IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN SPEAKING ENGLISH USING TALK SHOW TECHNIQUE
IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN SPEAKING
ENGLISH USING TALK SHOW TECHNIQUE
A RESEARCH ARTICLE
By:
FIPPI APRILA
F1021131034
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
LANGUAGES AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHING TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
TANJUNGPURA UNIVERSITY
PONTIANAK
2017
1
IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN SPEAKING ENGLISH
USING TALK SHOW TECHNIQUE
Fippi Aprila, Eni Rosnija, Yanti Sri Rezeki
English Education Study Program FKIP Untan Pontianak
Email: fippiaprila@gmail.com
Abstract
This research was done to know how the use of Talk Show technique can improve
students’ participation in speaking English. The form of this research was a classroom
action research, in which the subject is the first grade students (X IPA 1) of SMA N 1
Sungai Raya in academic year 2016/2017. The data were collected using observation
checklist, field notes, and recorders. The students’ participation were observed,
calculated, analyzed, and classified. The result of this research showed that the students’
participation in each cycle has improved during their discussion and performance of
their talk shows. The improvement can also be seen through the percentages: 47% (poor)
for discussion and 85% (excellent) for performance on the first cycle and improved again
to 67% (good) for discussion and 84% (excellent) for performance on the second cycle. In
conclusion, the findings from the observation checklist and field notes confirmed that the
use of Talk Show technique can improve students’ participation.
Keywords: Participation, Speaking English, Talk Show Technique
Abstrak
Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaplikasian teknik Talk Show
dapat meningkatkan partisipasi siswa dalam berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Bentuk dari
penelitian ini adalah penelitian tindakan kelas, yang mana subjeknya adalah siswa kelas
satu (X IPA 1) di SMA N 1 Sungai Raya pada tahun ajaran 2016/2017. Data
dikumpulkan menggunakan daftar observasi, catatan lapangan, dan alat rekam.
Partisipasi siswa diobservasi, dihitung, dianalisis, dan diklasifikasikan. Hasil dari
penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa partisipasi siswa pada setiap siklus meningkat pada
saat diskusi dan penampilan talk show mereka. Peningkatannya juga dapat dilihat
melalui persentasenya: 47% (buruk) untuk diskusi dan 85% (luar biasa) pada
penampilan di siklus pertama dan meningkat lagi menjadi 67% (bagus) untuk diskusi dan
84% (luar biasa) pada penampilan di siklus kedua. Kesimpulannya, hasil temuan dari
daftar observasi dan catatan lapangan mengkonfirmasi bahwa penggunaan teknik Talk
Show dapat meningkatkan partisipasi siswa.
Kata Kunci: Partisipasi, Berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris, Teknik Talk Show
The
tenth
grade
students,
specifically at X IPA 1, of SMA N 1
Sungai Raya in academic year
2016/2017 did not participate actively in
speaking English. The problems are that:
(1) some students did not want to speak
up even when they were pointed directly
by the teacher, (2) they were afraid of
making mistakes, (3) some students
could not speak in English due to
limited vocabularies, and (4) some
students were not interested in learning
English. These problems had caused the
students to be very passive in speaking
English. The students had to participate
in speaking actively in the teaching and
learning process to succeed in speaking
class. Thus, it is important to improve
2
their participation, which can be done by
using certain techniques.
The technique that was used in
this research to improve students‟
participation is Talk Show technique. In
talk show technique, all students have to
participate in the activity. Each student
plays a role. Klippel (1985) divided the
roles in talk show technique into three:
hosts, guests, and audiences. All of the
roles played by the students will open
opportunities to speak within their
groups. In addition, Nimehchisalem
(2013) stated that this technique is
advantageous for engaging students to
participate. They will be able to practice
their speaking skill in the discussion
stage and in the performance stage.
They will also be able to directly apply
the new knowledge. The use of this
technique is aimed to make students
have better confidence to speak up, to
maximize students‟ potential to be more
active, to enhance their participation by
asking questions, offering ideas, giving
suggestions, and even listening to their
teacher and peers. Thus, every student
can participate actively in the learning
process using this technique.
A class is considered working
well when the students participate in the
entire process of learning. Murray and
Lang (1997) stated “students who
participate actively in the classroom will
in fact learn the subject matter more
effectively than students that are taught
in the traditional lecture mode…”.
Students‟ participation can be assessed
by observation using rubrics. Czekanski
and Wolf (2013, p. 6) stated “rubrics
and other guidelines provide details of
performance expectations in courses,
and include a range of marks for levels
of class participation”.
There are some objectives that can
be used for assessing participation.
Based on Mustapa and Abd Rahman‟s
(2011) opinion, they are: 1) Initiate
interaction whenever appropriate, 2)
Spontaneity, 3) Not afraid to challenge
others‟ ideas, 4) Able to defend own
ideas, 5) Elaborate answers, 6) Show
confidence, 7) High interaction with
classmates, 8) Tend to participate to
help classmates out, 9) Interact with
teacher or peers when they need help,
and 10) Pay attention.
The students are considered able
to initiate interaction when they take any
opportunity to share their ideas for their
talk show. They can be spontaneous in
making their talk show by giving
nonverbal
interactions
naturally.
Mustapha and Abd Rahman (2011, p.
