THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING NEAR-PEER ROLE MODELING (NPRM) ON STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the First Grade of SMPN 3 South Tangerang)

(1)

THE

EFFECTIVENESS

OF

USING

NEAR-PEER

ROLE

MODELING

(NPRM)

ON

STUDENTS’

SPEAKING

ABILITY

(AQuasi-ExperimentalStudyattheFirstGradeofSMPN3SouthTangerang)

By

NURLAILAINDAHJ.

NIM.109014000148

THE

DEPARTMENT

OF

ENGLISH

EDUCATION

FACULTY

OF

TARBIYA

AND

TEACHERS

TRAINING

SYARIF

HIDAYATULLAH

STATE

ISLAMIC

UNIVERSITY

JAKARTA

2014


(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

NurlailaIndahJ.(Reg.No.109014000148).TheEffectivenessofUsing Near-Peer Role Modeling (NPRM) on Students’ Speaking Ability (A Quasi-ExperimentalStudyattheFirstGradeofSMPN3SouthTangerang).Skripsiof FacultyofTarbiyaandTeachersTrainingofSyarifHidayatullahStateIslamic UniversityJakarta,2014

Keywords: Speaking,Near-PeerRoleModeling,Motivation,SelfEfficacy. SpeakingskillhasbeenoneofthemostwantedskillsinEnglishlearning today.Therefore,speakingwasthefocusoftheresearch.Thewriteradministered aresearchbyapplyingamethodnamedNear-PeerRoleModeling(NPRM)inthe firstgradeofSMPN3SouthTangerang.Thepurposeofthestudywastogetthe empirical data which can describe whether Near-Peer Role Modeling was effective or not in enhancing students’ speaking competence in English. This studyusedaquantitativemethodwithaquasiexperimentalstudydesign.This studywasheldonOctoberuntilDecember2013.Thesamplingtechniqueusedin theresearchwassimplerandomsampling.Thereforethewritertooktwoclasses forbeingthesubjectoftheresearch;oneforexperimentalclassandanotherfor thecontrolledclass.Thedatawereanalyzedbyusingt-testformula.Thedata found indicated that there was a significance difference between students in experimentalclassandcontrolledclass.Theresultoft-testformulain5%degree ofsignificanceshownthattobserved(t0)>ttable(tt)=7.05>1.99. So,thenull

hypothesis(H0)isrejectedandalternativehypothesis(Ha)isaccepted.Itmeans

that,therewasasignificantdifferencebetweenstudentsusingNPRMandthose whodidnot.ThestudentswhoweretaughtbyNPRMcanattainbetterspeaking scorethanthestudentswhowereonlytaughtbymemorizingtextwhilespeaking. Inotherwords,theNPRMiseffectivetobeappliedinSMPN3SouthTangerang.


(6)

ABSTRAK

NurlailaIndahJ.(NIM.109014000148).KeefektivanPenggunaanNear-Peer Role Modeling terhadap Kemampuan Berbicara Siswa (Sebuah Penelitian Kuasi-ExperimentaldikelasVII,SMPN3TangerangSelatan)Skripsi,Jurusan PendidikanBahasaInggris,FakultasIlmuTarbiyahdanKeguruan,Universitas IslamNegeriSyarifHidayatullahJakarta,2014.

KataKunci: Berbicara,Near-PeerRoleModeling,Motivasi,SelfEfficacy. Keterampilanberbicaratelahmenjadisalahsatuketerampilanyangpaling dicari dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris sekarang ini. Maka dari itulah, keterampilanberbicaramenjadifokusdalampenelitianini.Penulismengadakan sebuah penelitian dengan mengaplikasikan metode bernama Near-Peer Role Modeling(NPRM)dikelasVII,SMPN3SouthTangerang.Tujuandaripenelitian initidaklainadalahuntukmendapatkandataempiris yangdapatmenjelaskan bahwaNPRMituefektifatautidakdalammeningkatkankemampuanberbicara siswa dalam bahasa Inggris. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kuantitatif dengandesainquasiexperimental.PenelitaninidilaksanakanpadabulanOktober hingga Desember 2013. Pengambilan sampel yang digunakan penulis adalah dengantekniksampelacaksederhana.Makadariitupenulismengambilduakelas sebagai subjek penelitian; satu merupakan kelas eksperimen dan yang lainnya merupakan kelas kontrol. Data yang diperoleh dianalisa dengan menggunakan rumust-test.Datatersebutmengindikasikanbahwaadaperbedaan yangcukup signifikanantarakelaseksperimendankelaskontrol.Hasildariujit-testpada tarafsignifikansi5%tersebutmenunjukkanbahwattes(t0)>ttabel(tt)=7.05>1.99.

Makahipotesisnull(H0)ditolakdanhipotesisalternative(Ha)diterima.Halini

berarti ada perbedaan yang cukup signifikan antara murid yang menggunakan NPRMdanmuridyangtidakmenggunakanNPRM.Muridyangdiajarkandengan metode NPRMdapatmeraihnilaispeakingyanglebihbaikdaripadamuridyang hanya diajarkan dengan metode menghapalkan teks. Dengan kata lain, NPRM efektifuntukditerapkandiSMPN3TangerangSelatan.


(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

IntheNameofAllah,theMostGracious,theMostMerciful

PraisedbetoAllah,Lordoftheworlds,WhohasgiventhewriterHislove andcompassiontofinishthelastassignmentinherstudy.Peaceandsalutationbe upontotheprophetMuhammadPBUH.,hisfamilyandhiscompanion.

Itisapleasuretoacknowledgethehelpsandcontributionsofalllecturers, institution,family,andfriendswhohavecontributedindifferentwayshencethis skripsiwasprocesseduntilitiscompletedandpresentedtotheFacultyofTarbiya andTeachersTrainingasapartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthedegreeof S.Pd.(BachelorofArts)inEnglishLanguageEducation.

Firstofall,thewriterwouldliketoconveyherspecialgratitudetoher advisors,DR.AtiqSusilo,MAandAtikYuliyani,MA.TESOL,whosescholarly suggestionsandcriticalremarkshaveenabledthewritertorefinethisskripsi.A specialgratitudeisalsoconveyedforherbelovedparents,Mr.SigitJatmikoand Mrs.PujiAstutiwhohavegiventheirinfinitelove,care,supports,andhelps.The writerbelievesthatitisalmostimpossibletofinishthisskripsiwithoutthemby herside.

Thewriter’ssinceregratitudealsogoesto:

1. AllofthelecturersofEnglishEducationDepartment 2. Drs.Syauki,M.Pd.,theHeadofEnglishDepartment

3. H.Maryono,SE.,M.M.Pd.,theHeadofSMPN3SouthTangerang

4. Agit Pratroris Nugraha, S.Pd., the English Teacher of SMPN 3 South Tangerang

5. ZaharilAnasy,M.Hum.,theSecretaryofEnglishDepartment

6. Dra. Nurlena, MA., Ph.D., the Dean of the Faculty of Tarbiya and TeachersTrainingSyarifHidayatullahStateIslamicUniversityJakarta 7. NidaHusna,M.Pd.,MA.TESOL,theacademicadvisor


(8)

8. AllofherbelovedfriendsatSMAN1Purwakarta,D-Class2009Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, KMM RIAK (Komunitas Musik Mahasiswa-RuangInspirasiAtasKegelisahan),andeverybodywhocannot bementionedonebyone, thanks for givinghappiness when she feels bored,thankyoufornicebrotherhoodandsisterhood

The writer does realize that this skripsi cannot be considered perfect withoutcritiquesandsuggestions.Therefore,itissuchapleasureforherto getcritiquesandsuggestionstomakethisbetter.

