ELT LEARNERS’ COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES IN A SUBJECT MATTER ELT CLASS AT UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

i

ABSTRACT

ELTLEARNERS’ COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES

IN A SUBJECT MATTER ELT CLASS AT UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

by

Tyas Hantia Febiani

The present research is aimed to find out what communication strategies used and how they are used in a subject matter class at University of Lampung (UNILA). The research was held in English Teaching (ET) Media Class and the subjects were ELT learners in sophomore year of UNILA’s English Study Program. ET Media Class was, coincidentally, taught using two models of learning: EXCLUSIVE for A sophomore class and Task-Based Learning for B sophomore class. The data was collected from observation and questionnaire. The observation data was recorded, transcribed, and coded to Dornyei’s taxonomy (1995) before it was finally analyzed.

The results indicate that there are seven types of communication strategies produced by students of ELT learning subject matter at University of Lampung: Message Abandonment, Topic Avoidance, Use of All-Purpose Words, Non-Linguistic Signals, Code Switching, Appeal for Help, and Time Gaining.

The results also show that communication strategies occurred more frequently in the class that used EXCLUSIVE learning. It stimulated 8.83% more of communication strategies than the class taught using Task-Based Learning.

ii

Keywords. Communication strategies, message abandonment, topic avoidance, use of all-purpose words, non-linguistic signals, code switching, appeal for help, time gaining

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Alhamdulillahi Rabbil _‘Alamin.All praise belongs to Allah the merciful alone for blessing the writer health and faith to finish her undergraduate thesis entitled “ELT Learners’ Communication Strategies in EXCLUSIVE and Task-Based Class”. This thesis is presented to fulfill one of the requirements to accomplish S1 or undergraduate degree of English Education Study Program at University of Lampung.

The writer would not be able to finish this thesis without any support, encouragement, guidance, and assistance by several very important persons. Firstly, the writer would like to address her respect and gratitude to Prof. Ag. Bambang Setiyadi, M.A., Ph.D. as the writer’s first thesis adviser for his kindness, feedbacks, and valuable suggestions throughout the writing process. The best sincere gratitude is also extended to Budi Kadaryanto, S.Pd., M.A. as the writer’s second thesis adviser for his understanding, positive suggestions, ideas, encouragement, and friendliness in guiding the writer to finish the thesis and also for kindly offering to conduct observation in his classes. The writer also would like to express her gratefulness to her examiner, Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D., for his positive criticism and suggestions to make the thesis more qualified.

viii

The researcher also wants to address her appreciation to all of the English Education Study Program Class of 2012 students for being cooperative during the research.

The writer addresses sincere gratefulness to a man named Kevin Pierce Jones, for his care and enthusiastic support whenever the writer faced obstacles and pessimism during the thesis writing process. The next appreciation also goes to the writer’s closest friends in English Study Program: Desilya Anggraini, Fitrivani Amalia Rahadi, Rizki Amalia Ayuningtyas, Anwar Fadila, and Siti Amalina Santi—for sharing the happiness and going through hardships together for years and counting.

The greatest appreciation and honor are due to her parents, H. Deddy Susatyo, B.Sc. and Hj. Hatmiyati, for their infinite support and endless prayer for her. She is also thankful to her sisters: Deti Ratnasari, Riesky Meidyastuti, and Yosi Marta Selina_—who always encourage her to focus in achieving a bright future.

Hopefully, this thesis can give a great contribution for educational development and inspires those who want to conduct further research.

Bandar Lampung, September 2014 The Writer,

iii

CURRICULUM VITAE

The name of the writer is Tyas Hantia Febiani. She was born in Bandar Lampung on February 29th, 1992 as the fourth and the youngest daughter of H. Deddy Susatyo, B.Sc. and Hj. Hatmiyati.

She joined TK Taman Indria Teluk Betung in 1995. Then she entered SD Taman Siswa Teluk Betung in 1997 and graduated in 2003. She continued her study at SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung and graduated in 2006. Three years later (2009), she graduated from SMAN 2 Bandar Lampung.