154) stated “they used their hands, head
or facial expression to show agreement
or disagreement with what was being
discussed in class”. In addition, their
questions or feedback can also be
spontaneous (Mustapha & Abd Rahman,
2011). The students can participate
actively by asking for others‟
clarification of their opinions or ideas
politely to show that they are not afraid
to challenge others‟ ideas. When the
students convey their opinions, they can
also elaborate their opinions to make
them clear. Mustapha and Abd Rahman
(2011, p. 151) stated “they can defend
their ideas by explaining the logic
behind their ideas and share with the
class their thought processes”.
In discussion and performance of
their talk show, the students should also
show confidence. They do not hesitate
or rush to finish answering the question
which shows confidence and poise
(Mustapha & Abd Rahman, 2011). The
other objective is that the students show
high interaction with classmates. They
can share their thoughts with their peers,
ask questions, and give verbal or nonverbal responds. The students also have
to participate to help classmates out by
helping them to speak in English,
helping them with vocabularies and
grammar, and also helping their peers
about their pronunciation. They can
participate actively by interacting with
teacher or peers when they need help.
3
They can ask teachers or their peers at
times of difficulty in making their talk
show. The students also must pay
attention to their classmates and teacher
by listening or even taking notes. These
are the indicators to show that students
participate actively in the classroom.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research was done as a
classroom
action
research.
The
researcher did this research within two
cycles. Each cycle consists of four
stages: plan, act, observe, and reflect.
The subject of this research is the tenth
grade students of SMA Negeri 1 Sungai
Raya in academic year 2016/2017,
specifically at Class X IPA 1. To be
able
to
analyze
the
students‟
participation
improvement,
the
researcher wanted to get qualitative data
about students‟ participation in speaking
activities. In this research, the
observation was done by using
observation checklist, field notes, audio
recorders and video recorders to help the
researcher collect the data easily. The
observation checklist was used to see the
students‟ participation during the
teaching-learning process using Talk
Show technique. The field note was
used to help the researcher have better
insights and remember important details
of
what happened during the
observation. The recordings were used
for further reflection for the researcher
in each cycle. The specification of the
observation checklist used by the
researcher is as follows:
Table 1. Specifications for Discussion
Objectives
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
Spontaneity
Not afraid to challenge others‟ ideas
Indicators
Share their ideas
Giving verbal or nonverbal interactions
Asking for other‟s ideas/opinions
clarifications
Able to defend own ideas
Can answer or give reasons about their
ideas/opinions
Elaborate answers
Can explain and elaborate their or
others‟ opinions
Show confidence
Not hesitate or rush
High interaction with classmates
Share their opinions with their peers
Ask questions to their peers
Give verbal or non-verbal respond
Tend to participate to help classmates out
Help their peers to speak in English
Help their peers to find vocabularies in
English
Help their peers about their grammar
Help
their
peers
about
their
pronunciation
Interact with teacher or peers when they
Ask teachers at times of difficulty
need help
Ask peers at times of difficulty
Pay attention
Listen to others when they talk
Take notes of teachers‟ lecture
Modified from Mustapha and Abd Rahman (2011)
4
Table 2. Specifications for Performance
Objectives
Indicators
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
Share their ideas
Spontaneity
Giving verbal or nonverbal interactions
Show confidence
Not hesitate or rush
High interaction with classmates
Talk to their group based on their roles
Pay attention
Listen to others when they talk
Modified from Mustapha and Abd Rahman (2011)
The data gathered from recordings
Note:
K = The percentage of active
and field notes were used to help the
participation in each activity
researcher analyze and score the
A = The number of students who
students in the observation checklist.
actively participates
The collected data from the observation
N = The number of whole
checklist in this research would be
students
analyzed by counting the percentage
through proportion technique formula as
The result then will be categorized
as follows:
follows:
...................... (1)
Table 3. Percentage Qualification
Students‟ score
80 – 100
60 – 79
50 – 59
0 – 49
Category
A
B
C
D
This research involved the subject
teacher as the observer in the classroom
activities, and the researcher as the
teacher in the classroom activities.
RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS
Result
The data gathered are divided into
two categories: discussion stage and
performance stage, where both of the
categories are included in each cycle.
The material for the first cycle is simple
past tense, while for the second cycle is
adverb of time. Based on the
observation, it is proved that students‟
participation in speaking English
improved by using talk show technique.
The improvement is described as
follows:
Qualification
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
(Modified from Heaton (1990))
In the first cycle, most of the
students were still passive on the
discussion stage. On the other hand, on
the performance stage, the students
mostly participated actively. Half of the
students in the class interacted with each
other to make their talk shows‟
conversations by asking and giving
opinions. For example, in discussion of
Group 2, the students asked and gave
their opinions about their talk show‟s
topic:
An: “What is the topic today?”
Ar: “I think eer..”
N: “About trending topic!”
Although some of the students did
not contribute in offering ideas, they
agreed with their friends‟ opinions and
also paid attention. The students also
confidently challenged and defended
5
each other‟ opinions. The students also
could
elaborate
their
answers.
Furthermore, the students showed high
interaction with classmates by giving
and asking opinions. They also asked
the teacher when they felt confused
about certain things, like each role duty
in their talk show and how to make the
conversations because some of the
students were still confused on how a
talk show should be. The students also
helped their team mates by searching for
examples in the internet and helped
them with vocabularies.
When the students performed,
most of the students still brought some
notes to help them. This also made some
students‟ pronunciation was terrible.
However, there were also some students
who did not bring any notes and could
perform well and spontaneously.