Jakarta,January27th2014

TheWriter


(9)

TABLE

OF

CONTENT

TITLE... i

SURATPERNYATAANKARYAILMIAH... ii

APPROVALSHEET... iii

ENDORSEMENTSHEET... iv

ABSTRACT... v

ABSTRAK... vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT... vii

TABLEOFCONTENTS... ix

LISTOFFIGUREANDTABLES... xi

LISTOFAPPENDICES ... xii

CHAPTERI INTRODUCTION ...1

A.BackgroundofStudy...1

B.LimitationoftheProblem...3

C.ProblemsFormulation...4

D.PurposeoftheStudy...4

E.ObjectiveoftheStudy...4

CHAPTERII LITERATUREREVIEW...5

A.Speaking...5

1.TheUnderstandingofSpeaking...5

2.PurposeofSpeaking...5

3.KindsofSpeakingActivities...6

4.ElementsofSpeaking...7

a.Grammar...7

b.Pronunciation...9

c.Vocabulary... 10

B.SpeakingAbility... 12

C.TeachingSpeaking... 14

1.TeachingSpeakingEnglishasaForeignLanguage... 14

2.GoalofEnglishTeachinginIndonesia... 15

D.NearPeerRoleModeling... 16


(10)

1.TheUnderstandingofNear-PeerRoleModeling... 16

2.BenefitsofNear-PeerRoleModeling... 20

3.TheApplianceofNear-PeerRoleModeling... 20

E.PreviousStudy... 20

F.ConceptualFramework... 22

G.TheoreticalHypothesis... 23

CHAPTERIII RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY... 24

A.PlaceandTimeoftheStudy... 24

B.ResearchMethodandDesign... 24

C.PopulationandSample... 25

D.ResearchInstrument... 25

E.DataAnalysisTechnique... 29

F.StatisticalHypothesis... 31

CHAPTERIV RESEARCHFINDINGSANDDATA INTERPRETATION... 32

A.ResearchFindings... 32

1.DataDescription... 32

a. Pre-testandPost-testofExperimentalClass... 32

b.Pre-testandPost-testControlledData... 34

2.DataAnalysisandHypothesisTesting... 36

a. AnalysisofPre-testandPost-test... 36

b.HypothesisTesting... 39

B. DataInterpretation... 41

CHAPTERV CONCLUSIONANDSUGGESTIONS... 43

A.Conclusion... 43

B.Suggestions... 43

REFERENCES... 45

APPENDICES... 48


(11)

LIST

OF

FIGURE

AND

TABLES

Figure2.1 SpeakingProficiency...13

Table 2.2 ModelsofLearning...17

Table 3.1 ResearchSchedule...24

Table 3.2 ScoringInstrument...26

Table 3.3 RatingScale...27

Table 4.1 TestResultofExperimentalClass...32

Table 4.2 TheResultofControlledClass...34

Table 4.3 NormalityofPre-Test...37

Table 4.4 NormalityofPost-Test...38

Table 4.5 Pre-TestHomogeneity...38


(12)

LIST

OF

APPENDICES

1. SKKDofFirstGradeofJuniorHighSchool...48

2. LessonPlans ...51

3. Materials...78

4. IntervalGroupforHypothesisTesting...88

5. TheCriticalValueofT...89

6. SuratKeteranganSMPN3SouthTangerang...90

7. ScheduleofSMPN3SouthTangerang...91

8. PengesahanProposalSkripsi...92

9. SuratPermohonanIzinObservasi...93

10. SuratPermohonanIzinPenelitian...94

11. SuratBimbinganSkripsi...95


(13)

CHAPTER

I

INTRODUCTION

A.

Background

of

the

Study

TherehavebeenmanywaystoteachEnglish.Itstartedinthelatenineteenth century,whenlinguistandlanguagespecialistwantedtoimprovethequalityof language teaching. As stated by Richards and Rodgers, “In the mid-and late nineteenth century opposition to Grammar-Translation Method gradually developed in several European countries. This Reform Movement, as it was referredto,laidthefoundationsforthedevelopmentofnewwaysofteaching languagesandraisedcontroversiesthathavecontinuedtothepresentday.”1

TomakestudentsunderstandandhavegoodcompetenceinEnglish,itis neededagoodtheoryofhowalanguageshouldbetaughtandlearnt.Therefore, newmethodsweredevelopedtostudyEnglishbyreferringtogeneralprinciples andtheoriesconcerninghowlanguagesarelearnt,howknowledgeoflanguageis representedandorganizedinmemory,orhowlanguageitselfisstructured.

Somehow a good method will focus not only on the rethoric aspect of knowledge but also the psychological aspect of the students when they are learninganewlanguage.Languageskillswhicharedevelopedassomebodystarts learninganewlanguagearespeaking,listening,reading,andwriting.Tohave thoseskills all at once maynot be easy. Hence, therehas to be an effective teaching and learning English based on the goal. Nowadays, the focus in conventionalmodernlanguageteachinghasbeenonthelanguagefunctionitself. Languageisusedtocommunicateeachother.So,itisneededagoodmethod whichhelpstudentstoinitiateinspeakingEnglishandimprovetheirskillsin speakingEnglish.Itcombinestheaspectofknowledge,social,andpsychology. Thenstudentscanbemotivatedtokeeplearninganddoingmoreimprovement. The goal ofmodernlanguageteachingis students arerequired to have a communicativecompetence.Communicativecompetencereferstothelanguage

1 Jack C. Richards and Theodore S. Rodgers, Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching,1sted.,(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1986),p.5.


(14)

2

user'sgrammaticalknowledgeofsyntax,morphology,phonologyinEnglishand indeed the social knowledge of how and when the utterances should be used appropriately. Unfortunately in Indonesia, English is onlytaught as a foreign language.Therefore,studentsarenotreallyforcedtospeakinEnglishasinother countriesofESL(EnglishasSecondLanguage).Astheconsequence,students willnothavegoodcircumstancestolearnEnglisheffectively.

Unfortunately,alotofproblemsfoundinstudentstospeakEnglishinEFL country.StudentswhoarenotinEnglishspeakingcountryareusuallyafraidto startspeakingEnglishbecausetheyfeellackofvocabulary,ormakingmistakes anderrorswhilespeaking.Therefore,theyarenottryingtospeakEnglish.To makestudentsinitiatetospeakEnglishandhaveagoodskillinspeaking,itneeds morethanjustgivingstudentsalotofwordstorememberortensesbasedonits context.Asinfact,speakingskillcanonlybeachievedbyspeakingtrainingandit isnotaninstantwork.

Moreover,whenattemptingtospeak,learnersmustgathertheirthoughtand encodetheideasinthevocabularyandsyntacticstructuresofthetargetlanguage (English).Inthiscase,speakingskillissomehowassociatedtothemotivationof thestudentsthemselves.Besides,thechallengeneedstobefacediswhenstudents whoareinterestedinEnglishgettheirenthusiasmdisappearsoverthetime,some are caused of learning foreign language need hard work, some are caused of Englishdoesnotseemimmediatelyusefulorrelevanttotheirlives,andsomeare causedofthechancetousetheskillshavebeenlearntisnull.Motivationcan reallyinfluenceonstudyingnewthingsandthereviewperformanceofmaterials whichhavebeenlearnt,tactics,andmanners.2

ItisNear-PeerRoleModeling,amethodwhichemergesfromanunderlying principlethatpeerscanbeatrustedandcrediblesourceofinformation.Thepeers cansharesimilarexperiencesandsocialnorms.Itencouragesstudents’interaction duringtheclassundertheinfluenceoftheclosepeertouseEnglishsuccessfully. Usingapeermodeltodeliverinformationtostudentscanensurethateachof

2Dale H. Schunk, Paul R. Pintrich, and Judith L. Meece, Motivation in Education-Theory, Research,andApplication,3rded.(NewJersey:PearsonEducation,2008),p.5.


(15)

3

peerscantakeanequalroleininforming,shaping,andpassingoninformation. Near-PeerRoleModelingisassumedtobeabletoincreasestudents'motivation andstrategy-choicewhiledaringtobeliefin studyingEnglish. Itis amethod whichmoregivesfocus onthepsychologicalaspectofstudentsinlearninga language,especiallyinspeakingEnglish.

Furthermore based on writer’s findings on preliminary study in SMPN 3 South Tangerang, it was found that students were afraid to start speaking in English.Theyusuallyfeltdoubttotryspeakingaslackingofvocabularythough theteacherhadencouragedthemtospeak.Studentswereusuallyforcedtospeak inaplannedconversation.Theyusedtotakeaconversation/dialoguefrombooks tobememorizedandpracticed.Infact,speakingskillcanalsobeattainedfrom workingoutEnglishinreallifefromcertaintopicsrelatedtothesubjectmaterial. Fromthisproblem,itisquiteobviousthatstudentsmightneedamodelwhichcan givethemmoreself-efficacyandmotivation.Apeermodelcandefinitelygivea positive influence to the students as “seeing or visualizing people similar to oneselfperformsuccessfullytypicallyraisesefficacybeliefsinobserversthatthey themselvespossessthecapabilitiestomastercomparableactivities.”3Therefore,

as well as Near-Peer Role Modeling, it can overcome the problems faced by studentswhentheywanttospeakup.

AsteachingmethodofEnglishcanaffectstudents’competenceinEnglish, thewriterwaseagertotakethisproblemasherresearch. Thewritertriedto stimulate students to speak English byusing Near-Peer Role Modeling-where studentscouldtrytospeakfreelywithoutfeelinganxiousofmakingmistakes. Thewriterconductedaresearchon“TheEffectivenessofUsingNear-PeerRole Modeling(NPRM)onStudents’SpeakingAbility”.

B.

