THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH AND THEIR SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE THIRD GRADE STUDENTS OF SMPN N 3 NATAR

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH AND THEIR SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE THIRD GRADE STUDENTS OF SMPN N 3 NATAR

By

IRINE SONIA PRATIWI

This research was aimed at investigating the correlation between students’ motivation in learning English and their speaking ability. The researcher used purposive sampling and there were 31 students selected as the respondent. Students’ motivation scores were estimated by using Likert scale in the range of 1 to 3, and their English speaking ability was tested by transactional speaking test based on criteria proposed by Heaton (1991).

From the questionnaire of motivation, it was obtained that the highest score was 82, the lowest score was 54, and the average was 70. For the detail, there was one student who got 82, meaning that he/she had high motivation. While there was one student who got 54, this score means low motivation, and three students who had average motivation. It means that most of the students had good motivation. For English speaking score, it showed that the average of students’ speaking ability was 84. The highest score was 90 and the lowest score was 75. It could be claimed that the students at third year of SMP N 3 Natar had good ability in speaking.

The result showed that the coefficient correlation was 0.622. This value means that the correlation is significant. It also found that motivation influenced English speaking ability of the students was 38.7%. The students who had motivation had more effort and willpower to reach their goals. It inferred that motivated students had more effort to overcome the learning difficulty. While for students who were not motivated, they would not give their best effort in learning and in achieving their goals so that their result in speaking was not maximal.

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH AND THEIR SPEAKING ABILITY AT THE THIRD GRADE STUDENTS OF SMPN 3 NATAR

(A Script)

By

IRINE SONIA PRATIWI A script

Submitted In A Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements For S-1 Degree

In

The Language and Arts Department of Teacher Training And Education Faculty

TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

CURRICULUM VITAE

The name of the writer is Irine Sonia Pratiwi. She was born in Temanggung on January 18th, 1994 as the first daughter of a happy moslem family Mr. Supriyadi and Mrs. Sukini.

She joined elementary school in SD N 3 Raja Basa Bandar Lampung in 1999 and graduated in 2005. She continued her study at MTs Al- Hidayah Sukajaya Bandar Lampung and graduated in 2008. Three years later (2011), she graduated from senior high school of MAN 1 (MODEL) Bandar Lampung.

She entered the S1 regular program at English Department Program of the Teacher Training and Education Faculty (FKIP) of Lampung University through SNMPTN in 2011.

In July-September 2014, she did her Teaching Field Practice (PPL) at SMP N 1 Ngambur Pesisir Barat.

Dedication

This script is dedicated to:

My beloved mom and dad, Sukini and Supriyadi. Thank you so much for your eternal love, support, attention, and pray for me.

Without you I would not be like the way I am now.

My beloved sister and brother, Bernessa Ghita Prabawa and Krisna Benedicta Prima. Thank you so much for your love.

My beloved friends Erlin Arisca, Eva Mayang S, Lia Anggraini S, Reininta Kesuma R, and family of Sumber Agung. Thank you so much

for your support and I love you so much.

My beloved Fraternity English Department 0 … thanks for the best moments I’ve experienced.

Motto

“If you are working in something exciting that you are really care about,

you don’t have to be pushed. The vision pulls you”.

Acknowledgement

Praise to Allah for the blessing and mercy that the writer is able to finish her script entitled “The Correlation between Students’ Motivation in Learning English and their Speaking Ability of the Third Grade Students at SMP N 3 Natar.” This script is submitted as compulsory fulfillment of the requirements for S1 degree of English Department at Teacher Training Education Faculty of Lampung University.

It is important to be known that this script would never have come into existance without many supports, encouragement, and assistance by several gorgeous persons and institutions, here, the writer would like to address her respect and gratitude to:

1. Prof. Ag. Bambang Setiyadi, M.A., Ph.D as the writer’s first advisor for his kindness within his time during the script writing process.

2. H. M. Ujang Suparman, M.A., Ph. D as the writer’s second advisor for his ideas, valuable suggestions, kindness in guiding the writer finishing the script and also as the writer’s academic advisor.

3. Dr. Flora Nainggolan, M.Pd as the writer’s examiner for his innovative ideas to make this script more valuable.

4. Dr. Mulyanto Widodo, M.Pd as the chairperson of the Department of Language and Arts Education.

5. Dra. Ros Lili Budiarti, the head of SMP N 3 Natar and Singgih Tri Widodo, S.Pd for providing the opportunity to conduct the research and being so helpful during the research process.

7. The writer’s beloved friends of 2011 English Department, Erlin Arisca, Eva Mayang Sari, Lia Anggraini Sari, Reininta Kesuma Redante, Barry Afriando, S.Pd as the chairman, Caboca crew; Marshela Risdanti, Ratih Widiasari, Luh Ayu Ferniawati M., S.Pd, Sofia Permatasari, S.Pd., Nitta Sitta Rahma, R. Siwi Juwita N., Komang Mega Susanti, Yohanes Agung P., Revi Marsita, Elisabeth G, Arthadina J, Dewi Firdanti, Ita Retno S, Anggarini Khandari, Yuni Apriani, Nurul A, Fiya S, Dara Helmasena, Rima Priska, Nidia Putri, Anggun KS, and all the boys in class B; Tri Widioko, Afif, Aria Nugraha, Chairul Ichwan, Hamdan H, I Nyoman, Kharis M, and Bagus Alghani, S.Pd and also my familiy of Sumber Agung, Agus Komari, S.Pd., Agus Wantoro, Galant Jodhi, Satrya Kurniawan, Maulida Etikasari, S.Pd. Nyoman Lusiani, Rika Sundari, Ria Afriza, Hani Ervina, Marelita Devisa and Dwi Winarsih and all of English 2011 fraternity. Thanks for your support to finish this script.

8. The writer’s brother and sister. Thank you for your support.

9. The writer’s mother and father for the love, guidance, support and care.

At last but not the least, the writer truly realizes that this script has not been perfect yet but hopefully, it can give a contribution and be a reference for educational purposes.

Bandar Lampung, May 2015 The Writer,

TABLE OF CONTENT

LIST OF TABLES ... ix

LIST OF APPENDICES ... x

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1Background of the Problems ... 1

1.2Identification of the Problems ... 3

1.3Limitation of the Problems ... 3

1.4Formulation of the Problems ... 3

1.5Objectives of the Research ... 4

1.6Uses of the Research ... 4

II. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION 2.1Review Preview Research ... 5

2.2Review of related Literature ... 9

2.2.1Motivation ... 9

2.2.2 Motivation in Language Learning ... 12

2.2.3 Motivation in Speaking ... 14

2.2.4 Notion of Speaking ... 16

2.2.5 Theoritical Assumption ... 19

2.2.6 Hypothesis ... 19

III.RESEARCH METHODS 3.1Setting of the Research ... 21

3.2Research Design... 22

3.3Population and Sample ... 23

3.4Research Procedure ... 23

3.5Data Collecting Techniques ... 26

3.6Validity and Reliability of the Instruments ... 30

3.6.1 The Validity of the Questionnaire ... 30

3.6.2 The Validity of the Speaking Test ... 30

3.6.3 Reliability of the Questionnaire ... 32

3.6.4 Reliability of the Speaking Test ... 33

3.7Data Treatment... 34

3.8Hypothesis Testing ... 35

IV.RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Result of the Data Analysis ... 37