The percentage of students‟
participation on the first cycle based on
the observation checklist is as follows:
Table 4. First Cycle Percentage
Objectives
Discussion
Performance
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
48%
93 %
Spontaneity
Not afraid to challenge others‟ ideas
45%
24%
76 %
-
Able to defend own ideas
38%
-
Elaborated answers
41%
-
Showed confidence
59%
76 %
High interaction with classmates
55%
86%
Tended to participate to help classmates out
34%
-
Interacted with teacher or peers when they need
help
28%
-
Paid attention
93%
93%
Overall, the students‟ participation
in discussion stage of first cycle was
47%, which is categorized as poor. By
contrast, the students‟ participation in
performance stage of first cycle was
85%, which is categorized as excellent.
In the second cycle, most of the
students participated more actively
compared with in the first cycle on the
discussion stage. Most of the students
interacted more actively to make their
talk shows‟ conversations by asking and
giving opinions. The students also could
elaborate their opinions. For example, in
discussion of Group 2, a student
elaborated her opinion by saying:
E: “I mean you are an actress, it‟s
about movies that you like not
movies you are in.”
Sometimes, when they didn‟t
know the vocabulary they looked up
their dictionaries or asked their friends.
For example, a student asked it by
saying “What‟s „bintang tamu‟ in
English?” or like “Laziyess? (Laziness)”
Then their friends told them the meaning
6
and even spelled some vocabularies for
their friends. The students also
challenged and defended their opinions
bravely. They also interacted with the
teacher to ask for help in vocabularies,
grammar and ideas.
When the students performed,
there were still some students who
brought notes. However, they didn‟t use
them to merely read, but to be glanced
at. Despites so, some students could also
perform without any notes. The
students‟ also showed more confidence
compared to the first cycle by speaking
louder and looked at their classmates
when they talked. They were also being
spontaneous by chanting some students‟
names, clapping when the guests came
in, and other nonverbal gestures like
hugging the guests, waving hands, and
laughing. The percentage of students‟
participation on the second cycle based
on the observation checklist is as
follows:
Table 5. Second Cycle Percentage
Objectives
Discussion
Performance
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
86%
86%
Spontaneity
86%
62%
Not afraid to challenge others‟ ideas
52%
-
Able to defend own ideas
59%
-
Elaborated answers
59%
-
Showed confidence
86%
93%
High interaction with classmates
52%
86%
Tended to participate to help classmates out
55%
-
Interacted with teacher or peers when they
need help
48%
-
Paid attention
90%
93%
Overall, the students‟ participation
in discussion stage was 67%, which is
categorized as good. By contrast, the
students‟ participation in performance
stage was 84%, which is categorized as
excellent. It means that the students
participate actively both in their
performance and discussion.
Discussions
In this study, the researcher found
that Talk Show improved students‟
participation in speaking. During their
discussion, some students in their groups
were still chit-chatting with their
classmates and did not fully pay
attention. Some of them even were still
playing with others, but only for a brief
time. Despites the mischief behaviors of
some students, the other students
showed good attitude and participated
actively in the activity. They asked and
gave opinions within groups, asked
friends from other groups about things
7
they didn‟t know, looked up for
examples of Talk Show as their
references, looked up e-dictionary
(Google Translate) to help them making
their talk shows dialogues. This is
aligned with Nimehchisalem (2013)
statement planning of conducting their
talk shows. Although sometimes the
students still talk in their first language,
the students frequently tried to speak in
English for short replies, like „yes‟ and
„no‟.
On the performance stage, the
students were enthusiastic to show their
talk shows and to watch their friends‟
talk shows. Most of them were being
spontaneous by giving small comments
and clapped hands in each show. This is
also aligned with Nimehchisalem‟
(2013) statement that every student also
may add spontaneous gestures, small
jokes, and words in their performances.
From the field notes taken by the
observer,
most
students
show
enthusiasm in learning English by using
Talk Show technique. This is in line
with Klippel‟s (1985) theory that Talk
show technique is guided by the
intention to achieve effective language
learning situations.
According to the observation
checklist of first cycle, the students‟
participation in discussion stage is
categorized as poor. Meanwhile, the
students‟ participation in performance
stage is categorized as excellent. In
contrast, in the second cycle, the
students‟ participation in discussion
stage is categorized as good and the
students‟ participation in performance
stage is categorized as excellent. On the
first cycle, 47% of the students
participate actively in the discussion
stage and 85% of the students participate
actively in the performance stage. In
which, this result shows that only some
students who participate actively.
However, in the second cycle, the result
shows students participation has
improved again. It is shown that 67% of
the students participate actively in the
discussion stage and 84% of the students
participate actively in the performance
stage.
Each cycle improvement can be
seen in the following charts:
Figure 1. Students’ Participation in First Cycle
100%
Percentage
80%
93%
93%93%
86%
76%
76%
60% 48% 45%
38% 41%
40%
24%
20%
0% 0% 0%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
59% 55%
34%
Discussion
28%
Performance
6
7
Criterion Number
0%
0%
8
9
10
8
Percentage
Figure 2. Students’ Participation in Second Cycle
93% 86%
86%
100% 86%
86% 86%
80%
62%
52%
60%
59% 59%
93%
90%
52% 55% 48%
40%
Discussion
20%
0%
0%
0%
3
4
5
0%
0%
8
9
Performance
0%
1
2
6
7
10
Criterion Number
The overall results indicated that
the
students‟
participation
has
significantly improved in speaking using
Talk Show technique. The findings
confirmed
the
previous
study
(Nimehchisalem, 2013) that Talk Show
is advantageous for engaging students to
participate in speaking class. In
conclusion, the researcher has answered
the research problems by describing the
teaching and learning process using Talk
Show technique.
CONCLUSIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS
Conclusions
The researcher concludes that: 1)
Talk Show technique improves students‟
participation in speaking. It can be seen
from the percentage 47 % and 85% on
the first cycle and improved to 67% and
84% on the second cycle, 2) Talk Show
technique
improves
students‟
participation in students‟ discussion by
writing their conversations for their talk
shows, 3) Talk Show technique
improves students‟ participation in
students‟ talk show performances by
having the students to talk in English to
each other like in a talk show, and 4)
Students participated actively in learning
English using Talk Show technique and
showed enthusiasm in performing their
talk shows.
In conclusion, the students‟
participation has improved as shown in
the first and second cycle. Therefore, the
action hypothesis that the students‟
participation will improve during the
teaching and learning process using talk
show technique is proved correct.
Suggestions
Based on this study, the researcher
would like to propose some suggestions
to improve teaching and learning
process,
especially
in
students‟
participation. They are: 1) tell the
students
beforehand
that
their
participation in the class activities will
be graded, 2) write down the procedures
of Talk Show technique and the
activities that students should do on the
white
board
to
help
students
understanding it, 3) make more specific
allocation of time for each activity, and
stay strict, 4) give warning or
punishment to students who are being
disruptive towards other groups, 5)
approach the students when they are
working in groups to give them chances
to ask the teacher about what they don‟t
know.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bean, J. C., & Peterson, D. (1998).
Grading classroom participation.
New Directions for Teaching
and Learning, 33-40.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Teaching by
principles:
An
interactive
approach to language pedagogy
(2nd ed.). New York: Pearson
ESL.
9
Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research
in language English teaching: A
guide for practitioners. New
York: Routledge.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K.
(2000). Research methods in
education.
New
York:
Routledge Falmer.
Cremin, T. (2009). Teaching English
creatively. New York, United
States of America: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Education
research (4th ed.). Boston:
Pearson Education Inc.
Czekanski, K. E., & Wolf, Z. R. (2013).
Encouraging and evaluating
class participation. Journal of
University Teaching & Learning
Practice, X(1), 7-21.
Ferrance, E. (2000). Action reserach.
New York: LAB Brown
University.
Guillemin,
M.
(2014,
October).
Assessing class participation:
What, why and how? Retrieved
from Teaching and Learning
Quality Assurance Committee
(TALQAC):
http://arts.unimelb.edu.au/__dat
a/assets/pdf_file/0006/1722399/
assessing-class-participation.pdf
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of
English language teaching (3rd
ed.). New York: Longman Inc.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of
English language teaching (4th
ed.).
Harlow:
Pearson
Education.
Harmin, M., & Toth, M. (2016).
Inspiring active learning: A
complete handbook for today's
teachers. Alexandria, Virginia:
Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Heaton, J. B. (1990). Writing English
language tests. New York:
Longman Inc.
Howard, J. (2002). Do college students
participate more in discussion in
traditional delivery courses or in
interactive
telecourses?:
A
preliminary comparison. The
Journal of Higher Education,
764-780.
Hughes, A. (1996). Testing for language
teachers. Cambridge, Great
Britain: Press Syndicate of the
University of Cambridge.
Jeanette. (2001). Teaching English as a
second or foreign language (3rd
ed.). (M. Celce-Murcia, Ed.)
Boston,
U.S.A.:
Thomson
Learning Inc.
Klippel, F. (1985). Keep talking:
Communiative fluency activities
for language teaching. Avon:
Press
Syndicate
of
the
University of Cambridge.
Liu, J. (2001). Asian students’
classroom
communication
patterns in U.S. universities: An
emic perspective. Wesport CT,
USA: Greenwood Publishing
Group, Inc.
Mappiasse, S. S., & Johari, A. B.
(2014). Evaluation of English as
a foreign language and its
curriculum in indonesia: a
review.
English
Language
Teaching Journal, VII, 113-122.
Maznevski, M. L. (1996, January).
Grading Class Participation.
Charlottesville: University of
Virginia.
Mukminin, A., Masbirorotni, Noprival,
Sutarno, Arif, N., & Maimunah.
(2015). EFL speaking anxiety
among senior high school
students
and
policy
recommendation. Journal of
Education and Learning, IX(3),
217-225.
Murray, H. G., & Lang, M. (1997).
Teaching and learning in higher
education. Western Ontario:
Newsletter of the Society for
Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education.
Mustapha, S. M. (2010). Understanding
classroom interaction: A case
10
study of international students‟
classroom participation at one of
the colleges in Malaysia.
International Journal for the
Advancement of Science & Arts,
I(2), 91-99.
Mustapha, S. M., & Abd Rahman, N. S.
(2011). Classroom participation
patterns: A case study of
malaysian
undergraduate
students. International Journal
for Educational Studies, III(2),
145-158.
Nation, I. S., & Newton, J. (2009).
Teaching ESL / EFL listening
and speaking. New York:
Routledge.
Nimehchisalem, V. (2013, September).
The talk show method in ESL
classroom. Voices in Asia
Journal 2013, 1(1), 58-71.
Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching
listening and speaking from
theory to practice. New York,
United States of America:
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1999).
Approaches and methods in
langauge teaching. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Rocca, K. A. (2010, April). Student
participation in the college
classroom
an
extended
multidisciplinary
literature
review.
Communication
Education, 185-213.
Tomal, D. R. (2003). Action Research
for Educatord. Oxford, U.K:
The
Scarecrow
Press.
