IMPROVING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY THROUGH DRILL TECHNIQUE AT SECOND GRADE OF MAN 1 BANDAR LAMPUNG

INCREASING STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY THROUGH DRILL

TECHNIQUE AT SECOND GRADE OF MAN 1 BANDAR LAMPUNG

By

MOHAMMAD FIKRI NUGRAHA KHOLID

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

LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY

BANDAR LAMPUNG

xii

APPENDICES

Appendix Page

1. Research Schedule... 66

2. Lesson Plan of Pretest 1... 67

3. Lesson Plan of Pretest 2 ... 72

4. Lesson Plan of Pretest 3 ... 77

5. Speaking Test of Pretest ... 82

6. Result of Students’ Score in Pretest 1 ... 83

7. Result of Students’ Score in Pretest 2 ... 84

8. Result of Students’ Score in Pretest 3 ... 85

9. Final Result of Students’ Score in Pretest 1 ... 86

10.Final Result of Students’ Score in Pretest 1 ... 87

11.Final Result of Students’ Score in Pretest 3 ... 88

12.Frequencies of Pretest 1 ... 89

13.Frequencies of Pretest 2 ... 90

14.Frequencies of Pretest 3 ... 91

15.Inter – Rater Reliability of Pretest 1 ... 92

16.Inter – Rater Reliability of Pretest 2 ... 94

17.Inter – Rater Reliability of Pretest 3 ... 96

18.Lesson Plan of Posttest 1 ... 98

19.Lesson Plan of Posttest 2 ... 103

20.Lesson Plan of Posttest 3 ... 108

21.Speaking Test of Posttest ... 113

22.Result of Students’ Score in Posttest 1 ... 114

23.Result of Students’ Score in Posttest 2 ... 115

24.Result of Students’ Score in Posttest 3 ... 116

25.Final Result of Students’ Score in Posttest 1 ... 117

26.Final Result of Students’ Score in Posttest 2 ... 118

27.Final Result of Students’ Score in Posttest 3 ... 119

28.Frequencies of Posttest 1 ... 120

29.Frequencies of Posttest 2 ... 121

30.Frequencies of Posttest 3 ... 122

31.Inter – Rater Reliability of Posttest 1 ... 123

32.Inter – Rater Reliability of Posttest 2 ... 125

33.Inter – Rater Reliability of Posttest 3 ... 127

34.Average Score of the Students’ in Pretest – Posttest 1 ... 128

35.Average Score of the Students’ in Pretest – Posttest 2 ... 129

36.Average Score of the Students’ in Pretest – Posttest 3 ... 130

37.Paired Samples Statistics of Five Aspects of Speaking... 131

I.

INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses certain points such as: background of the problem, formulation of the problem, objective of the problem, uses of the problem, scope of the problem and definition of terms.

1.1 Background of the problem

In globalization era, English is an international language in the world. Now English is a compulsory subject starting from elementary school. There are four skills that will acquire in English, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The ability to communicate is the primary goal of foreign language instruction that speaking is put ahead on the other skills. Speaking is communication process

between at least two people and speaking is a way to express someone’s idea.

However, today’s world requires that goal of teaching speaking should improve student’s communicative skill, because only on that way students can express themselves by their argument and opinion, and learn how to follow the social and cultural rules appropriate in each communicative circumstance.

It is the duty for the teacher to use suitable teaching methods and technique. There is no bad students, if the teacher teach them well. So the good way teachers deliver their material, the good way students learn the language. English is the

language that has four aspect of skills; listening, speaking, reading, writing. In every skill has their own difficulties which make the students think that English is the difficult and boring subject.

This is also supported by the writer experience when he was teaching at SMA Muhammadiyah 1 Purbolinggo Lampung Timur in 2012 , where the majority of the students had difficulty to express their ideas in English orally. This might be due to a number of factors, one which was the inappropriate technique used in the classroom. The teachers were often found to use traditional way of teaching.

The other reason causing the failure was the teacher’s tendency to stress their teaching on the form of language rather than on the use of language. The students lack of practice in using the language. And an English teacher should understand and think of an interest and practical technique which gave challenge and opportunities for students to practice their English in the classroom.

Because the function of language is to communicate with others, so how students can communicate with others in English while they can not speak English. Based on the writer observation in teaching english at SMA Muhamadiyah 1 Purbolinggo that students hard to improve their speaking because the teacher did not speak english and used the interesting technique when they taught english in the class. In fact in teaching learning process the teachers do not have the good

technique for teaching speaking, so there is no improvement in student’s speaking ability. This is the chance for the teacher to overcome this problem by providing some creative activities in the classroom.

Based on the facts that the students lacked of speaking ability, the researcher

intended to use Audio Lingual Method (ALM) to improve the students’ speaking ability. ALM assumes that language learning is a process of habit formation. Since ALM focuses on listening and speaking ability, thus, listening and speaking come first, and reading and writing come later. Drill techniques such as repetition drill, substitution drill, transformation drill, replacement drill, response drill, cued response drill, rejoinder drill, restatement drill, completion drill, expansion drill, contraction drill, and integration drill are used in the form of target language dialogue. By drilling the students, it will be easier for them to remember and learn; since the more often English is repeated, the stronger the habit and the greater learning will be achieved. As in the process of a child for example, who learns his/her mother tongue, a child always begins with hearing first what his/her parents speak, then he/she tries to speak afterward. Thus, ALM believes that learning a foreign language is the same as the acquisition of the native language (Larsen-Freeman, 2000: 43). Actually ALM is the old method, many language researcher said that this method is not effective anymore to be used in English teaching. But, the writer use ALM in this research because the material in this research is dialog which is one of microskills, this method is still effective in English teaching especially in micro skills.

Huebner (1960: 5) says that speaking is a skill used by someone in daily life communication whether at school or outside. The skill is required by much repetition, it primarily neuromuscular and not an intellectual process. It contents of competence in sending and receiving massage. By this theory drill technique is

one of the technique that can be used to improve students’ speaking ability

because repetition is the central in this technique.

Doff (1987:2) stated that in all communication or conversation, two people are exchanging information or they have a communication or conversation need. This theory also can support why drill technique is one of the suitable technique in

improving students’ speaking ability because the activity of using drill technique in this research is conversation.

1.2 Problem

Based on background of the problem mentioned previously, the formulation of the problem is as follow :

1. Is there any difference of the students’ speaking ability before and after being taught through drill technique?

2. Which aspect of speaking is the most improved in the students’ speaking ability after tought through drill technique?

1.3 Objective

In relation to the problems of the research questions, the objectives of the research are as follows:

1. To find out whether there is a difference of the students’ speaking ability before and after being taught through drill technique.

2. To find out which aspect of speaking is the most improved before and after being thougt through drill technique.

1.4 Uses

The uses of this research are:

Theoretically :

1. This research is to contribute useful information for the future research of teaching speaking.

2. It is expected that this study can enrich our understanding of the aspect of speaking.

3. As empirical information for the English teachers about the using of drill technique in students speaking performance in task based learning.

Practically :

1. to give the information and knowledge about the implementation of drilling technique in teaching speaking. The writer hopes that his finding can be used by the researchers to open further analysis of drilling technique.

1.5 Scope

The research was conducted at the second year MAN 1 Bandar Lampung. The material was given in several kind of dialogues based on KTSP curriculum of senior high school, which considered suitable vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, voice, and fluency for their level. For example, the dialogues were

conducted in the topic of expressing likes and dislikes, asking for clarification, and making an arrangement. To suit the level of the students, the drills technique was taken from several kinds of ALM drills such as repetition drill, substitution drill, and transformation drill. The materials, which were taken from KTSP based curriculum in the form of dialogues, were drilled by those drills had been chosen. By considering the suitability and appropriateness of the material that was presented to the students by the researcher, finally the researcher decide to take 3 patterns of drill as his teaching technique.

