

(43)

☎ ✆

shy or being afraid in making mistake. Basically, they also need to join conversation class where it can give them more space to practice their English. In maintaining the students’ motivation, the writer also suggests some tips that can preserve students’ motivation; that students must join in a group where people in this group has good motivation in learning English so that they can learn each other on how to master in English, learn everything that can improve your ability in English, associate with optimists and positive people, and find a people that can motivate you when you need some suggestions or trouble in your life.

5. For future researcher, they can use this research as a literature to guide them when they want to do the similar research.

(44)

✝6

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. 1997.Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bina Aksara.

Astuti, Puji Nita. 2010.Correlation between Students’ Self-Esteem and Their English Speaking Ability of Second Year Students of International Standard Class at SMP N 2 Bandar Lampung.Unpublish script. Bandar Lampung: FKIP Unila. Atkinson, J. W. 1964.An Introduction to Motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.

Retrieved October 20, 2009, <http://www.ils.nwu.edu/e-for-e/nodes/NODE-62-pg.html>

Brophy, J. E. 1988.On Motivating Students. In D. Berliner & B. Rosenshine (Eds.), Talks to teachers (pp. 201-245). New York: Random House.

Brown, Douglas H. 1987.Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. Enleewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Inc.

Brown, Douglas H. 2000.Teaching by Principles.San Francisco: Longman.

Egen, Paul D. 1977.Educational Psychology,Third Edition. New Jersey: Prenticehall Inc.

Handoko, Martin. 1992.Motivasi Daya Penggerak Tingkah Laku.Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.

Harris, David P. 1974.Testing English as a Second Language. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing.

Krashen, S. 1981.Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. London: A. Wheaton Co. Ltd.

Mc.Intosh, Celcia N. 1997.Teaching Foreign Language Skills. Oxford: University Press.

Santrock, John W. 2004.Educational Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Co. Setiyadi, Ag. Bambang. 2006.Metode Penelitian untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing.

(45)

✞✞

Uniroh. 1990.The Correlation between The Students’ Motivation in Learning English and Their Reading Comprehension Achievement at Third Year Students of SMA Perintis Bandar Lampung.Unpublish script. Bandar Lampung: STKIP PGRI Bandar Lampung.

Universitas Lampung. 2006.Pedoman Penulisan Karya Ilmiah. Bandar Lampung: Lampung University Press.

Yufrizal, Hery. 2008.An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition.Bandung: Pustaka Reka Cipta.