Limitation

of

the

Problem

Alloftheproblemshappenedabovemightconsumetoomuchtimetobe researchedallatonce.Duetotheproblemsfacedaretoowide,thewriteronly

3TimMurphey,SelfandOtherModeling:StreghteningImaginedIdealSelvesforStudents


(16)

4

focusedononeproblem.ThewriterfocusedtheresearchontheEnglishteaching methodwhichishopefullywillincreasestudents’motivationandself-efficacyby usingNear-PeerRoleModelinginoralcompetencies.

C.

Problems

Formulation

Basedonthebackgroundabovethewriterformulatedtheresearchquestions asfollows:

1. IsNear-PeerRoleModeling(NPRM)effectiveonstudents’speakingability inEnglish?

D.

Purpose

of

the

Study

The purpose of the study was to get empirical evidence about the effectivenessofusingNear-PeerRoleModeling(NPRM)onstudents’speaking abilityinEnglish.

E.

Objective

of

the

Study

The results of the study are expected to give information for teachers, especiallyEnglishteachersinJakartawhetherNear-PeerRoleModelingsupports


(17)

CHAPTER

II

LITERATURE

REVIEW

A.

Speaking

1. TheUnderstandingofSpeaking

McDonoughandShawstates,“Speakingisnottheoralproductionofwritten language,butinvolveslearnersinthemasteryofawiderangeofsub-skillswhich, addedtogether,constituteanoverallcompetenceinthespokenlanguage.”1So,it

means that speaking is an activity which involves several sub-skills such as pronunciation,grammar,andvocabulary.

Speaking is a productive skill that involves genuine exchange of information.2Itmeansthatspeakingisanactivitywhichproducessomething,in

thiscasewordstoshareinformation.WhileaccordingtoTarigan,“Speakingisan ability to say sounds, articulation, or words to express, convey, or deliver thoughts,ideas,andfeelings.”3Therefore,speakingisdeterminedasaskillwhich

dealsthewayofpronouncingwordsandgiveinformationfromthespeaker‟ sside whetheritistheideas,thought,orevenfeelings.MoreoverTariganenforcesthat speakingisbeyondutteringwordsormakesounds.Itiscalledas“aninstrument tocommunicateideaswhicharearrangedanddevelopedaccordingtotheneedsof listener or hearer.”4 Through speaking, human can converse each other. To

conclude,speakingcanbedefinedasanactivitywhich enactiveseveralskills such as knowledge of vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammatical features to encodeandexpressanoralideaforaccomplishingapurpose.

2. PurposeofSpeaking

Speaking also refers to a desire which enables people to produce certain wordsinapurpose.ItissupportedbyMcDonoughandShawwhostates:

1

McDonough and Christopher Shaw, Materials and Methods in ELT-A Teacher’s Guide, (Oxford:Blackwell,1993),p.151.

2Swaminatha Pillai, English Language Teaching-First Year, (Chennai: Tamilnadu

Corporation,2008),p.106.

3Henry Guntur Tarigan, Berbicara Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan Berbahasa, (Bandung:

Angkasa, 2008), p. 16.

4Ibid.


(18)

6

As a skill to produce utterances, when genuinely communicative, speaking is desire and purpose driven, in other words we genuinely want to communicate

somethingtoachieveaparticular end.Thismayinvolveexpressingideas,opinions,

expressingawishoradesiretodosomething;negotiatingand/orsolvingaparticular

problem;orestablishingandmaintainingsocialrelationshipsandfriendship.5

WhitmanandBoasenotesthatthefunctionofspeaking(publicspeaking)are to interest, to entertain, to inform, to inquire, to persuade, to convince, to stimulate,todenounce,toimpress,towarn,toarouse,toinstruct,toexplore,to move,andtoconfuse.6WhileaccordingtoTarigan,speakinghasthreegeneral

purposes:a)toinform,b)toentertain,andc)topersuade.7Eventhemixtureof

thosethreeintoonepurposeisalsoapossibility.

ItisalsosupportedbyBoerthattherearethreegeneralpurposesofspeaking: a)Toinform,thespeakergivesthehoworwhatofatopic,withanaimofgetting thelistenerinbelievingsomething.b)Topersuade,thespeakergivesthewhy, withanaimofgettingthelistenerstodosomething.c)Toentertain,onlygiving thelistenersanenjoyment.8Thosegeneralpurposesareallbasedonwhatthe

speaker wants to do with their words to other people. It can informative, persuasive,orevenentertaining.

3. KindsofSpeakingActivities

AccordingtoSnow,inaprocessofproducingasentenceinEnglish,students needtostrugglewiththegoalofspeakingidea,strategy,listener‟ sbackground knowledge, word choice, grammar, pronunciation, and gestures and facial expression.ThereareseveralclassesactivitiescanbedoneinteachingEnglishas follows:

a. Memorization of material, students are encouraged to speak by memorizingsomepassagesordialogues.

b. Choraldrill,theall-classrepeatwhattheteachersays.

5McDonoughandShaw,op.cit.,p.152.

6Yayan G. H. Mulyana, A Practical Guide for Public Speaking, (Bekasi: Kesaint Blanc,

1995),pp. 2─3.

7

Tarigan,op.cit.,pp. 16─7.

8John J. Boer, Basic Language Messages and Meanings, (New York: Harper & Row


(19)

7

c. Classroom chat, it is the informal communication which is more fun, nonthreatening,andlikeamodelofgenuinecommunication.

d. Model-based dialogues, using a dialogue in a textbook and act the dialoguewiththemovesthatillustratethedialogue.

e. Presentations,studentsprepareandpracticematerialwithinitsgrammar, vocabulary,pronunciation,andintonationinfrontoftheclass.

f. Roleplays,pairpracticeoffreedomtoplay,improvise,andcreatearole. g. Survey,askingthesamefewquestionsseveraltimestodifferentstudents. h. Interviews,converseingreaterdepthwithapair.

i. Cocktailparties,anendlesstalkwithapersonandclosetheconversation, thenmoveonforsomechatwithanotherperson.

j. Pairorsmall-grouptasks,studentsworktogetherinpairsorgroupwitha tasktodeal.

k. Debates,arguewithanissueandthereisonlyonepersoncangiveanidea atatimeindebatephase.

l. Large-group discussion, it can arise students‟ interest in topic about something.9

4. ElementsofSpeaking a. Grammar

Grammaristhesetofstructuralrulesthatgovernsthecompositionofclauses, phrases,andwordsinanygivennaturallanguage.10So,grammarisalanguage

rule considering the pattern of words/sentences. While according to Yule grammaris,“theprocessofdescribingthestructureofphrasesandsentencesin suchawaythatweaccountforallgrammaticalsequencesinalanguageandrule outalltheungrammaticalsequenceisonewayofdefininggrammar.”11Itmeans

thatgrammarisallaboutthefeaturesoflanguagestructure.Besides,Kollnand

9DonSnow,FromLanguageLearnertoLanguageTeacher,(Virginia:TeachersofEnglish

toSpeakersofOtherLanguages,Inc.,2007),pp. 108─17.

10Grammar,(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar),January13,2014.

81.


(20)

8

Funkstatesthatgrammarrefersto:a)thesystemofrulesinourheads,b)the formaldescriptionoftherules,c)thesocialimplicationsofusage,sometimes called „linguisticetiquette‟ .12 Thus, grammarcan bedefined as astudyabout

knowing to produce any sentences subconsciously in mind, the branch of linguisticsscience,andmannersofdailyusageoflanguage.

Englishgrammaticalfeaturesconsistofseveralrulessuchas:verbtenses, partofspeech,wordclassorder,andsentence/clausepattern.Englishtensesare classifiedintothree-present,past,andfuture.Presenttensesareusedtoshowthe dailyactivities.Pasttensesareusedtoshowtheactivitiesinpasttime.While futuretensesareusedtoexpresstheactivitieswhicharegoingtodoinfuture. Whilepartofspeecharethewordclasses.Thereareeightkindspartofspeech.It canbeseenasbelow.

Nouns, words used to refer to people, object, creatures, qualities, phenomena,andabstractideas.(e.g.boy)

Articles,wordsusedwithnounstoformnounphrasesoridentifyingthe thingsalreadyknown.(e.g.a/the)

Adjectives,wordsusedtypicallywithnouns,toprovidemoreinformation aboutthethingsreferred.(e.g.happy)

Verbs,wordsusedtorefertovariouskindsofactionsandstatesinvolving peopleandthingsinevents.(e.g.talk)

Adverbs,wordstypicallywithverbs,toprovidemoreinformationabout actions,states,event.(e.g.slowly,yesterday)

Prepositions, words used with nouns in phrases providing information abouttime,place,andotherconnectorsinvolvingactionsandthings.(e.g. at,in)

Pronouns, words used in place of noun phrases, typically referring to peopleandthingsalreadyknown.(e.g.it,herself)

12

MarthaKollnandRobertFunk,UnderstandingEnglishGrammar,8thed.,(NewYork:


(21)

9

Conjunctions,wordsusedtomakeconnectionsandindicaterelationships betweenevents.(e.g.and,because)13

b. Pronunciation

Pronunciationisthewayawordoralanguageisspoken,orthemannerin which someone utters a word.14 The study of how a language should be

pronouncedisphonology.Phonologyis“essentiallythedescriptionofthesystem andpatternsofspeechsoundsinalanguage.”15TopronounceEnglishwordsto

some people may be quite difficult. Speech sounds are made by air moving outwardfromthelungsthroughthemouthornose.16Itiscausedofthedifferent

mannerofpronouncingtheirfirstlanguageandEnglishlanguage.Englishwords soundedunfamiliartotheirfirstlanguage.EspeciallyIndonesian,itslanguageis pronouncedaswhatwritten.

