Comparative Analysis between Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response Methods in English Language Learning for Kindergarten Students

(1)

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN AUDIOLINGUAL AND

TOTAL PHYSICAL RESPONSE METHODS IN ENGLISH

LANGUAGE LEARNING FOR KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS

A THESIS By:

FIKRY PRASTYA SYAHPUTRA REG. NO. 100705027

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA MEDAN 2014

(2)

Comparative Analysis between Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response Methods in English Language Learning for Kindergarten Students

A Thesis By:

Fikry Prastya Syahputra Reg. No. 100705027

Supervisor, Co. Supervisor,

Drs. H. Chairul Husni, M.Ed. TESOL Drs. Bahagia Tarigan, M.A. NIP. 19570803 198404 1 004 NIP. 19581017 198601 1 001 Submitted to Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara Medan in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra in Department of English

UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

(3)

(4)

Approved by the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara (USU) Medan as thesis for The Sarjana Sastra Examination.

Head, Secretary,

Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, MA. Ph.D NIP. 19541117 198003 1 002 NIP. 19750209 200812 1 002

(5)

Accepted by the Board of Examiners in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara, Medan.

The examination is held in Department of English Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara on Thursday, 17th April 2014

Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara

Dr. H. Syahron Lubis, MA NIP.19511013 197603 1 001

Board of examiners

Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S

Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, MA. Ph.D

Dr. H. Syahron Lubis, MA

Prof. Dra. Tengku Silvana Sinar, M.A., Ph.D

(6)

AUTHOR‟S DECLARATION

I, FIKRY PRASTYA SYAHPUTRA, DECLARE THAT I AM THE SOLE

AUTHOR OF THIS THESIS. EXCEPT WHERE REFERENCE IS MADE IN THE TEXT OF THIS THESIS, THIS THESIS CONTAINS NO MATERIAL

PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE OR EXTRACTED IN WHOLE OR IN PART FROM A THESIS BY WHICH I HAVE QUALIFIED FOR AWARDED ANOTHER DEGREE.

NO OTHER PERSON‟S WORK HAS BEEN USED WITHOUT DUE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN THE MAIN TEXT OF THIS THESIS. THIS THESIS HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED FOR THE AWARD OF ANOTHER DEGREE IN ANY TERTIARY EDUCATION.

Signed :

(7)

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION

NAME : FIKRY PRASTYA SYAHPUTRA

TITLE OF THESIS : ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING IN KINDERGARTEN THROUGH AUDIOLINGUAL AND TOTAL PYSHICAL RESPONSE METHODS

QUALIFICATIONS : S-1/ SARJANA SASTRA DEPARTMENT : ENGLISH LITERATURE

I AM WILLING THAT MY THESIS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION AT THE DISCRETION OF THE LIBRARIAN OF

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES, THE UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT USERS ARE MADE AWARE OF THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA.

Signed :

(8)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Alhamdulillah, in the name of Allah SWT, the writer would like to thank Allah SWT, for all the mercy and blessing that I have. Also for the chance and power that given to me to complete this thesis. Praises and greets to Muhammad SAW who has brought us to the luminous era and lead us to the goodness of mankind.

The writer sincere gratitude also goes to the Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies, University of North Sumatera, Dr. Syahron Lubis, MA, the Head and the Secretary of English Department, Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S and Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, MA. Ph.D for all the facilities and opportunities given to the writer during the study.

First and foremost, the writer would like to thank the writer supervisor and co-supervisor, Drs. H. Chairul Husni, M.Ed. TESOL and Drs. Bahagia Tarigan, M.A.for the guidance, support, advice, and constructive comments during the writing of this thesis.

The writer special thanks are expressed to the writer beloved parents, Freedy Syahputra and Supiah Mansyur and also beloved brother Al Gery Prayudi for giving the writer support and attention. The other special thanks goes toFitri Annisa for her kindness, support, time and love all the time.

Big thanks are addressed to the writer best friends Rizki Andrian,WinaViqa, Annisa Musa, Yuni Erika, Nadia Marchelina, and also to all my friends in English Department attended year of 2010. For all people in IMSI‟s big family and for my friend Hary Utomo who edited the video, Uke Tri for letting me uses her laptop and Dian Putra who accompanied me in any occasion. Thank you everyone.

Finally, the writer has to admit that this thesis is far from being perfect. Thus any comments, suggestions, and criticism will be humbly accepted. May Allah SWT bless us. Amin.

Medan

(9)

ABSTRACT

This thesis entitled; “Comparative Analysis between Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response Methods in English Language Learning for Kindergarten

Students” is a study of linguistic. This study appeared because of the issue about government policy to eliminate English subject in Elementary school. This emerged many opinions and claims that interested to be analyzed. Those opinions / claims are; age predictor in language learning and teaching methods effect in the successful of language learning, especially foreign language learning. This study / thesis focus on the language learning and language acquisition of children age of five. The objects of the study are language learning activities in a kindergarten. And discuss the

phenomena of language acquisition within the process of English language learning as foreign language.

The study is based on Krashen claims that comparing two teaching methods will lead to an experiment of language acquisition. So this study conducted a

research which compared two teaching methods. The methods are; Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response. The teaching material created by the researcher and the teachers. The researcher recorded the teaching-learning activities to recognize the progress of study.

This thesis concluded that Audio-lingual was more effective applied in the TPA/TKI Ad-Dirasa (kindergarten). The conclusion was based on the analysis of the data supported by teachers‟ opinions. There is still a chance of different result regarding the same research with a different object (kindergarten). Because this research is not the final answered of issues related to the topic. This research is a supporting evidence of the writer claims within the topic discussed and a reference to a better teaching method for kindergarten students.

(10)

ABSTRAK

Skripsi yang berjudul “Comparative Analysis between Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response Methods in English Language Learning for Kindergarten Students” ini adalah study mengenai linguistik. Studi ini muncul karena adanya perdebatan mengenai rencana pemerintah untuk menghapuskan pelajaran bahasa Inggris di Sekolah Dasar. Perdebatan tersebut memunculkan spekulasi-spekulasi yang menarik untuk diteliti, antara lain pengaruh umur dan metode pengajaran bahasa dalam keberhasilan suatu pengajaran bahasa terutama bahasa asing. Dalam study ini berfokus pada pembelajaran bahasa dan pemerolehan bahasa pada anak – anak umur 5 tahun. Objek penelitian adalah pembelajaran bahasa di sebuah taman kanak-kanak dan membahas fenomena-fenomena pemerolehan bahasa di dalam proses pengajaran bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa asing (foreign language).

Penelitian berdasarkan pendapat Krashen yang menyatakan bahwa membandingkan dua metode pembelajaran bahasa akan menuju kepada sebuah penelitian bahasa. Metode yang digunakanadalah Audio-lingual dengan Total Physical Response. Materi yang digunakan rancangan bersama antara guru-guru dan peneliti. Untuk mengetahui kemajuan dalam pembelajaran penilti merekam kegiatan belajar-mengajar.

Dalam study ini Audio-lingual dianggap lebih berhasil diterapkan pada anak-anak. Hal ini berdasarkan hasil penelitian yang berpedoman pada keberhasilan para siswa menyerap materi pembelajaran serta didukung oleh pendapat guru-guru . Akan tetapi tidak menutup kemungkinan di tempat yang lain dengan jenis penelitian yang sama akan mendapatkan hasil yang berbeda pula. Sebab dari itu hasil dari penelitian ini bukan akhir. Hasil studi ini melainkan sebagai bahan pertimbangan untuk para pengajar bahasa dan peneliti bahasa lainnya kelak.