She entered English Education Study Program at University of Lampung through early acceptance (PMDK) in 2009. In August 2011, she took one year academic leave and went to United States as she was accepted by American Indonesian Exchange Foundation (AMINEF) and World Learning as one of ten Indonesian grantees for a non-degree scholarship program sponsored by U.S. State Department, Global Undergraduate Program, for two semesters.

She studied Literature and Performing Arts at American University, Washington, D.C. Besides studying, she volunteered as a tutor of an after-school program at Tubman Elementary School where she taught fourth to sixth graders Arts, Bahasa Indonesia, and Mathematics. In spring of 2012, she volunteered for American University Abroad Office as American University Incoming Spring 2012

iv

Exchange Students Assistant. She also interned at Ambassador Theater and joined American University Gospel Choir (AUGC). In April 2012, she participated in American University Gospel Concert in Kay Spiritual Life Center.

She returned to Indonesia in May 2012 and continued her study at UNILA’s English Education Study Program with Class of 2010. From July to September 2013, she did her fieldwork program or KKN-KT at SMAN 1 Batu Brak, West Lampung. From September 2013 to June 2014, she was appointed as Vice President of Outgoing Exchange at AIESEC UNILA where she assisted Indonesian college students who wanted to participate in global community development programs abroad.

v

DEDICATION

This undergraduate thesis is dedicated to: My mother and father,

my sisters,

Kevin Pierce Jones and the Davis in California, and my fraternities of English Study Program UNILA.

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Extension of Dornyei’s Taxonomy of CSs (1995)...47 Appendix 2 Table of CSs (Observation Sheet) ...48 Appendix 3 Oral Communication Strategy Inventory by Nakatani

Questionnaire ...49 Appendix 4 Lesson Plan of Task-Based Class...56 Appendix 5 Lesson Plan of EXCLUSIVE Class ...59

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1. Coding of CSs ...26 Table 4.1. Specification of CSs Used in A Class...29 Table 4.2. Specification of CSs Used in B Class ...30 Table 4.3. Total Numbers of Occurrence and Types of CSs Used By Subjects

in A and B Class ...32 Table 4.4. Students_’Responses to OCSI Questionnaire ...35

vi

MOTTO

✁✂✄ ☎✆ ✝✁ ✂ ✞✄✟✠ ✟ ✞ ✡✞✁ ☛✄

ke skillful drivers.

ELT LEARNERS’ COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES

IN A SUBJECT-MATTER ELT CLASS AT UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

(A Script)

By

Tyas Hantia Febiani

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG BANDAR LAMPUNG

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...i

CURRICULUM VITAE ...iii

DEDICATION ...v

MOTTO ...vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...ix

LIST OF TABLES ...xi

LIST OF APPENDICES ...xii

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background of the Problems ... 1

1.2. Formulation of the Problems ... 4

1.3. Objectives ... 4

1.4. Uses ... 5

1.5. Scope ... 5

1.6. Definition of Terms ... 6

II. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Review of Related Literature ... 7

2.1.1. Speaking Ability ... 7

2.1.2. Communication Strategies ... 9

2.1.3. Typology of Communication Strategies ... 10

2.1.4. Exclusive Learning... 13

2.1.1. Task-Based Learning ... 14

2.2. Review of Related Research ... 16

2.3. Theoretical Assumption ... 18

2.4. Prediction of Communication Strategies Applied by Learners ... 20

III. RESEARCH METHOD 3.1. Design ... 22

x

3.3. Procedures ... 23

3.3.1. Planning ... 23

3.3.2. Application... 23

3.3.3. Reporting... 24

3.3.4. Planning ... 24

3.4. Data Collecting Technique ... 24

3.4.1. Natural Discourse Data ... 24

3.4.2. Recording ... 24

3.4.3. Questionnaires... 24

3.4.4. Transcribing ... 25

3.4.5. Coding ... 25

3.4.6. Analyzing ... 26

3.5. Data Analysis ... 26

3.5.1. Validity of the Data ... 26

3.5.2. Model of Data Analysis ... 27

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1. Results of Data Analysis ... 28