ENGLISH USING TALK SHOW TECHNIQUE
A RESEARCH ARTICLE
By:
FIPPI APRILA
F1021131034
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
LANGUAGES AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHING TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
TANJUNGPURA UNIVERSITY
PONTIANAK
2017
1
IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PARTICIPATION IN SPEAKING ENGLISH
USING TALK SHOW TECHNIQUE
Fippi Aprila, Eni Rosnija, Yanti Sri Rezeki
English Education Study Program FKIP Untan Pontianak
Email: fippiaprila@gmail.com
Abstract
This research was done to know how the use of Talk Show technique can improve
students’ participation in speaking English. The form of this research was a classroom
action research, in which the subject is the first grade students (X IPA 1) of SMA N 1
Sungai Raya in academic year 2016/2017. The data were collected using observation
checklist, field notes, and recorders. The students’ participation were observed,
calculated, analyzed, and classified. The result of this research showed that the students’
participation in each cycle has improved during their discussion and performance of
their talk shows. The improvement can also be seen through the percentages: 47% (poor)
for discussion and 85% (excellent) for performance on the first cycle and improved again
to 67% (good) for discussion and 84% (excellent) for performance on the second cycle. In
conclusion, the findings from the observation checklist and field notes confirmed that the
use of Talk Show technique can improve students’ participation.
Keywords: Participation, Speaking English, Talk Show Technique
Abstrak
Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaplikasian teknik Talk Show
dapat meningkatkan partisipasi siswa dalam berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Bentuk dari
penelitian ini adalah penelitian tindakan kelas, yang mana subjeknya adalah siswa kelas
satu (X IPA 1) di SMA N 1 Sungai Raya pada tahun ajaran 2016/2017. Data
dikumpulkan menggunakan daftar observasi, catatan lapangan, dan alat rekam.
Partisipasi siswa diobservasi, dihitung, dianalisis, dan diklasifikasikan. Hasil dari
penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa partisipasi siswa pada setiap siklus meningkat pada
saat diskusi dan penampilan talk show mereka. Peningkatannya juga dapat dilihat
melalui persentasenya: 47% (buruk) untuk diskusi dan 85% (luar biasa) pada
penampilan di siklus pertama dan meningkat lagi menjadi 67% (bagus) untuk diskusi dan
84% (luar biasa) pada penampilan di siklus kedua. Kesimpulannya, hasil temuan dari
daftar observasi dan catatan lapangan mengkonfirmasi bahwa penggunaan teknik Talk
Show dapat meningkatkan partisipasi siswa.
Kata Kunci: Partisipasi, Berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris, Teknik Talk Show
The
tenth
grade
students,
specifically at X IPA 1, of SMA N 1
Sungai Raya in academic year
2016/2017 did not participate actively in
speaking English. The problems are that:
(1) some students did not want to speak
up even when they were pointed directly
by the teacher, (2) they were afraid of
making mistakes, (3) some students
could not speak in English due to
limited vocabularies, and (4) some
students were not interested in learning
English. These problems had caused the
students to be very passive in speaking
English. The students had to participate
in speaking actively in the teaching and
learning process to succeed in speaking
class. Thus, it is important to improve
2
their participation, which can be done by
using certain techniques.
The technique that was used in
this research to improve students‟
participation is Talk Show technique. In
talk show technique, all students have to
participate in the activity. Each student
plays a role. Klippel (1985) divided the
roles in talk show technique into three:
hosts, guests, and audiences. All of the
roles played by the students will open
opportunities to speak within their
groups. In addition, Nimehchisalem
(2013) stated that this technique is
advantageous for engaging students to
participate. They will be able to practice
their speaking skill in the discussion
stage and in the performance stage.
They will also be able to directly apply
the new knowledge. The use of this
technique is aimed to make students
have better confidence to speak up, to
maximize students‟ potential to be more
active, to enhance their participation by
asking questions, offering ideas, giving
suggestions, and even listening to their
teacher and peers. Thus, every student
can participate actively in the learning
process using this technique.
A class is considered working
well when the students participate in the
entire process of learning. Murray and
Lang (1997) stated “students who
participate actively in the classroom will
in fact learn the subject matter more
effectively than students that are taught
in the traditional lecture mode…”.
Students‟ participation can be assessed
by observation using rubrics. Czekanski
and Wolf (2013, p. 6) stated “rubrics
and other guidelines provide details of
performance expectations in courses,
and include a range of marks for levels
of class participation”.
There are some objectives that can
be used for assessing participation.
Based on Mustapa and Abd Rahman‟s
(2011) opinion, they are: 1) Initiate
interaction whenever appropriate, 2)
Spontaneity, 3) Not afraid to challenge
others‟ ideas, 4) Able to defend own
ideas, 5) Elaborate answers, 6) Show
confidence, 7) High interaction with
classmates, 8) Tend to participate to
help classmates out, 9) Interact with
teacher or peers when they need help,
and 10) Pay attention.
The students are considered able
to initiate interaction when they take any
opportunity to share their ideas for their
talk show. They can be spontaneous in
making their talk show by giving
nonverbal
interactions
naturally.
Mustapha and Abd Rahman (2011, p.
154) stated “they used their hands, head
or facial expression to show agreement
or disagreement with what was being
discussed in class”. In addition, their
questions or feedback can also be
spontaneous (Mustapha & Abd Rahman,
2011). The students can participate
actively by asking for others‟
clarification of their opinions or ideas
politely to show that they are not afraid
to challenge others‟ ideas. When the
students convey their opinions, they can
also elaborate their opinions to make
them clear. Mustapha and Abd Rahman
(2011, p. 151) stated “they can defend
their ideas by explaining the logic
behind their ideas and share with the
class their thought processes”.