AveryandEhrlichnotes,“TheEnglishspellingsystemoftenfailstorepresent thesoundsofEnglishinastraightforwardmanner.”17Itisobvioustoseethat

Englishwordsaredifferentlypronouncedfromitswrittenform.Alettercanbe pronouncedinseveralways.Thereisnotanyregularsound-spellingrulewhich caneasethewayofEnglishlearnerstopredictthepronunciationofawordthey neverhavefoundbefore.

Thesoundsystemorpronunciationofthefirstlanguage(L1)caninfluence students‟ pronunciationinEnglishforthreeaspects.First,thedifficultiesmay arisewhenthelearnerencounterssoundsinEnglishwhicharenotpartofthe soundinventoryofthelearner‟ snativelanguage;second,difficultiesmayarise becausetherulesforcombiningsoundsintowordsaredifferentinthelearner‟ s nativelanguage;third,thepatternsofstressandintonation,whichdeterminethe

13

Ibid.,pp.82─3.

14Pronunciation,(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronunciation),January13,2014. 15Yule,op.cit.,p.42.

16Peter Avery and Susan Ehrlich, Teaching American English Pronunciation, (Oxford:

OxfordUniversityPress,2012),p.11.


(22)

10

overall rhythm and melodyofa language, can betransferred from thenative languageintosecondlanguage.18

c. Vocabulary

Vocabularyisthecommonwordsofalanguagewhichisusedbypeople.A person'svocabularyisthesetofwordswithinalanguagethatarefamiliartothat person.19 It also supported by Read who states, “Our everyday concept of

vocabularyisdominatedbythedictionary.Wetendtothinkofitasaninventory of individual words, with their associated meanings.”20 Therefore, to know

vocabularyis aboutknowingthemeaningofwords. Inaddition,accordingto RichardasnotedbyRead,thereareseveralassumptionsaboutthemeaningof knowingaword:

1. Toknowlexicalitemsofvariouskinds

2. Knowingthedegreeofprobabilityofencounteringthatwordinspeechor print

3. Knowingthelimitationsontheuseofthewordaccordingtovariationsof functionandsituation

4. Knowingthesyntacticbehaviorassociatedwiththeword

5. Knowledgeofthenetworkofassociationsbetweenawordandotherwordsin language

6. Knowingthesemanticvalueofaword

7. Knowingmanyofthedifferentmeaningsassociatedwithaword.21

There aretwo types of vocabulary, function and content words. Function wordsarereferredtoarticles,prepositions,pronouns,conjunctions,auxiliaries.It belongs to grammatical feature of the language and used for the syntactical reasons.Whilecontentwords,suchasnouns,verbs,adjectives,andadverbarethe wordswhichhavemeanings,provideandmodifyeachwordsinasentence.Some

18Ibid.,p.xv.

19Vocabulary, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocabulary), January 13, 2014.

20John Read,AssessingVocabulary, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 16. 21Ibid.,p.25.


(23)

11

English words are derived from other languages such as Germanic, French, Arabic,andLatin.Evensomewordsarederivedfromtheseveralprocessesof coinage, borrowing, compounding, blending, clipping, backformation, conversion,acronyms,derivation,prefixesandsuffixes,infixes,andkamhmu.

a) Coinage,thewordsfrominventionwhicharetotallynewterms.Itisfrom the invented trade names of commercial products which become familiarlyusedandbecomeageneralterm.(e.g.aspirin)

b) Borrowing, the words are generated from the other language. (e.g. croissantfromFrench,akindofbread)

c) Compounding,thewordsaretakenfromcombiningtwosinglewords. (e.g.bookcase,good-looking)

d) Blending,thewordsareformedbycombiningtwosinglewordsintoa newterm.(e.g.gasolineandalcoholgasohol)

e) Clipping,thewordsarereducedfromthecommonformintotheshorter form.(e.g.advertisementad)

f) Backformation,areducedformwhichhaveanothertypeofwordclass, nounintoverb.(e.g.televisiontelevise)

g) Conversion,thewordsarefunctionalshifted.Thefunctionofthewords canbeasnounandalsoverb.(e.g.amustandmust)

h) Acronym,wordscreatedfromtheinitialletterofwordsset.(e.g.CD CompactDisk)

i) Derivation,aprocessofcreatingnewEnglishwordswhenthereisnot anydealwiththecommonwordformationprocess.Itisfamiliarlycalled asaffixes.Theaffixesarecategorizedintothree:

 Prefixes,itprecedesthewords,suchasun-,mis-,pre-,(e.g.unhappy)  Suffixes,itcomesafterandfollowthewords,suchas-ful,-less,-ness,

-ish,and-ism.(e.g.joyful)

 Infixes,itisanaffixwhichappearsinsideaword. (e.g.absogoddamlutely!)


(24)

12

j) Kamhmu,wordsofinfixinginEnglish.Itisalanguagesetspokenin SouthEastAsia.(e.g.v.seen.srnee)22

B. SpeakingAbility

Speakingabilityisaconditionwhereaspeakerhasacapabilityinusingtheir ownsubconsciousunderstandingtouttereverysinglesentence.Mostly,students learnEnglishinordertospeakaswellasnativespeakers.Therefore,itisneeded several competences to be able to speak. As what has been noted by a sociolinguistHymesinHarmer,“grammaticalcompetenceisnotenough;native speakersalsohavecommunicativecompetence-thatisasubconsciousknowledge oflanguageuse,andoflanguageasdiscourse.”23Butwhilespeaking,thewords

comeoutareone-shotproduction.So,thecompletegrammaticalfeatureswhich areinvolvedinspeakingcannotberedraftedasinwrittentext.Nomatterwhat, thosecompetencesareneededtobuildagoodspeakingability.

To have good speaking ability, it is required to have the language use knowledge.Itisthecompetenceofaspeakertousealanguagebasedonthe context.Thespeakerknowshowtochooseandpickawordineverysentence stated.Harmeraffirmsthatthereareseveralfactorswhichaffectlanguageusersin choosing some words, they are: “setting, participants, purpose, channel, and topic.”24

Settingistheplaceandsituationwhichthespeakerhastodealwith.Itisthe circumstanceswhichmakethespeakeruseformalorinformalwaytospeakup. Participantsarepeoplewhotakechargeinthespeakingwiththespeaker.Itcanbe speaker‟ sfriends,parents,acquaintances,orevenbosses.Purposeisthegoalof speaking. The purpose itself can be anything, e.g. expressing any thoughts, suggestions,greeting,andwarnings.Everypurposewillmakeadifferentwayof utterances.Channelisthewayofthespeakertakesthecommunication.Itcanbe

22

Yule,op.cit., pp. 53─9.

23JeremyHarmer,ThePracticeofEnglishLanguageTeaching,(NewYork:Longman,1991)

p.14.


(25)

13

facetoface,ontelephone,orvideocall.Whiletopicisthecontentofthespeaking itself,itisthemainideaofthespeakingisabout.

Theknowledgeoflanguageasadiscoursemeansthecompetenceofhowa speakerusestheorganizedgrammarandvocabularybasedonthepurposeofthe speaking.Thatiswhatiscalledasstructuringdiscourse.Harmerstates,“Inspeech we use intonation and restatement of points together with a range of speech phenomenatostructurewhatwesay.”25

Besidestheknowledgeoflanguageuseanddiscourse,thereisalsoanother type of competence which should be recognized in speaking. It is strategic competence. Itisthecompetencewhichletthespeakercangivethefeedbackof each words spoken to them. Strategic competence “is not knowledge about anythingbutratherknowledgeofhowtoevaluatewhatissaidtousandhowto planandexecutewhatwewanttosayback.”26Whilesociolinguisticcompetence

isthecompetencetorespondappropriatelythespeakernon-verballybasedonthe purpose of the talk. To sum up, speaking is referred into four kinds of competences, grammatical competences, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence, and strategic competence. Those competences can be figured as below.27

Figure2.1 SpeakingProficiency 25Ibid., p. 16.

26Ibid.