1) Repetition Drill → to improve the student pronunciation 2) Expansion Drill → to build up the student speaking ability 3) Response Drill → making the student active in communicating

1.6 Definition of Terms

Definition of terms aims at avoiding misunderstanding about the terms in the research. The definitions of term are:

Audio Lingual Method (ALM)

Audio lingual method is a style of teaching used in teaching foreign languages. It is based on behaviorist theory, which professes that certain traits of living things, and in this case humans, could be trained through a system of reinforcement— correct use of a trait would receive positive feedback while incorrect use of that trait would receive negative feedback. This method was introduced in the United States of America (USA) in 1940s, in order to equip the learners with the knowledge and skill required for effective communication in a foreign language.

Speaking

Speaking is s complex skill requiring the simultaneous use of a number of different abilities which often develop different rates (Harris, 1974:81-82). Speaking is oral communication. It is two ways process between speaker and listener and involves productive and reactive skill of understanding (Byrne, 1984).

Drill Technique

Drill technique is the technique in Audio Lingual Method (ALM) which requires the learners to repeat the sentences the teacher says; thus, it is easier for the students to remember and learn, since ALM believes that the stronger the habit is, the greater learning will be achieved.

Teaching Learning through Variety of Pattern Drills

Teaching learning through variety of pattern drills is the way of the teacher teaches the students by drilling or repeating the sentences in the target language dialogue several times through variety of pattern drills, such as repetition drill, substitution drill, and transformation drill.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter discusses about the literature review that will be used in this study, such as : Speaking (Concept of Speaking, component of speaking, concept of teaching speaking), concept of Audio Lingual Method (ALM), and concept of drill technique. This chapter also describes the principle of ALM, procedures of teaching speaking through drill technique, and theoretical assumption.

2.1 Speaking

Speaking is a communication process between two people or more. Speaking is a productive skill, where it can produce a language. According to the Oxford Advance Learner‟s Dictionary, speak means to say words; to say or to talk somebody about something, to have a conversation with somebody; to address somebody in word. Harris (1974) defines speaking as the encoding process whereby we communicate our ideas, thought, and feeling orally. It means that we produce a communication to someone. Communication is our ideas, message, think, and feeling that we want to deliver to the other people. So, here the situation of speaking involves a speaker who puts the message with a verbal code ( word or sentence) that has content structure and a listener.

Speaking oral communication is a two way process between speaker and listener which involves productive and receptive skills and understanding, (Byrne, 1984). It means that speaking is a productive skill to which the speaker produces or uses language at the same time message across. In this problem, there is a process of giving message or decoding process. Within a productive skill, the students need a learn words and phrases to express.

Welty states that (1976: 47) speaking is one of four basic skills of language and it has important role in daily life because it is the main skill in communication. Speaking must fulfill these following criteria, they are:

1. Pronunciation

Pronunciation refers to the ability to produce easily comprehensible articulation (Sakura: 1978). There are 3 basic of the main range of the teaching technique which can be involved to assist pupils in learning pronunciation. The first is exhortation. Exhortation is the instruction to imitate and mimic, to make such a sound, without father explanation. The second is speech training, it is the construction of special games and exercises which entail the use of word or sentence so as to practices particular sounds, sequences of sounds, stress-patterns, rhythm, and intonation. The researcher asks the students to practice how to pronoun sentences. The third is practical phonetics which including description of the organ of speech, description of the articulation of sounds, description of stress, rhythm and intonation.

2. Grammar

The study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences, structural relationship in language or in a language, sometimes including pronunciation, meaning, and linguistic history. Grammar is the set of logical and structural rules that govern the composition of sentences, phrases, and words in any given natural language. Grammars refers it is a kind of regularity of sounds structure that nobody could learn language without grammar.

3. Vocabulary

Vocabulary means the appropriate diction which is used in communication (Syakur 1987). Vocabulary refers to the selection of words that suitable with content (Harris 1974: 68-69). Vocabulary is divided in to two parts, close class and open class. Close class consist of preposition, pronoun, conjunction, e.g.

And : I like dancing and singing A : I eat a bowl of meatball Your : What is your favorite food? My : My hobby is riding bicycle

But : I do not like meatball but I like noodle Open class consist of noun, adjective, verb, adverb, e.g

Noun

I : I love playing badminton My : My hobby is reading story book Basketball : Basketball is Rahmi‟s favorite sport

Verb

Play : Rudi is playing football with his brother Go : Romi go to the fields to play football Makes : Mother makes a cup of coffee for my father

Adjective

Good : Markus is a good singer

Bore : I always bore if I stay at home alone

4. Fluency

Fluency is the smoothness of flow with which sounds, syllables, words, and phrases are joined together when speaking. Brumfit (1984) in Nation sees fluency as the maximal affective operation of the language system so far acquired by the students. It refers to the one who express a language quickly and easily without any difficulty.

2.2 Teaching Speaking

Teaching is an activity which has a purpose to share an information from the teacher to the students in order to be able to finish the task which can not be finished by the students (Rozali, Mahani). Teaching speaking means how to use the language for communication, for transferring idea, thought or even feeling to other people. Rivers (1978: 6) states that speaking is developed from the first contact with the language that we learn, because by the speaking we can transfer our ideas or thought to order people. Moreover Johnson (1983: 23) says that the essence of human language is human activity on the part of the individual to make

him understand by another and activity on the part of the other understands what was on the first. Then, he adds that the languages as an activity that permits people to communicate with each other. Therefore it is clear that language is very important. We can not only teach what will be spoken but also the situation what we deal with. The teacher teaches speaking by carrying out the students in certain situation when the topics is being talked about. The topic must be familiar with the students so what the ideas have an oral command of the language need to describe the topic.

Therefore, if students do not learn how to speak or do not get any opportunity to speak in the language classroom they may soon lose their motivation and interesting in learning. On the other hand, if the right activities are taught in the right way, speaking in class can be a lot of fun, raise general learner motivation and make the English language classroom a fun and dynamic place.

Teaching speaking is to teach English language learners to:

1. Produce the English speech sounds patterns.

2. Use word and sentences stress, intonation patterns and the rhythm of the second language.

3. Select appropriate words and sentences according to the proper social setting, audience, situation, and subject matter.

4. Organize their thoughts in a meaningful and logical sequence. 5. Use language as a mean of expressing values and judgments.

6. Use the language quickly and confidently with few unnatural pauses, which are called as fluency. (Nunnan, 2003 in Kayi, 2006).

It is clear that speaking is the ability to express one‟s thought and it is one of the suitable forms of communication. There are several ways of teaching speaking that we can use during teaching learning process. In order to teach second language learners how to speak in the best way possible, that teacher must use speaking activities that can be practiced and applied in the classroom. Short dialogue is one of them

2.3 Audio Lingual Method (ALM)

ALM was introduced in Indonesia in 1960‟s to prepare people to master foreign language orally in a short time, emphasizes oral forms of language. However, ALM still considers the other language skills, in which the oral forms like listening and speaking should come first, then reading and writing come later. Besides that, ALM believes that learning is simply habit formation in which to learn a new language means to acquire another set of speech habits which can be formulated through the observance of rules. Therefore, successful language learners are those who finally become spontaneous in communication and the rules have been forgotten.

Since ALM focuses on listening and speaking skills; thus, listening and speaking come first, and reading and writing come later. Therefore, as ALM assumptions about language learning is a process of habit formation, the students are equipped with the knowledge and skill required for effective communication in foreign language by using drill techniques and several techniques in the form of target language dialogue. According to Larsen-Freeman, in her book Techniques and

Principles in Language Teaching (1986:45-47) there are expanded descriptions of some common/typical techniques closely associated with the ALM, such as dialog memorization, backward build-up (expansion) drill, repetition drill, chain drill, single-slot substitution drill, multiple-slot substitution drill, transformation drill, question and answer drill, use of minimal pairs, completing the dialogue, and grammar game.

1) Dialog memorization: Traditionally, an ALM lesson begins in a dialog or short conversation which is later memorized either through mimicry or applied role playing. To this latter, there are three ways:

a) The students take the role of one character of a dialog and the teacher takes the other with roles switching after a while.

b) One half of the class plays the role of one character from the dialog and the other half plays the other with roles switching after a while.

c) Or else pair-work, in which two students perform the dialog before their classmates.