(11)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AUTHOR‟S DECLARATION

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION………. 1

1.1 Background of the Study ………. 1

1.2 Problems of the Study……… 6

1.3 Objectives of the Study………. 7

1.4 Scope of the Study……… 7

1.5 Significances of the Study………... 7

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE………. 8

2.1 Behaviorism……… 8

2.2 Nativism………. 9

2.3 Audio-Lingual Method……….. 11

2.4 Total Physical Response ……… 12

2.5 Applied Linguistic Research………... 13

2.6 Relevant Studies ………. 14

CHAPTER III METHOD OF RESEARCH ……… 21

3.1 Research Design………. ……… 21

3.2 Data and Data Source……….. ……….. 22

3.3 Data Collecting Method………. 23

3.4 Data Analysis……….. 24

(12)

3.4.2 Data Display……… 25

3.4.3 Conclusion Drawing and Verification……… 25

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND FINDING………. . 26

4.1 Analysis……….. 26

4.2 Findings……….. 42

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS……….. .. 52

5.1 Conclusions……… 52

5.2 Suggestions……….. 53 REFERENCES

(13)

ABSTRACT

This thesis entitled; “Comparative Analysis between Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response Methods in English Language Learning for Kindergarten

phenomena of language acquisition within the process of English language learning as foreign language.

The study is based on Krashen claims that comparing two teaching methods will lead to an experiment of language acquisition. So this study conducted a

(14)

ABSTRAK

(15)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background of the Study

Indonesia government always concerns the national education. As we know that well educated people will create a better nation. Indonesia as a developing country needs to focus more on education side in order to enrich the human resources.

There is a policy in the blueprint of 2013/2014 curriculum to eliminate English subject for elementary school students. This policy is quoted from the news.

“JAKARTA (Pos Kota) - Kementerian Pendidikan dan

Kebudayaan (Kemendikbud) belum dapat memastikan apakah akan menghapus mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris dari kurikulum Sekolah Dasar (SD). Mendikbud Mohammad Nuh bahwa penghapusan mata pelajaran untuk SD itu masih belum final.

„Masih belum final. Tapi kemungkinan untuk itu ada dan terbuka.

Sebelum diputuskan mata pelajaran dan kurikulumnya, kami uji publik dulu. Karena hasil diskusi kan belum bisa dijadikan pegangan,‟ kata Mohammad Nuh di kantornya, Kamis (11/10).”

The Ministry of Education said that the policy is not final yet. There are still some things to be tested for this policy. The reason for this policy said that the children did not focus in other lesson when they study English. Kunjana Rahardi a socio-linguist (2012) in an interview with a local radio said that

“Menurutnya sudah selayaknya anak di usia kelas 1 sampai kelas 3 SD memang tidak dikenalkan dengan bahasa asing lebih dahulu. Sebaliknya harus difokuskan pada bahasa ibu

(16)

The other reason is stated by the vice ministry of Education Ministry of Indonesia Government Mr. Musliar Kasim.

“Bahasa Inggris mungkin dihapuskan dari kurikulum wajib siswa SD yang akan diberlakukan pemerintah pada tahun ajaran 2013-2014. Alasannya, keberadaan mata pelajaran tersebut membuat siswa tidak fokus mendalami kemampuan belajar Bahasa Indonesia.”

The government policy is not coherence with the need of English language for Indonesia future. In 2014-2015 Indonesia will face AFTA (Asean Free Trade Association) and AEC (Asean Economic Community). The need of English is an important issue. It is stated in newspaper of Wall Street English Thailand “For people over 30, there‟s a danger of being “outdated” compared to those who are AEC ready. Unfortunately, it may be harder to find a new job. The only solution is to learn something new –such as English”

The news also mentions other opinion about English “English will be the language for business in AEC 2015. In the near future, China, Japan, and South Korea, will join the AEC as well. This means learning English will become even more crucial”

Meanwhile, parents have some arguments too about the government policy to eliminate English subject in the elementary school. Most of them disagree with this policy. This is stated in the news of VOA.

(17)

“VOA Indonesia - Sebagian orangtua mempertanyakan rencana penghapusan pelajaran Bahasa Inggris dari sekolah dasar oleh Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Keputusan Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Indonesia untuk menghapuskan pelajaran Bahasa Inggris dari sekolah dasar mulai tahun ajaran 2013-2014 dipertanyakan oleh para orangtua yang menganggap bahasa asing semakin mudah diajarkan pada

anak-anak jika dilakukan sejak dini.”

“Sayang jika Bahasa Inggris dihapuskan. Sekarang [anak-anak] sudah pada bisa, tiba-tiba dihapuskan. Kasian mereka, mengapa jadi mundur ya,” ujar Lita Anggraeni, seorang pegawai negeri sipil di Jakarta.“Biar bagaimana juga pengetahuan umum itu sumbernya bahasa asing, terutama Bahasa Inggris,” tambahnya.

Pendapat serupa disuarakan seorang pegawai bank

bernama Inggrid yang mengatakan, “Bahasa Inggris sebenarnya

dasar ya. Ke depan nanti Bahasa Inggris banyak dipakai, jadi menurut saya lebih baik dikenalkan sejak dini.”

Most of them strongly disagree with the government policy to eliminate English in elementary school.

Parents‟ ideas and responses about the government policy to eliminate English from elementary school are in compliance with some linguists and scholars ideas about studying second languages. The writer agrees with the idea that „children are more effective to achieve second language in a long term study‟. These ideas came from people who disagree with this policy and some linguists statements which stated below.

Krashen (1995:43) says “It has been popularly assumed that age itself is a predictor of second language proficiency, that younger acquirers are better at second language acquisition than older.” Krashen (1995:43) also says “Acquirers who begin natural exposure to second languages during childhood generally achieve higher second language proficiency than those beginning as adults.”

(18)

Ellis (1997:68) states that “Studies of immigrants in the United States show that if they arrive before puberty (+ 12 years old) they go on to achieve much higher levels of grammar proficiency than if they arrive after.” Ellis (1997:68) also argues that age is an important matter in language acquisition and learning, “Interestingly, age of arrival is as much better predictor of ultimate achievement than the number of years of exposure to the target language. In the case of pronunciation, the crucial age appears to be much earlier, possibly as early as six.”

Bialystok & Miller (1999; 143) say “There is no doubt that learners who arrived in Canada at a younger age and began learning English earlier had a better chance of doing well than learners who arrived later. This general trend was found in our data for the Spanish learners and replicates numerous studies that offer empirical support for the widely held view that children are more successful at learning a second language than adults are.”

Parera (1986:84) says “anak – anak memperoleh bahasa lebih cepat dan lebih gampang dari pada orang dewasa karena

anak – anak secara biologis diprogramkan untuk belajar bahasa

sedangkan orang dewasa tidak.”

Based on the claim above linguists and scholars strongly argue that children are able to learn language better in younger ages.

The policy to eliminate English in the elementary school provokes many politicians, scholars and teachers. Some agree while others oppose this policy. English is very important to Indonesian students. English is one of the subjects in National Examination from junior to senior high school. In the higher level of education, some university requires TOEFL score to enter the faculty.

(19)

English is very important to graduates too. Some job vacancies require applicants who can speak English. Therefore English is very important to Indonesian students. The government policy to eliminate English subject from elementary school is not wise. Based on the arguments, ideas and opinions stated above, the writer believes that learning English from childhood will achieve a better result in acquiring them. That‟s why the writer is interested in observing and analyzing children who learn English language in early childhood. The research attempts to prove that children can learn English, as a second or foreign language. This research is aimed at finding out a better language teaching method for children.

This paper has a focus on Language Acquisition and Language Learning. Language acquisition is a study on how people acquire language and use the language. Language acquisition combines many aspects of linguistic in the study. As the fundamental aspects of human being, language is very important.

Language will be useless if no one uses it and like what Chomsky (1968) says that language is unique to human. Chomsky (1968) in Jendra (2010: 2) says that “when we study language, we are approaching what some might call „human essence‟, the distinctive qualities of mind that are so far we know, unique to man.”