27KangShumin, “Factors toConsider:DevelopingAdultEFLStudents Speaking Abilities”,

inJackC.Richards(eds.),MethodoloyinLanguageTeaching-AnAnthologyofCurrentPractice, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 207.


(26)

14

Moreover,whensomebodysucceedsonbuildinggoodcommunication,this showstheirpersonalityhasbeenmature.AswhathasbeensaidbyPowersin Tarigan,thecharacteristicsofmaturepersonalityare:socialskill,semanticskill, phoneticskill,andvocalskill.28Thoseskillsaretheoneswhichallowandmake

somebodytobeabletospeakwell.

C. TeachingSpeaking

1. TeachingSpeakingEnglishasaForeignLanguage

TeachingtospeakEnglishinanEFL(EnglishasaForeignLanguage)setting isaboutteachingtocommunicateinEnglishtostudentswholiveinaplacewhere Englishisnottheirfirstlanguage.TeachingspeakinginanEFLsettingisrather hardtodobecauseEnglishisnotusedindailylifecommunication.Tarigannotes that,“Speakingisaskillwhichdevelopsinchildageandonlyachievedformerly fromlisteningskill,andthattimespeakingskillisalsolearned.”29Itmeansthat

speaking can naturally achieved by any children born and living. It is what naturally happens when children start learning a language, but in learning a foreignlanguagesuchasEnglishisadifferentmatter.

InIndonesia,studentsarefacedtotherealitythatEnglishisneededtobe learnt while there is not any good circumstance for them to speak. In EFL (EnglishForeignLanguage)countrylikeIndonesia,speakingEnglishisveryhard. ThesituationandconditionwillneverbesupportiveenoughtospeakEnglish.As whathasbeennotedbyGebhard,“InEFLsettingstherearefewerchancesfor studentstouseEnglishoutsidetheclassroom.”30

Eventhoughitishelpedthroughaconditionedsituation,itwillonlysucceed on certain groups. Indonesian who major of them speaks Bahasa and native languageoftheirhometownwhenforcedtospeakEnglishinclass,theyusually find difficulties. The factors which usually discourage the students to speak: studentsfeelnervousandafraidofmakingerrors,atmosphereintheclassroomis

28Tarigan,op.cit.,p.20. 29Ibid., p. 3.

30Jerry G. Gebhard, Teaching English as a Foreign or Second Language: A Teacher Self-DevelopmentandMethodologyGuide,(Michigan:MichiganPress,2009),p.40.


(27)

15

notsupportive,themesofconversationarenotinteresting,andresponseofthe otherstudentsisnothelpfultoencouragespeaking.

2. GoalofEnglishTeachinginIndonesia

Goal of English teaching nowadays is the communicative competence. Gebhard states that, “Communicative competence has four interrelated

components - grammatical, discourse, socio-cultural, and strategic competence.”31

It means that students have to comprehend those four components all at once to achieve the main goal. Or at least, the students in Indonesia can express their meanings in English through writing and speaking. At a basic level, this includes development of students‟ ability to comprehend and produce written and spoken English in communicatively proficient and accurate ways.32It is very different

from the several years before, where English is merely taught as an additional subject in school; English was only taught from translating word to word to understand each text given by teacher.

Majority in Indonesian school, oral English teaching materials are usually focused on situational or communicative function. The topics used are about introducing self, talk about hobby, family, and the way of cooking, discuss about job, visiting, meeting, or shopping. Unfortunately, the materials are not really depth learnt. Then, almost all of the students talking about the same topic and give boredom to the class.

Consequently, the audiences in the speaking classroom are not conducive and dry. The speaker will talk without attention of other students. And students will never be able enjoy it. To them, at least they do the job to speak English. So, the students cannot improve their skills in speaking. Many of classes do not pay attention to the effect of oral class atmosphere on language learning. A free and light-hearted atmosphere promotes communications, while a nervous and stiff atmosphere builds invisible obstacles in communications.33

31Ibid.,p.64. 32Ibid.,p.63.


(28)

16

D. Near-PeerRoleModeling(NPRM)

1. TheUnderstandingofNear-PeerRoleModeling(NPRM)

NPRMisonekindofmethodwhichencouragesapeerteaching.Therehas beensomepeerteachingmethodbefore.Italsoencouragesstudentstobealeader in the class tutoring others. An English teacher even has been forced by the studentstokeepdoingpeerteaching.Tostudents,peerteachingisfun.Itisnoted byTeeHwathat,“Moreconversationswithhimandotherstudentsledmeto realizethattheyallsharedthesamefrustrations.Heandhispeershadaccesstoa broadrangeofinterestingandrichmediaoutsidetheclassroom,buttheschool stillsubjectedthemtothetraditionalwayofpassiveandrotelearning.

34

BasedonMurphey,“nearcanmeandifferentthings:age,ethnicity,gender, interest,nearinproximity,andnearinfrequency.”35Peermeansachildwhois

roughlyequivalentindevelopmenttotheobserver.36Rolemeans“aroleorsocial

roleisasetofconnectedbehaviours,rights,obligations,beliefs,andnormsas conceptualised by actors in a social situation.”37 Model means an individual

whosebehavior,verbalizations,andexpressionsareattendedtobytheobserver and serve as cues for subsequent modeling. Modeling means behavioral, cognitive,andaffectivechangesderivingfromobservingoneormoremodels.38

Therearethreemodelsoflearning:reception,construction,andco-construction. Thesecanbeseenasbelow.39

34TanTeeHwa,StudentPeerTeachingStrategy,Malaysia.(Bangkok:UNESCOBangkok,

2009), p. 2.

35Tim Murphey, National Foreign Language Resource Center, What is Near Peer Role Modeling?,2013,(http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu).

36Dale H. Schunk, Peer Models and Children's Behavioral Change. Review of Educational Research,57, (1987), p. 1.

37Role, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role), January 15, 2014. 38

DaleH.Schunk,LearningTheories-AnEducationalPerspective,6thed.,(Boston:Pearson

Education,Inc.,2012),p.123.

39Chris Watkins, Eileen Carnell, and Caroline Lodge, Effective Learning in Classrooms,


(29)

17

Table2.2 ModelsofLearning

Fromthetableabove,itcanbeseenthatmodelsoflearningcanbeateacher, individual‟ sexperience,orevenfromothers.Thethirdmodeloflearningcanbe calledasco-construction.Itincludesthelearners“tocreateknowledgeandthey maycreateacollaborativeproductfromthis.”40Theteacherencourageslearners

tohavedialoguesoranykindsofcollaborativeactivitiestohelpstudentsmake sense of the experiences. This third model of learning is the prior model of learningwhichsupportsNear-PeerRoleModeling.

AccordingtoMurphey,“Near-PeerRoleModelingispresentingrolemodels who are from the same culture, near the students' ages, and using English successfully(notperfectly)increasesourstudents'motivationandstrategy-choice whilechallenginglimitingbeliefs.”41AndNear-PeerRoleModels(NPRMs)are

peerswhoareclosetooursocial,professionaland/oragelevelwhoforsome

40Ibid., p. 17.

41Tim Murphey, Motivating with Near Peer Role Models, JALT'97:Trends&Transitions,

1998,p.201.

Modelsoflearning

Reception Concernedwithquantity,facts,andskills;assumes transmissionofknowledgefromanexternalsource(e.g. teacher).Emotionalandsocialaspectsarenotattendedto. Learning=beingtaught.

Construction Concernedwiththelearner‟ sconstructionofmeaning throughdiscussion,discovery,open-endedlearning, makingconnections.

Learning=individualsense-making.

Co-construction Concernedwiththelearner‟ sconstructionofmeaning throughinteractionandcollaborationwithothers, especiallythroughdialogue.


(30)

18

reasons we may respect and admire.42 Besides NPRMs is also described as

“peoplewhomightbeneartotheirtuteesinage,ethnicity,gender,interest,pastor

presentexperiencesandalsoproximityandinfrequencyofsocialcontact.”43So,

itcanbeconcludedthatNPRMisamethodwhichencouragestudentsbyamodel fromthenearone,canberespect,andadmirebecauseoftheability/experiencesin learningEnglishowned.Fromthemodel,thestudentsarehopedtobemotivated tolearnEnglish.Therefore,students‟ selfefficacyraiseasthepeermodelshows studentsofwhatshouldbedoneintensively.