4.1.1 The Correlation between Motivation and English Speaking Ability ... 37

4.1.1.1 Questionnaire ... 38

4.1.1.2 Speaking Test ... 39 4.1.2 The Contribution of Students’ Motivation in their

4.2 Discussion ... 54

V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion ... 65

5.2 Suggestion ... 66

REFERENCES ... 69

ix

LIST OF TABLES

3.1 Table of Specification of Questionnaire ... 27

3.2 Table of Specification of Speaking Ability ... 31

3.3. Table of Calculating the Students’ Answer of Questionnaire ... 34

3.4 Table of Classification of Positive and Negative Questions of Questionnaire ... 35

4.1 Table of the Value of Pearson Product Moment Correlation ... 38

4.2 Table of Score of Students Motivation in Learning Speaking ... 39

4.3 Table of Descriptive of Motivation Questionnaire ... 39

4.4 Table of The Percentage of Students’ Speaking Ability ... 40

4.5 Table of The Frequency of the Students’ in Each Component of Speaking ... 41

4.6 Table of Score of Students’ Speaking Test ... 44

4.7 Table of The Value of Regression ... 44

LIST OF APPENDICES

SPSS Correlation Table ... 73

SPSS Regression Table ... 74

Reliability Analysis Cronbach Alpha Correlation ... 76

Students’ Score of Motivation Questionnaire ... 78

English Speaking Test ... 77

Students’ Score of Motivation and English Speaking Score ... 80

Students’ English Speaking Score ... 81

Pearson Product Moment Correlation ... 82

I. INTRODUCTION

This chapter deals with introduction in relation to background of the problems, identification the problems, limitation of the problems, formulation of the problems, objective of the research, uses of the research, scope of the research, and definition of terms.

1.1 Background of the Problems

Speaking is an important aspect in language learning. By speaking, speaker and listener can get information or ideas. Speaking is an oral communication which maintains social relationship with others. On the other hand, most of the students in SMPN 3 Natar think that speaking is the most difficult skill when they learn English as a foreign language. There are potential problems that can hinder the students to speak. There are shyness, nervousness, feeling afraid of making mistakes, do not know how to pronounce certain words and low level of motivation. Those factors above become the reasons why the students of junior high school often get problems in speaking though they have to study English more than three years. Among the factors influencing students’ learning, motivation is taught to be a very important reason for different achievement. However, when the researcher did the pre-observation in SMPN 3 Natar, she found that 8 of 10 students were probably not interested in learning materials from

their teacher, and they felt bored. This was also based on the researcher’s daily observation, it seems that the teacher failed to motivate the students in learning English, especially in speaking skill. In speaking class, the teacher asked the students to practice the conversation by reading the diaogues from their book. The students were asked to perform their dialogues in pair. The teacher distributed the speaking test in the final examination at the end of the semester. This is contrast to good syllabus and lesson plan of the teacher, that the teacher should distributed the sepaking test at the end of the topic in every lesson plan. This technique was not effective to know the students’ speaking ability. In the prosses of teaching learning in the class, the teacher rarely uses the media as the facilitator in delivering the materials. Besides, material is important to make the students become more interested with the subject. It created negative impact for students’ motivation or students’ enthusiasm to learn English, especially in speaking. The students were not interested in the materials and also the subject. Those factors made students might lose their motivation in learning English in the class.

In line with the matters above, the researcher was interested in investigating the students’ motivation in learning English by finding out the correlation between students’ motivation and their speaking ability at SMPN 3 Natar and the researcher also wanted to find out how far the motivation can contribute in students’ speaking skill.

3

1.2 Identification of the Problems

Based on the background of the problems, the researcher identified the problems of the research as follows:

1. Students get difficulties in speaking

2. Students’ motivation in learning English is still low 3. Students’ motivation in speaking is still low

4. Students are lack of vocabulary knowledge 5. Students’ speaking ability is still low

6. Students feel shy when the teacher asks them to speak English 7. Students’ environment does not give the positive support

8. Students do not practice their English in school or outside the school 9. Students are not interested in the materials

10. Students feel allergic to English

1.3 Limitation of the Problems

Based on the identfication of the problems, the researcher limited this research on the correlation between students’ motivation and their speaking ability at SMPN 3 Natar and also to find out how far motivation can contribute in students’ speaking ability.

1.4 Formulation of the Problems

Based on limitation of the problems mentioned above, the researcher formulated the research problems as follow:

1. Is there any correlation between motivation and speaking ability at the third year students of SMPN 3 Natar

2. How far does motivation contribute students’ speaking ability at the third grade year of SMPN 3 Natar?

1.5 Objectives of the Research

In relation to the research questions the objectives of this research are:

1. To investigate whether there is correlation between motivation and speaking ability at the third year of students in SMPN 3 Natar.

2. To analyze how far motivation contributes students’ speaking ability at the third grade sof students in SMPN 3 Natar.

1.6 Uses of the Research

The uses of this research as follow:

1. Theoretically, the result of this research is expected to verify the previous theory and to give contribution to the theory of teaching as a reference for next researcher who will concentrate in correlating students’ motivation with students’ speaking ability.

2. Practically, the result of the research can give information to the English teacher to make the classroom to be more active. The teacher also can make maximum effort to motivate the students to speak English.

II. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION

This chapter presents the theories which are used in the research. It covers a number of aspects; review of previous research, motivation, motivation in language learning, motivation in speaking, notion of speaking, theoretical assumption, and hypothesis.

2.1 Review Previous Research

There are five previous researches that have relationship with this research. First, Yuliani (2002) found some problems on the students of the information technology faculty who thought that English was not a major of their subject. But after she found the result of the questionnaire, it showed that there was a tendency in most respondents to choose the wish which was enjoyable as well as less serious materials and facility to practice and improve their English proficiency. She stated in her research on The Correlation between the Students’ Motivation and the English Proficiency among the Students of Strata One (S1) Information

Technology Faculty of UNIBANK in Semarang, that there was a positive

correlation between motivation in learning English and English proficiency. She computed that the average score of motivation was 73.3. This figured out that

most students as the respondents of this research had a good motivation in learning English.

Second, the Relationship between Motivation and Students’ English Learning Achievement: A study of the Second – year vocational certificate level Hatyai

Technical College Students research of Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songka

University, Choosri had some factors responsible for low English proficiency of the majority of Thai students including traditional pedagogical prescriptive approaches (Bunnag 2006, Forman 2005, Kongpecth 2004), the influence of Thai culture, EFL learning environments, and low motivation in learning a foreign language. After doing his research, the research showed 1) a high level of motivation in both high and low group. In high achievement group, the mean score of instrumental motivation was higher than the mean score of low achievement group, and 2) the motivation and English learning achievement were significantly positively correlated with each other. The result of the study indicated that there was a positive relationship between their achievement and motivation. This might be due to the fact that the students who got a high grade average in English courses tended to be interested in English learning.

Third, Li found The Relationship between Motivation and Achievement- A Survey of the Study Motivation of English Majors in Qingdao Agricultural University, that motivation was taught to be a very important reasons for different achievement. People thought that it was reasonable for English major to learn English, since they chose English as their major. The subjects were junior of non-English majors. They had low motivation in learning non-English. Revealing the correlation among motivational factors and their influences in students English

7

learning were: the instrumental motivation played an extremely important role in English major’s learning, both high achievers and lower achievers had higher instrumental motivation, high achievers had higher sense of achievement while low achievers had lower sense of achievement. Students with higher motivation were achieve greater success in their language learning, while those lacking in motivation made no attempts in the process of language learning and often fail the exam.