Halliday (1973) also says that “all uses of language, however abstract and however complex the social structure with which they associated, were to be explained in terms of certain elementary functions. Language acquisition or language development needs to be seen as the mastery of linguistic functions.”

(20)

In Indonesia if the L1 is their native language like Javanese so the L2 is probably Bahasa, but if their L1 is Bahasa there is a change that their L2 is their tribe language or any other foreign languages. English, Arabic and Mandarin are commonly learned by Indonesian people.

Based on the explanations above it can be argued that second language acquisition is a systemic study of how people acquire a second language (L2). Ellis (1997:3) says “L2 acquisition; then can be defined as the way in which people learn a language other than their mother tongue, inside or outside of classroom”.

The writer uses Applied Linguistics Research in this paper by comparing two Language Teaching Methods. Those teaching methods are Audio-lingual Method and Total Physical Response Method. In order to be able to get a better teaching method, the writer compares these two teaching methods.

Krashen (1995) also agrees by comparing two teaching methods, an experiment of language acquisition is likely to occur. Krashen (1995:3) says “An example that will be important to us in our discussion of language teaching consists of experiments that compare teaching methods.” These experiments are not going to attack one method or another but to find a better teaching method for language learners.

1.2. Problems of the Study

Based on the background above, here are the problems in this research:

a) Which Learning / Teaching Methods are more suitable for kindergarten students who learn English?

(21)

b) How children response to both methods?

1.3. Objectives of the Study

Related to the problems above, the writer state some objectives to answer it:

a) To find out what Learning / Teaching Methods are more suitable for kindergarten students who learn English.

b) To find out the response of children in learning English language using TPR and Audio-lingual methods.

1.4. Scope of the Study

There are many studies in language acquisition and language learning but the writer makes a limitation in order to make the analysis more specific.

The writer makes a scope of analysis which focuses on English as the second/foreign language being learned by children attending kindergarten or pre – school (around 4 – 6 years of age). The writer compares Audio-lingual Method with Total Physical Response Method. The data of the observation are the results of learning process taken from those two methods.

1.5. Significances of the Study

The writer hopes the findings of this study will help teachers, especially kindergarten teachers who teach English in the class. This study hopefully can provide some necessary information about a better Language Teaching Method for young language learners. It is also hoped that the finding of this research can give valuable knowledge about children capability in learning English.

(22)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1. Behaviorism

Ellis (1997:31) stated that during 1950s and 1950s behaviorist learning theory was dominant in psychological theory of language acquisition. This theory says; “language learning is like any other kind of learning that involves habitual action. Habits are formed when learners respond to stimuli in the environment and subsequently have their responses reinforced so that they are remembered. Thus, a habit is a stimulus – response connection.” As a concept of acquiring language behaviorism plays a great part in the development of language acquisition study. Children under seven years old are mostly influenced by the behaviorism theory in acquiring the second language. Hanafia (2013) in his lecture stated that children under seven years old tend to memorize the words that they always heard. He gave an example of a mother who taught her baby to say „ibu/mama‟. The word from the mother is the stimulus and the word from the baby is the response. The concept of behaviorism matches the discussion in this research, because the object of study mainly or mostly captures the behaviorism theory and concept in acquiring language. The object of study is also children under seven years old.

Another example of acquiring second language (behavioral) by children is when they learn to read Qur‟an. Qur‟an is the holy book of Islam religion. Muslim children tend to learn how to read Qur‟an since childhood. Holy Qur‟an used Arabic language.

(23)

The way of learning Qur‟an is coherence with Krashen (1988) opinion in acquiring language. Krashen (1988) says "Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious drill."

Thus, children do not require some extensive grammatical rule to understand the language. They just listen and repeat it. When the „Ustadz‟ (a teacher of Islam religion) say „alif‟ (آ), „ba‟ (ب) „ta‟ (ت) for this sign, the children simple listen the sound from the „Ustadz‟ and they acquire it. They pronounce it again after listening to the sound (utterances) from the „Ustadz‟ this activities is called memorize and mimicry in behavioral study. It is an example of language acquisition by children in Arabic language. The writer program and objective in this research is to observe the same activities but in the different object of study, English instead of Arabic.

The writer focuses on the first stage of acquiring language, vocabulary acquisition. The children listen to the sound (utterances), and pronounce it again. This is very much similar to the behavioral strategy mentioned above; repeating the word loudly to remember it. This is also the reason why Audio-lingual is adopted as one of the teaching methods in this study. Because some patterns and conditions to learn / acquire language in audio-lingual methods similar to behaviorism theory. They are; form habitual activities and force the learner / acquirer to memorize and mimicry the language.

(24)

2.2. Nativism

The writer uses another language acquisition theory to support this thesis. Beside behaviorism the writer also mentioned nativism theory in this thesis. Ellis (1997:32) says “the obvious inadequacies of behaviorists explanations of L2 acquisition led researchers to look towards an alternative theoretical framework.” Linguists and scholars who opposed behavioral theory began to see another theory. Ellis (1997:32) “From a preoccupation with the role of „nature‟ (i.e. how environmental factors shape learning), researchers switched their attention to „nature‟ (i.e. how the innate properties of human mind shape learning). This new paradigm was, therefore, mentalist (or „nativist‟) in orientation.”

In difference to behaviorism, nativism holds that language is not the result of general learning mechanisms, but rather innate capacity. This special capacity is belong only to human and not include to the sound or any other being communication (animal, etc).

Ellis (1997:32) says “in the 1960s and 1970s a mentalist theory of first language (L1) acquisition emerged. According to this theory:

- Only human beings are capable of learning language.

- The human mind is equipped with a faculty for learning language, referred to as a Language Acquisition Device (LAD). This is separate from the faculties responsible for other kinds of cognitive activity (for example, logical reasoning).

(25)

- Input is needed, but only to „trigger‟ the operation of the language acquisition device.

The explanations above showed the principals of nativism theory. This theory mentions in this thesis because, some of the principals similar to some principals in Total Physical Response methods. In TPR the input is a trigger to an acquisition. The pattern drill activities in TPR produce an understanding of language by children, as if they already have the language. This pattern drill is also similar to the existence of LAD in human brain that nativists belief.

2.3. Audio-lingual Method

Krashen (1995:129-130) says “Audio-lingual; the lesson typically begins with dialogue, which contains the structures vocabulary of the lesson. The student is expected to mimic the dialogue and eventually memorize it (termed „mim-mem‟).”

This method focuses on remembering and uttering the words that have been taught. Teacher is the role model in class that conducts dialogue contains new vocabulary to learn. Krashen (1995:130) “The dialogue is followed by pattern drill on the structures introduced in the dialogue. The aim of the drill is to „strengthen habits‟, to make the pattern automatic.” From this statement, Audio-lingual method matches with behavioral theory in the term of „strengthen habits‟. Along with it, the writer chooses Audio-lingual method because of it coherency with behaviorism theory. So the writer hopes this method suit for children.

Noori (2001) describes the principles of the Audio-lingual method as follows: - instructions are given in the target language

(26)

- language forms occur within a context

- students‟ native language interferes as little as possible with the students‟ attempts to acquire the target language

- teaching is directed to provide students with a native –speaker like model - analogy provides a better foundation for language learning than analysis - errors are carefully avoided because they lead to the formation of bad habits - positive reinforcement helps the student to develop correct habits

- students are encouraged to learn to respond to verbal and non-verbal stimuli - the teacher is regarded as an orchestra leader conducting , guiding and

controlling the students‟ behavior in the target language

- Learning foreign language is treated on par with the native language.

This method focuses on mimicking and memorizing the new vocabulary similar to what the kindergarten teachers used to teach the children. The role of grammar is less. Using dialogues and group works. The writer chooses this method because the principals can be modified to be used for children. The matters of study between Audio-lingual and TPR are made in the similar difficulties.