In discussion and performance of
their talk show, the students should also
show confidence. They do not hesitate
or rush to finish answering the question
which shows confidence and poise
(Mustapha & Abd Rahman, 2011). The
other objective is that the students show
high interaction with classmates. They
can share their thoughts with their peers,
ask questions, and give verbal or nonverbal responds. The students also have
to participate to help classmates out by
helping them to speak in English,
helping them with vocabularies and
grammar, and also helping their peers
about their pronunciation. They can
participate actively by interacting with
teacher or peers when they need help.
3
They can ask teachers or their peers at
times of difficulty in making their talk
show. The students also must pay
attention to their classmates and teacher
by listening or even taking notes. These
are the indicators to show that students
participate actively in the classroom.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research was done as a
classroom
action
research.
The
researcher did this research within two
cycles. Each cycle consists of four
stages: plan, act, observe, and reflect.
The subject of this research is the tenth
grade students of SMA Negeri 1 Sungai
Raya in academic year 2016/2017,
specifically at Class X IPA 1. To be
able
to
analyze
the
students‟
participation
improvement,
the
researcher wanted to get qualitative data
about students‟ participation in speaking
activities. In this research, the
observation was done by using
observation checklist, field notes, audio
recorders and video recorders to help the
researcher collect the data easily. The
observation checklist was used to see the
students‟ participation during the
teaching-learning process using Talk
Show technique. The field note was
used to help the researcher have better
insights and remember important details
of
what happened during the
observation. The recordings were used
for further reflection for the researcher
in each cycle. The specification of the
observation checklist used by the
researcher is as follows:
Table 1. Specifications for Discussion
Objectives
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
Spontaneity
Not afraid to challenge others‟ ideas
Indicators
Share their ideas
Giving verbal or nonverbal interactions
Asking for other‟s ideas/opinions
clarifications
Able to defend own ideas
Can answer or give reasons about their
ideas/opinions
Elaborate answers
Can explain and elaborate their or
others‟ opinions
Show confidence
Not hesitate or rush
High interaction with classmates
Share their opinions with their peers
Ask questions to their peers
Give verbal or non-verbal respond
Tend to participate to help classmates out
Help their peers to speak in English
Help their peers to find vocabularies in
English
Help their peers about their grammar
Help
their
peers
about
their
pronunciation
Interact with teacher or peers when they
Ask teachers at times of difficulty
need help
Ask peers at times of difficulty
Pay attention
Listen to others when they talk
Take notes of teachers‟ lecture
Modified from Mustapha and Abd Rahman (2011)
4
Table 2. Specifications for Performance
Objectives
Indicators
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
Share their ideas
Spontaneity
Giving verbal or nonverbal interactions
Show confidence
Not hesitate or rush
High interaction with classmates
Talk to their group based on their roles
Pay attention
Listen to others when they talk
Modified from Mustapha and Abd Rahman (2011)
The data gathered from recordings
Note:
K = The percentage of active
and field notes were used to help the
participation in each activity
researcher analyze and score the
A = The number of students who
students in the observation checklist.
actively participates
The collected data from the observation
N = The number of whole
checklist in this research would be
students
analyzed by counting the percentage
through proportion technique formula as
The result then will be categorized
as follows:
follows:
...................... (1)
Table 3. Percentage Qualification
Students‟ score
80 – 100
60 – 79
50 – 59
0 – 49
Category
A
B
C
D
This research involved the subject
teacher as the observer in the classroom
activities, and the researcher as the
teacher in the classroom activities.
RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS
Result
The data gathered are divided into
two categories: discussion stage and
performance stage, where both of the
categories are included in each cycle.
The material for the first cycle is simple
past tense, while for the second cycle is
adverb of time. Based on the
observation, it is proved that students‟
participation in speaking English
improved by using talk show technique.
The improvement is described as
follows:
Qualification
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
(Modified from Heaton (1990))
In the first cycle, most of the
students were still passive on the
discussion stage. On the other hand, on
the performance stage, the students
mostly participated actively. Half of the
students in the class interacted with each
other to make their talk shows‟
conversations by asking and giving
opinions. For example, in discussion of
Group 2, the students asked and gave
their opinions about their talk show‟s
topic:
An: “What is the topic today?”
Ar: “I think eer..”
N: “About trending topic!”
Although some of the students did
not contribute in offering ideas, they
agreed with their friends‟ opinions and
also paid attention. The students also
confidently challenged and defended
5
each other‟ opinions. The students also
could
elaborate
their
answers.
Furthermore, the students showed high
interaction with classmates by giving
and asking opinions. They also asked
the teacher when they felt confused
about certain things, like each role duty
in their talk show and how to make the
conversations because some of the
students were still confused on how a
talk show should be. The students also
helped their team mates by searching for
examples in the internet and helped
them with vocabularies.
When the students performed,
most of the students still brought some
notes to help them. This also made some
students‟ pronunciation was terrible.
However, there were also some students
who did not bring any notes and could
perform well and spontaneously.
