165 be significantly effective in developing students’ speaking skills. Other than that,
the  action  was  found  to  have  grown student’  collaborative  learning  skill  quite
significantly. As students had gone through the overall learning process, they were able to achieve the best of their individual learning outcome.
166
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents a conclusion to the research. It provides a reflection on the implementation of teaching strategies based on differentiated instruction as
well as collaborative learning.
A. CONCLUSIONS
In  the  world  of  EFL,  some  teachers  find  teaching  mixed-competence students  in  the  same  classroom  inevitable  at  some  situations.  A  lot  of  special
efforts  are  required  to  teach  mixed-competence  classes,  particularly  in  English speaking subject due to the number of problems existing in this kind of class. This
study  serves  as  an  initiative  to  cope  with  those  seemingly  complex  problems. Thus, this study came with two research questions: 1 Is differentiated instruction
incorporated  in  the  action  taken  to  solve  the  problems  in  an  English  speaking class of mixed-competence learners?; 2 How effective is the action in developing
learners’ speaking skills as well as promoting learners’ collaboration skill? This section summarizes the findings that contribute in the quest for the answers of the
research questions. Responding  to  the  research  questions,  the  participatory  action  research
Kemmis,  et  al.,  2014  was  carried  out  to  help  participants  discover  the  proper action to facilitate the teaching learning activities of speaking classes with mixed-
competence  learners  since  action  research  serves  a  means  of  finding  effective solutions  for  local  problem  and  increase  work  effectiveness  Stringer,  2007
167 through  the empowerment  of the participants.  Thus,  this  action research adopted
maximum involvement from all students as the participants in this research. In  the  effort  to  answer  the  first  research  question,  all  participants  were
involved in a class discussion session prior to the action research commencement. The  discussion  session  was  conducted  to  start  raising  awareness  among  the
students  regarding  the  problems  that  existed  in  mixed-competence  classes,  in which  they  belonged  to.  In  the  local  context,  those  problems  might  well  hinder
students in achieving the course goal, which was  to be  able to speak English for general communication purposes including conversations and oral presentations in
both formal and informal contexts. Once their awareness was raised, the students were  invited  to  deliberate  some  solutions  to  solve  those  problems.  It  was,
however,  anticipated  that  the  students  might  come  up  with  unsuitable  solutions. Therefore, some  concepts  proven to  have been successful  in  coping with  mixed-
competence classes were offered in the negotiation process. At the end of the discussion session, the participants proposed to carry out
a  set  of  action,  which  comprised  the  following  strategies:  1  fun  learning environment;  2  extensive  speaking  practices;  3  collaborative  learning.  All
participants  also  consented  to  incorporate  differentiated  instruction  principles  as the fundamental basis of the teachinglearning process conduct, which formed the
answer for the first research question. Those strategies were conjoined in a set of action expected to be effective in solving the problems of this mixed-competence
speaking class. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
168 The  action  research  was  carried  out  in  three  cycles,  each  of  which
consisted  of  planning,  acting,  observing,  and  reflecting.  The  overall  action formulated  before  was  implemented  throughout  these  three  cycles  of  action
research,  during  which  a  series  of  data  were  collected  as  well.  To  answer  the second  research  question  regarding  the  effectiveness  of  the  action  in  developing
speaking skill, a progress test was administered at every end of the cycle to obtain quantitative data.
The progress test results were compared to the pre-test result administered prior to the course commencement using a one-way repeated measured ANOVA.
There was a significant effect from the action, Wilks’ Lambda = .083, F 3, 6 = 22.16, p  .05, multivariate partial eta squared = .92. Based on the commonly used
guidelines  proposed  by  Cohen  1988,  p.284-7,  as  cited  in  Pallant,  2011,  p.263, .01=small,  .06=moderate,  .14=large  effect,
the  result  suggested  a  very  large effect.  From  this  result,  it  was  concluded  that  the  action  was  effective  in
enhancing students’ speaking achievement. To answer the second research question related to students’ improvement
in learning process,  which in this case was  the action effectiveness in improving students’ collaboration skill, both quantitative and qualitative data were used. The
qualitative  data  were  obtained  through  researchers’  observation  field  notes, students’ reflective journals, and in-depth interview with students. Meanwhile, the
quantitative  data  were  collected  through  pre-  and  post-  program  questionnaire. Qualitatively,  despite  the  inconstancies  in  the  dynamics  of  students  learning
process, it subsequently turned out that students’ collaboration skill increased due
169 to  the  behaviors  observed  during  the  action  research  period.  This  result  was  in
accordance  with  their  questionnaire  responses.  Quantitatively,  their  responses  in the  pre-  and  post-  test  were  compared.  A  Wilcoxon  signed-ranked  test
demonstrated  a  statistically  significant  improvement  on  stu dents’  collaboration
skill between the pre-program Mdn = 3.5 and post-program Mdn = 3.78, z = - 2.55, p = 0.011, with a medium effect size r = .49. Therefore, it was evidenced
that  the  action  taken  during  the  research  was  moderately  effective  in  promoting the participants’ collaboration skill.
The  empowerment  of  all  participants  became  the  key  of  success  in  this research.  Therefore,  the  action  determined  and  taken  by  OMI  students  in
overcoming those existing problems was found to be effective in enhancing their learning  process  as  well  as  speaking  skills,  which  was  confirmed  in  the  study
results.  Learning  strategies  rooted  in  differentiated  instruction  were  effective  in promo
ting  learners’  collaboration  and  learning  autonomy.  Besides,  those strategies  g
ave  significant  contributions  in  developing  students’  speaking  skills. Overall, the incorporation of differentiated instruction strategies and collaborative
learning  in  a  fun  learning  environment  was  found  to  be  effective  in  improving students’  collaborative  learning  skill,  as  well  as  developing  speaking
achievements.
B. IMPLICATIONS
The overall process  of action research had contributed a major  change in both the teachers and the students’ perspectives on being in a mixed-competence
170 English speaking class. Both of them probably had much fear and worries about
how the teaching learning process would go when the students did not even have similar  linguistic  knowledge,  not  to  mention  they  had  different  learning
preferences  and  styles.  This  action  research  shed  lights  to  those  academic practitioners  who  teach  non-streamed  students  in  non-formal  institution  to  have
more  positive  view  towards  teaching  mixed-competence  classes.  That  is, improving  the  situation  taking  place  in  such  classrooms  is  not  impossible.  It  is
attainable  to  use  the  resources  available  within  the  classroom  to  create  more acceptable  and  positive  teaching  learning  atmosphere,  although  it  is  among
students with great differences. Learning  from  this  research,  other  teachers  who  handle  students  with
similar characteristics, both for English or non-English subjects, may do as what has been done in this research. It is also possible for teachers to adopt and adapt
the  strategies  implemented  in  this  research  depending  on  the  students’ characteristics  and  needs.  After  all,  teachers  can  be  more  reflective  in  their
teaching  practices,  so  that  they  can  also  invite  their  students  to  be  also  be reflective learners.
Through  this  action  research,  additionally, students’  quality  as  a  human
being is raised as they were empowered and emancipated in the process of their own learning.
Moreover, students’ self-actualization is promoted as their talents and  potentials  are  realized  and  fulfilled.  Despite  their  various  differences,  they
are  viewed  equally  as  a  student  with  the  same  rights  to  study  in  a  positive learning atmosphere. As in this research, it is hoped that they could promote the