2.4. Total Physical Response Method (TPR)

Krashen (1995:140) says “Total Physical Response (TPR) consists basically of obeying commands given by the Instructor that involve an overt physical response.” This method used actual body response to the words given. The learners understand the meaning of the words through this action.

(27)

Moreover, Asher (2003) says “TPR (total physical response) is a method of teaching language using physical movement to react to verbal input in order to reduce student inhibitions and lower their affective filter. It allows students to react to language without thinking too much, facilitates long term retention, and reduces student anxiety and stress.” Asher (2003) also mentions how to implement TPR effectively; “it is necessary to plan regular sessions that progress in a logical order, and to keep several principles in mind.” The terms of logical order in TPR principals is similar to nativism theory of language acquisition.

Asher (2003) also mentions that some principles in doing TPR are as follows:

- Prepare a script

- Build on what has gone before

- Recycle language and review extensively - Don‟t change the target language

- Be good-natured and positive. In order for students to relax and feel comfortable, during TPR practice the teacher should project a friendly and positive manner.

- Introduce limited number of new items and manipulate them extensively - Incorporate some humor

- Students don't speak

(28)

The writer chooses TPR because it is easy to practice and the principles can be adapted to use for children. Widodo (2005:240) mentions some disadvantages of using TPR “it is only really suitable for beginner level.” That is why the writer is interested to use this method.

2.5. Applied Linguistics Research

Krashen (1995:3) says “Applied Linguistics Research: a great deal of research goes on in linguistics that is not aimed at supporting or attacking any coherent theory. This research, rather, is aimed at solving practical, real problems that confront society. A few examples will hopefully make this category clear.” The research method that is used in this paper is to compare two teaching methods. The two teaching methods will be used in two different classes but in the same level. The teaching methods will be used are Audio-lingual & Total Physical Response. The students will be researched are children who attend kindergarten school. The basic research hypothesis is adapted from Krashen‟s statement stated in his book; Krashen (1995:3) says “An example that will be important to us in our discussion of language teaching consists of experiments that compare teaching methods.” Children are assumed to have a better ability to grasp language.

In order to optimize their potential, a better teaching method must be applied to them. Thus, this research aim is to give a supporting evidence of above assumption. The result of research and observation are data of children ability in studying English using those two methods. Therefore, the data will be the supporting evidence and references to choose a better language teaching method for young language learners.

(29)

2.6. Relevant Studies

The writer of this thesis quoted some research of language acquisition and language learning applied for children. Ellis (1997:8) conducted a research of SLA in two immigrant child. J was a ten year Portuguese boy and R was an eleven year boy came from Pakistan. Both of them moved to England and studied English. Ellis‟ goal for both of them was to make them able to use „request‟ sentence. Ellis (1997:11) says that “My goal was narrower; I was concerned with how J and R acquired the ability to perform a single language function (request).”

This research was focused on J and R ability to perform request in time to time. The first attempt showed that both of them performed simple words to show request. They just pointed and objects for the hints, Ellis (1997:9) said that “their requests were verb less”. When J needed a rubber he just said rubber. So did R. Their progress showed some time after when they performed request using „give me‟ and „can‟. Then Ellis assumed that (1997:10) “both learners are capable of successfully simple request even when they knew very little English.”

There was also research conducted by Wagner-Gough and Hatch (1975). In the research they determined the progress of acquirer by comparing the data from before being taught and after being taught.

(30)

The subject was Paul five years old boy and the object was English as second language. According to Wagner-Gough and Hatch (1975) in Krashen (1988: 119) “at least some of Paul‟s progress can be attributed to the fact that he had the benefit of input that was more appropriate for language acquisition. He engaged in conversations such as this one”:

Adult Paul

Paul, are you writing? Yeah

What are you doing? I‟m write

Paul, are you writing? Yeah

What are you doing? I‟m writing

Is the baby crying? Baby is crying

The research showed that Paul was able to communicate using English. Paul understood the grammar rules in the second conversation. The researcher determined Paul progress by his capability in doing this conversation.

Aini (2013) introduces direct method and natural method of English Beginner as a Second Language for Children of 4-5 Years Old (Kindergarten).

Her thesis focuses on the same object with this thesis object. The object was students who learn English in kindergarten school / period. The research has different problems of study and teaching method. However, the writer can learn something from this thesis.

(31)

Aini used Parera (1986) concept as the anchor of analyzing the data and problem. The writer can get many aspects from Aini‟s thesis to support his research.

Aini introduced English by using the Direct Method and Natural Method. She acted herself as the observer. The activity is as follows:

Subject Matter TK.A Greeting

Teacher said, “Good morning students?” and then students answered, “Good morning Mom”. Teacher said, “How are you students?” and then students answered, “Fine”.

This method indicates that teacher uses vocabulary in daily life with a simple structure so that children can understand the meaning and they know when they can use it as greeting. (According to Parera, direct method point 1)

Color

Children were assigned to learn colors by using English such as red, green, yellow and blue as primary colors. The teacher taught the students with visual aid in front of the class room and repeated each color three times by showing the visual aid.

This method according to Parera is called natural method by showing the meaning with some objects or pictures.

Number

The Students were assumed familiar with number one to ten (1-10). Teacher wrote number 1 to 10 in the blackboard and pointed to each number and then said it with correct pronunciation and the students repeated it after the teacher. The teacher repeated it until three times from number 1 to 10. This method is adapted from to

(32)

natural method, showing the meaning by using pictures in front of the class. In this case teacher wrote it down on the blackboard and asked each student what the number was.

Body

Students were already familiar with the parts of body, such as: eyes, hands, nose, and ears. Teacher showed the parts of body with the visual aid. This method is in accordance with natural method which uses many objects in order to make it easier for the children to understand new vocabularies that they have just got. This method is also in accordance with direct method point 5which shows concrete meaning with reference. Students knew the meaning of each vocabulary because they know the real object that they had seen. In this case students were not yet taught singular or plural matters.

Subject Matter TK.B Color

Students were familiar with colors such as: red, yellow, green and blue. The teacher asked the students about colors by visual aid in front of the class every time the teacher began the lesson. The teacher always repeated the lesson in order to make the student remember the lesson that they had got before. This method is adapted from direct method point 7where the students listen and imitate generously and then the vocabulary appears automatically.

Number

Students had known number one until twenty (1-20). Teacher wrote number 11 to numbers 20 on the blackboard, pointing each number and asked the students what

(33)

number they were randomly. Teacher usually repeated the number three times for each number. This method applies natural method that uses some pictures or drawings to show the meaning of vocabulary. This method is adopted from direct method point 1that uses vocabulary in daily life.

Body

Students knew parts of their body such as: hands, nose, ears, eyes, mouth, leg, neck, hair, cheek. This method is adopted from direct method point 1that uses vocabulary in daily life.

Write

Students were assigned to write and to spell number 1 until 20.For example 1 = O-NE, 2 = T-W-O, 3 = T-H-R-E-E etc. The students wrote it in the class room not as a home work so each student had a book for English. The teacher always repeated the lesson in order to make students always remember the lesson for several weeks or hours and focus on utterance. Most activities were done in the class and the teacher just met the students when she was teaching them. In introduction English for beginner specifically for kindergarten, grammar was not introduced, the teacher just introduced vocabularies about daily life.

The activities used in Introduction English for four and five years old beginners (kindergarten) are as follows:

- Teacher taught vocabulary about daily life such as: color, number and body. - Teacher used visual aid to show the vocabulary so that the students

understood what the teacher said. - Most of the matters were learned orally.

(34)

- Students found it easy to understand each vocabulary by using picture and visual aid.

All the conclusions are in accordance with Parera: 160

Although Aini‟s thesis is using different methods in introducing English, the writer gets something from this thesis. The writer finds supporting evidence that children are able to learn English as second or foreign language. Language teaching method can be modified for children, depending on the teacher‟s capacity to use it.