2) Backward build-up (expansion) drill: This drill is used when a long line of a dialog is giving the students trouble. It consists of breaking up any student frustrating line into small units, then repeating it backward, one unit at a time, for example “How are you?” “You” is taken as a first unit, “are you” as the second unit, and “how are you” as the last unit. Every unit should be repeated or drilled backward with a sufficient number of times, especially the last unit. 3) Repetition drill: It is used to teach the lines of conversations or dialogs. The

students are asked to repeat the teacher‟s model as accurately and quick as possible.

4) Chain drill: It is used to form around the room as the students, one-by-one, ask and answer questions of each other. Thus, it will allow some controlled communication even though it is limited, and give the teacher opportunity to check each student‟s speech.

5) Single-slot substitution drill: The teacher states a line from the dialog, then uses a word or a phrase as a cue when the students are repeating the line in the sentence, then substitutes the cue into the line in its proper place. For example, “how old are you?” (Cues are: she/he/they), and the answer would be: “how old is he?”; “how old is she?”; “how old are they?”

6) Multiple-slot substitution drill: Similar to the previous one, single-shot substitution drill, the difference within them is that the teacher gives cue phrases, multiplicity of cues (two or more), one at a time, which fit into different slots. Then the students should substitute and make any changes as needed to the structure of the sentence like subject-verb agreement, for example, “She is playing in the school yard.” (cues: they/go/the park).

7) Transformation drill: A grammatical tool, as a matter of fact, in which the students are asked to transform sentences of one form into another form, for example, transforming an affirmative sentence into a negative-affirmative one, a passive sentence into an active one, a simple statement into a question, or direct speech into reported speech.

8) Question and answer drill: The students are required, in such a drill, to answer questions and ask the others as accurately and quickly as possible. Thus, the students can practice with the question pattern.

9) Use of minimal pairs: The teacher works with pair of words which differ in only one sound, for example, “ship/sheep.” Then the comparison between the students‟ native language and the target language, contrastive analysis, is analyzed.

10) Completing the dialog: It simply consists of a dialog of which some linguistic items, grammatical or lexical, are dropped and which the students should fill the blanks with the missing words by their own answer or from a suggested box of possible answers.

11) Grammar game: It is designed to get the students to practice a grammar point within a context which there are still a lot of repetitions, in which the students are able to express themselves, although it is limited in this game. For example, the alphabet game, take the topic about the supermarket. The first student says, “I am going to the supermarket. I need a few apples.” (The first student names something beginning with A.) The second student says, “I am going to the supermarket. I need a few apples and I need a few bananas.” The game continues in this manner with each consecutive student adding an item beginning with the next letter after repeating the items named before their own.

2.4 Drills

Drilling as a process of habit formation that makes the students easier to remember and learn the target language. As ALM believes that learning a foreign language is the same as the acquisition of the native language (Larsen-Freeman,

2000:43), the more often English is repeated; the stronger the habit and the greater learning will be achieved.

According to Richards, J.C. et-al. (1986), there are several kinds of drill techniques:

1) Repetition Drill: drill in which the students only repeat what the teacher says. For example:

T : I study in the morning. S1 : I study in the morning. T : I study in the afternoon. S2 : I study in the afternoon. Etc.

2) Substitution Drill: drill in which the students are required to replace one word with another. For example:

T : John is cold. T : Hungry. S1 : John is hungry. T : John and Marry.

S3 : John and Marry are hungry. Etc.

3) Transformation Drill: drill in which the students are required to change sentences from negative to positive, from positive to interrogative, or from simple present to simple past tense, depending on the instruction from the teacher. For example:

T : The book is new. S1 : Is the book new?

T : We are in the class. S2 : Are we in the class? Etc.

4) Replacement Drill: drill in which the students replace a noun with a pronoun. It is the same drill as the substitution drill, but it involves with a replacement. For example:

T : I like the book. S1 : I like it.

T : I met the people in Jakarta. S2 : I met them in Jakarta. T : John will come here. S3 : He will come here. Etc.

5) Response Drill: drill in which the students respond to somebody‟s sentence. This drill may involve “wh” questions or “yes/no” questions. For example:

T : Alice is at school. T2 : Where is Alice? T3 : At school. Etc.

6) Cued Response Drill: drill in which the students are provided with a cue before or after the questions. For example:

T : What did the man buy? (A book). S1 : The man bought a book.

T : Who will help you? (His brother). S2 : His brother will help us.

7) Rejoinder Drill: drill in which the students are given instruction of how to respond, similar to the cued response drill. For example:

T : Come to my house. (Be polite). S1 : Would you like to come to my house? T : Your idea is not good. (Disagree). S2 : I disagree with your idea. Etc.

8) Restatement Drill: drill in which the students rephrase an utterance and address it to somebody else, based on the content of the utterance. For example:

T : Tell him where you live.

S1 : I live at Raden Intan Street no. 5. T : Ask her what she has for breakfast. S2 : What do you have for breakfast? Etc.

9) Completion Drill: drill in which the students are told to supply a missing word on a sentence or statement. For example:

T : I bring my book and you bring ….

S1 : I bring my book and you bring your book. T : I have to solve…. own problems. S2 : I have to solve my own problems. Etc.

10)Expansion Drill: drill in which the students build up a statement by adding a word or phrase. For example:

S1 : We study mathematics. T : Everyday.

S2 : I study mathematics everyday. Etc.

11)Contraction Drill: drill in which the students replace a phrase or clause with a single word or shorter expressions. For example:

T : I did not mean to kill the bird. S1 : I did not mean it.

T : Do not go to that place. S2 : Do not go there. Etc.

12)Integration Drill: drill in which the students combine two separate statements. For example:

T : Which one do you think is true? The earth goes around the sun or the sun goes around the earth.

S1 : I think the earth goes around the sun. T : I know that lady. She is wearing a blue shirt. S2 : I know the lady wearing a blue shirt.

By considering the suitability and appropriateness of the material that are going to be presented to the students by the researcher, finally the researcher decide to take repetition drill as his teaching technique.

2.5 Teaching Speaking Through Drill Technique

Teaching is an activity where the teacher give the information about the learning materilals to the students in order to be able to finish the task which can not be finished by the students (Rozali, Mahani). Teaching speaking means how to use

the language for communication, for transferring idea, thought or even feeling to other people. Rivers (1978: 6) states that speaking is developed from the first contact with the language that we learn, because by the speaking we can transfer our ideas or thought to order people. Drilling as a process of habit formation makes the students easier to remember and learn the target language. As ALM believes that learning a foreign language is the same as the acquisition of the native language (Larsen-Freeman, 2000:43), the more often English is repeated; the stronger the habit and the greater learning will be achieved. So it can be concluded that teaching speaking through drill technique is teaching speaking by using drill technique in order to get the suitable technique for its skill to get the improvement of students‟ speaking skill.

2.6 Procedures of Teaching Speaking Through Drill Technique

The procedure in teaching speaking through drill technique is by presenting the target language dialogue which involves listening and speaking. According to Huebener (1969:37), cited in Setiyadi (2006:59), there are steps of a procedure in speaking as follows:

a. The language teacher gives a brief summary of the content of the dialogue. The dialogue is not translated but equivalent translation of key phrases should be given in order for the language learners to comprehend the dialogue. b. The language learners listen attentively while the teacher reads or recites the

dialogue at normal speed several times. Gestures and facial expressions or dramatized actions should accompany the presentation.

c. Repetition of each line by the language learners in chorus is the next step. Each sentence may be repeated a half dozens of times, depending on its length and on the alertness of the language learners. If the teacher detects an error, the offending learner is corrected and is asked to repeat the sentence. If many learners make the same errors, chorus repetition and drill will be necessary.

d. Repetition is continued with groups decreasing in size, that is, first the two halves of the class, then thirds, and then single rows or smaller groups. Groups can assume the speakers‟ roles.

e. Pairs of individual learners now go to the front of the classroom to act out the dialogue. By this time they should have memorized the text.