The percentage of students‟
participation on the first cycle based on
the observation checklist is as follows:
Table 4. First Cycle Percentage
Objectives
Discussion
Performance
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
48%
93 %
Spontaneity
Not afraid to challenge others‟ ideas
45%
24%
76 %
-
Able to defend own ideas
38%
-
Elaborated answers
41%
-
Showed confidence
59%
76 %
High interaction with classmates
55%
86%
Tended to participate to help classmates out
34%
-
Interacted with teacher or peers when they need
help
28%
-
Paid attention
93%
93%
Overall, the students‟ participation
in discussion stage of first cycle was
47%, which is categorized as poor. By
contrast, the students‟ participation in
performance stage of first cycle was
85%, which is categorized as excellent.
In the second cycle, most of the
students participated more actively
compared with in the first cycle on the
discussion stage. Most of the students
interacted more actively to make their
talk shows‟ conversations by asking and
giving opinions. The students also could
elaborate their opinions. For example, in
discussion of Group 2, a student
elaborated her opinion by saying:
E: “I mean you are an actress, it‟s
about movies that you like not
movies you are in.”
Sometimes, when they didn‟t
know the vocabulary they looked up
their dictionaries or asked their friends.
For example, a student asked it by
saying “What‟s „bintang tamu‟ in
English?” or like “Laziyess? (Laziness)”
Then their friends told them the meaning
6
and even spelled some vocabularies for
their friends. The students also
challenged and defended their opinions
bravely. They also interacted with the
teacher to ask for help in vocabularies,
grammar and ideas.
When the students performed,
there were still some students who
brought notes. However, they didn‟t use
them to merely read, but to be glanced
at. Despites so, some students could also
perform without any notes. The
students‟ also showed more confidence
compared to the first cycle by speaking
louder and looked at their classmates
when they talked. They were also being
spontaneous by chanting some students‟
names, clapping when the guests came
in, and other nonverbal gestures like
hugging the guests, waving hands, and
laughing. The percentage of students‟
participation on the second cycle based
on the observation checklist is as
follows:
Table 5. Second Cycle Percentage
Objectives
Discussion
Performance
Initiated interaction whenever appropriate
86%
86%
Spontaneity
86%
62%
Not afraid to challenge others‟ ideas
52%
-
Able to defend own ideas
59%
-
Elaborated answers
59%
-
Showed confidence
86%
93%
High interaction with classmates
52%
86%
Tended to participate to help classmates out
55%
-
Interacted with teacher or peers when they
need help
48%
-
Paid attention
90%
93%
Overall, the students‟ participation
in discussion stage was 67%, which is
categorized as good. By contrast, the
students‟ participation in performance
stage was 84%, which is categorized as
excellent. It means that the students
participate actively both in their
performance and discussion.
Discussions
In this study, the researcher found
that Talk Show improved students‟
participation in speaking. During their
discussion, some students in their groups
were still chit-chatting with their
classmates and did not fully pay
attention. Some of them even were still
playing with others, but only for a brief
time. Despites the mischief behaviors of
some students, the other students
showed good attitude and participated
actively in the activity. They asked and
gave opinions within groups, asked
friends from other groups about things
7
they didn‟t know, looked up for
examples of Talk Show as their
references, looked up e-dictionary
(Google Translate) to help them making
their talk shows dialogues. This is
aligned with Nimehchisalem (2013)
statement planning of conducting their
talk shows. Although sometimes the
students still talk in their first language,
the students frequently tried to speak in
English for short replies, like „yes‟ and
„no‟.
On the performance stage, the
students were enthusiastic to show their
talk shows and to watch their friends‟
talk shows. Most of them were being
spontaneous by giving small comments
and clapped hands in each show. This is
also aligned with Nimehchisalem‟
(2013) statement that every student also
may add spontaneous gestures, small
jokes, and words in their performances.
From the field notes taken by the
observer,
most
students
show
enthusiasm in learning English by using
Talk Show technique. This is in line
with Klippel‟s (1985) theory that Talk
show technique is guided by the
intention to achieve effective language
learning situations.
According to the observation
checklist of first cycle, the students‟
participation in discussion stage is
categorized as poor. Meanwhile, the
students‟ participation in performance
stage is categorized as excellent. In
contrast, in the second cycle, the
students‟ participation in discussion
stage is categorized as good and the
students‟ participation in performance
stage is categorized as excellent. On the
first cycle, 47% of the students
participate actively in the discussion
stage and 85% of the students participate
actively in the performance stage. In
which, this result shows that only some
students who participate actively.
However, in the second cycle, the result
shows students participation has
improved again. It is shown that 67% of
the students participate actively in the
discussion stage and 84% of the students
participate actively in the performance
stage.
Each cycle improvement can be
seen in the following charts:
Figure 1. Students’ Participation in First Cycle
100%
Percentage
80%
93%
93%93%
86%
76%
76%
60% 48% 45%
38% 41%
40%
24%
20%
0% 0% 0%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
59% 55%
34%
Discussion
28%
Performance
6
7
Criterion Number
0%
0%
8
9
10
8
Percentage
Figure 2. Students’ Participation in Second Cycle
93% 86%
86%
100% 86%
86% 86%
80%
62%
52%
60%
59% 59%
93%
90%
52% 55% 48%
40%
Discussion
20%
0%
0%
0%
3
4
5
0%
0%
8
9
Performance
0%
1
2
6
7
10
Criterion Number
The overall results indicated that
the
students‟
participation
has
significantly improved in speaking using
Talk Show technique. The findings
confirmed
the
previous
study
(Nimehchisalem, 2013) that Talk Show
is advantageous for engaging students to
participate in speaking class. In
conclusion, the researcher has answered
the research problems by describing the
teaching and learning process using Talk
Show technique.
CONCLUSIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS
Conclusions
The researcher concludes that: 1)
Talk Show technique improves students‟
participation in speaking. It can be seen
from the percentage 47 % and 85% on
the first cycle and improved to 67% and
84% on the second cycle, 2) Talk Show
technique
improves
students‟
participation in students‟ discussion by
writing their conversations for their talk
shows, 3) Talk Show technique
improves students‟ participation in
students‟ talk show performances by
having the students to talk in English to
each other like in a talk show, and 4)
Students participated actively in learning
English using Talk Show technique and
showed enthusiasm in performing their
talk shows.
In conclusion, the students‟
participation has improved as shown in
the first and second cycle. Therefore, the
action hypothesis that the students‟
participation will improve during the
teaching and learning process using talk
show technique is proved correct.
Suggestions
Based on this study, the researcher
would like to propose some suggestions
to improve teaching and learning
process,
especially
in
students‟
participation. They are: 1) tell the
students
beforehand
that
their
participation in the class activities will
be graded, 2) write down the procedures
of Talk Show technique and the
activities that students should do on the
white
board
to
help
students
understanding it, 3) make more specific
allocation of time for each activity, and
stay strict, 4) give warning or
punishment to students who are being
disruptive towards other groups, 5)
approach the students when they are
working in groups to give them chances
to ask the teacher about what they don‟t
know.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bean, J. C., & Peterson, D. (1998).
Grading classroom participation.
New Directions for Teaching
and Learning, 33-40.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Teaching by
principles:
An
interactive
approach to language pedagogy
(2nd ed.). New York: Pearson
ESL.
9
Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research
in language English teaching: A
guide for practitioners. New
York: Routledge.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K.
(2000). Research methods in
education.
New
York:
Routledge Falmer.
Cremin, T. (2009). Teaching English
creatively. New York, United
States of America: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Education
research (4th ed.). Boston:
Pearson Education Inc.
Czekanski, K. E., & Wolf, Z. R. (2013).
Encouraging and evaluating
class participation. Journal of
University Teaching & Learning
Practice, X(1), 7-21.
Ferrance, E. (2000). Action reserach.
New York: LAB Brown
University.
Guillemin,
M.
(2014,
October).
Assessing class participation:
What, why and how? Retrieved
from Teaching and Learning
Quality Assurance Committee
(TALQAC):
http://arts.unimelb.edu.au/__dat
a/assets/pdf_file/0006/1722399/
assessing-class-participation.pdf
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of
English language teaching (3rd
ed.). New York: Longman Inc.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of
English language teaching (4th
ed.).
Harlow:
Pearson
Education.
Harmin, M., & Toth, M. (2016).
Inspiring active learning: A
complete handbook for today's
teachers. Alexandria, Virginia:
Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Heaton, J. B. (1990). Writing English
language tests. New York:
Longman Inc.
Howard, J. (2002). Do college students
participate more in discussion in
traditional delivery courses or in
interactive
telecourses?:
A
preliminary comparison. The
Journal of Higher Education,
764-780.
Hughes, A. (1996). Testing for language
teachers. Cambridge, Great
Britain: Press Syndicate of the
University of Cambridge.
Jeanette. (2001). Teaching English as a
second or foreign language (3rd
ed.). (M. Celce-Murcia, Ed.)
Boston,
U.S.A.:
Thomson
Learning Inc.
Klippel, F. (1985). Keep talking:
Communiative fluency activities
for language teaching. Avon:
Press
Syndicate
of
the
University of Cambridge.
Liu, J. (2001). Asian students’
classroom
communication
patterns in U.S. universities: An
emic perspective. Wesport CT,
USA: Greenwood Publishing
Group, Inc.
Mappiasse, S. S., & Johari, A. B.
(2014). Evaluation of English as
a foreign language and its
curriculum in indonesia: a
review.
English
Language
Teaching Journal, VII, 113-122.
Maznevski, M. L. (1996, January).
Grading Class Participation.
Charlottesville: University of
Virginia.
Mukminin, A., Masbirorotni, Noprival,
Sutarno, Arif, N., & Maimunah.
(2015). EFL speaking anxiety
among senior high school
students
and
policy
recommendation. Journal of
Education and Learning, IX(3),
217-225.
Murray, H. G., & Lang, M. (1997).
Teaching and learning in higher
education. Western Ontario:
Newsletter of the Society for
Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education.
Mustapha, S. M. (2010). Understanding
classroom interaction: A case
10
study of international students‟
classroom participation at one of
the colleges in Malaysia.
International Journal for the
Advancement of Science & Arts,
I(2), 91-99.
Mustapha, S. M., & Abd Rahman, N. S.
(2011). Classroom participation
patterns: A case study of
malaysian
undergraduate
students. International Journal
for Educational Studies, III(2),
145-158.
Nation, I. S., & Newton, J. (2009).
Teaching ESL / EFL listening
and speaking. New York:
Routledge.
Nimehchisalem, V. (2013, September).
The talk show method in ESL
classroom. Voices in Asia
Journal 2013, 1(1), 58-71.
Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching
listening and speaking from
theory to practice. New York,
United States of America:
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1999).
Approaches and methods in
langauge teaching. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Rocca, K. A. (2010, April). Student
participation in the college
classroom
an
extended
multidisciplinary
literature
review.
Communication
Education, 185-213.
Tomal, D. R. (2003). Action Research
for Educatord. Oxford, U.K:
The
Scarecrow
Press.