Bachrie (2011) in his study shows the level of competence in Using "Must" and "Have To" for The Eighth Grade of SMPN 1” for children of 12 – 14 years old in acquiring English. Those students did not just study the language but had a focus on using the language. The writer of this thesis directly examines the students by giving some questions around the use of “must” and “have to”.

The test took place in MTs. ULIL AL-BAAB. Mts is in the same level of junior high school. Mts or „Madrasah Tsanawiyah‟ is a junior high school based on Islamic way of teaching. In spite of under Indonesia education and cultural ministry

(MENDIKBUD), Madrasah Tsanawiyah is under the Indonesia Islamic ministry.

In this research, the findings show that the second year students of MTs. ULIL

AL-BAAB, “fail” in using modal “must and have to”. It can be seen from the result of

student‟s score in using “must and have to” at the second year students of MTs. ULIL

(35)

From 20 students` writing, the researcher concluded that 1 student that was classified “excellence”, 1 student got “good” in writing task, then 7 students were classified “fair”, and 11 students were classified “poor”. In the other word, 5% of student excellence, 5 % got good score, then 35% of students got fair score and 55% of students got poor score, which meant that they were failed. From the interview,

The writer shows the findings above to show how poor the ability of junior high student in English. Based on this supporting evidence, the government‟s policy to eliminate English in elementary subject is not wise.

(36)

CHAPTER III

METHOD OF RESEARCH 3.1 Research Design

The writer uses qualitative method in this paper. Miles and Huberman (1994) define the way of qualitative research is to find the meaning of data based on the goals stated by the researcher. “Qualitative modes of data analysis provide ways of discerning, examining, comparing and contrasting, and interpreting meaningful patterns or themes. Meaningfulness is determined by the particular goals and objectives of the project at hand: the same data can be analyzed and synthesized from multiple angles depending on the particular research or evaluation questions being addressed.”

This research may use any other discipline in analyzing the data. The researcher focuses on the goal of research. Miles and Huberman (1994) “The varieties of approaches - including ethnography, narrative analysis, discourse analysis, and textual analysis - correspond to different types of data, disciplinary traditions, objectives, and philosophical orientations.”

Based on ideas above, the writer uses qualitative method in this study to make it easy to be understood by directly in touch with the source of data. Here are the steps applied in doing the research:

- The observation is done by recording the teaching / learning activity. - The result of the observation is the data which will be analyzed. - The writer compares two teaching methods.

(37)

- The two teaching methods are Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response. - The target language is English.

- The materials of teaching are made to fit with the children ability. - Observer does not take part in the teaching – learning activities.

- The data of the teaching and learning progress will be converted from recorded file to transcript form.

- Giving conclusion and suggestion will be the final point of the observer‟s programs.

The writer uses library research and field research for gathering the data. The writer search for some books, thesis or articles related to the topic and makes them as the references. In field research the writer gathering the data by the actual observation of teaching – learning activity, recorded audio and visual.

3.2 Data and Data Source

The data are transcript file of actual observation in a class while studying English. The data source is kindergarten student in TKI/TPA AD – DIRASHA. The writer will record the audiovisual of the teaching and learning activities. The samples are the students and the informants are the teachers. The texts which will be analyzed and discussed are based from the recorded activities. The recorded activities are the teaching and learning activities in the kindergarten and the subject of study is English lesson.

(38)

From the recorded activities the writer will make a script of dialogues between students and teacher (teaching and learning process) and every utterance will be recorded by the recording machine. The writer records it with audiovisual mode.

In this regards, the writer adopts Krashen‟s statement. Krashen (1995:3) says “An example that will be important to us in our discussion of language teaching consists of experiments that compare teaching methods.” the writer uses this hypothesis to find out the ability of children in understanding English.

3.3 Data Collecting Method

Data collecting method used in this thesis is documentary technique through observation. The data are the document and the document is the recorded files that will be converted into script, these are the steps administrated in collecting the data:

- Asking permission to the headmaster to observe in her/his place. - Cooperating with the teachers there for the observation.

- The teaching process is designed by the observer and taught by the kindergarten teacher.

- Recording the teaching and learning activities.

- Observing the recorded files and understanding all utterances. Converting all utterances into a script that will be the document for the analysis.

- Classifying the data: classifying the important data based on the scope of the analysis. Only the use of English language or the teaching – learning activities of English used for the analysis

(39)

- Identifying the data: the data individually will be classified within the context - Conclusion: making a conclusion is the final step of the research.

3.4 Data Analysis

Miles and Huberman (1994) in their book „Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook‟ suggest that qualitative data analysis consists of three procedures; data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing and verification.

3.4.1. Data Reduction

Miles and Huberman (1994) say “data reduction refers to the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting, and transforming the data that appear in written up field notes or transcriptions. Not only do the data need to be condensed for the sake of manageability, they also have to be transformed so they can be made intelligible in terms of the issues being addressed.”

In collecting the data, observer might capture utterances that do not belong to English usage being investigated or simply say it out of the scope of the analysis. This is the raw data. The raw data have to be reduced in order to be more specific and the utterances selected fit the study.

(40)

3.4.2. Data Display

Data display is the second stage of analyzing the data, after the writer gets the data from reducing the raw data before. The data need to be displayed as the writer needs to analyze the data intensively. The data will be displayed as a script of dialogues (teaching – learning process). Miles and Huberman (1994) say “a display can be an extended piece of text or a diagram, chart, or matrix that provides a new way of arranging and thinking about the more textually embedded data.”

3.4.3. Conclusion Drawing and Verification

This step is to gain validity of the data; the final step is conclusions. In analyzing the data, the results of analyzing should be concluded in order to inform people about the subject. The data analyzed are expected to meet the goal and purposed of the research.

In order to analyze the data, the writer determined the possible condition whether the teaching – learning activities succeeded or failed. The writer stated the purposes of teaching – learning first. Based on Schmidt in Ellis (1997) and Wagner-Gough and Hatch (1975) researches, the writer stated the goal of each method. The goal is for students to perform all words that have been taught by the teacher.

The goal for each method is different. For Audio-lingual the purpose is to make the children able to perform „thank you‟ and „you are welcome‟. This is to acknowledge them on how to thank and give regard in English because it is essential in daily live.

(41)

Total Physical Response, the writer aim is to make the children be able to perform „stand up‟ and „sit down‟. They are expected to understand those words and can perform the action. These words can be used when they start the lesson every morning to perform greetings. This research is not designed to understand English grammar yet, just some words that are familiar with them and can be used later after the research. To claim whether the purpose of this research is fulfilled or not the writer combines his opinion with the teachers‟ opinion. And the basic idea is simply to determine the progress; whether the students are able or unable to perform the words after being taught.

(42)

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND FINDING 4.1. Analysis

In this chapter, the writer analyzed the data to make some conclusions and suggestions. The data are dialogues of teaching – learning activities. The writer gave a brief explanation about what has happened during the class, plus to transcribe the teaching – learning activities. The video recorded wass the real condition of teaching-learning activities, without any addition, deduction, schemes and still mixed with Bahasa.

The observation took place from November, 11 to 14 2013. At first, the writer wanted to take or shoot the activities all the time. But, the writer skipped it on Wednesday. Also, there were events that were not captured by the writer in order to keep the class‟ situation in a good order.

The writer displayed the full transcribed version first. The text is pure from the video and the writer took some notes when the teaching – learning activity took place. These were the raw data.

The writer made the sentence in bold mode at some dialogues which show the progress of the children learning / acquisition. These bold sentences determined the goal in each method. The findings of this research determined the suggestion in the next chapter.

(43)

The first day, (Monday 11 of November 2013) the writer just took the daily activity of children. Fortunately, the writer captured a moment when they used English.

