Research Instrument RESEARCH METHOD

influenced by the mother tongue but no serious phonological errors. made an effort and search for words, there are not too many unnatural pauses. Fairly smooth deliveries mostly. easy to be followed. His intention is always are clear but several interruption are necessary to help him to convey the message or to see the clarification. 50-59 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 gap to search for the desired meaning. Rather halting delivery and fragmentary. The other can understand a lot of what is said, but they must constantly seek clarification. Cannot understand many of the speaker’s more complex or longer sentences. 40-49 Pronunciation is influenced with mother tongue with errors causing a breakdown in communication. Long pauses while the speaker searches for the desired meaning. Frequently halting delivery and fragmentary. Almost gives up for making the effort at times. Only small bits usually short sentences and phrases can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone use to listen the speaker. 30-39 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 give up making the effort. Hardly anything of what is said can be understood. Even when the others make a great effort or interrupt, the speaker is unable to clarify anything that have to say Validity a. Content Validity This kind of validity depended on a careful analysis of the language being tested and of the particular course objectives. The test should be constructed to contain a representative sample of the course, the relationship between the test items and the course objectives always being apparent Heaton, 1991. To get the content validity of speaking comprehension, the researcher tried to arrange the materials based on the objective of teaching in syllabus for second grade of senior high school students. b. Construct Validity In this research, construct validity concerned whether the test was true reflection of the theory of the trait – in our case - language which was being measured. If a test had construct validity, it was capable of measuring certain specific characteristics in accordance with a theory of language behaviour and learning. This type of validity assumed the existence of certain learning theories or constructs underlying the acquisition of abilities and skills Heaton, 1991. To find construct validity of the test, the researcher formulated the test by the concept of speaking. Reliability According to Crocker and Algina1986, reliability is the desired consistency of test scores or the degree to which individuals deviation score, or z-scores, remain relatively consistent over repeated administration of the same test or alternate test. To get the reliability of the data, the researcher asked the English teacher in SMAN 1 Kalianda as the inter- rater in analyzing the student’s speaking performance. Both the researcher and the English teacher gave score based on the oral ability scale by Heaton.

3.6 Data Analysis

The researcher provided analysis of the data by using the steps proposed by Moleong 1990 as follows: 1. Making the abstraction of the collected data was treated in one unit. The researcher interpreted all data available by selecting them into an abstraction. In this step, she selected the data in order to keep them relevant with the research question. 2. The researcher identified the data into a unity meaning that she paid attention to the term the students. It was used to distinct the activities in the process. 3. Categorizing the data based on the research questions. 4. Interpreting the data after categorizing the data then describing conclusion.

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

This chapter discusses about the conclusions and suggestions from the research.

5.1 Conclusion

After having results and discussion of the research, the researcher would like to draw conclusions as follows: 1. All components in negotiation of meaning: Trigger T, Confirmation Check through Repetition CCR, Confirmation Check through modification CCM, Confirmation Check trough Completion CCC, Clarification of Request CR, Response Self-Repetition RSP, Response Other-Repetition ROP, Response Self-Modification RSM, Response Other-modification ROM, Confirm or Negate Response RN, and Follow-up are used by the students in their conversation. 2. The highest frequency of negotiation of meaning’s component used by the students is Confirmation Check through Repetition CCR in 15 times. The less used component is Confirmation Check through Completion CCC in 1 time. 3. In the conversation most of students have difficulties in speaking English. Limited vocabulary and grammar become the biggest problem that they encounter while they are speaking English. 4. Most of the students’ speaking score is at 60-69. 29 students 87.88 get score 60-69, 2 students 6.06 get score 70-79, 2 students 6.06 get score 50-59.

5.2 Suggestion

Referring to the research findings and discussion on the previous chapter, the researcher would like to propose some suggestions as follows: 1. Students should be more active to practice English in order to improve their English ability. The students are expected to practice their speaking whether in class or out class. 2. The teacher is expected to be more creative in arranging the material. It supposes to create a fun English class so the students could enjoy the teaching-learning activity. 3. The teachers should motivate the students to learn a foreign language with objects which are known by them because those objects are familiar in everyday use. 4. Using realia in the teaching speaking could be a fun media to the students. Realia can become a thread between the student’s own knowledge and what it could be totally new for them when learning a language.