Fourth, Nuri on The Effects of Age and Motivation Factors on Second Language

Acquisition, the writer said the competency of a learner in his or her first language

had a direct relationship with his or her age. Schooling and cognitive development were the other factors affecting the second language acquisition. Motivation was another factor affecting second language acquisition. Achieving motivation let the learner desire to learn a language. The writer, in the field of applied linguistics called for an expansion of the motivational construction in second language learning. The research expressed that motivation was a key factor in the second language learning process. They stressed that a less able student who was highly motivated achieved greater success than the more intelligent student who was not well motivated. Sometimes students came highly motivated and the task of the teacher was to maintain motivation of the students. The task of the teacher was to maximize the motivation.

In the last previous research, Yue of A Study of English Learning Motivation of Less Successful Students, the author intended to explore the types of motivation and the correlation between the types of motivation and their performance. The subjects were 207 unsuccessful students through a questionnaire and 20 of them

were selected randomly. The result suggested 9 types of motivation (interest motivation, personality, language value, group value, instrumental motivation, teaching and curriculum value, cultural influence, personal development and self-evaluation), in which instrumental motivation affected the students the most and intrinsic motivation the least. There was a significant correlation between language value and achievement. The significant correlation between language value motivation and achievement proved that even those students got low mark on their tests, they were aware that language value was a great importance. They believed that the mastery of a foreign language will bring them good education and economic status.

In this research, the researcher gave the informations about correlation between two variables: students’ motivation and students’ speaking ability. The researcher informed how motivation contributed students’ speaking ability. Based on the data of pre-observation in SMPN 3 Natar, the researcher assumed that the students at the third year were not interested in speaking through English. Based on the questionnaire, there were 85% of students at SMPN 3 Natar who were lowly motivated in learning English.

9

2.2 Review of Related Literature 2.2.1 Motivation

Harmer (2007:98) states that motivation is essential to success: that people have to want to do something to succeed. Without such motivation the learners will almost certainly fail to make the necessary effort. Motivation is the one of the psychological factors that affects to langauge learning. It is easy in second language learning to claim that learner will be successful with the proper motivation. Such claims are of course not erroneous, for countless studies and experiments in human learning have shown that motivation is a key to learning. According to Brown (2000:160) there are three different definitions of motivation.

a. From a behaviouristic perspective, motivation is seen in very matter of fact terms. It is quite simply the anticipation of reward. Driven to acquire positive reinforcement, and driven by previous experiences of reward for behaviour.

b. From a cognitive perspective, motivation places much more emphasis on the individulas decisions, “the choices people make as to what experiences of goals they will approach or avoid, and the degree of effort they will exert in that respect” (Keller 1983 in Brown 2000:160)

c. From a constructivist perspective, motivation places even further emphasis on social context as well as individual personal choices (Williams & burden, 1997 in Brown 2000:161)

Motivation in students’ learning can be divided into 2 types, extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. According to Brown (2001 p.76) extrinsic motivation refers to

motivation that comes from outside an individual. The motivating factors are external, or outside, rewards such as money or grades. These rewards provide satisfaction and pleasure that the task itself may not provide. For example, an extrinsically motivated person who dislikes math may work hard on a math equation because want the reward for completing it. In the case of a student, the reward would be a good grade on an assignment or in the class.

Intrinsic motivation has important role to the process of language learning. Intrinsic motivation is defined as performing an action or behavior because the learners enjoy the activity itself. Intrinsic motivation in second language classrooms in particular, consider the activities that capitalize on the intrinsic be appealing to learners’ self-determination and autonomy:

a. Oral fluency exercises in which learners talk what about what interest them and not about a teacher-assigned topic.

b. Communicative language teaching, in which language is taught to enable learners to accomplish certain specific functions.

Gardner and Lambert (1972) made a distinction between two kinds of motivation in second language learning:

a) Instrumental Motivation

Learners with an instrumental motivation want to learn a language because of a practical reason such as getting a salary bonus or getting into college. Many college language learners have a clear instrumental motivation for language learning: They want to fulfill a college language requirement.

11

b) Integrative Motivation

Learners who are integratively motivated want to learn the language because they want to know the people who speak that language. They are also interested in the culture associated with that language. Integratively motivated learners may have significant others such as a boyfriend or girlfriend or family members who speak the language, and heritage language learners typically have a particularly strong integrative motivation for language learning. Several studies have found that language learners who are integratively motivated are more successful than those who are instrumentally motivated; it is likely that integratively motivated language learners are more successful because their motivation is stronger than that of instrumentally motivated students.

Based on the explanation above, the researcher stated that motivation is something that can like self-esteem, be global, situational, or task-oriented, that support learner to do something to success. For example, a learner may possess high “global” motivation but low “task” motivation to perform well on, the written mode of the language. Motivation is also typically examined in terms of the intrinsic and extrinsic motives of the learner.

There are two types of motivation in students’ learning process. First, extrinsic (instrumental) motivation is a support which comes from the outside of the individuals, while intrinsic (integrative) motivation comes from the inside of the individuals. Students who are integratively motivated might be successful than the

students who are instrumentally motivated. Both of those motivations have role that can push someone to do something to reach a goal.

2.2.2. Motivation in Language Learning

Motivation plays a significant role in the process of learning a language. A language teacher cannot effectively teach a language if they do not understand the relationship between motivation and its effect on language acquisition. The core of motivation is what might be called passion, which relates to a person's intrinsic goals and desires. Successful learners know their preferences, strengths and weaknesses, and effectively utilize strengths and compensate for weaknesses. Successful language learning is linked to the learner’s passion.

Motivation has several effects on students’ learning and behavior.

a. Motivation directs behavior toward particular goals. It affects the choices

students made—for instance, whether to enroll in physics or studio art, whether to spend an evening completing a challenging homework assignment or playing video games with friends.

b. Motivation affects cognitive processes. Motivation affects what learners

pay attention to and how effectively they process it. For instance, motivated learners often make a concerted effort to truly understand classroom material to learn it meaningfully and consider how they might use it in their own lives.

c. Motivation determines which consequences are reinforcing and punishing.

The more learners who are motivated to achieve academic success, the more they will be proud of an A and upset by a low grade. The more

13

learners want to be accepted and respected by peers, the more they will value membership in the “in” group and be distressed by the ridicule of classmates. To a teenage boy who is uninterested in athletics, making or not making the school football team is no big deal, but to a teen whose life revolves around football, making or not making the team may be a consequence of monumental importance.

d. Motivation often enhances performance. Because of the other effects just

identified goal directed behavior, effort and energy, initiation and persistence, cognitive processing, and the impact of consequences, motivation often leads to improve performance. As you might guess, then, students who are most motivated to learn and excel in classroom activities tend to be the highest achievers.

In this research, the researcher did not compare between students who had extrinsic or intrinsic motivation or who were instrumentally or integratively motivated. The researcher was interested in investigating whether there is any correlation between students’ motivation in learning English and their speaking ability. The researcher wanted to know whether the students who had motivation would be a good achiever or not, and whether the students who were not motivated would be a bad achiever. Based on the previous explanation, motivation can affect students’ performance. Motivation affects cognitive process. Motivation also determines which consequences are reinforcing and punishing and directs behavior toward particular goals. In this case, the students learnt English because the curriculum at the school were able the students to learn English as the subject in a class. Almost all of the students, had extrinsic

motivation while the process of teaching learning English. But not all of the students were intrinsically motivated in learning English as their subject.

2.2.3 Motivation in Speaking

Success and failure in language learning especially in speaking seems largely to depend on students’ motivation to learn English. In particular, students’ motivation is important in the development of speaking skill. Motivation is term for explaining the success and failure or virtually any complex task (Brown, 2008). It is easy in language learning to claim that a learner will be more successful with the proper motivation. In addition, motivation is all power that pushes someone to do something (Nasution, 2000). This means that there is positive effect that influences someone to do a lot activity. According to Nasution (2009), motivation pushes people to create an acitivity or to do positive activity.