Monday 11 of November 2013

The children sang a song about the colors in Indonesia and English. The colors inside the song were; Red Yellow Black Blue Green Pink. The transcript of the song is as follows:

Students : “… dalam bahasa Inggris, red merah, yellow kuning, black hitam, blue biru, green hijau, pink merah jambu.” (this was the song that the students sang)

Teacher : “Siap!”

Students : “Siap!” (while jumping)

Teacher : “Siap!”

Students : “Siap!” (while jumping)

The teacher then asked about numbers while showing her fingers, like making the sum of numbers, one finger pointed for one, two for two and so on.

Teacher : “bahasaInggris satu?” (while showing her finger for „one‟ mark)

Students : “one”

Then the teacher just showed her fingers and the students already knew what to do, they summed to ten.

(44)

Students : “two”

Students : “three”

Students : “four”

Students : “five”

Students : “six”

Students : “seven”

Students : “eight”

Students : “nine”

Students : “ten”

Teacher : “satu, dua, tiga”

Students : “satu, dua, tiga. One, two, three [some of the students and with a very low sound]” (the teacher wanted the students to reply it in English language)

Teacher : “Satu, dua, tiga”

Students : “satu, dua, tiga.”

Teacher : “one, two, three.”

(45)

Teacher : “kalo ibuk bilang satu, dua, tiga anak ibuk bilang bahasa Inggrisnya. Satu, dua, tiga”

Students : “one, two, three.”

Teacher : “heh, empat, lima, enam.”

Students : “four, five, six.”

Teacher : “tujuh, delapan.”

Students : “seven, eight.”

Teacher : “Sembilan, sepuluh.”

Students : “nine, ten yes.”

From the observation script above it can be concluded that the children were familiar with English. However, after the practice, they learned English words. They knew colors and could count from one to ten. After the practice the writers met with the teachers. The writer then showed the teachers some videos of teaching – learning activities with TPR and Audio-lingual methods. The teachers then agreed to adopt the methods.

Tuesday 12 of November 2013

The first method being used was Audio-lingual. The activity was to say thanks and response. In sort, saying; „thank you‟ and gave the response; „you are welcome‟. The teacher adapted behavioral technique, by repeating the words loudly. Before starting the lesson, the teacher gave a brief explanation of what they were

(46)

going to do. She said that they would learn two new English words. She explained it in Bahasa.

Teacher : “tambah 2 lagi”

Students : “Ada yang baru bu?”

Teacher : “iya tambah 2 lagi, kalo kemaren belom hapal tambah lagi gak pande- pande, lipet tangannya semua. „Thank you‟.” (the teacher wanted the students to say „thank you‟ too)

Students : “thank you” (in a very low voice) Teacher : “mana suaranya?”

Students : “thank you” (much louder now)

Teacher : “sekali lagi”

Students : “thank you”

Teacher : “sekali lagi”

Students : “thank you”

Teacher : “apa artinya? Ada yang tau?

Students : “ada! Terima kasih” (a girl answered it)

Teacher : “o… paten … ada yang tau rupanya. Terima kasih. Sekali lagi „thank you‟.”

(47)

Students : “thank you”

Teacher : “thank you” Students : “thank you” Teacher : “apa artinya?” Students : “terima kasih!”

Teacher : “terima kasih apa artinya? Bahasa Inggrisnya?” Students : “thank you” (they answered but not in cohesiveness)

Teacher : “gak denger. Rasya!” (the teacher wanted the students to be louder and she also scolded one of her student)

Students : “thank you!” (each of them answered it loudly)

Teacher : “thank…”

Students : “you”

Teacher : “artinya?”

Students : “terima kasih”

After giving the first phrase „thank you‟, the teacher moved on to the second one; „you are welcome‟. The teacher gave explanation about the phrase. She emphasized this for the students that this phrase is the answer to the previous phrase. She illustrated a condition where someone gives them a candy or something else.

(48)

In that situation they must say thanks and to response it. In short, to response your friend gratitude (thank you), you can answer it with „you are welcome‟.

Students : “you are welcome” Teacher : “apa artinya?” Students : “terima kasih”

Teacher : “terima kasih kembali / sama-sama”

In the second phrase, the students still mixed it with the first phrase, but in the fifth and the sixth attempts they had already got the meaning of each word.

The lesson from another class was using TPR method. The teacher said the words / phrase while doing the action of what she said too. The words which would be taught were „sit down‟ and „stand up‟. The role was to introduce the words to the children with an actual response of their body.

Teacher : “sit down” (while sitting down on a chair) Student : “sit down, duduk”

Teacher : “sit down”

Student : “duduk”

Teacher : “stand up” (the teacher got up) Student : “berdiri” (they got up too) Teacher : “sit down”

(49)

Student : “duduk”

Teacher : “stand up”

Student : “berdiri”

Teacher : “sit down”

Student : “duduk”

Teacher : “stand up”

Student : “berdiri”

In doing the activities, some misunderstanding occurred. The students were supposed to spell the English words not in Bahasa. From the data above it can be said that the children had already known the meaning of the words. But they missed the aim to utter the words in English.

Thursday 14 of November 2013

The writer did not come to the class on Wednesday. But the teachers there still taught the words to the students. This day was the evaluation day. The writer adapted other research on children second language acquisition and learning, proposed by Schmidt (1997) and Wagner – Gough and Hatch (1975) to determine the development of the children. They did a test in a simple conversation using the words which had been taught to them. Here is the class with the audio-lingual method.

Teacher : “saya buk, saya pak, apa terima kasih?” Students : “thank you”

(50)

Teacher : “jawabannya apa? Yang tadi baru di bilang” Students : “terima kasih”

Teacher : “iya terima kasih juga, kembali, apa jawabnya? Dah lupa?” Students : “you are welcome” (only one student)

Teacher : “you are welcome, katanya si Danar.Pande si Danar.” Students : “you are welcome” (the other said it)

Teacher : “laki-laki disini gak pande, si Danar pande dia. Apa jawabnya?

Students : “you are welcome”

Teacher : “apa jawabnya?”

Students : “you are welcome”

(Interrupted)

Teacher : “apa terima kasih?” Students : “you are welcome” (false)

Teacher : “gak denger, apa terima kasih?” Students : “you are welcome” (false)

Teacher : “terima kasih, thank …” Students : “you”

(51)

Students : “thank you”

Teacher : “terima kasih kembali” Students : “terima kasih kembali”

Teacher : “apa jadi jawabnya? Apa jawabannya?” Students : (one student mumbling something)

Teacher : “kuat Bila, apa Bila?” (the teacher wanted the student to say it loudly)

Nabila : “you are welcome” Teacher : “apa jawabnya Daffa?” Daffa : “Belcome”

Teacher : “apa belcome-belcome. Apa jawabannya?”

Students : “you are welcome” (two students answered, one by one) The teacher then asked the students who seems not saying it

Teacher : “coba Janar, apa Janar?” Janar : “… welcome”

Teacher : “gak denger, coba apa?”

Students : “you are welcome” (two students answered with a very loud voice)

(52)

Teacher : “Rizki ajalah, apa Rizki? Apa tadi? Rizki : “you are welcome”

(Interrupted)

Teacher : “hah, gak denger. Apa Tiara?

Tiara : “you are welcome” (the other student also said it)

Teacher : “hush, yang laen diem ibu nyuruh Tiara. Apa Tiara?

Tiara : “you are welcome”

Teacher : “Gilang? Apa Gilang? Gilang : “you are welcome” Teacher : “Bunga? Apa Bunga? Bunga : “you are welcome” Teacher : “Farish! Apa Farish?”