Thismethodemergedfromanideathatnativespeakermaynotbeavailable formodeling.AsstatedbyRuddickandNadasdy,“TheideabehindNPRMsis thatwemayidentifymorecloselywiththosepeoplethatareneartousinthe abovecategories anddoingso wemaywanttoimitatethemorimitatesome aspectortalentthatNPRMshave.”44Thismethodpromotestheadvantagesof

using the peer from higher level to be imitated as teaching learning process begins. It is appropriate as what has been stated bySchunk that, “Competent modelsteachskills,butsimilarmodelsarebestforselfefficacy.”45

Selfefficacycaninfluencewhatthestudentswanttodointheirdailylives. Students with low efficacymayavoid doing thetask given. Theythemselves judgethattheyarecapableornotindoingthetask.Whilethosewhoareinhigh efficacywilldosometrialuntiltheproblemsfacedaresolved.Evenstudents‟ self-efficacy may change in the count of day. It is due to “the individual‟ s preparation,physicalcondition(sickness,fatigue),andaffectivemood,aswellas externalconditionssuchasthenatureofthetask(length,difficulty)andsocial milieu(generalclassroomconditions).46Toseethatarolemodelisveryimportant

inleadingstudentstospeakEnglish,soaclose/nearpeerrolemodelcanbethe bestrolemodel.

42Ibid.

43MichaelRuddickandPaulNadasdy,TheInfluenceofNearPeerRoleModels(NPRMs)in

Second Language Classrooms Intended to Improve Students‟ Pronunciation When Teacher InterventionisNotEnough,AsianEFLJournal,ProfessionalTeachingArticles,Vol.65,2013,p. 29.

44Ibid.

45Schunk,LearningTheories-AnEducationalPerspective,op.cit.,p.157. 46Ibid.,p.148.


(31)

19

Murpheysupposesthatstudentscanspeakwhentheybelievethattheycould doitso.Weinernotesthat,“Theapproachcomponentofachievementmotive (hopeforsuccess)isassociatedwithattributingfailuretoluckorlackofeffort and success to availability, whereas the avoidance component is linked to attributingfailuretolackofabilityandsuccesstoluck.47Fromthisidea,Murphey

initiated a peer-model to increase students‟ motivations and self-efficacy. Heckhausenpointsoutthat,“Eveniftherearemanypotentialpositiveincentives, onewillonlybemotivatedtostriveforthemifoneexpectsthat:1)thebehaviors oneiscapableofperformingwillleadtosuccessfultaskperformance,and2) successful task performance will lead to incentives (i.e., possesses high instrumentality).”48

Moreover it is noted by Murphey that Bandura suggests, “seeing or visualizingpeoplesimilartooneselfperformsuccessfullytypicallyraisesefficacy beliefs in observers that they themselves possess the capabilities to master comparable activities.”49 It is obvious to see whether NPRM would be

successfullydoneinteachingEnglishasthestudentswerehelpedtospeakwith otherstudentseffectivelywithoutfeelingdoubtofmakingmistakes.Thestudents aremotivatedtospeakEnglishasothersarealsoinitiatedtospeakEnglishsimilar tothepeers.AswhathasbeennotedbySchunk,“Observingapeermodelraised self-efficacyandachievementmorethanobservingateacherornomodel;the teacher-modelconditionpromotedtheseoutcomesbetterthannomodel.”50So,

Near-Peer Role Modeling (NPRM) is a method which promotes students‟ interactionduringtheclassundertheinfluenceoftheclosepeertouseEnglish successfully.

47InternationalHandbookofPsychology,(London:SagePublicationsLtd..,2000),p.201. 48Ibid.,p.200.

49Tim Murphey, Self and Other Modeling: Strenghtening Imagined Ideal Selves for Students

and Teachers,IndependentLearningAssociation, 2007, p. 2.


(32)

20

2. BenefitsofNear-PeerRoleModeling

Bandura states that, there are three key functions of modeling: response facilitation,inhibition/disinhibition,andobservationallearning.51Responserefers

totheactionswhichhavetobecopiedandperformedfromthemodel.Inhibition referstothepositiveexpectationsoftheobserverthattheywillhavethesame experiencelikethemodel.Observationallearningreferstothepayingattention process of new information/behavior from the model. While, according to Schunk,thereareseveraladvantagescanbeattainedfromNRPM:

a. Peermodelsmaybeespeciallyhelpfulwithstudentswhoholdself-doubts abouttheircapabilitiesforlearningorperformingwell.

b. Teachers often apply these ideas by selecting one or more students to demonstrateaskilltootherclassmembers.

c. Peersalsocanbeusedtoenhanceobservers'self-efficacyinthecontextof small-groupwork.

3. TheApplianceofNear-PeerRoleModeling

Adapted from Ruddick and Nadasdy, while Near-Peer Role Modeling is appliedintheclassroom,NPRMsareinstructedtoactinthefollowingway:

a. Tointroducethemselvesandincludeabrieflanguagelearninghistory. b. Totakepartinspeakingactivitywiththeinstructor.

c. Tomonitortheclassroomforproblemsandhelpwhenneeded. d. Totakepartincommunicativegroupactivities.

e. Tolistenforandcorrectstudents.52

E.

Previous

Study

Thesametopicofnear-peerrolemodelinghasbeenalsoresearchedbyTim MurpheyfromNanzanUniversityandTroyMillerfromNagoyaUniversity.Tim MurpheydealtwiththewaystohighlightthepotentialNearPeerRoleModels (NPRMs)andwaystonoticetheirimpact.Hestimulatedstudentstospeakfreely

51Ibid.,p.125.


(33)

21

throughconductingseminarandvideoproject.Theresultwasquiteinteresting. Students‟ beliefofspeakingcouldbechanged.Thestudentsrecordedinthevideo hadinspiredstudentswhowatchedtospeakEnglishtoo.Modelscouldchange student beliefs about risk-taking, making mistakes, and the importance of enjoyingwhattheyarestudying.53

WhileTroyMillertookaresearchontheeffectiveuseofNearPeerRole Modeling (NPRM) combined with video clips as a way to model interactive strategies.Hefocusedonthetheoreticalbackgroundbehindinteractivestrategies, interactionandlearning,andNPRM.Healsoexplainedandgaveexamplesof howtousetheclipsinactivitiesorasstrategyreviewsinconversationclasses. Theresult was compilingvideoclips, creating activities,and usingin several classesofthepastyearasthemethodofteachingtothelowerclasses,couldbe helpful.Hecouldfindanideaofshowingtheperfectinteractivestrategiestoother student peersto bean effectivewayofteachingthestrategies. Andthat was throughavideowhichencouragesstudentstospeakEnglishwell.

Another research concerning peer modeling was also done by Dale H. Schunk.Hecriticallyreviewedtheresearchliteratureonpeermodelingamong children as a function of model attributes. Peer modeling is hypothesized to dependinpartonperceivedsimilaritybetweenmodelandobserver.54Heassumed

that similarity can serve important source of information for judging the behavioral appropriateness, formulating outcome expectations, and assessing one's self-efficacy for learning or performing tasks. It was assessed from the effects of model age, model sex, model competence, number of models, and model background. The attributes which support behavioral change were discussed. The result was peer modeling could help students in social skill trainingandself-efficacyenhancement.Hesuggestedthatclassroompeerscan helptrainsocialskills,enhanceself-efficacy,andremedyskilldeficiencies.

Toconclude,theresultsofresearchesshowthattherewasapositiveeffecton students‟ capabilityinspeakingthroughNear-PeerRoleModelingmethod.From

53Murphey, Motivating with Near Peer Role Models,loc.cit. 54Schunk,loc.cit.


(34)

22

thenearestmodelofthestudents,studentscanapttocopythemodelsbecause theyaremotivated to havethesamechanceand powerto beas good as the models.Thedifferenceofresearchwhichthewriterdidliesontheobjectofthe research. The writer chooses to do a research in a Junior High School. The samenessoftheresearchliesonthewaytodotheresearch.Itappliesthe near-peerfromthehigher-gradestudentstoactasthemodel.Themodelsarenottoo fartheobjectsage,sothemodelscangivethestrongeffecttothelower-grade studentstohavegoodselfefficacyandmotivationinspeakingEnglish.

F.

Conceptual

Framework

Teachingspeakingisamatterofmakingstudentsunderstandinproducing correctsounds,selectingappropriatewords,andorganizingideasintoonepoint meaningtocomprehend.Speakingskillcannotbeattainedeasily.Itneedssome pre-requisite sub-skills such as grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary. Therefore,tohaveagoodspeakingskill,itisneededmorechancesforstudentsto speakup.Unfortunately,inIndonesiaEnglishisnotusedlargelybyitscitizen. Thecitizenusuallyusethemotherlanguage(Bahasa).Sothat,thereshouldbea goodteachingspeakingmethodapplied.

ByusingNear-PeerRoleModeling,studentsareencouragedtospeakupin frontofclass.Consequently,schoolwillprovidethechanceforstudentstospeak while they merely get little opportunities to speak in their out of school circumstances.Near-PeerModelingisamethodwhichallowstudentstokeep speakingeventheymakeseveralmistakes.Mistakesarenotaproblem,becauseit isthewaystudentslearnthelanguage.Fromthepeer-models,studentswilllook howtohavesogoodspeaking-skillthattheycanalsobemotivatedtospeakas well.ItisworthtolearnspeakingEnglishfromthestudentswhohavealready beensuccessfulenoughinspeaking.