Motivation was important factor which supports the students in learning, especially, for developing students’ speaking skills. If the students had motivation in learning, they were interested in speaking English. However, students who were not motivated in learning, they were not interested in speaking English. The students who had high motivation or integratively motivated might be a good achievers. Integrative motivation was important because when the students were interested in speaking, they understood the material or context of speaking easily. It is because they did the assignment or practiced their speaking enjoyably.

Moreover, Harmer (2001) was interested in initiating and sustaining motivation in the teaching and learning process. He further extended his

15

explanation about increasing and directing students’ motivation is one of a teacher’s responsibilities. There are three areas which can directly influences students continuing participation. Those will be briefly illustrated as follows:

a. Goal and goal setting means motivation is closely bound up with a person’s desire to achieve a goal. A person desires whether to achieve long term goals or short term goal. Long term goal may include the mastery of English, the passing of an exam (at the end of the year), the possibility of a better job in the future, etc. On the other hand, short term goal might be the learning of a small amount of the new language, the successful writing of an essay, the ability to partake in a discussion or the passing of the progress test at the end of the week.

b. Learning environment refers to the teachers who are able to choose the students actual classrooms, the psychical appearances at the emotional atmosphere of our lessons. When the students walk into an attractive classroom at the beginning of the course, it may help to get their motivation for the process going. When they come to unattractive place, motivation may be not initiated in this way. c. Interesting class refers to the choice of material to take into class

but even more important than it will be the ways in which to use in the lesson. If students are continuing to be intrinsically motivated, they clearly need to be interested both in the subject they are studying and in the activities and the topics they are presented with.

2.2.4 Notion of Speaking

Speaking is one of important skills which is needed by students from elementary school up to university. They will get informations by sharing to one another. But many students get difficulties in speaking. When someone asks you “Do you speak English?” this usually means: Can you carry on a conversation reasonably and competently? The benchmark of successful language acqusition is almost always the demonstration of an ability to accomplish paragmatic goals to interactive discourse with other speakers of the language. And yet, as Richards (1990) noted “the conversation class is something of an enigma in language teaching.” The goals and the techniques for teaching conversation are extremely diverse, depending on the student, teacher, and overall context of the class. Brown (1980) states that speaking is interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving, and proessing information. Based on the theory above, there are three main important points of view which must occur to the participants of communication (speakers and listeners) to construct the meaning during the interaction among them.

Brown (1980) also classifies types of spoken language into two types, they are monologue and dialogue. In monologue, when a speaker uses a spoken language such as in speech, lecture, etc. The listener must process long strecher of speech without interruption and the stream of speech will go on whether the listener comprehends or not. While in dialogue, it involves two or more speakers and can

17

be subdivided into interpersonal and transactional. An interpersonal language is a dialogue which purposes to promote social relationship between speakers. On the other hand, transactional language is a dialogue which involves two or more speakers and the purpose is to convey propositional or factual information.

On the relevancies of curriculum applied in Indonesia, especially in speaking subject, students were expected to be 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. Therefore, after being taught the English subject, the students should have good ability in speaking. They have to be able to communicate, to convey meaning, and to have a meaningful conversation in English. Referring to this, transactional dialogue was suitable to measure students’ speaking achievement since transactional dialogue refers to situation where the focus is on what is said or done. The message and making oneself understood clearly and accurately is the central focus, rather than the participants and how they interact socially with each other. Speaking must fulfill these following aspects as follows:

a. Fluency can be defined as the ability to speak fluently and accurately. Signs of fluency include a reasonably fast speed of speaking and only a small numbers of pauses. Fluency refers to the ease and speed of the flow of the speech (Harris, 1974). Fluency is the smoothness or flow with which sounds, syllables, words and phrases are joined together when speaking. It means that when a person makes a dialogue with another person, he or she can give respond well without difficulty.

b. Accuracy (grammar and pronunciation) focuses on issues of appropriateness and other formal factors. It relates to the use of grammar and pronunciation. Heaton (1978) defines grammar as the students’ ability to manipulate structure and to distinguish appropriate grammatical form in appropriate ones is needed for students to arrange correct sentences in conversation, while pronunciation refers to the ability to produces easily comprehensible articulation (Syakur, 1987)

c. Comprehension is defined for oral communication that requires a subject to respond the speech as well as to initiate it (Syakur, 1987). Comprehensibility denotes the ability of understanding the speakers’ intension and general meaning (Heaton, 1991). It means that if a person can answer to express well and correctly, it shows that he/she comprehends or understand well.

Based on the explanation above, speaking is one of important skills that students can get the information by sharing or talking with each other. Brown classifies speaking into two types monologue and dialogue. Monologue refers to when a speaker speaks on the long stretcher of speech without interruption. While dialogue involves two or more speakers who speak in interpersonal or transactional. The beginner level of speaker can speak by concerning three aspects such as pronunciation, fluency and comprehension in a transactional dialogue is suitable to this speaking achievement.

19

2.2.5 Theoritical Assumption

Based on the theoritical review, motivation had important role in learning process, especially in speaking. Based on the previous explanation, motivation was essential to succed: that people have to do something to succeed. One of the motivation effects in language learning was motivation affected cognitive process. Motivation affected what learners paid attention on and how effectively they processed it. For example, motivated students made a concerted effort to truly understood the classroom material – to learn it meaningfully – and to consider how they might use it in their own lives.

In speaking skill, students who had motivation were able to acquire the language and speak English fluently, confidently, and regularly. Because of motivated students looked for the ways that could help them in mastering English, particularly in speaking. They were brave to taking a risk of making mistake and deciding about what to say and how to express their ideas in English.

Based on the ideas above, the researcher was attracted in investigating how students’ motivation affects students’ speaking ability in learning English at the third year of SMPN 3 Natar.

2.2.6 Hypothesis

Refering to the theoritical reviews and assumptions above, the researcher stated the hypothesis as follows:

1. There is no significant correlation between students’ motivation and their speaking ability of third year students at SMPN 3 Natar.

2. There is no contribution of students’ motivation in learning speaking toward their speaking ability at third year students at SMPN 3 Natar.

III. RESEARCH METHODS

This chapter discusses the methods of the research used in this study: setting of the research, research design, population and sample, research procedure, data collecting techniques, validity and reliability of the instruments, data treatment, and hypothesis testing.

3.1 Setting of the Research

The place of this research was SMPN 3 Natar. This school was regarded as the favorite and successful school. This research had done in second semester. There were 31 respondents in this research. The researcher distributed the test in two weeks. In the first week, the researcher evaluated students’ speaking ability and then distributed the questionnaire to 16 students. The students were given the questionnaire after they finished their conversations. On the next week, the researcher evaluated students’ speaking ability to 15 students. Then, the researcher distributed the motivation questionnaire in the same room. The researcher evaluated students’ speaking ability with two other raters. In the speaking test, the researcher recorded students’ conversation. So the utterances of the conversations will be heard clearly.

3.2 Research Design

In conducting this research, The researcher used quantitative method and more specifically the researcher used Pearson-product moment correlation coefficient. This design was used because it was the most suitable to measure the correlation between two variables. The design can be illustrated as follows:

X – Y

(Hatch and Farhady, 1982:27) Which:

X

:

Motivation test (independent variable) Y : Speaking test (dependent variable)

The researcher investigated the students’ motivation in speaking class. The researcher distributed motivation questionnaire to the students after giving the speaking test.