This is the procedure of teaching speaking through drill technique that researcher conducts :

Pre activity

a. Teacher opens the class with greating. b. Teacher checks the students‟ attendance list.

c. Teacher gives question relate to the focus of the lesson that would be learnt. In this case, students are asked about their experience during learning speaking so far. Whether or not they have difficulties in learning speaking and what reasons cause the difficulties.

d. Teacher introduces about drilling is a technique which will be applied in the class. Teacher explains what they will have to do during the lesson.

e. Teacher explains the three components involved in speaking; they are fluency, pronunciation, and comprehension.

While Activity

a. Teacher divides the class into group of four.

b. Teacher give the example of the conversation dialogue

c. The teacher ask the students to repeat what the teacher says. The teacher also rehearse them to response what the teacher says.

d. The teacher give examples to the students how to pronounce the words in the conversation dialogue.

e. Teacher asks the students start the perform by throwing dice to determine who will get the first turn.

f. Teacher asks the pairs to practice the conversation in front of the class as a speaking test.

g. Teacher observes students‟ pronunciation, fluency, and comprehensibility. h. The teacher observes students‟ willing in using drilling technique in speaking

class by seeing their motivation and their confidence during the process of implementing drilling technique in English speaking class.

i. Teacher observes whether or not the students have difficulties in delivering their speaking in the conversation dialogue.

j. Teacher also observes their comprehension towards the conversation dialogue by watching how they deliver their speaking to others.

k. Teacher asks another pairs to note the mistakes (pronunciation, fluency, and comprehension).

Post activity

a. Teacher comments on students‟ performance especially in pronunciation, fluency, and comprehension.

b. Teacher asks the students about their difficulties during learning process c. Teacher discusses the ways to solve the difficulties together with students. d. Teacher closes the class with greeting.

2.7 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Pattern Drill Technique to

Improve Students’ Speaking Ability

According to Huebener (1969: 44) the advantages of Pattern Drill Technique are:

1. It ensures the participation of the students because the students have unique, essential information; all learners need to get other‟s information.

2. It helps the students in earning the content of the subject.

3. It has a strong effect on learning attitude and social relationship among students in a group.

4. It enables the students to understand the dialogue because while they are doing the activity, they will try to know the meaning of the words or sentences in order to get the complete content of the dialogue.

Since the aim of the technique is speaking ability, teaching through Pattern Drill Technique language teachers spend most of the time for drilling. However,

experimentation with the technique has showed that the technique has certain disadvantages (Huebener, 1969: 9).

1. Real Conversation is difficult to be achieved in the classroom .

2. Conversation must not be confused with oral practice. Conversation involves a free, spontaneous discussion by two or more persons of any topic of common interest. Part of its effectiveness is due to facial expressions and gestures. 3. Conversational competence depends essentially on an extensive vocabulary,

memorization of numerous speech patterns, and the automatic control of stress.

4. Requires planning and structuring by the teacher in order to make the teaching to be successful.

2.8 Theoretical Assumption

In teaching speaking, there are some techniques that can help the teacher to reaches the aim of teaching learning process. For this Pattern Drill Technique is chosen as the technique in teaching speaking. Pattern Drill Technique is used in teaching speaking because it may get the students involved and active. Since, the students in this case have a unique, essential part to ply in the activity. Therefore, Pattern Drill Technique is an effective technique in teaching speaking.

At least, appropriate teaching technique is needed to improve students‟ speaking ability. It is assumed that Pattern Drill Technique is the most suitable technique for teaching speaking. It has been found highly successful in helping the learners to improve their ability in speaking. Moreover, Pattern Drill Technique has

systematic steps that help students to comprehend and master the materials deeper. It is also an active process and collaborative because dialogue/ discussion between students are required during learning process. It provides opportunities for students to learn to monitor their own learning and thinking. Students with variety levels share their knowledge. Finally, students speaking ability will improve

2.9 Hypothesis

Concerning the theories and the assumption above, the hypothesis can be formulated as follows:

1. There is a significant difference of the students‟ speaking ability before and after being taught through drill technique.

III.RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter describes the design of the research, how to collect the data from the sample of the research and how to analyze the data. This chapter also describes research procedure, population and sampling , data collecting technique, validity, and reliability , criteria for evaluatingstudents’speaking ability , data analysis, and hypothesis testing.

3.1 Research Design

This research intended to find out whether drill technique could improvestudents’

speaking ability. Therefore, the researcher conducted this quantitative research by using time series design. The researcher used one class where the students were given three times pre-test, three times treatment, and three times post-test.

The research design was described as follows:

T1 X T2 T3 X T4 T5 X T6

Note: T1 T2 T3 :Pre-test

X :Treatment (Using Drill Technique)

technique was implemented, to see the students’basic speaking ability. Then, the treatment of teaching speaking through drilltechinque. The post-test was

adminstered afterward, to analyze how the improvement of their speaking ability through drill technique.

3.2 Population and Sampling.

The population of the research was the second grade students of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung, in which consisted of ten (10) classes that were chosen by Purposive Random Sampling. The class chosen was class XI A2, consisting of 32 students.

The researcher chose XI A2as the sample because the students still had low ability

in their speaking and afraid of making mistakes in expressing themselves.

3.3Data Collecting Techique

The data of this research was the form the students’ speaking ability in performing transactional dialogue in terms of pronunciation, fluency, and comprehensibility. In collecting the data, the researcher used the following steps:

1. Administrating the Pre-test

The pre-test was administered to the students before the treatment of teaching speaking through drill technique was implemented. Pre-test was conducted to know thestudents’ basic speaking ability. Meanwhile, before administered pre-test, the researcher explained the topic that would be tested. The tests focused on dialogue form of oral test.

The post-test was administered to the students after the treatment of teaching speaking technique through drill technique would be implemented. It was a subjective test and focused in oral test..

3.4 Research Procedure

In the collecting data, the resercher follows the following steps:

1. Determining the subject

There wereeight classes at second grade of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung which consisted of about 30- 38 students for each class. The sample of this reseacher choose by using probability sampling technique as the control and experimental class.

2. Selecting the Materials

The researcher choose the materials from the students’ book based on the syllabus. The material was about agreement and disagreement. The researcher conducted three times in improving students’ speaking ability through drill technique.

3. Conducting Pre-test

The pre-test was adminstered to the students before the treatment of teaching speaking through drill technique, to know thestudents’ basic speaking ability. Meanwhile, before administer pre-test, the researcher explained the topic that would be tested. The tests focused on oral test. The researcher was conducted three times test by giving the same

reseacher explained generally the test and asks the students to make a group that consist two persons. The researcher give the students situational dialogue andthey will perform it in front of class. In performing the test, the students ask to speak up clearly since the

students’ voice would be recorded. Futhermore, the researcher and another English teacher judge thestudents’ performance.

4. Treatments

In this research, the treatments were administered in three meetings.At the first treatment the resercher deliver the indicators and objectives of treatment. She also explains the material by using drill technique. And the next, the researcher asks the students to make conversation

dialogue with their pair group. The procedure of teaching speaking through drill technique as follows:

a. Pre Activities b. While Activities c. Post Activities

5. Administering Post-test

Post-test was conducted after the treatment. Post-test was used in order to know the progress of speaking ability after using drill technique. Based on the design of this research that was time series design, post-tests was conducted in three times, after each meeting or after each treatment. The reseacher used a subjective test in oral test. The

had to perform the dialogue in front of the class. In performing the dialogue, the students wasasked to speak up clearly since thestudents’

voice would be recorded. Moreover, the researcher and the English teacherjudge the students’ performance.

6. Analyzing Data

After conducting the final test, the reseacher analyzed the data. After collecting the data, the students’ worksheet were analyzed

subjectively by both reseacher and teacher. Then, The reseacher

analyzed the mean of every test by compared from the two raters based on the test. The mean of pre-test and post-test were used to know the improvement of students’ speaking ability through drill technique.