(35)

23

G.

Theoretical

Hypothesis

Based on the theories which was described above, it can be proposed a hypothesisasfollows:


(36)

CHAPTER

III

RESEARCH

METHODOLOGY

A.

Place

and

Time

of

the

Study

1. PlaceoftheStudy

ThestudywasadministeredinSMPN3SouthTangerang.ItliesonSt.Ir.H. Juanda,No.1,KampungUtan,Ciputat-SouthTangerang.

2. TimeoftheStudy

Thisresearchwasconducted onOctobertoNovember2013.Thewritergave five times treatments based on the syllabus of the school. After five times treatments,thewriterobservedandanalyzedthedatataken.

Table3.1 ResearchSchedule

B.

Research

Method

and

Design

1. ResearchMethod

This research used a quantitative method. This method was used as the researchdealtwithstatisticaldata.

24

Treatment Date Theme

Pre-Test 17-10-2013 Self-Introduction

I 22-10-2013 Self-Introduction

II 24-10-2013 GiveInformation(time)

III 29-10-2013 Prohibition/Command

IV 31-11-2013 DescribingPlace

V 05-11-2013 DescribingPeople


(37)

25

2. ResearchDesign

Thedesignoftheresearchwasexperimental.Inthisexperimentalresearch, the writer wanted to see the potential cause or effect of independent and dependent variables from the treatments given to the sample. From the significanceresultoftreatment,thewritercouldthenverifyanyeffectorcauseof theindependenttodependentvariable.Itisakindofresearchwhichtakestwo classesseparatedtobetreatedasexperimentalandcontrolledclass.

Inanexperimentaldesign,theresearchercouldmanipulateswhatthesubjects will experience. Therefore, the research done bymanipulating the subjects of research.Then,thewritercouldmakethecomparisonofeachclass;betweenthe controlledandexperimentgroup.Toeasetheresearch,thewriterchosethe quasi-experimental.Itincludesassignment,butnotrandomassignmentofparticipantsto group, because the experimenter cannot artificially create groups for the experiment.1

C.

Population

and

Sample

The writer took simple random sampling technique which all of the populationcouldhavetheequalprobabilitytobethesubjectoftheresearchto representthepopulationoftheresearch.Thepopulationofthisresearchisallof the first grade (VII) students in SMPN 3 South Tangerang. There were nine classesoffirstgradeinSMPN3SouthTangerang.Andthesamplewhichhad beenrandomlyselectedfortheresearchweregradeVII-7andVII-9.Eachofthe classconsistsabout46students.

D.

Research

Instrument

The writer collected the data by using: Test (Pre-test and Post-test). The writerdidapre-testandpost-testandtooktwoclassesasherresearchparticipants. Pre-testisthetestwhichisadministeredtoassesstheparticipantsofexperiment

1 John W. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating QuantitativeandQualitativeResearch, 3rd ed., (New Jersey: Pearson Merril Prentice Hall, 2008),


(38)

26

beforetheyreceiveatreatment.Whilepost-testisthetestwhichisadministeredto assesstheparticipantsofexperimentaftertheyreceiveatreatment. Oneofthe class was given a treatment of Near-Peer Role Modeling while another one (controlledclass)wasgiventhefollowedlearningsystemasusual-memorizing texts.ThetreatmentclasswasstimulatedtospeakEnglishbyNPRMingmethod while the control class was stimulated to speak English so-called standard instructionoftheschool.

Heaton states that, A comprehensive and balanced examination of oral productionmightthusconsistof:a)anoralinterviewinvolvingtwo-students,b)a short problem-solving activity involving the comparison or sequencing of pictures,c)alongeractivitycomprisinggroupdiscussion.2Therefore,thewriter

tooktheactivityclasswhichinvolvesstudentsinpairs/groupdiscussion.Bothof theclassaregivensamegroupdiscussionsorshorttalktwo-by-twostudentsabout severaltopics.

Thematerialsgivenarebasedonthesyllabusoftheschoolinthefirstyearof gradeseven.Attheendofthesemester,theresultofeachstudentwouldbeseen andcompared.Toassesstheoraltest,thewriterusedascoringinstrumentas notedbyHughesbelow3:

Table3.2 ScoringInstrument WeightingTable

(ArthurHughes‟ InstrumentofSpeakingAssessment)

2J.B.Heaton.WritingEnglishLanguageTest,(NewYork:LongmanInc.,1988),p.104. 3 Arthur Hughes, Testing for Language Teachers, 2nd Ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge

UniversityPress,2003),pp. 131─3.

1 2 3 4 5 6 (A)

Accent 0 1 2 2 3 4

Grammar 6 12 18 24 30 36

Vocabulary 4 8 12 16 20 24

Fluency 2 4 6 8 10 12


(39)

27

Thetotaloftheweightedscoresisthenlookedupinthefollowingtable, whichconvertsitintoaratingonascale0-4+below.

Table3.3 RatingScale (ConversionTable)

(ScoreRatingConversionofArthurHughes‟ Instrument)

ProficiencyDescription Accent

1. Pronunciationfrequentlyunintelligible.

2. Frequent gross errors and a very heavy accent make understanding difficult,requirefrequentrepetition.

3. “Foreignaccent”requiresconcentratedlistening,andmispronunciations,

leadtooccasionalmisunderstandingandapparenterrorsingrammaror vocabulary.

4. Marked„foreignaccent”andoccasionalmispronunciationswhichdonot interferewithunderstanding.

5. Noconspicuousmispronunciations,butwouldnotbetakenforanative speaker.

6. Nativepronunciation,withnotraceof“foreignaccent” Score Rating

16-25 0+

26-32 1

33-42 1+

43-52 2

53-62 2+

63-72 3

73-82 3+

83-92 4


(40)

28

Grammar

1. Grammaralmostentirelyinaccurateexceptinstockphrases.

2. Constanterrorsshowingcontrolofveryfewmajorpatternsandfrequently preventingcommunication.

3. Frequenterrors showingsomemajorpatterns uncontrolledandcausing occasionalirritationandmisunderstanding.

4. Occasional errors showing imperfect control of some patterns but no weaknessthatcausesmisunderstanding.

5. Fewerrors,withnopatternsoffailure.

6. Nomorethantwoerrorsduringtheinterview.

Vocabulary

1. Vocabularyinadequateforeventhesimplestconversation.

2. Vocabulary limited to basic personal and survival areas (time, food, transportation,etc.)

3. Choiceofwordssometimesinaccurate,limitationsofvocabularyprevent discussionofsomecommonprofessionalandsocialtopics.

4. Professional vocabulary adequate to discuss special interest; general vocabulary permits discussion of any non-technical subject with some circumlocutions.

5. Professionalvocabularybroadandprecise;generalvocabularyadequateto copewithcomplexpracticalproblemsandvariedsocialsituations.

6. Vocabularyapparentlyasaccurateandextensiveasthatofaneducated nativespeaker.

Fluency

1. Speech is so halting and fragmentary that conversation is virtually impossible.

2. Speechisveryslowandunevenexceptforshortorroutinesentences. 3. Speech is frequently hesitant and jerky; sentences may be left


(41)

29

4. Speech is occasionally hesitant, with some unevenness caused by rephrasingandgropingforwords.

5. Speechiseffortlessandsmooth,butperceptivelynon-nativeinspeedand evenness.

6. Speechonallprofessionalandgeneraltopicsaseffortlessandsmoothasa nativespeaker‟ s.

Comprehension

1. Understandstoolittleforthesimplesttypeofconversation.

2. Understands only slow, very simple speech on common social and touristictopics;requiresconstantrepetitionandrephrasing.

3. Understands careful, somewhat simplified speech when engaged in a dialogue,butmayrequireconsiderablerepetitionandrephrasing.

4. Understandsquitewellnormaleducatedspeechwhenengagedindialogue, butrequiresoccasionalrepetitionorrephrasing.

5. Understandseverythinginnormaleducatedconversationexceptforvery colloquial or low-frequency items, or exceptionally rapid or slurred speech.

6. Understands everything in both formal and colloquial speech to be expectedofaneducatednativespeaker.

E.

Data

Analysis

Technique

Theformulausedinthisresearchisforuncorrelateddata.Thisformulais usuallyusedinaconditionofwhichagroupscoreisnotdependonothergroup‟ s score.Inthisresearch,thewriteronlywantedtoseeanddiffertheresultsoftest onasingletreatment.Theformulacanbeseenbelow4:

4AnasSudijono,PengantarStatistikPendidikan,(Jakarta:RajaGrafindoPersada,1987),p.