4.1.1. Result of the Observation... 28

4.1.1.1. Communication Strategies Result in A Class ... 29

4.1.1.2. Communication Strategies Result in B Class ... 30

4.1.2. Qualitative Data of Communication Strategies ... 32

4.1.3. Result of the Questionnaire ... 35

4.2. Discussions... 36

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1. Conclusions ... 40

5.2. Suggestions ... 41

5.2.1. Suggestions for Teachers ... 41

5.2.2. Suggestions for Future Research... 41

REFERENCES APPENDICES

I. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Problems

Speaking is the most basic means of communication; therefore, for most people, knowing a language means being able to speak it. However, speaking appears to be demanding for foreign language learners (Lazarton, 2001)

The ability to operate in a second language can be actually equated to the ability to speak that language (Nunan, 1999). Meanwhile, most of Indonesian EFL learners faced by the hesitation to speak in English although they have been studying it since junior high and some even since elementary school. Learning a second language can be a particularly anxiety-provoking experience for several reasons. When learners are asked to express themselves using a language in which they have limited competence, the task can be very threatening to their self-image. In an oral discussion, shyness, nervousness, feeling afraid of making mistakes, and not knowing the way how to pronounce certain words are the most potential problems that can hinder the students to speak (Susilawati, 2007). Learners also often feel foolish when they happen to speak their native language beyond their consciousness.

Poulisse in Spolsky (1999: 484) also states similar opinion that EFL learners frequently encounter linguistic problem when they attempt to speak the target

2

language. Learners of foreign language have trouble with certain syntactic constructions, find some sounds hard to pronounce, and are often faced with gaps in their knowledge of the second language vocabulary.

Since no individual’s linguistic repertoire is perfect, most people have experienced struggling to find the appropriate expression or grammatical construction when attempting to communicate their meaning. The steps taken by language learners in order to enhance the effectiveness of their communication are known as communication strategies (Littlemore, 2003). CSs are inevitable in oral communication for language learners. These strategies keep speakers flexible, and confident, and make their communication more effective.

Canale in Nation and Thomas (1991: 16) also states that to keep the conversation goes on, the speakers need some strategies for their communication. Canale considers strategic competence to be a component of communicative competence. Communication strategies allow speakers to make up for a lack of mastery of the language and to make communication more effective. Based on the ideas above, it is clear that communication strategies have important role in the process of communication.

The most common communication strategies adapted from Tarone (1977), Faerch and Kasper (1984), and Willems (1987) can be classified into reduction strategies and achievement strategies. Reduction strategies such as meaning replacement, message abandonment, and topic avoidance are used for the purpose of giving up a fragment of the original communication goal. On the other hand, achievement strategies such as appeal, literal translation, code-switching, restructuring, word

3

coinage, paraphrasing, and nonlinguistic strategies are used to maintain the original goal of the language speaker.

Meanwhile, the writer also personally experienced a situation when she took a native speaker to her campus which is the ELT study program at University of Lampung. Her classmates were interested in asking questions to the native speaker but they asked the writer to relay the question in English to the native speaker. When the classmates were asked why they did not want to ask the questions themselves, the answers was because they were afraid that their English would look bad so that the native speaker would judge them. In fact, those who major in English are the group of students who are supposed to have competence to communicate in English for their professional careers after graduation. In addition, it is true that people also would judge one's language competence from one's speaking performance first rather than any other language skills. Thus, learning and using oral communication strategies can be beneficial for them in order for them to engage in effective conversations in English and to make them look good "at face value" (McDonough & Shaw, 2003, p. 133). In order to know how far communication strategies has been used by Indonesian ELT learners when they speak English, the writer did a research connected with the use of communication strategies entitled ELT Learners’ Communication Strategies in A Subject-Matter ELT Class at University of Lampung.