(53)

Farish : (the student did not answered) Teacher : “kan gak mau geleng-geleng”

The teacher gave some advice because some students answered it in a very soft voice

Teacher : “Jaffa. Apa Jaffa? Jaffa : “you are welcome”

Teacher : “sama –sama! Satu, dua, tiga apa?” Students : “you are welcome”

Teacher : “sekali lagi”

Students : “you are welcome” Teacher : “terima kasih”

Students : “terima kasih / thank you” (some students said „terima kasih‟ the other „thank you‟ but more were correct)

Teacher : “terima kasih” Students : “thank you”

Overall the students had understood and could use the words in social life. The avtivities in the TPR class were as follows;

Teacher : “ibu duduk bahasa Inggrisnya apa semalam? Bilang duduk, apa

(54)

Students : “sit” Teacher : “sit down” Students : “sit down” Teacher : “apa?” Students : “sit down”

Teacher : “stan…” (the teacher stand up while spell the word) Students : “stan”

Teacher : “stand up” Students : “stand up”

Teacher : “apa sekali lagi, duduk apa?” (the teacher do the „sit down‟) Students : (the students do „sit down‟ too but keep silent)

Teacher : “apa? Sit down” Students : “sit down” Teacher : “apa duduk?” Students : “sit down” Teacher : “duduk apa?

(55)

Teacher : “berdiri, apa ya berdiri. Stand…” (The teacher does the „stand

up‟)

Students : “stand” (do the „stand up‟ too) Teacher : “up”

Students : “up” Teacher : “stand up” Students : “stand up” Teacher : “apa berdiri?” Students : “stand up”

Teacher : “apa duduk?” (the teacher does „sit down‟) Students : (keep silent while do the „sit down‟ too) Teacher : “duduk apa duduk? Apa duduk? Sit…”

Students : “sit” (one student say sit down in a very soft voice)

Teacher : “iya apa Fahri?”

Students : “sit down” (more students said it)

Teacher : “iya sit down pinter. Berdiri” (does the stand up) Students : (they stand up but do not say the words)

(56)

Students : “stand up” Teacher : “stand up”

Students : “stand up”

Teacher : “ibu ulangi lagi, sit down” (while sitting down again)

Students : “sit down” (do the „sit down‟ too)

Teacher : “apa sit down?”

Students : “duduk”

Teacher : “sit down apa?”

Students : “duduk”

Teacher : “stand up” (while standing up)

Students : “stand up” („stand up‟ too)

Teacher : “apa stand up?”

Students : “berdiri”

Teacher : “duduk (the student „sit down‟) apa duduk?

Students : “sit down” (a few students answered it)

Teacher : “iya sit down.Berdiri”

Students : “stand up” (do the stand up)

(57)

Students : “sit down”

Teacher : “pinter, berdiri”

Students : “stand up”

Teacher : “pinter, sekali lagi” (the teacher just do the „sit down‟ action)

Students : “sit down”

Then, the teacher just did the „stand up‟ and „sit down‟ action without saying the word. The student said it. They repeated it twice.

The students did not understand the purpose / activity of study. They kept quiet for a long time and failed to meet the teacher expectation.

4.2. Findings

This section contains analyzed data of the research. The findings will answer the problem of this study.

Teacher : „Thank you‟.” (the teacher wanted the students to say „thank

you‟ too)

Students : “thank you” (in a very low voice)

The dialogues above are the teaching learning activities happened in the class. This class used audio-lingual method. The teacher spelled the word first then the students repeated it.

(58)

Teacher : “apa artinya? Ada yang tau?

Students : “ada! Terima kasih” (a girl answered it)

After repeating the phrases for several times, the students had learned the meaning of this phrase in Bahasa. The students were not only able to perform the phrase in English but also had known the meaning in their L1. In order be able to perform this phrase in actual conversation, the students must know the meaning.

Teacher : “thank you” Students : “thank you” Teacher : “apa artinya?” Students : “terima kasih!”

Teacher : “terima kasih apa artinya? Bahasa Inggrisnya?” Students : “thank you” (they answered but not in cohesiveness)

This time the students had been able to perform and understand the phrase. The process of mimic and memorize in audio-lingual method so far did not face any obstacle.

Students : “you are welcome” Teacher : “apa artinya?” Students : “terima kasih”

(59)

At this point, the teacher moved to another phrase „you are welcome‟ the students still mixed the meaning with both phrases. But they could spell the phrase correctly.

Teacher : “sit down” (while sitting down on a chair) Student : “sit down, duduk”

In the class that used TPR method, the teacher spelled the phrase while doing the action. The students repeated the phrase (sit down) and said the meaning / translation meaning in Bahasa (duduk). The role in TPR class was for the teacher to spell the phrase and the student response was to do the action. In the beginning the students were not obligated to say the phrase or the meaning. The response was only to do action, to perform the action of the phrase. When the teacher thought the lesson was enough, they stopped and the teacher asked the meaning of „sit down‟ in Bahasa.

Teacher : “stand up” (the teacher got up) Student : “berdiri” (they got up too)

In fact, the role of TPR method applied in this teaching-learning activity was missed. The students performed the action but they spelled the meaning of the phrase in Bahasa. They did not spell the phrase itself.

Teacher : “apa terima kasih?” Students : “thank you”

(60)

Students : “terima kasih”

Teacher : “iya terima kasih juga, kembali, apa jawabnya? Dah lupa? Students : “you are welcome” (only one student)

Teacher : “you are welcome”

Students : “you are welcome” (the other said it)

This is the evaluation days in Audio-lingual method class. The teacher asked in Bahasa then the students answered it in English. For the second phrase only one student answered it at first. The others answered it after it.

Teacher : “apa terima kasih?” Students : “you are welcome” (false)

Teacher : “gak denger, apa terima kasih?” Students : “you are welcome” (false)

The answered was not correct. The students still mixed the meaning of both phrases.

Teacher : “terima kasih, thank …” Students : “you”

Teacher : “apa terima kasih?” Students : “thank you”

(61)

Teacher : “terima kasih kembali” Students : “terima kasih kembali”

Again, the students failed to utter the phrase.

Teacher : “apa jadi jawabnya? Apa jawabannya?” Students : (one student mumbling something) Teacher : “kuat Bila, apa Bila?”

Nabila : “you are welcome” The student answered it correctly

Teacher : “apa jawabnya Daffa?” Daffa : “Belcome”

Teacher : “apa belcome-belcome. Apa jawabannya?”

Students : “you are welcome” (two students answered, one by one) This time the teacher asked the students one by one.

Teacher : “coba Janar, apa Janar?” Janar : “… welcome”

Teacher : “gak denger, coba apa?”

Students : “you are welcome” (two students answered with a very loud voice)

(62)

More students were exited with this lesson.

Teacher : “Rizki ajalah, apa Rizki? Apa tadi? Rizki : “you are welcome”

This student was able to utter the phrase correctly

Teacher : “apa si Saskia? Saskia : “you are welcome” Teacher : “apa si Kirana?” Kirana : “you are welcome” Teacher : “apa si Tiara?” Tiara : “you are welcome” Teacher : “Gilang? Apa Gilang? Gilang : “you are welcome” Teacher : “Bunga? Apa Bunga? Bunga : “you are welcome”

All students were able to utter the phrase. Only one last student did not utter it

Teacher : “Farish! Apa Farish?”

(63)

Teacher : “Jaffa. Apa Jaffa? Jaffa : “you are welcome”

Teacher : “sama – sama! Satu, dua, tiga apa?” Students : “you are welcome”

Teacher : “sekali lagi”

Students : “you are welcome” Teacher : “terima kasih”

Students : “terima kasih / thank you” (some students said „terima kasih‟ the other „thank you‟ but more were correct)

Teacher : “terimakasih” Students : “thank you”

The overall of this evaluation; the students could utter the phrase in real life and could use it in actual conversation. Later the teacher conducted a role play in which the students had to use the phrases given before.