3.5 Criteria for Evaluating Students’_{Speaking Ability}

The form of the test was subjective test since there was no exact answer. In this test, the researcher used inter-rater reliability to assessed the students’

performance, in which the performance then were given score and were recorded together by the researcher as the first rater and the English teacher of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung as the second rater. The rater gave the score by recording the

students’ speech performance. The researcher recorded the students’ utterances because it helped the raters to evaluate the data more objectively.

In fulfilling the criteria of a good test, validity and reliability of the test should be considered. Theywere as follows:

The test can be said valid if the test measures the objective to be measured and suitable with the criteria (Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 250). To measure whether the test in this research had a good quality, the types of validity was used in this research werecontent validityandconstructvalidity.

1. Content Validity

Content validity is the extent to which a test measures a representative sample of the subject matter content, the focus of content validity is adequacy of the sample and simply on the appearance of the test (Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 251). It is correlated the test with the educational goal sated on 2006 English curriculum and the syllabus for the first year of SMA’s students.

In content validity, the test is a good reflection of what has been taught and the knowledge which the teacher wants his students to know. It can best be examined by the table of specification (Shohamy, 1957: 74). Below are the table of specification:

No Aspects of Speaking Theories

1. Pronunciation Pronunciation refers to the ability to produce easily comprehensible articulation (Syakur, 1987).

It refers to the intonation patterns (harris, 1984).

2. Grammar Grammar is needed for the students to arrange a correct sentence in creating a conversation.

It is one of the ability of the students to manipulate and to distinguish appropriate grammatical form in appropriate ones (Heaton, 1978: 5).

3. Vocabulary Vocabulary means the appropriate diction which is used in communication (Syakur, 1987).

4. Fluency Fluency refers to the ease and the speed of the flow of the speech (Harris, 1974: 81).

It also can be defined as the students’ability to speak fluently and accurately. Signs of fluency include a

5. Comprehension It defines that comprehension for oral communication which requires a subject to respond to speech as well as to initiate it (Syakur, 1987).

2. Construct Validity

Construct validity is concerned with whether the test is actually in line with the theory of what it means to know the language (Shohamy, 1985: 74) that is being measured, it examines whether the test actually reflects what it means to know a language. It means that the test measures certain aspects of speaking: pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension based on the indicator.

3.5.2 Reliability of the Test

Reliability refers to extend to which the test is consistent in its score and gives us an indication of how accurate the test score are (Hatch and Farhady, 1982: 244). The concept of reliability stems from the ideas that no measurements is perfect even we go to the same scale there will always be differences.

Inter-rater reliability was applied in this research in order to ensure the reliability of the score and to avoid the subjectively of the researcher. To achieve the reliability in judging the students’ speaking performance, the researcher used a speaking criteria based on Harris (1974), in which the focus of speaking skills that have been asses are; pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. The second rater was the English teacher who has been experienced in rating students’speaking, in means of getting a consistent and fair judgement. The statistical formula for counting the reliability was as follow:

R= 1– Where:

R : Reliability

N : Number of Students

D : The Different of Rank Correlation 1-6 : Constant Number

(Nitko, 1983: 395)

After finding the cooeficient between raters, the researcher then analyzed the cooeficient of reliability with the standard of reliability according to Slameto (1998: 147) in Hayanti (2010: 38) as follow:

A very low reliability (range from 0.00–0.19) A low reliability (range from 0.20–0.39) An average reliability (range from 0.40–0.59) A high reliability (range from 0.60 –0.79) A very high reliability (range from 0.80–0.100)

After calculating the data, the result of the reliability can be seen as the following tables:

Rater’s Reliability

Reliability Pretest Posttest Criteria

the reliability of the rater is high, in which it means that the way of the first’s rater of scoring was similar to the researcher’s. They have almost the same scoring system.

3.6 Speaking Test

The researcher conducted an speaking test lasted for 90 minutes in each meeting. In conducting the tests, the researcher provided a topic. Each pair had to make a dialog based on the topic that was given by the teacher. The test was done orally and directly. The teacher called each of the pair one by one to come in front of the class to perfomed their dialog based on the topic given by the teacher. The researcher asked the students to speak clearly since the students’performance was being recorded during the test.

The form of the test was subjective since there was no exact answer. The teacher gave the score of the students’ speaking ability based on the oral rating sheet provide. The teacher assessed the students concern on five aspects that should be fulfilled by the students in speaking skill; pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. In scoring the test, the researcher used inter-rater. The one was the researcher itself, and then the other one was the English teacher of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung. During the process of evaluating the students’

speaking ability scores, the researcher and the another rater who was the class teacher, listened to the students’ record carefully and used the oral English. The

evaluate them and made them more objectively.

The rating sheet was modified from Harris (1974). Based on the oral rating sheet, there were five (5) aspects of speaking skills that should be tested, namely pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. Below are the Sample Oral - English Rating Sheet of Harris (1974):

Pronunciation

5. Has few traces of foreign accent.

4. Always intelligible, though one is conscious of a definite accent.

3. Pronunciation problems necessitate concentrated listening and occasionally lead to misunderstanding.

2. Very hard to understand because of pronunciation problems. Must frequently be asked to repeat.

1. Pronunciation problems so severe as to make speech virtually unintelligible.

Grammar

5. Makes few (if any) noticeable errors of grammar or word order. 4. Occasionally makes grammatical and word-order errors which do not,

however, obscure meaning.

3. Makes frequent errors of grammar and word order which occasionally obscure meaning.

2. Grammar and word-order errors make comprehension difficult. Must often rephrase sentences and/ or restrict himself to basic patterns.

1. Errors in grammar and word order so severe as to make speech virtually unintelligible.

Vocabulary

5. Use of vocabulary and idioms is virtually that of a native speaker.

4. Sometimes uses innapropriate terms and/ or must rephrase ideas because of lexical inadequacies.

3. Frequently uses the wrong words; conversation somewhat limited because of inadequate vocabulary.

2. Misuse of words and very limited vocabulary make comprehension quite difficult.

1. Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to make conversation virtually impossible.

5. Speech as fluent and effortless as that of a native speaker.

4. Speed of speech seems to be slightly affected by language problems. 3. Speed and fluency are rather strongly affected by language problems. 2. Usually hesitant often forced into silence by language limitations. 1. Speech is so halting and fragmentary as to make conversation virtually

impossible.

Comprehension

5. Appears to understand everything without difficulty.

4. Understands nearly everythig at normal speed, although occasional repetition may be necessary.

3. Understands most of what s said at slower-than-normal speed with repetitions.

2. Has great difficulty following what is said. Can comprehend only“social conversation”spoken slowly and frequent repetitions.

1. Cannot be said to understand even simple conversational English.

Note:The interpretation of grading system was as follows: Identification of the scores.

If the student got 5, so 5 x 4 = 20 4, so 4 x 4 = 16 3, so 3 x 4 = 12 2, so 2 x 4 = 8 1, so 1 x 4 = 4 For example:

A students got 5 in pronunciation, 2 in grammar, 3 in vocabulary, 4 in fluency, and 3 in comprehension. Therefore, the student’s total score would be:

Pronunciation 5 x 4 = 20

Grammar 2 x 4 = 8

Comprehension 3 x 4 = 12

It means that the student got 64 for speaking.

The oral production score was based on the five (5) components and can be compared in the percentage.

3.7 Data Analysis

In order to find out the improvement of the students’ oral production before and after being taught through drill technique by using recount text, the researcher examined the students’ score by using the following steps. The first step was transcribing the students’ dialog performance, in which the researcher recorded

the students’ spoken work and transcribed into written form. The second step was scoring the pretest and posttest of the student’s scores from the two raters using rating scale of Harris (1974)

The data of pretest (T1) and posttest (T2) scores can be seen on the table below:

Student

’s Name

Pronunciation Grammar Vocabulary Fluency Comprehension Total

R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2

A B

∑ N=

The data of inter–rater reliability scores of pretest and posttest can be seen on the table below:

No Student’sCode Rater 1 Total Rater 2 Total

Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest

3 4

The third step was calculating the mean scores of the data such as minimum score and maximum score to know the mean of the test, in which to know the improvement by making both pretest and posttest a graphic on the data. Hatch and Farhady (1982) stated that there were three posibilities of analysis result, shown by graphic below.