The score of the questionnaire was based on Likert Scale and ranges 1 to 3. The score was given to each answer for each item function as the symbol in showing whether one of the activities is higher or lower than the others. By using scale in the questionnaire, the researcher collcted the ordinal data in form of numbers. So, the data had been collected easier and were analyzed by using statistical formula. In this research, the students were given a speaking test before giving the questionnaire of motivation. The speaking test was used to find out the students’

23

speaking ability through a topic. The topic was the expression of certainty and uncertainty.

3.3 Population and Sample

The population of this research was the students at the third year of SMPN 3 Natar. There were 3 classes of the third year students and each class consisted of 37-38 students. The students of the third year were 114 students and divided into 3 classes. The sample used purposive sampling. Purposive sampling also known as judgemental, selective or subjective sampling. This is a type of non-probability sampling, which focuses on sampling technique where the units which investigated were based on the judgement of the researcher. The aim of this purposive sampling was the data which had been gotten by the students will represented the cases that could solve the research questions.

3.4 Research Procedure

In constructing the research, the research procedure used these following steps: 1. Determining the problems of the research

The researcher observed the students in the class by giving interview and questionnaire. The interview section was like a discussion in the class. The researcher distributed some questions that could express their motivation in language learning. The questions of the questionnaire were about students behaviour in learning, and their comprehension about their own

self in learning English as a foreign language. When the researcher asked the students “do you like English or your English teacher?”. Almost all of students answered “NO”. The other question was “do you feel happy when you are in English class?”. The students aswered „NO’. The answers mean that they were not interested in Englsih. The students answered the questions directly without any joking expression. The researcher also found that the students did not pay attention to the teacher when the teacher taught them in the class. Those factors showed how was the role of motivation in language learning at SMPN 3 natar.

2. Determining the population and sample

The population of this research was the students at the third year of SMPN 3 Natar. The researcher used purposive sampling technique to have data of questionnaire motivation. Those result of students’ speaking test represented the speaking achievement of students at the third year at SMPN 3 Natar.

3. Determining the research instruments

The instruments in this research were questionnaire and speaking test. The researcher conducted speaking test to get the score of the students’ speaking ability. They performed their dialogue in form of transactional dialogue that concern in three aspects of speaking test, they were pronunciation, fluency, and comprehension.

In achieving the reliability of the speaking test, inter rater reliability was used in this study. This research had three raters for the speaking test. The first rater was the researcher, the second rater was the English teacher of

25

that class and the third researcher was the English teacher from another class.

A set of questionnaire consisted of 32 items of close-ended questions that was used in this research to measure students’ motivation in speaking ability. It is adapted and modified from Setiyadi’s (2006).

4. Administering the questionnaire

The questionnaire test was given to the students on the third year at SMPN 3 Natar. The numbers of the questions were 32. Each item had mainly three alternatives answer, there were a, b, and c. The alternative answer described very positive, positive and negative.

5. Administering the speaking test

The researcher distributed the students’ speaking ability by giving a topic and guiding to make a short dialogue in pair. The material was the topic according to the syllabus of the third year of junior high school based on the curriculum or KTSP. The topic told about ”Expression of Certainty and Uncertainty”. The students were asked by the researcher to present the dialogue in a speciall room. The researcher recorded the conversation by using cellphone.

6. Analyzing the result of the test

Both of the instruments, motivation questionnaire and speaking test of the class were analyzed by using Pearson Product Moment. It was used to find out whether any correlation between students’ motivation and their speaking ability and to find how motivation contributes the students’ speaking ability.

The students’ utterances were recorded when they perform their dialogue. The data was analyzed by referring to the rating scale namely speaking ability by Heaton (1991). First, the researcher classified the result of the questionnaire. Second, the researcher scored students’ speaking test. The data was analyzed by using SPSS. The hypothesis was analyzed at the significance level of students’ speaking ability.

3.5 Data Collecting Techniques

In collecting the data of the research, the researcher used these following steps: 1. Questionnaire

This test was given to the students after the researcher knew the base problem of students at the third year of SMPN 3 Natar in English subject, especially in speaking class. This questionnaire was given to know whether the students have motivation in learning English or not.

According to Setiyadi,(2006), close-ended questionnaire means the options are provided and there are no other alternatives. Close-ended questionnaire was used to help the researcher in selecting the data, so that the researcher did not have to waste the time for the data which are not relevant to the research problem. The respondents were directed to give the data that related to the research problem. The students’ motivation score was taken after they answered the questionnaire about motivation in learning. The motivation questionnaire covered the encouragement which emergences the willingness to do the activity as a students. The questions determined the action they wanted to do, and purpose achieved in

27

the process of learning systematically, which from inside or outside their self, those were: the students’ behaviour in learning, persistency, vision in learning, achievement, and practice.

A set of the motivation questionnaire was taken from Setiyadi (2006) in which the scores were based on the Likert Scale and the range of 1 to 3 for the positive statements and the range of 3 to 1 for the negative statements. The last scores were taken from the total answers which given by the researcher, so that the high and the low score showed the motivation range. The questionnaire was translated into Indonesian language in order to ease the students’ difficulty when they answer the questionnaire. There the options numbers of the questionnaire:

1 = Negative 2 = Positive 3 = Very Positive

Table 3.1 Table of Specification of Questionnaire

No Indicator Sub Indicator Total Number Number

1 Students’

learning behaviour

The tendency of

behaviour: happy, doubt, unhappy

12 6,18,19,2

0,21,22,2 3,27,28,2 9,30,31 2 Persistency The students’ ability to

solve the problem

2 3,7

3 Vision in learning

Students’ learning target which is creative,

6 1,5,14,15

innovative, and effectiove compulsion

4 Achievement The stduents’ aspiration or the achievement

7 2,10,12,1

3,16,25,3 2

5 Practice The frequency of students’ practice their speaking ability

5 4,8,9,11,

26

The reason of giving score was to facilitate and to ease counting and giving score for each answer given by the students about their motivation toward speaking English ability.

2. Speaking Test

The speaking test was distributed to the students those have been selected before. The students were asked to present their conversation in front of the class and the researcher recorded the conversation by using cellphone.

In gathering students’ speaking data, the researcher matched the test with the syllabus of the third year of SMPN student based on school based curriculum or KTSP which was appropriate with their grade. The researcher conducted speaking test, which last for 90 minutes. In conducting the test the students had a topic and guided to make a short dialogue in pair. The test was orally, and directly the teacher called the group in pairs on by one to a speciall room. In the room, The students presented their dialogues. During the conversation, the researcher recorded the conversation to help in scoring studets’ conversation.

29

The students were asked to speak clearly since their voices would be recorded during the test. The material of the test was taken from students’ book which was appropriate for the students in the third grade. The score of the students’ speaking ability was given based on the oral rating sheet provided. The raters of the test were the researcher, the English teacher of that grade and another English teacher in the school. Heaton (1991) as a guidance in measuring students’ speaking ability, the teacher and the researcher assessed the students concerned on three aspects namely pronunciation, fluency, and comprehension. During the speaking test, the researcher recorded the students’ voices in the cellphone.

The score of each point is multiplied by there: Students 2 got 84.