Teacher : “ibu duduk bahasa Inggrisnya apa semalam? Bilang duduk, apa

semalem ibu bilang duduk? Sit…”

Students : “sit” Teacher : “sit down”

(64)

Students : “sit down” Teacher : “apa?” Students : “sit down”

This is the evaluation in TPR class. In the first dialogues, the teacher asked the children what was meant by „duduk‟ in English while doing the action. The children responded it but they seemed did not know the answered. Based on the dialogues above, it showed that the students did not know what to do.

Teacher : “stan…” (the teacher stand up while spell the word) Students : “stan”

Teacher : “stand up” Students : “stand up”

This time the students also failed to pronounce the phrase.

Teacher : “apa sekali lagi, duduk apa?” (the teacher do the „sit down‟) Students : (the students do „sit down‟ too but keep silent)

Teacher : “apa? Sit down”

The children did not know this phrase too. They pronounced it after the teacher said it.

Students : “sit down” Teacher : “apa duduk?”

(65)

Students : “sit down”

The children had forgotten the phrases that they had already learned in two days. In contrast with Audio-lingual method class, this class needed a long time to recover the lesson again. There was not any single student who still remembered the phrases.

Teacher : “berdiri, apa ya berdiri. Stand…” (The teacher does the „stand

up‟)

Students : “stand” (do the „stand up‟ too)

Again, the students could not perform the word.

Teacher : “up” Students : “up” Teacher : “stand up” Students : “stand up” Teacher : “apa berdiri?” Students : “stand up”

After the teacher told them again, slowly they began to understand and grasp the phrase.

Teacher : “apa duduk?” (the teacher does „sit down‟) Students : (keep silent while do the „sit down‟ too)

(66)

No one answered the teacher, the children seemed nervous and worried. One student answered it then

Teacher : “iya sit down pinter. Berdiri” (does the stand up) Students : (they stand up but do not say the words)

Teacher : “stand up” Students : “stand up”

From these dialogues in the class, the students were able to pronounce the phrases and performed the action. The teacher needed a long time to retell the lesson.

It can be concluded that the students in Audio-lingual class can acquire English better than students in TPR class. There were many factors that caused this phenomenon to happen. Those factors are listed in the next chapter as the students / children response to both methods.

(1)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

This chapter consists of conclusion and suggestion to the topic of this thesis.

5.1. Conclusion

The conclusion comes from the data analysis and findings in the previous chapters. The conclusion is to meet the problem in 1.2.

a) Which Learning Teaching Methods are more suitable for young English learners?

Based on the data analysis, findings and discussion with the teachers involved in this research, it can be argued that the audio-lingual method class is more successful in the attempts to give proper input of English language. In other words, the students in the Audio-lingual class succeeded to understand and remember the phrase given to them. In TPR class the teacher had to repeat to teach them from the beginning. The writer also quoted the teacher opinion as references. The teachers‟ role in this thesis was vital. They helped to maintain / conduct the research. And the teacher was the role model of the methods. There were two teachers and both of them gave their opinions about this research.

Regarding the data analysis and findings, the writer concluded that audio-lingual method is better applied in TKI/TPA Ad-Dirasah. The findings showed that children in audio-lingual class could utter the phrase given by the teacher. The children knew what to do and they prepare for the instruction. Desy Aryati (NUPTK

(2)

560760661300043) as the teacher in audio-lingual class said that it was a good method but difficult to use. She also used this method to taught Arabic version of saying thanks and response. This method has met the significance by giving teacher an alternative method in teaching language.

Meanwhile in TPR class was not failed at all but the teacher and students miss the order of the method. The student should not speak at all in the first stage. They supposed to respond it with physical action. Such as did the sit down and stand up. Then the second stage was to utter the phrase in English. In reality the student utter it in Bahasa. This missed order made the acquiring process became more difficult. In fact, in evaluation section the children did not know what to do. Trisna Rubiyani, as the teacher in TPR class said that the children were exited with this new way of teaching but they seem did not ready with it. The children would be more focus on it if the lesson was fun.

It can be argued that both methods are good for children. But Audio-lingual method seems simpler to adapt by the children. And the basic ideas of Audio-lingual (mimic and memorize) match with children condition to learn language in behavioral system theory.

Overall research and study show that Audio-lingual method is better applied for students at TKI/TPA AD – DIRASHA. There might be a change that TPR deal more effectiveness in other school. Both methods have weakness and advantages so an advanced research is needed to deal about this issue.

(3)

b) How children responded to both methods?

The children‟s response in both languages teaching methods is essential in the attempted to get a successful result.

In the Audio-lingual method class the students seemed exited to learn something new at first. But then they lost their focus and there were many „interrupted‟ sections in Audio-lingual class. To describe the possibly factors that happened in the class the writer adds the teacher perspectives. For Audio-lingual method the experience mentioned by the teacher and the writer observation are:

- The teacher was familiar with teaching simple words. Such as; kinds of color and numbers. But, this was the first time she taught a phrase in foreign language with a meaning. Basically, she is not an English teacher and just knows English a little.

- The students seemed to get bored when the lesson took place. They did other things, like talking to their friends.

In TPR method class the students focused on the lesson. No „interrupted events‟ during the class. The student was interested in TPR. They eagerly took part in the actions like; “stand up” and “sit down”. In TPR class the experience mentioned by the teacher and the writer observation is as follows;

- The teacher said that the methods might help the students to understand English better. But, like the other teacher. It was her first time using TPR in a class. And there was a wrong procedure in the TPR class teaching – learning activity. The students did not practice to utter the phrases in English.

(4)

- The students did not understand the instruction of TPR well.

5.2. Suggestion

The writer gave the suggestions based on the conclusion of the thesis and the actual experienced during his research in the kindergarten. The audio-lingual class should be more attractive, by adding role play. Not only repeated words given by the teacher. For example of saying thanks and respond; the teacher asked one student to give something to her/his friend. Then his/her friend should say „thank you‟ and the other one should say „you are welcome‟. This kind of role play can be adapted in other phrase pr words. The main problem of this method was children anxiety during the lesson. Because of that, an attractive and fun way can be used to interpret the method.

The TPR class actually fit with the children. Teacher who used this method should tell the class order first. The students should not speak in Bahasa and response it only in action, for example. And the most important thing the teacher should remember the class order and conduct the class from the beginning until the end.

(5)

REFERENCES

Aini, Siti Noor. 2013. Method of introduction of English Beginner as a Second Language for Children 4-5 years old (Kindergarten)

Asher, James. J. 2003. Learning Another Language Through Actions

Bachrie, Fauzan. 2011. Students` Ability in Using Must and Have To for The Eighth Grade

Bialystok, Ellen & Barry Miller. 1999. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2. England: Cambridge University Press

Djadjasudarman, Fatimah. 1993. Metode Linguistik; Ancangan Metode Penelitian & Kajian. Bandung: Eresco

Ellis, Rod. 1997. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Jendra, Made Iwan Irawan. 2010. Sociolinguistic; The Study of Societies‟ Languages.

Krashen, Stephen D. 1988. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. United Kingdom: Prentice-Hall International

Krashen, Stephen D. 1995. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. United Kingdom: Pergamon Press Ltd

Miles, Matthew B. and A. Michael Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. New York: Sage publication

Parera, Jos Daniel. 1986. Linguistik Edukasional. Jakarta: Erlangga

Tarigan, Henry Guntur. 1988. Pengajaran Kedwibahasaan. Bandung : Angkasa

Unsworth, Len. 2000. Researching Language in School and Communities. London: Cassel

(6)

October 2012. Pos Kota News. Retrieved from

http://www.poskotanews.com/2012/10/11 (September 2013)

VOA Indonesia. Retrieved from http://www.voaindonesia.com/content (September 2013)

Wall Street English Thailand. Retrieved from http://www.wallstreetenglish.in.th (February 2014)

Radio Australia. Retrieved from http://www.radioaustralia.net.au (February 2014)

Comparative Analysis between Audio-lingual and Total Physical Response Methods in English Language Learning for Kindergarten Students