(42)

30

Where:

M1 =Themeanofgroup1(experimentalclass)

=Themeanofgroup2(controlledclass)

=Thestandarderrorofgroup1(experimentalclass) =Thestandarderrorofgroup2(controlledclass)

Afterwards,thecalculationgoestoseveralprocessesasfollows: 1. DeterminingMeanofVariableX

2. DeterminingMeanofVariableY

(∑

(∑ )

) 3. DeterminingStandardofDeviationScoreofVariableX

√∑ (∑ )

4. DeterminingStandardofDeviationScoreofVariableY

√∑ (∑ )

5. DeterminingStandardErrorof MeanofVariableX √

6. DeterminingStandardErrorof MeanofVariableY

7. DeterminingStandardErrorofDifferenceofMeanofVariableXandY √


(43)

31

9. Determiningttableinsignificancelevel5%,withdf(degreesof freedom)5

( )

F.

Statistical

Hypothesis

H0: μ1 =μ2

Ha: μ1≠ μ2

Andthen,thecriteriawillusedasfollows:

1. Iftobserved(t0)>ttable(tt)insignificantrankof0.05,H0(nullhypothesis)is

rejected;asreversedHaisaccepted.Itmeansthattheratesofmeanscoreof theexperimentalgrouparehigherthanthecontrolledgroup.

2.Iftobserved(t0) < ttable(tt)insignificantrankof0.05,H0(nullhypothesis)is

accepted,asreversedHaisrejected.Itmeansthattheratesofthemeansscore oftheexperimentalgrouparelowerthanthecontrolledgroup.

5


(44)

CHAPTER

IV

RESEARCH

FINDINGS

AND

DATA

INTERPRETATION

A.

Research

Findings

1. DataDescription

a. Pre-testandPost-testofExperimentalClass

Table4.1

TheExperimentalClassTestResult

32

NO SCORE GAINSCORE

PRE-TEST POST-TEST

1 63 70 7

2 60 70 10

3 42 72 30

4 58 70 12

5 44 58 14

6 58 72 14

7 52 68 16

8 61 70 9

9 67 70 3

10 44 64 20

11 52 72 20

12 29 52 23

13 52 70 18

14 52 72 20

15 61 74 13

16 67 74 7

17 19 64 45


(45)

33

NO SCORE GAINSCORE

PRE-TEST POST-TEST

19 50 74 24

20 63 73 10

21 62 74 12

22 57 70 13

23 63 67 4

24 52 70 18

25 63 70 7

26 25 68 43

27 52 72 20

28 63 74 11

29 52 74 22

30 58 74 16

31 52 74 22

32 63 74 11

33 46 58 12

34 35 56 21

35 43 73 30

36 58 71 13

37 52 74 22

38 63 74 11

39 63 74 11

40 61 70 9

41 52 74 22

Σn=41 ΣXo=2192 ΣX1=2868 ΣX2=676

AVERAGE 53.46 69.95 16.48

MAX 67 74


(46)

34

Mpre-test =

=

=

53.46

Mpost-test=

=

=

69.95

Mgain =

=

=

16.48

Basedonthecalculationresultabove,itisshownthatthemeanofpre-test inexperimentalclasswas53.46andthemeanofpost-testwas69.95.Itmeansthat thestudentshadgainedscoreabout16.48points.Itisalsoshownthatthehighest scoreonpre-testwas67andthelowestscorewas19.Whileonthepost-testresult whichtheaverageofthepost-testwas69.95,thehighestscorewas74andthe lowestscorewas52.

b. Pre-testandPost-testofControlledClass

Table4.2

TheControlledClassTestResult

NO SCORE GAINSCORE

PRE-TEST POST-TEST

1 60 60 0

2 58 58 0

3 61 73 12

4 55 73 18

5 55 58 3

6 61 63 2

7 49 58 9

8 63 67 4

9 52 52 0

10 63 73 10


(47)

35

NO SCORE GAINSCORE

PRE-TEST POST-TEST

12 52 58 6

13 63 65 2

14 51 60 9

15 55 71 16

16 51 64 13

17 54 69 15

18 63 71 8

19 63 63 0

20 55 67 12

21 20 50 30

22 63 63 0

23 47 69 22

24 54 56 2

25 63 63 0

26 50 54 4

27 52 67 15

28 58 72 14

29 58 58 0

30 54 56 2

31 50 52 2

32 57 58 1

33 52 64 12

34 57 58 1

35 40 50 10

36 67 73 6

37 65 73 8

38 52 58 6


(48)

36

Mpre-test =

=

=

55.58

Mpost-test =

=

=

63.07

Mgain =

=

=

7.49

From thecontrolled group data shown above, it can beconcludedthat the highestscoreonthepre-testwas67andthelowestscorewas20withanaverage of55.58.Theaverageofthepretestincreasedonthepost-testupto63.07.The highestscoreofpost-testwas74whilethelowestscorewas50.Itcanbeseenthat thecontrolledgroupcouldonlygainedscoreabout7.49points.

2. DataAnalysisandHypothesisTesting a. AnalysisofPre-testandPost-test

Beforecalculatingthet-testvaluetofindoutthehypothesisoftheresearch,a testofnormalityandhomogeneityareneededtoknowwhetherthedatahasbeen normallydistributedornot;thedataarehomogeneousorheterogeneous.These testsarevaluedusingSPSSStatistics17.Thenormalityandhomogeneitytests resultscanbeseenasbelow:

NO SCORE GAINSCORE

PRE-TEST POST-TEST

40 55 74 19

41 63 64 1

Σn=41 ΣY0=2279 ΣY1=2586 ΣY2=307

AVERAGE 55.58 63.07 7.48

MAX 67 74


(49)

37

1. Normality

Table4.3 NormalityofPre-test

The normality calculation above used One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test.Fromthetableabove,itisshowntheabsolutedifference(D)ofexperimental classdatais0.204. ItismuchlesserthanDtablewiththeclosest

Kolmogorov-Smirnovcriticalpointsof40=0.210.Whiletheabsolutedifference(D)ofcontrol classis0.147,itisalsomuchlesserthanDtable(0.210).Besides,Zexperimental=1.307

(p>0.05)andZcontrol=0.944(p>0.05).So,itcanbeconcludedthatthedatais


(50)

38

Table4.4 NormalityofPost-Test

ThenormalitytestabovewasalsodonebyusingOne-Sample Kolmogorov-SmirnovTest.Fromthetableabove,itcanbeseentheabsolutedifference(D)of experimentalclassdatais0.284.ItisnottoofarfromtheDtablewiththeclosest

Kolmogorov-Smirnovcriticalpointsof40atdegreessignificance 0.05%=0.210. So,itdoesnotaffecttoomuch.Whiletheabsolutedifference(D)ofcontrolclass is0.132,itislesserthanDtable(0.210).Tofindthenormality, itcanbereferredto

Zexperimental=1.819(p>0.05)andZcontrol=0.846(p>0.05).So,itcanbeconcluded

thatthedataisnormal.

2. Homogeneity

Table4.5 Pre-TestHomogeneity


(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Dokumen yang terkait

The Effectiveness of Using Storyboard Technique on Students' Reading Comprehension of Narrative Text (A Quasi-experimental Study at the Tenth Grade of MAN 1 Tangerang Selatan)

3 41 145

The Effectiveness Of Using Story Mapping Technique Towards Students’ Reading Ability Of Narrative Text (A Quasi-Experimental Study At Tenth Grade Students Of Sma N 4 Tangerang Selatan)

4 78 108

The effectiveness of using mind mapping technique on students’ reading of narrative text: a quasi-experimental study at the second grade of MAN 19 Jakarta

0 4 181

The Effectiveness Of Using Reading, Encoding, Annotating And Pondering (Reap) Technique Towards Students’ Reading Skill Of Descriptive Text (A Quasi-Experimental Study At The Seventh Grade Of Mts Salafiyah)

5 18 138

The Effectiveness of Using Picture in Teaching Reading of Procedure Text (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Third Grade of SMK YAPIMDA Jakarta)

1 8 114

The Effect of Using Drama Technique on Students’ Speaking Ability (A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Seventh Grade Students of SMPN 6 South Tangerang).

0 9 0

The effectiveness of using games to improve students' vocabulary (a quasi-experimental study at the tenth grade students of SMA Nusantara 1 Tangerang)

0 3 138

The effectiveness of classroom debate to improve students' speaking skilll (a quasi-experimental study at the elevent year student of SMAN 3 south Tangerang)

1 33 122

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF “FIND SOMEONE WHO” GAME TOWARD STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILL (A Pre-experimental Study of First Grade Students of Culinary Department at SMK Negeri 3 Tangerang)

1 19 117

The Effect of Using Flashcards on Students' Vocabulary Achievement (A Quasi-experimental Study at the Seventh Grade Students of SMPN 178 Jakarta)

0 10 102