Here is identification of scores

For example, a student got 80 in pronunciation, 84 in fluency and 88 in comprehension. Therefore, the students’ score will be:

P 80

C 84

F 88

Total 80+84+88 = 252, 252:3 = 84

3.6 Validity and Reliability of the Instruments 3.6.1 Validity of the Questionnaire

Validity is a matter of relevance. It means that the test measures what is claimed to measure. To measure whether the test has a good validity, it has been analyzed from content and construct validity. Content validity concerned with whether the content of the test was sufficiently representative and comprehensive for the test or not. The questionnaire was expected to be valid. In the questionnaire, the researcher identified some factors, as follow: students behaviour in learning, persistency, vision in learning, achievement, and practice.

Construct validity focused on the kind of the test that was used to measure the ability. Since the purpose of the test was to measure as wll as know students’ motivation, the researcher applied a questionnaire that dealt with motivation developed by Setiyadi (2006).

3.6.2 Validity of the Speaking Test

Validity refers to extent to which the test measures what it was intended to measure. This means that it related directly to the purpose of the test. In content validity, the test is good reflection of what has been taught and the knowledge which the teacher wants his or her students to know. Construct validity concerns on whether the test is actually in line with the theory of what it means to the language (Shohamy, 1985).It examined whether the test was actually reflected that means to know these three aspects of criterion of students’ speaking skill. It means that the test will measure certain aspects based on the indicator. The researcher used three aspects in speaking ability because the aspects were based

31

on the indicators in curriculum. In the beginner level, speaking consists of pronunciation, fluency and comprehensibility. The beginner level more imitate the sounds and pattern than focus on grammar and vocabulary. In this level the children speak in English but they do not think about grammar deeply. They just speak what they want. This research hopes that this method can motivate students in speaking aspects. It is caused the researcher used three aspects in speaking skill in junior high school.

The researcher compared the test with the table of specification to know whether the test was good reflection of what has been taught and the knowledge by teacher wanted the students to know. A table of specification was the instrument that helped the test constructor planned the test. The following table is oral ability scale proposed by Heaton (1991) that has been used as the scoring standard for the students’ speaking ability.

Table 3.2 Table of Specification of Speaking Ability

Range Pronunciation Fluency Comprehensibility

90-100 Pronunciation only slightly influenced by the mother tounge

Speak without too great an effort with the fairly wide range of expression. Search for words occasionally but only one or two unnatural pauses.

Easy for listener to understand the

speaker’ intention

and general meaning.

80-89 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tounge 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 paeses.

The speaker’s

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

70-79 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tounge but no serious phonological errors.

Although she/he has made an effort and seearch for words, there are not 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 r to see the clarification.

60-69 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tounge 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 uderstand many of the speakers’ more complex or longer sentences.

40-59 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tounge 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 the considerable effort by someone who is used to listening to the speaker.

30-49 Serious pronuncation errors. No evidence of having mastered any of the language skill 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.

3.6.3 Reliability of the Questionnaire

Shohamy (1985 p.70) stated that the reliability refers to extent to which the test is consistent in its score, and it give an indication of how accurate the test score. It

33

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. Reliability is a consistency of certain measurement in getting the result. The reliability of the questionnaire was described by using Cronbach’s alpha called correlation coefficient which had range between 1 and 3. The higher Alpha, the more reliable the questionnaire adapted on (Setiyadi, 2006).

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

1. 0.80 - 1.0 : very high reliability 2. 0.60 - 0.79 : high reliability 3. 0.40 - 0.59 : medium reliability 4. 0.20 - 0.39 : low reliability 5. 0.0 - 0.19 : very low reliability

From the calculation of reliability analysis of the questionnaire, the alpha was 0.778. It means that the questionnaire had high reliability. It can be interpreted that the questionnaire was proper to be used for a research. The analysis of each items showed that if the item deleted, it made the alpha became lower.

3.6.4 Reliability of the Speaking Test

The form of the test was subjective test because there was no certain answer. In this test, the researcher used inter rater to assess students’ performance. The raters were the researcher, English teacher of that grade and another English teacher in

that school. The raters gave the score by listening the conversation directly and orally during the performance. The researcher also recorded the students’ utterances because it helped the raters to evaluate more objectively.

In the researcher’s consideration, the two raters were qualified to measure the students’ speaking ability. Because, they had experiences in teaching English more than five years, and graduated from university (S1 degree) in English major. Before the two raters assessed the students’ speaking ability, the two raters discussed about the speaking proficiency description checklist to be used, to make sure that they had the same understanding in using the checklist.

3.7 Data Treatment

In order to know the students’ motivation in learning speaking, the researcher calculated the students’ score that devised from Haris (1974) as follow:

Table 3.3 Calculating of the Students’ Answers in Motivation Questionnaire.

Classification Items Students' Score

A B C

Negative-positive-very positive items

1, 3, 8, 9, 10, 13, 18, 20, 22, 28, 30, 31,

32 1 2 3

Very positive-positive-negative items

2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 32, 26, 27,

29 3 2 1

Table 3.4 Classification of Positive and Negative Questions

Classification Items

Positive words items 1-32, and 32

35

Based on the table 3.4, the researcher stated that the motivation questionnaire used negative wording to avoid students feel bored when they answer the test. The score items test number were 1, 3, 8, 9, 10, 13, 18, 20, 22, 28, 30, 31, and 32 and the range was 1 to 3. It means that the score has been chosen A was 1, B was 2, and C was 3. The score items of test number 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 32, 26, 27, and 29 in the range of 3 to 1. It means that the score that has been chosen as A as 3, B as 2 and C as 1.

3.8 Hyphotesis Testing

In this section, the researcher conducted the hypothesis to determine whether there is any correlation between students’ motivation and their speaking ability. The researcher applied a critical value table for Pearson Correlation Coefficient in the following criterion acceptance used:

H0= rvalue < rtable

H1= rvalue> rtable

With the explanation as follow:

H0 : there is no significant correlation between students’ motivation and

students’ speaking ability in English. The hypothesis can be accepted if the rvalue

H₁ : there is a significant correlation between motivation and students’ English speaking ability. The hypothesis can be accepted if rvalue is higher than

rtable.

H0 : there is no contribution of motivation toward their speaking ability. H1 :there is contribution of motivation toward their speaking ability.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

In this chapter, the researcher presents the conclusions of the research and suggestions for the readers.

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the description of the data analysis which is described in the previous chapter, it can be concluded that;

1. There is a significant correlation between students’ motivation in learning speaking (X) and their speaking ability (Y). After analyzing both variables by Pearson’ Product Moment formula, it is found that rxy

=

0.622. Based on the

result of r_xy = 0.622, it indicates the gravity of correlation in this research is in the high level. It is considered that there is high correlation between students’ motivation in learning English and their speaking ability. It means that the students’ motivation and their speaking ability has an important relationship. Students who are motivated will be more confident to speak in front of the class. It is because motivation drives their performance, so they can perform their best ability. Besides by looking at the calculation above,

there is positive correlation between X variable and Y variable. It means that students who have motivation get better speaking ability than the lower one. 2. Motivation contributes students’ speaking ability in 38.7%. Motivation

directs students’ behavior in learning, their persistency, vision and also the frequency of practicing the word. Besides, other 61.3% of students’ speaking ability were influenced by other factors.

3. Furthermore, from the result of the data analysis, it was considered that the students who are learning to speak, will be able to achieve the better speaking ability by using motivation. The students who had high motivation made an effort to follow the learning process intensively, and they learnt the lesson as well as possible not only in the school but also out of the school. They were motivated to enrich their vocabulary and to practice their speaking ability. Moreover, motivated students usually enjoy in their learning. It makes them easily to speak up confidently wherever they are although English is a foreign language. Motivated students overcome obstacles which come to them with strong powerful from inside. They liked to face challenging things in learning. Moreover, motivated students often get best result because motivation improved their performance to achieve their goals.