80 70 60 50 40

Mean 30

20 10 0

Pretest 1 Pretest 2 Pretest 3 Posttest 1 Posttest 2 Posttest 3

3.8 Hypothesis Testing

The hypothesis testing was used to prove whether the hypothesis planned in this research was accepted or not. SPSS was used to know the improvement of treatment effect. The hypothesis is analyzed at significance level of 0.05 in which the hypothesis is approved if Sig < α. It means that probability of error in

analyzed them in order to find out whether there was an increasing in students’

ability in writing or not after the treatment. The researcher used Paired Sample T-test to know the level of

significance of the treatment effect. The formulation is:

and

∑x2d = ∑d2–

Md = mean from the differences pretest and posttest (posttest-pretest) Xd = deviation of each subject (d–md)

∑x2d = total of quadratic deviation N = subjects on sample

(Arikunto, 2010: 349-350) The criteria are:

H0 : There is no improvement of the students’ speaking ability after being

taught by using drill technique.

The criteria is Ho (null hypothesis) is accepted if alpha level is higher than 0.05(α> 0.05)

H1 : There is an improvement of the students’ speakingability after being

taught by using drill technique.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter presents the conclusions and suggestions based on the discussion and finding of the data analysis.

5.1 Conclusions

Having conducted the research at the second grade of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung and analyzed the data, the researcher would like to state some conclusions as follows:

1. There is an difference of the students‟ speaking ability before and after being taught through drill technique at the second grade of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung. This can be seen from the difference of the students‟ mean scores in pretest 1 has improved from 68.88 up to 84.00 in posttest 1 with gain of 15.12, pretest 2 improved from 69.24 up to 83.59 in posttest 2 with gain of 14.35, and pretest 3 improved from 72.13 up to 84.69 in posttest 3 with gain of 12.56. The result of hypothesis testing of p< 0.05, p= 0.000 shows that it is accepted. It means that there is a significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the students‟ speaking ability by usingdrill technique.

2. This research has been focused on the five aspects of speaking based on Harris David (1974). Then, from the calculation of the five aspects of Speaking explained in the previous chapter, it can be seen that the most improved is onfluency aspect with the final gain is 4,08. (see Appendix40)

3. Drill technique can be used to improve the students‟ speaking ability because the students could have many opportunities to speak. The students can practice their speaking skill by communication with others. Further, teaching speaking through drill technique can be used to improve the students‟ speaking ability.

5.2 Suggestions

Considering the findings of the research, the researcher would like to recommend some suggestions as follows:

1. Since there is an improvement on the students‟ speaking ability before and after being taught through drill technique, English teachers are suggested to use drill in teaching speaking. Because the fact of learning English in almost every school, the teacher only teaches grammar but teacher also can teach about speaking so that the students can maximize their speaking skill in order to communicate with others by using English. The teacher should present the suitable learning of English, so the students not only learn about Grammar. The teacher also should enforce the students to speak English when they talk with each other, for example: when they ask some questions, they should speak it up in English. It also can be done

when the teacher explains the materials, it will be better if the teacher speaks in whole English (more English than Indonesian).

2. The students are suggested to practice English in their daily activities. It can make them more familiar with this second language. The teacher should determine an English speaking day where students have to use English in communicating with others. Although it is difficult to practice, but it is important to stimulate the habit of speaking in English, which can improve their fluency in speaking. Therefore, the students should have more practice in speaking English especially in communicating with others.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 1991. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2010. Prosedur penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Bodgan, R. C. and Biklen, S. K. 1982. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by principle: An interactive Approach to Language

pedagogy. New York: Longman.

Bryne, D. 1984. Teaching Oral English. New Jersey: Longman Group Ltd. Desiana, Mega Ayu. 2013. The Implementation of Jigsaw Technique in

Improving The Students’ Oral Production of Recount Text at The First

Grade of SMAN 1 Bandar Sribawono. (A Script). Bandar Lampung Lampung Unversity.

Fraenkel, Jack R. and Wallen, Norman E. 1993. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: San Francisco State University. Haris, David. 1974. English as Second Language. New York: Mc, Graw

Mill.

Harris, David. 1987. English as Second Language. New York: Mc. Graw Hill Book Company.

Harmer, Jeremy. 1984. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Grow Hill Press.

Hatch, Evelyn and Farhady. 1982. Research Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistic. Tokyo: Newsbury House Publisher.

Heaton, J. B. 1987. Language Testing Modern English Publication. London: Longman.

Heaton, J .B. 1991. Writing English As a Second Language Test. London: Longman.

Heryanto, Erlan. 2010. Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Through Patern Drill Technique at First Year of SMA Sunan Kalijaga Jati Agung. (A Script). Bandar Lampung: Lampung University.

Johnson, Keith. 1983. Communicative Approach and Communicative Processe, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kayi, Hayriye. Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XII, No. 11, November 2006. Lado, Robert. 1974. Testing for Language teachers. New York: Cambridge

University Press

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane.1986. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane and Long, H. Michael. 1991. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. London: Longman.

Nitko, Antony. J. 1983.Educational Tests and Measurement: An introduction. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

Rivers, Wilga, M. 1978. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as Second or Foreign Language. New York: Cambridge. Language Teaching Library.

Richards, J. C., Plat, J. and Weber, H. 1986. Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Hong Kong: Longman Group.

Setiyadi, Ag. Bambang. 2006. Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.

Setiyadi, Ag. Bambang. 2006. Metodologi Penelitian untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing, Pendekatan Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu. Shohamy, Elena. 1985. A Practical Handbook in Language Testing for the Second

language Teacher. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Syakur. 1987. Language Testing and Evaluation. Surakarta: Sebelas maret University Press.

Appendix 1

Research Schedule

No Day/ Date Activities

1. Tuesday, August 20th, 2013 First Pretest in X1

2. Wednesday, August 21st, 2013 Second Pretest in X1

3. Friday, August 23rd, 2013 Third Pretest in X1

4. Tuesday, August 27th, 2013 First Treatment in X1

5. Wednesday, August 28th, 2013 First Posttest in X1

6. Friday, August 30th, 2013 Second Treatment X1

7. Tuesday, September 1st, 2013 Second Posttest in X1

8. Wednesday, September 2nd, 2013 Third Treatment in X1

Appendix 2

LESSON PLAN 1

Unit of Education : Senior High School (SMA)

Subject : English

Class/ Semester : XI/ 1

Material : Agreement and Disagreement Topic : Going to the Holiday Place Focusing Skill : Speaking

Genre : Conversation Dialog Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

1. Standard Competence

a. Expressing meaning at short simple transactional and interpersonal conversation and sustained in daily life context.

b. Comprehend the short functional text and essay (conversation dialog) in daily life and to access science.

2. Basic Competence

a. Expressing meaning at short simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal (to socialize) conversation by using spoken language accurately, fluently, and acceptable to interact and involve spoken language accurately in daily life to access knowledge.

b. Responding the meaning and the procedure of written text (conversation dialog) accurately in daily life to access knowledge.

3. Indicators

a. Students are able to present their own dialog according to the topic in front of the class (going to the holiday place).

b. Students are able to communicate with their pair well about their conversation dialog..

c. Students are able to understand the information given by their pair.

4. Learning Objectives

Students are able to:

a. Understand the procedure of making dialog by using the expressions of agree and disagreement with the topic going the the holiday place.. b. Understand the structure and the content of the topic in their dialog. c. Present their dialog according to the topic in front of the class. d. Communicate with their pair well in the dialog that they deliver. e. Understand the information given by their pair.

5. Learning Material

The example of coversation dialog.

6. Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

7. Learning Methods

Conversation

a. Pre Activities

1. The teacher opens the class with greeting, and then checks the students‟ attendance list in order to make sure that all students are present in the class.