The rationale to use these models of learning came from research of Murad (2009) and Abdurrahman (2012). Through his research, Murad found out that the Task-Based Learning (TBL) activities enhanced significantly the speaking skill of the students and positively affected their attitudes towards English. Meanwhile,

4

Abdurrahman’s findings show that EXCLUSIVE Learning enhanced students’ problem solving skill and critical in learning. Since there was no research that tells about the possibility to solve students’ hesitation to speak in English by applying these two recently developed models of learning, the writer conducted the research.

1.2. Formulation of the Problems

Based on the background of the problem above, the researcher formulated the problem as follows:

1. What types of communication strategies are produced by students of ELT learning subject matter at University of Lampung?

2. If the subject matter class is undertaken through EXCLUSIVE and Task-Based Learning, under which models of learning will the communication strategies occur more frequently?

1.3. Objectives

The objectives of this research are:

1. To find out types of communication strategies produced by students of ELT learning subject matter at University of Lampung.

2. To find out under which models of learning the communication strategies will occur more frequently.

5

1.4. Uses

It was expected that the research result could be used as: 1. Theoretical use

This research would complement previous research and theories about communication strategies. Moreover, this research can be used as a reference for those who will do further research regarding communication strategies.

2.Practical use

The results can be used as a logical consideration for the teachers to train more of communication strategies to students as an effort to reduce their hesitation to perform spoken English and to improve their speaking performance.

1.5. Scope

The researcher would find out types and prevalence of communication strategies that occur in a subject matter class that was coincidentally taught using EXCLUSIVE and Task-Based Learning. The speaking activities were limited to classroom discussion. The research was conducted at a sophomore-year English Teaching Method class of English Education Department, University of Lampung in three meetings. Each meeting lasted for 100 minutes. The classes discussed three topics: Educational Technology, Media, Teaching and Learning (of English Teaching), The Assure Model (of English Teaching). The data from the observation would be recorded, transcribed, and coded using Dornyei’s taxonomy (1995) before it was finally analyzed.

6

1.6. Definitions of Terms

 Communication Strategy is defined as “a systematic technique employed by a speaker to express his or her meaning when faced with some difficulty (Corder, 1981, in Dornyei, 1995, p. 56). It can be in the form of using circumlocution, fillers, code switching, et cetera (Dornyei, 1995, p. 58).

 EXCLUSIVE Learning is a recently developed metacognitive-based model of learning that has five phases of learning: Exploring, Clustering, Simulating, Valuing, and Evaluating (Abdurrahman, Tarmini, Kadaryanto, 2012: 219).

 Task-Based Learning is a model of learning puts tasks at the center of the methodological focus. It views the learning process as a set of communicative tasks that are directly linked to the curricular goals they serve (Brown, 2001).

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Review of Related Literature

The writer tried to identify several points related to this research. There are some points that should be explained deeply. These includes concept of speaking, communication strategies, typology of communication strategies, EXCLUSIVE Learning, Task-Based Learning (TBL), and the previous researches related to communication strategies.

2.1.1. Speaking Ability

Bryne (1998) defines speaking as a two way process between speaker and listener and it involves the productive and receptive skill of understanding. It means that in the process of speaking, we try to communicate with each other and use one language to send our message to the second person.

Whenever people intend to learn to understand a spoken language, they use language by speaking the ideas, feeling, experience, and so on. Therefore, Lado (1961) says that speaking is described as an ability to converse or to express a sequence of idea fluently.

The use of the language is to express one self to be understood by the others. It is clear that speaking is a skill of how to transfer the message to the others to be

8

achieved. It concerns with the use of language in daily activity in which people need to communicate with others to fulfill the needs of life and socialization. According to Canale and Swain (1980), there are four competences underlying the effectiveness of speaking:

1. Grammatical Competence

Grammatical competence is an umbrella concept that includes expertise in grammar (morphology, syntax), vocabulary, and mechanics (basic sound of letters and syllables), pronunciation of words, intonation, and stress. Grammatical competence enables speaker to use and understand the structure of English accurately and unhesitatingly, which contributes to their fluency.

2. Discourse Competence

Discourse competence is defined as the ability to understand and produce the range of spoken, written and visual texts that are characteristics of a language. This also includes the ability to convey information appropriately and coherently to those who are listening to, or viewing one's texts. Basically discourse competence is knowing how to interpret the larger content and how to construct longer stretches of language, so that the parts together make up a whole coherent unit.