5.2 Suggestions

Motivation made teaching and learning process easier and interesting. It is very good if both of teacher and students motivate each other in teaching and learning process. English teacher has important role to support their students in learning English,

67

especially in learning speaking. There are the suggestions from the researcher as follows;

1. The teacher should create an interesting and comfortable situation in the classroom, such as use media as the facilitator in delivering the materials. The media that can teacher use in language learning process are slide (power point), pictures, coloured papers, etc. The teacher also can motivate the students by giving a short movie about people who work hard in reaching their goals, or by giving some positives statements that can make the students feel supported. The teacher can create an English club in the school. So the students can enjoy and they will feel comfertable and acuostumed in reading an Eglish written word and listen English spoken language.

2. For the students, they are expected to increase their motivation. They can enjoy English club in the school, so they will learn English and practice their abilities in more times. The students also are expected to be more aware that English is important fotr their life. Because, by speaking, the students can share the informations or ideas between one and another. The students also need more knowledge about English and the importances of English.

3. For the further researchers who are interested in conducting similar study, this study can be used as the reference for them to support their study. However, the further researchers are expected to take the larger sample in their study because the sample of this study is only 31 respondents. They are also suggested to conduct their study in a longer time in order to get more valid and more reliable data in their study because this study was conducted

only within a month. Besides, they are expected to add the instruments in collecting the data for their study because this study only used questionnaires and classroom observation in assessing students’ motivation, and oral test in assessing students’ speaking ability. The further reseachers can add some aspects in the questionnaire such as age, attitude and apptitude of students’ behaviour in learning English. The further reserchers can distribute the speaking test by asking the students to perform the students’ monologue. The further resracher can ask the students to tell about their holiday or their experiences.

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Prakek. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Atkinson, J. 1964. An Introduction to Motivation. England. Oxford: Van Nostrand. Bainbridge, C. 2005. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. Retrieved on December 16th

2014. http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/intrinsic.htm.

Brown, D. 2000. Principles of language Learning and Teaching (4th edition). New York: Logman.

Brown, D.2001. Teaching by Principles. (Second edition). New York: LongmanUniversity Press.

Brown, D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive approach to Language

Pedadgogy. New York:Logman.

Brown, G and Yule, G. 1999. Teaching the spoken Language. England. Cambridge University Press.

Choosri, C. 2011. Relationship between Motivation and Students’ English Learning

Achievement: A Study of the Second – Year Vocational Certificate Level

Hatyai Technical College Students. English Journal. Faculty of Liberal Arts,

Prince of Songkia University.

Cook, V. 2000. International Journal Bussiness and Social Science. Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Beijing: Foreign Languag Teacching and Research Press Macmillan Publisher. Ltd. In Sepora, T. & Moghaddas, S.. Motivation, its types, and its impacts. School of Language, Literacies and Translation university Sains Malaysia. Malaysia.

Deviyanti, R. 2010. The Correlation between Students’ Motivation and Their Speaking Ability of the First Year Students at SMA Negeri 2 Bandar

Lampung. Script. Bandar Lampung: FKIP Unila.

Egen, P. D. 1997. Educational Psychology. Third Edition. New Jersey: Prenticehall Inc.

Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acqusition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. --- The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Sanghai Foreign Language Education Press by Arrangement with Oxford University. Gardner, R. C. & McIntyre, P. D. 1992. A Students’ Contributions to Second

Language Learning: Part I: Cognitive Variable. Language Learning.

Gardner, R. C. & McIntyre, P. D. 1992. A Students’ Contributions to Second

Language Learning: Part I: Affective Variable. Language Learning.

Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Harmer, J. 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman. Harmer, J.1998. How to teach English: An introduction to the practice of English

language teaching. NewYork: Logman

Harmer, J. 2003. The practice of English Language Teaching. (Third Edition). England:Pearson education Limited.

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

Hatch, E. and Farhady, H. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for Applied

Linguistics. Rowley. Newburry House Publishers. INC

Heaton, J.B. 1991. Writing English Language Testing. New York: Longman.

Horwitz, E., K. & Cope, J., A. 1986. Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety among

Foreign Language Journal, Vol. 70 (2), 125-132.

http://www.jstro.org/stable/327317. Accessed on January 3rd 2015.

Krashen, S.D. 1981. Second Language Acquisistion and Language Learning. Oxford. Pergamon

Krashen, S.D. 1982. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford. Pergamon.

Krashen, S.D. 2003. Exploration in Language Acquisition and Use. Portsmouth: NH: Heinemann.

Lado, R. 1997. Langauge Testing. London. Longman.

Li &Guirong Pan. 2009. The Relationship between Motivation and Achievement – A Survey of the Study Motivation of English Majors in Qingdao Agricultural

University Vol. 2, No. 1. English Journal. Foreign Language School Qingdao

Agricultural University. www.ecsenet.journal.html.

Lightbrown, P.M. & Spada, N. 2001. Factors Affecting Second Language Learning. In: Candilin, C. N. & Mercer. N. (Eds.). English Language Teaching in its social context. London. Routledge.

Nuri, M. 2001. Firat University Journal of Social Science. English Journal. web.firat.edu.tr/sosyalbil.

Reece and Walker. 1997. Teaching and Training: A Practical Guide. Sunderland: Business Education Publishert. Ltd.

71

S. Nasution. 2000. Berbagai Pendekatan Dalam Proses Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara.

Sadewo, S. 2009. Hubungan Sikap Siswa, Motivasi Belajar dan Pemanfaatan Sumber Belajar dengan Kemampuan Bahasa Inggris Siswa Kelas XI MAN 1

Metro. University of Lampung (Unpublished Thesis). Bandar Lampung.

Setiawan, E. 2012. Correlation between Motivation and Speaking Ability of First

Grade Students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung. Unpublish script.

Bandar Lampung: FKIP Unila.

Setiyadi, Ag. Bambang. 2006. Metode Penelitian untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing. Yogyakarta. Graha Ilmu.

Shohamy, E. 1985. A Practical Handbook in Language Testing for Second

Language Teacher. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Spolsky, B. 1990. Conditions for Second Language Learning. Hongkong: Oxford University Press. In Wimolmas, R. A Survey Study of Motivation in English Language Learning of First Undergraduate Students at Sirinodhorn International Institute of Technology (SIIT). Thammsat University. Thailand. Stipek, D. 1988. Motivation to Learn: From Theory to Practice Englewood Cliffs.

New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Syakur. 1987. Language Testing and Evaluation. Surakarta: Sebelas Maret

Williams, M., B. ELT Journal, 2004 – Oxford University Press. 1997. New Themes

and Approaches in Second Languaage Motivation Research. In Z. Dornyei.

Honolulu: University of Hawai, Second Langauge Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Yu*, Yue. A Study of English Learning Motivation of Less Successful Students. English Journal. Jiangsu University of Science & Technology. Jiangsu, Chine. www.cetljournal.co.uk.

Yuliani, Endang Rahayu. 2002. The Correlation between Students’ Motivation and

the English Proficiency Vol. VII, No. 1. English Journal. Information

66

there is positive correlation between X variable and Y variable. It means that students who have motivation get better speaking ability than the lower one.

2. Motivation contributes students’ speaking ability in 38.7%. Motivation directs students’ behavior in learning, their persistency, vision and also the frequency of practicing the word. Besides, other 61.3% of students’ speaking ability were influenced by other factors.

