the factors involved in the change processes. In investigation triangulation, more than one observer is used in the same research setting Burns, 1999:163.
The aim of triangulation was to gather multiple perspectives on the situation being studied Burns, 1999:163. The researcher used some techniques to
get the same data. In this study, the researcher compared the data collected from the observation, interviews, pre-test and post-test and questionnaires. The data
being compared were observation data in the form of field notes, interview data in the form of interview script, pre-test, and post test’s scores and questionnaires
data in the form of questionnaires results.
H. Research Procedure
The research was conducted by following the action research procedure proposed by Kemmis and Mc Taggart In Burns, 1999:32-33. It included the
following four steps. 1.
Reconnaissance This step was conducted to identify the existing problems and to determine the
most feasible problem to be solved. In this first step, the researcher conducted classroom observations and interviews with the English teacher as well as the
fourth grade students of SDN 1 Pandak. The researcher focused on the problems related to teaching and learning of speaking in the classroom. Then the researcher
and the English teacher selected some problems that were feasible to be solved. It was to assess the democratic validity in which every participant was given
opportunities to give their opinions, feelings and expectations during the research.
2. Planning
After identifying the problems, the researcher and the English teacher discussed to plan some actions as the efforts to improve the speaking ability of the
fourth grade students. The actions were planned based on the discovered problems. The Standard of the Competence and Basic Competence, as well as the
condition of the school. It was decided to use board games as the basic of the actions. The implementation of board games would be supported by applying
other actions. 3. Implementing and observing the actions
The researcher implemented the actions that had been planned in the previous step. The actions were implemented in two cycles with three actions in
each cycle. Each cycle was done in three meetings. At first, the researcher conducted cycle one. Based on the reflection of cycle one, some weaknesses were
found. In that case, the cycle two was conducted. To find the weaknesses the actions, the researcher, the English teacher as the collaborator observed the
teaching and learning processes. The researcher also interviewed the students after the actions were implemented. The result of observation, field notes, and
interviews analyzed to know the effectiveness of the actions and to find problems that occurred.
To assess the process validity, the researcher examined the data and identified it whether the students could continue learning from the process. It was
supported by some data sources that show the process which was valid. To assess cataytic, it meant that the collaborator and the students were given opportunities
to give their response to the change occurred after the implementation of the actions.
4. Reflection
In this step, the actions implemented in the previous step were evaluated. The reflection was done by discussing the problems and the achievement during
the implementation the English teacher. The evaluation was focused on whether the implemented actions were successful. The actions would be considered
successful if the means of the means of the student’s speaking score improved. Here are the indicators that indicate the successful actions.
a. The students are able to respond to the language functions appropriately. b. The students are able to speak at the normal speech without pausing for words.
c. The students are able to use the vocabulary related to a certain theme in language functions.
d. The students are able to say the language function in correct pronunciation and appropriate intonation.
e. The students are able to use the language functions without grammatical mistakes.
The result of the reflection was used as the basis for further planning. The successful actions would be continued in the next teaching and learning process,
but the unsuccessful actions would be modified to be more suitable in order to improve students’ speaking. It was to assess the outcome validity. To assess the
dialogic validity, the researcher along with the English teacher as the collaborator reviewed the value of the actions.
CHAPTHER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. Reconnaissance 1.