3. Sociolinguistic Competence

Knowledge of language alone does not adequately for effective and appropriate use of the language. Speaker must have competence which involves knowing hat is accepted socially and culturally.

9

4. Strategic Competence

Strategic competence is the way speakers manipulate language in order to meet communication goals (Rababah, 2003). With reference to speaking, strategic competence refers to the ability to know when and how to take the floor, how to keep the conversation going, how to terminate the conversation and how to clear up communication breakdown as well as comprehension problems.

Referring to the main topic of this study which is communication strategy, we also relate it to communicative competence. Based on the explanation proposed by Canale and Swain, it is clear that communication strategy is part of strategic competence because CS is a strategy used by people to overcome communication problems and achieve communication goal. It means that those people who have strategy in communication, unconsciously they have communicative competence because the communication strategy belongs to the sub competences of communicative competence which is strategic competence.

2.1.2. Communication Strategies

According to Tarone, Cohen, and Dumas (1983), communication strategy is a systematic attempt by the learner to express or decode meaning in the target language, in situations where the appropriate systematic target language rules have not been formed.

Another perspective came from Corder (1983). He defines communication strategy as a systematic technique employed by a speaker to express his meaning when he faced some difficulty.

10

Furthermore, Tarone (1983) defines communication strategy as a mutual attempt of two interlocutors to agree on a meaning in situations where requisite meaning structures are not shared.

Other linguists who contributed in this field are Faerch and Kasper (1983). They see communication strategy as potentially conscious plans for solving what to an individual present itself as a problem in reaching a particular communicative goal.

Meanwhile, Bialystok (1990) states that communication strategy is the dynamic interaction of the components of language processing that balance each other in their level of involvement to meet task demands.

As well as other linguist, Poulisse (1990) defines communication strategies as strategies which a language user employs in order to achieve his intended meaning on becoming aware of problems arising during the planning phase of an utterance due to his own linguistic shortcomings.

Communication Strategy is defined as “a systematic technique employed by a speaker to express his or her meaning when faced with some difficulty (Corder, 1981, in Dornyei, 1995, p. 56). It can be in the form of using circumlocution, fillers, code switching, et cetera (Dornyei, 1995, p. 58). The types of CS will be discussed below.

2.1.3. Typology of Communication Strategies

There are several successful researchers that found several theories of the typology of communication strategies like Bialystok, Faerch and Kasper, Littlewood, Nijmen Group, Poulisse, and Tarone. There are some similarity and

11

also differences among their taxonomies. However, the most widely used taxonomy as a basis for subsequent study of communication strategies is Tarone‟s. However, the more developed taxonomy was proposed by Dornyei (1995). It categorizes the communication strategies as avoidance or reduction strategy, compensatory or achievement strategy, and time gaining strategy. The explanation is as follows:

1. Avoidance or Reduction Strategies

 Message Abandonment: the interlocutors start their talk but fail to keep talking because of language difficulties, so they give it up. For example: a learner says “he took the wrong way in mm…” (He/she does not continue his/her utterance).

 Topic Avoidance: the learners refrain from talking about the topics which they may not be able to continue for linguistic reasons. For example: a learner avoids saying certain words or sentence because he/she does not know the English terms or forget the English terms.

2. Achievement or compensatory strategies

 Literal translation: the learners literally translate a word, a compound word, an idiom, or a structure from L1 into L2. For example: do not enter sign for no entry sign.

 Borrowing or code switching; the learners use an L1 word or phrase with an L1 pronunciation while speaking in L2. For example: if a learner does not know the word baki, he/she will say „baki’ with L2 pronunciation.

12

or phonologically adjusting it to an L2 word. For example: a learner does not know the word tap, he/she uses the L1 word, that is kran but with L2 pronunciation, so he/she says kren.

 Approximation or Generalization: the learners employ an L2 word which is semantically in common with the targeted lexical item. For example: ship for sail boat; pipe for water pipe.