2. The teacher tells the students what they are going to learn.

3. The teacher shows the students an example of conversation Dialogue.

4. The teacher warms up the students by giving several questions related to the topic. It is aimed to brainstorming the students‟ background knowledge. The questions are as follows:

1. Do you have a holiday experience? 2. What happen in your holiday experience? 3. What is your impression of your experience? 4. Where is your holiday journey?

b. While Activities

1. The teacher drills the students about agreement and disagreement dialog (Repetition of each line by the language learners in chorus is the next step. Each sentences may be repeated a half dozens of times, depending on its length and on the alertness of the language learner. If the teacher detects an error, the offending learner corrects and repeats the sentence).

2. The students are asked to form into pair consists of two (2) students in each pair and they are asked to make dialogue according to the topic that are chossen by the teacher.

3. Each student is asked to present their dialogue in front of the class.

4. Post Activities

1. All of the students‟ speech performance in each pair is recorded by the researcher.

2. The students‟ dialogue in each pair is also assessed by two (2) raters, where the first rater (R1) is the researcher and the second rater (R2) is the English teacher of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung based on the rating scale of Harris (1974) which concerns on five (5) aspects namely: Pronunciation, Grammar, Vocabulary, Fluency, and Comprehension.

9. Learning Resources

a. Look Ahead Book 1 (an English Course for Senior High School Students Year XI), Publisher Erlangga.

b. Dictionary

10.Assessment

Speaking test in oral form

11.Scoring System

The analytical scoring is used and the aspect of speaking proposed by Harris (1974) is used to assess the students‟ speaking skill. The lowest rating score is 1, and the higher rating score is 5, in which the each score is accumulated as follow:

Code R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10.

The Criteria for each Column: 20 : Excellent 15 : Very Good 10 : Good 5 : Need Help

Total score = 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 = 100 Here is the identification of the scores.

If the student gets 5, so the score is 5 x 4 = 20 4, so the score is 4 x 4 = 16 3, so the score is 3 x 4 = 12 2, so the score is 2 x 4 = 8 1, so the score is 1 x 4 = 4

For example:

A student get 3 in pronunciation, 2 in grammar, 4 in vocabulary, 4 in fluency, and 4 in comprehension. Therefore, the student‟s total score is: Pronunciation 3 x 4 = 12

Grammar 2 x 4 = 8

Vocabulary 4 x 4 = 16

Fluency 4 x 4 = 16

Comprehension 4 x 4 = 16 Total Score : 68

The score of speaking is based on the five (5) components in which is compared in the percentage.

Appendix 3

LESSON PLAN 2

Unit of Education : Senior High School (SMA)

Subject : English

Class/ Semester : XI/ 1

Material : Agreement and Disagreement Topic : booking room in the hotel Focusing Skill : Speaking

Genre : Conversation Dialog Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

1. Standard Competence

a. Expressing meaning at short simple transactional and interpersonal conversation and sustained in daily life context.

b. Comprehend the short functional text and essay (conversation dialog) in daily life and to access science.

2. Basic Competence

a. Expressing meaning at short simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal (to socialize) conversation by using spoken language accurately, fluently, and acceptable to interact and involve spoken language accurately in daily life to access knowledge.

b. Responding the meaning and the procedure of written text (conversation dialog) accurately in daily life to access knowledge.

3. Indicators

a. Students are able to present their own dialog according to the topic in front of the class (booking room in the hotel).

b. Students are able to communicate with their pair well about their conversation dialog..

c. Students are able to understand the information given by their pair.

4. Learning Objectives

Students are able to:

a. Understand the procedure of making dialog by using the expressions of agree and disagreement with the topic booking room in the hotel. b. Understand the structure and the content of the topic in their dialog. c. Present their dialog according to the topic in front of the class. d. Communicate with their pair well in the dialog that they deliver. e. Understand the information given by their pair.

5. Learning Material

The example of coversation dialog.

6. Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

7. Learning Methods

8. Teaching and Learning Activities a. Pre Activities

1. The teacher opens the class with greeting, and then checks the students‟ attendance list in order to make sure that all students are present in the class.

3. The teacher tells the students what they are going to learn.

4. The teacher shows the students an example of conversation Dialogue.

5. The teacher warms up the students by giving several questions related to the topic. It is aimed to brainstorming the students‟ background knowledge. The questions are as follows:

5. Do you have booking hotel room experience? 6. What happen in your experience?

7. What is your impression of your experience?

b. While Activities

1. The teacher drills the students about agreement and disagreement dialog (Repetition of each line by the language learners in chorus is the next step. Each sentences may be repeated a half dozens of times, depending on its length and on the alertness of the language learner. If the teacher detects an error, the offending learner corrects and repeats the sentence).

2. The students are asked to form into pair consists of two (2) students in each pair and they are asked to make dialogue according to the topic that are chossen by the teacher.

3. Each student is asked to present their dialogue in front of the class.

c. Post Activities

1. All of the students‟ speech performance in each pair is recorded by the researcher.

2. The students‟ dialogue in each pair is also assessed by two (2) raters, where the first rater (R1) is the researcher and the second rater (R2) is the English teacher of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung based on the rating scale of Harris (1974) which concerns on five (5) aspects namely: Pronunciation, Grammar, Vocabulary, Fluency, and Comprehension.

d. Learning Resources

1. Look Ahead Book 1 (an English Course for Senior High School Students Year XI), Publisher Erlangga.

2. Dictionary

e. Assessment

Speaking test in oral form

f. Scoring System

The analytical scoring is used and the aspect of speaking proposed by Harris (1974) is used to assess the students‟ speaking skill. The lowest

rating score is 1, and the higher rating score is 5, in which the each score is accumulated as follow:

No Student’s

Code

Pronuciation Grammar Vocabulary Fluency Comprehension Total Score

R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10.

The Criteria for each Column: 20 : Excellent 15 : Very Good 10 : Good 5 : Need Help

Total score = 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 = 100

Here is the identification of the scores.

If the student gets 5, so the score is 5 x 4 = 20 4, so the score is 4 x 4 = 16 3, so the score is 3 x 4 = 12 2, so the score is 2 x 4 = 8 1, so the score is 1 x 4 = 4

For example:

A student get 3 in pronunciation, 2 in grammar, 4 in vocabulary, 4 in fluency, and 4 in comprehension. Therefore, the student‟s total score is: Pronunciation 3 x 4 = 12

Grammar 2 x 4 = 8

Fluency 4 x 4 = 16 Comprehension 4 x 4 = 16 Total Score : 68

It means that the student gets 68 for speaking.

The score of speaking is based on the five (5) components in which is compared in the percentage.

Appendix 4

LESSON PLAN 3

Unit of Education : Senior High School (SMA)

Subject : English

Class/ Semester : XI/ 1

Material : Agreement and Disagreement Topic : Going to the Restaurant Focusing Skill : Speaking

Genre : Conversation Dialog Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

1. Standard Competence

a. Expressing meaning at short simple transactional and interpersonal conversation and sustained in daily life context.

b. Comprehend the short functional text and essay (conversation dialog) in daily life and to access science.

2. Basic Competence

a. Expressing meaning at short simple transactional (to get things done) and interpersonal (to socialize) conversation by using spoken language

accurately, fluently, and acceptable to interact and involve spoken language accurately in daily life to access knowledge.

b. Responding the meaning and the procedure of written text (conversation dialog) accurately in daily life to access knowledge.

3. Indicators

a. Students are able to present their own dialog according to the topic in front of the class (going to the holiday place).

b. Students are able to communicate with their pair well about their conversation dialog..

c. Students are able to understand the information given by their pair.

4. Learning Objectives

Students are able to:

a. Understand the procedure of making dialog by using the expressions of agree and disagreement with the topic going the the restaurant..

b. Understand the structure and the content of the topic in their dialog. c. Present their dialog according to the topic in front of the class. d. Communicate with their pair well in the dialog that they deliver. e. Understand the information given by their pair.