3. Furthermore, from the result of the data analysis, it was considered that the students who are learning to speak, will be able to achieve the better speaking ability by using motivation. The students who had high motivation made an effort to follow the learning process intensively, and they learnt the lesson as well as possible not only in the school but also out of the school. They were motivated to enrich their vocabulary and to practice their speaking ability. Moreover, motivated students usually enjoy in their learning. It makes them easily to speak up confidently wherever they are although English is a foreign language. Motivated students overcome obstacles which come to them with strong powerful from inside. They liked to face challenging things in learning. Moreover, motivated students often get best result because motivation improved their performance to achieve their goals.

5.2 Suggestions

Motivation made teaching and learning process easier and interesting. It is very good if both of teacher and students motivate each other in teaching and learning process. English teacher has important role to support their students in learning English,

especially in learning speaking. There are the suggestions from the researcher as follows;

1. The teacher should create an interesting and comfortable situation in the classroom, such as use media as the facilitator in delivering the materials. The media that can teacher use in language learning process are slide (power point), pictures, coloured papers, etc. The teacher also can motivate the students by giving a short movie about people who work hard in reaching their goals, or by giving some positives statements that can make the students feel supported. The teacher can create an English club in the school. So the students can enjoy and they will feel comfertable and acuostumed in reading an Eglish written word and listen English spoken language.

2. For the students, they are expected to increase their motivation. They can enjoy English club in the school, so they will learn English and practice their abilities in more times. The students also are expected to be more aware that English is important fotr their life. Because, by speaking, the students can share the informations or ideas between one and another. The students also need more knowledge about English and the importances of English.

3. For the further researchers who are interested in conducting similar study, this study can be used as the reference for them to support their study. However, the further researchers are expected to take the larger sample in their study because the sample of this study is only 31 respondents. They are also suggested to conduct their study in a longer time in order to get more valid and more reliable data in their study because this study was conducted

68

only within a month. Besides, they are expected to add the instruments in collecting the data for their study because this study only used questionnaires and classroom observation in assessing students’ motivation, and oral test in assessing students’ speaking ability. The further reseachers can add some aspects in the questionnaire such as age, attitude and apptitude of students’ behaviour in learning English. The further reserchers can distribute the speaking test by asking the students to perform the students’ monologue. The further resracher can ask the students to tell about their holiday or their experiences.

Arikunto, S. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Prakek. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Atkinson, J. 1964. An Introduction to Motivation. England. Oxford: Van Nostrand. Bainbridge, C. 2005. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. Retrieved on December 16th

2014. http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/intrinsic.htm.

Brown, D. 2000. Principles of language Learning and Teaching (4th edition). New York: Logman.

Brown, D.2001. Teaching by Principles. (Second edition). New York: LongmanUniversity Press.

Brown, D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive approach to Language Pedadgogy. New York:Logman.

Brown, G and Yule, G. 1999. Teaching the spoken Language. England. Cambridge University Press.

Choosri, C. 2011. Relationship between Motivation and Students’ English Learning Achievement: A Study of the Second – Year Vocational Certificate Level Hatyai Technical College Students. English Journal. Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkia University.

Cook, V. 2000. International Journal Bussiness and Social Science. Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Beijing: Foreign Languag Teacching and Research Press Macmillan Publisher. Ltd. In Sepora, T. & Moghaddas, S.. Motivation, its types, and its impacts. School of Language, Literacies and Translation university Sains Malaysia. Malaysia.

Deviyanti, R. 2010. The Correlation between Students’ Motivation and Their Speaking Ability of the First Year Students at SMA Negeri 2 Bandar Lampung. Script. Bandar Lampung: FKIP Unila.

Egen, P. D. 1997. Educational Psychology. Third Edition. New Jersey: Prenticehall Inc.

Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acqusition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. --- The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Sanghai Foreign Language Education Press by Arrangement with Oxford University. Gardner, R. C. & McIntyre, P. D. 1992. A Students’ Contributions to Second

Language Learning: Part I: Cognitive Variable. Language Learning. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

70

Gardner, R. C. & McIntyre, P. D. 1992. A Students’ Contributions to Second Language Learning: Part I: Affective Variable. Language Learning. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Harmer, J. 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman. Harmer, J.1998. How to teach English: An introduction to the practice of English

language teaching. NewYork: Logman

Harmer, J. 2003. The practice of English Language Teaching. (Third Edition). England:Pearson education Limited.

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

Hatch, E. and Farhady, H. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics. Rowley. Newburry House Publishers. INC

Heaton, J.B. 1991. Writing English Language Testing. New York: Longman.

Horwitz, E., K. & Cope, J., A. 1986. Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety among Foreign Language Journal, Vol. 70 (2), 125-132. http://www.jstro.org/stable/327317. Accessed on January 3rd 2015.

Krashen, S.D. 1981. Second Language Acquisistion and Language Learning. Oxford. Pergamon

Krashen, S.D. 1982. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford. Pergamon.

Krashen, S.D. 2003. Exploration in Language Acquisition and Use. Portsmouth: NH: Heinemann.

Lado, R. 1997. Langauge Testing. London. Longman.

Li &Guirong Pan. 2009. The Relationship between Motivation and Achievement – A Survey of the Study Motivation of English Majors in Qingdao Agricultural University Vol. 2, No. 1. English Journal. Foreign Language School Qingdao Agricultural University. www.ecsenet.journal.html.

Lightbrown, P.M. & Spada, N. 2001. Factors Affecting Second Language Learning. In: Candilin, C. N. & Mercer. N. (Eds.). English Language Teaching in its social context. London. Routledge.

Nuri, M. 2001. Firat University Journal of Social Science. English Journal.

web.firat.edu.tr/sosyalbil.

Reece and Walker. 1997. Teaching and Training: A Practical Guide. Sunderland: Business Education Publishert. Ltd.

S. Nasution. 2000. Berbagai Pendekatan Dalam Proses Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara.

Sadewo, S. 2009. Hubungan Sikap Siswa, Motivasi Belajar dan Pemanfaatan Sumber Belajar dengan Kemampuan Bahasa Inggris Siswa Kelas XI MAN 1 Metro. University of Lampung (Unpublished Thesis). Bandar Lampung. Setiawan, E. 2012. Correlation between Motivation and Speaking Ability of First

Grade Students of SMA Al Azhar 3 Bandar Lampung. Unpublish script. Bandar Lampung: FKIP Unila.

Setiyadi, Ag. Bambang. 2006. Metode Penelitian untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing. Yogyakarta. Graha Ilmu.

Shohamy, E. 1985. A Practical Handbook in Language Testing for Second Language Teacher. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Spolsky, B. 1990. Conditions for Second Language Learning. Hongkong: Oxford University Press. In Wimolmas, R. A Survey Study of Motivation in English Language Learning of First Undergraduate Students at Sirinodhorn International Institute of Technology (SIIT). Thammsat University. Thailand. Stipek, D. 1988. Motivation to Learn: From Theory to Practice Englewood Cliffs.

New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Syakur. 1987. Language Testing and Evaluation. Surakarta: Sebelas Maret

Williams, M., B. ELT Journal, 2004 – Oxford University Press. 1997. New Themes and Approaches in Second Languaage Motivation Research. In Z. Dornyei. Honolulu: University of Hawai, Second Langauge Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Yu*, Yue. A Study of English Learning Motivation of Less Successful Students. English Journal. Jiangsu University of Science & Technology. Jiangsu, Chine. www.cetljournal.co.uk.

Yuliani, Endang Rahayu. 2002. The Correlation between Students’ Motivation and the English Proficiency Vol. VII, No. 1. English Journal. Information Technology Faculty of UNIBANK. Semarang.