The Researcher Field Notes during the Treatment in Class
54 board. Those who had written down the answer would run immediately to the
back. Through the researcher
’s notes, the students were enjoying the game. However, the students’ habit to answer the teacher’s question in Javanese
language was hardly omitted. The students who were not interested in playing the game would make a group and did not pay attention to the learning activities. The
researchers anticipated this action by walking around the class and dragged them back to their group. The game was quite interesting for the students. However, it
was a bit difficult to control the classroom management because the students who played the game tended to move around. The game was the part of networking
stage and the result was the students who were usually quiet and passive tried to participate. The speaking treatment itself happened in networking and creating
stages Kemendikbud, 2013. In the teaching learning process, the students were already having a lot of interaction with the teacher to build the students
’ engagement. According to Krathwohl 1961 as cited in Taher, 2013, the
lea rning activity and the students’ experience is the basic process in which the
students build their value system. With the majority of male students, teaching became more challenging because the teacher should make sure that all of the
students paid attention and built up their positive behavior to become students who would actively participate in teaching learning activity. Therefore, teaching
the material in the stages of observing, questioning, experimenting, and associating were only covered the knowledge domain. In order to thrill the
students’ excitement, the use of game could help all of the students to actively
55 participate. The treatment by using game was the process in which the students
having interaction and creating the product as the result of their learning process at the same time in interesting way.
The second treatment was done on April 23, 2015. The researcher was giving extra time to the students to practice their speaking skill through drilling.
First, the students got information about the next topic. The topic was about “if
clause type 2 ” in which the students had experienced the stage of observing. The
researcher plays the slide show about the topic. The students read the example and the construction of the sentence. According to Dyer 2011, observing is the
process where the students gain their insight by finding the ideas. The process of observing could affect the students’ engagement in the learning activity because
the students build up their knowledge in order to be able in participating actively. Then on the speaking treatment, the students were drilled by changing
“if clause type 1
” into “if clause type 2” one by one beginning from the students sitting at the back to the front.
The researcher took notes that the students could not easily get involve in the drilling process because they never experienced it before. Even though the
students had read the example, they still hesitated in answering. It could happen because the students did not optimally use the stages of questioning and
experimenting. According to Dyer 2011, in the stage of questioning, the students must actively question what they did not know and gain the understanding what
was the problem. Because of the drill was new for the students, the students could find the other sources to enrich their knowledge which belong to experimenting.
56 The researcher took this opportunity to make the students work in pair which
belongs to associating process. This action could be the stimulus to the students to understand the material better because they had the responsibility to explain to
their partner. The researcher tried to minimalize the use of Javanese language by giving the rules for those who speak in Javanese; they had to answer two
questions. After some trials in two rows, the students could follow the drilling process and showed their result of learning in speaking spontaneously.
The third treatment was done on April 28, 2015. In the induction phase, the researcher gave stimulus to the students to recall what they have learnt in the
previous meeting which was about if clause type 2. In the core activity, the students got information about the competence, learning object, function and steps
of the lesson about persuasive text. The students received a handout about the topic. The speaking treatment was a group discussion. They had to make a group
of 4. Each student was given a handout with reading passages of the persuasive text. There were 8 groups and each group had the responsibility to explain to the
whole class about the paragraph that was appointed for them based on the number of the group. This opportunity was created to make the students to be able to
speak in English to explain to their friends. However, not all of the students were able to explain because of the time limitation. The students tended to give the
responsibility to the cleverest student in their group to explain. The fourth treatment was done on April 30, 2015. The researcher
introduced persuasive speech and helped the students to prepare for their post-test by introducing the theme that will be used. The students discussed the theme with
57 their friend in pair about student shouldshould not smoke in school area. The
students consulted to the researcher or their friends about the content of their oral presentation in the post-test. The students also tried to find the way to pronounce
the words and mind the content of their speech. The post-test was conducted on May 4, 2015. There are three students who
were absent because they had test on another subject. The review was shown that the students made an improvement compared to the pre-test. There were still a
few mistakes in pronouncing the words. But, overall, the students could improve their speaking and communicating skill.
To conclude, the process of implementing Scientific Approach during the treatment helps the students in mastering speaking skill. Students
’ improvement could not be separated from the process of shaping their positive perception in the
learning process. The students ’ preparation in learning, their engagement during
the teaching learning activities, and the product of learning indicated that the element of language teaching which built the
students’ perception that mastering speaking skill could be fun. It could be compared with the learning process during
the subject teacher classroom activities , researcher’s PPL classroom activities, and
the treatment. During the subject teacher classes, the students lack of opportunity in practicing their speaking skill because the teacher tended to give writing
assignments. During the PPL, the researcher was implementing the process skill approach and followed the process in the lesson plan that was given by the
teacher. However, the stude nts’ engagement in learning could not show any
improvements. By optimizing the opportunity to practice speaking by
58 implementing Scientific Approach, the students were able to solve their problem
in mastering speaking skill. It happened because the implementation of Scientific Approach was using integrated skills. According to Oxford 2001 as cited in
Ferianda, 2013, integrated skills or integration of skills can be defined as the combination of two or more skills within a communicative task. In the language
learning process, listening, speaking, reading, and writing should be treated as integrated, interdependent, and inseparable element of language Ferianda, 2013.
Harmer 2009 states that productive skills writing-speaking and receptive skills reading-listening are two sides of a coin that cannot be separated, because one
skill can reinforce another in a number of ways. Work just one side of the coin as the subject teacher did, it would yield wrong results for the students and they
would have a broken English learning, which show up the deficiencies about any skill Ferianda, 2013. The integrated skill that was supported by affective,
knowledge, and attitude domains in term of students’ interaction, knowledge
construction, and active participation could bring the greatest chance of successful learning outcomes.
The treatment by implementing Scientific Approach was also decreasing the students’ habit to speak Javanese and Indonesian languages during the
teaching learning process. In each stage, the students had to practice their English during the treatment in order to maximize their speaking in English. By trying to
change their habit and improve their ability in speaking, the result showed that the students
’ perception in learning had changed altogether with their improvement in speaking.
59