5. Learning Material

The example of coversation dialog.

6. Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

Conversation

8. Teaching and Learning Activities

1. Pre Activities

a. The teacher opens the class with greeting, and then checks the students‟ attendance list in order to make sure that all students are present in the class.

b. The teacher tells the students what they are going to learn.

c. The teacher shows the students an example of conversation Dialogue. d. The teacher warms up the students by giving several questions related to

the topic. It is aimed to brainstorming the students‟ background knowledge. The questions are as follows:

8. Do you have a holiday experience? 9. What happen in your holiday experience? 10.What is your impression of your experience? 11.Where is your holiday journey?

2. While Activities

a. The teacher drills the students about agreement and disagreement dialog (Repetition of each line by the language learners in chorus is the next step. Each sentences may be repeated a half dozens of times, depending on its length and on the alertness of the language learner. If the teacher detects an error, the offending learner corrects and repeats the sentence).

b. The students are asked to form into pair consists of two (2) students in each pair and they are asked to make dialogue according to the topic that are chossen by the teacher.

c. Each student is asked to present their dialogue in front of the class.

3. Post Activities

a. All of the students‟ speech performance in each pair is recorded by the researcher.

b. The students‟ dialogue in each pair is also assessed by two (2) raters, where the first rater (R1) is the researcher and the second rater (R2) is the English teacher of MAN 1 Bandar Lampung based on the rating scale of Harris (1974) which concerns on five (5) aspects namely: Pronunciation, Grammar, Vocabulary, Fluency, and Comprehension.

9. Learning Resources

a. Look Ahead Book 1 (an English Course for Senior High School Students Year XI), Publisher Erlangga.

b. Dictionary

10.Assessment

Speaking test in oral form

11.Scoring System

The analytical scoring is used and the aspect of speaking proposed by Harris (1974) is used to assess the students‟ speaking skill. The lowest

rating score is 1, and the higher rating score is 5, in which the each score is accumulated as follow:

No Student’s

Code

Pronuciation Grammar Vocabulary Fluency Comprehension Total Score

R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10.

The Criteria for each Column: 20 : Excellent 15 : Very Good 10 : Good 5 : Need Help

Total score = 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 = 100

Here is the identification of the scores.

If the student gets 5, so the score is 5 x 4 = 20 4, so the score is 4 x 4 = 16 3, so the score is 3 x 4 = 12 2, so the score is 2 x 4 = 8 1, so the score is 1 x 4 = 4

For example:

A student get 3 in pronunciation, 2 in grammar, 4 in vocabulary, 4 in fluency, and 4 in comprehension. Therefore, the student‟s total score is: Pronunciation 3 x 4 = 12

Vocabulary 4 x 4 = 16

Fluency 4 x 4 = 16

Comprehension 4 x 4 = 16 Total Score : 68

It means that the student gets 68 for speaking.

The score of speaking is based on the five (5) components in which is compared in the percentage.

Appendix 5

PRETEST 1 – 2 – 3 Speaking Test

Pretest 1

Day/ Date : Tuesday, 20 August 2013 Topic : Going to the holiday place

Pretest 2

Day/ Date : Wednesday, 21 August 2013

Topic : discussion about booking room in hotel

Pretest 3

Day/ Date : Friday, 23 August 2013

Topic : discussion about choosing the restaurant for breakfasting Objective : To know how far the students‟ ability in mastering

speaking skill before given treatment Time Allocation : 2 x 45 Minutes

Directions:

1. Make a pair consists of two (2) students.

2. The topic of the conversation will be given randomly

3. Make the dialog according to the topic by using agreement and disagreement expressions.

4. Each pair is given 3 minutes in presenting their own dialog. 5. Try to do your best, speak clearly, your dialogue will be recorded.

Appendix 36

List of Students’ Average Score in Pretest 3- Posttest 3 No Students’ Code Average of Pretest

3

Average of Posttest 3

Improvement

1 AA 64 88 24

2 AH 84 78 6

3 AR 82 80 2

4 AP 76 86 10

5 ARN 76 80 4

6 BP 60 76 16

7 DS 82 84 2

8 ES 78 90 12

9 EJ 64 78 14

10 FF 66 76 10

11 FK 78 92 14

12 HA 64 82 18

13 IK 70 78 8

14 IP 74 84 10

15 KH 60 86 26

16 MAJ 66 88 22

17 MD 68 82 14

18 MRH 82 92 10

19 MZ 68 82 14

20 NL 66 88 22

21 RR 86 96 10

22 RR 62 78 16

23 RA 70 82 12

24 SP 70 78 8

25 WWT 68 76 8

26 SRN 80 90 10

27 TH 70 84 14

28 TW 78 94 16

29 WA 70 82 12

30 WWT 74 84 10

31 WWL 76 88 12

32 YA 70 84 14

Total 2302 2686 384

Appendix 37

Improvement of the Students’ Score in Five Aspects of Speaking

Aspects of Oral Production Pretest 1 Posttest 1 Gain

Pronunciation

13.68 18.25 4.57

Pretest 2 Posttest 2

14.40 18.25 3.80

Pretest 3 Posttest 3

15.18 18.81 3.63

Final Gain 4.00

Grammar

Pretest 1 Posttest 1

12.12 14.31 2.19

Pretest 2 Posttest 2

12.81 14.43 1.62

Pretest 3 Posttest 3

13.06 17.48 4.42

Final Gain 2.74

Vocabulary

Pretest 1 Posttest 1

13.75 15.81 2.06

Posttest 2 Posttest 2

13.31 15.81 2.50

Pretest 3 Posttest 3

13.81 15.81 2.00

Final Gain 2.18

Fluency

Pretest 1 Posttest 1

24.87 18.25 6.62

Pretest 2 Posttest 2

14.75 17.81 3.06

Pretest 3 Posttest 3

15.12 17.68 2.56

Final Gain 4.08

Comprehension

Pretest 1 Posttest 1

14.37 17.37 3.00

Pretest 2 Posttest 2

14.43 17.31 2.88

Pretest 3 Posttest 3

14.75 17.00 2.25

Appendix 38

Report of Treatment

One of the Report of First Treatment “ Breakfast Together”

A : Would you like follow me to Brakfasting in KFC today? B : Yes, I would. But KFC is too far from my house. A : How about Rumah Kayu?

B : mmmmmm, I am Sorry. I disagree Rumah Kayu is too expensive for me. A : How about serba 7000? Cheap and not too far from my house.

B : Yes, I agree with you.

A : I will waiting for you at five o‟clock. B : Yes, I will on time for you.

A ; See you. B : See you.

One of the Report of second Treatment “ Inviting for Playing Futsal”

Rifki : Assalamualaikum Fernanda : Walaikumsalam Rifki : Hey how are you? Fernanda : I am fine. And you? Rifki : Fine, thanks.

Fernanda : Would you like to come with me to playing futsal? Rifki : oh I am sorry I can not agree with this idea.

Fernanda : Why?

Rifki : Because I want to go to my grandmother‟s house now. Do you want to come with me? We can have lunch together.

Fernanda : I am sorry but I am not disagree, I have promise with my friend to playing Futsal.

Rifki : ok ok, I understand. By the way i have spare time in....in mmm next week so We can playing together.

Fernanda : Yes of course I totally agree with you. Rifki : Yes ok, I will waiting for you next week. Willy : wil I am sorry i must do my homework now. Willy : What the homework?

Rifki : Mathematic, this is so difficult, and this is a challange for we right? Willy : Yes i have the same opinion with you.

Rifki : well don‟t ypu do it together with me now. Willy : My pleasure.

Rifki : ok let‟s go. Willy : I „ll do my best.

“ Going to swimming pool” Ayu : Hay caca!

caca :Hay ayu!

Ayu : Do you have spare time for the next Sunday? Caca : I have, why?

Ayu : Because I want to join invite you to go swimming pool. Do you agree? Caca : hah swimming pool. You know, you know I can‟t swimming.

Ayu : no problem We will practice swimming togehther. Caca : ok I just follow you.