 Word coinage: the learners coin a non-existing L2 word by overgeneralization. For example: vegetarianist for vegetarian. (vegetarianist is not stated in the dictionary).

 Circumlocution: the learners describe or exemplify the action or object instead of using the right L2 structure or item. For example: if a learner does not know the word corkscrew, he/she replaces it by saying „the thing that you use to open the bottle’.

 Use of all-purpose words: the learners use a general word to fill the vocabulary gaps. For example: the overuse of the words thing, stuff, make, do, what-do-youcall- it, what-is-it.

 Appeals for assistance: the learners turn to partners for assistance directly (e.g. Do you understand? Can you speak more slowly? What do you call?) and indirectly (e.g. Rising intonation, pause, eye contact, puzzled expression).

 Nonlinguistic signals: mime, gesture, facial expression, and sound imitation. For example: a learner uses his/her hands and acts like flying to refer to birds. 3. Stealing or time-gaining strategies: the learners employ such hesitation devices as fillers or gambits to gain time to think. For example: well, as a matter of fact, now let me see, I think, you know, you see, um, mm, ah, sort of, OK, right,

13

really.

Since Dornyei‟s taxonomoy is a more developed theory, the researcher used it to analyze and categorize communication strategies in EXCLUSIVE and TBL-based activities.

2.1.4. EXCLUSIVE Learning

Abdurrahman (2012) states that in metacognitive-based EXCLUSIVE learning, teacher plays a role as facilitator that provides learning sources, motivates students to enhance problem solving skills through metacognitive problems, gives rewards, and assists students to optimally construct the knowledge. Through EXCLUSIVE Learning, there will be classroom interactions involving students, teacher, and also learning sources. The main points of this model of learning are implementation of cognitive strategy, control, and evaluation of students‟ learning through feedback interactions. The syntax of the learning is as follows:

- Phase 1 : Exploring

After conducting apperception of the theme that is going to be discussed, the students will be put into groups. Each group has to seek informations regarding to the assigned theme and they have to make sure that the members understand the information well.

- Phase 2: Clustering

When the time for the students to find the informations is over, students, assisted by teacher, will list the similarity of the informations found from the first phase to

14

establish cluster of information. Then the students will be put into new groups to do further comprehension of it.

- Phase 3 : Simulating

In simulating phase, the students will do the simulation of understanding, realization, and awareness of the theme.

- Phase 4 : Valuing

The students will then internalize the values taken from the discussion and simulation that will lead them to implement them in real life situations.

- Phase 5 : Evaluating

The last step is evaluating the overall learning process so that the students will do better in the next discussion. The evaluation will be delivered in L1 to make students really understand what correction they should do for the betterment.

It was proven on the research of Abdurrahman that this model can enhance students‟ speaking skill. Therefore, the writer would try to find out the types and prevalence of communication strategies that occured while the activity is conducted they were used in EXCLUSIVE learning.

2.1.5. Task-Based Learning

In this model, learning is developed through performing a series of activities as steps towards successful task realization (Malihah, 2010). By working towards task realization, the language is used immediately in the real-world context of the learner, making learning authentic. Willis (1996) broke the task completion into

15

three sections: pre-task, task cycle, and language focus. The elaboration is as follows:

1. Pre-task

In the pre-task, the teacher will present what will be expected of the students in the task phase. Additionally, the teacher may prime the students with key vocabulary or grammatical constructs, although, in “pure” task-based learning lessons, these will be presented as suggestions and the students would be encouraged to use what they are comfortable with in order to complete the task. The instructor may also present a model of the task by either doing it themselves or by presenting picture, audio, or video demonstrating the task.

2. Task Phase

During the task phase, the students perform the task, typically in small groups, although this is dependent on the type of activity. And unless the teacher plays a particular role in the task, then the teacher‟s role is typically limited to one of an observer or counselor—thus the reason for it being a more student-centered methodology.

a. Planning: Having completed the task, the students prepare either a written or oral report to present to the class. The instructor takes questions and otherwise simply monitors the students.

b. Report: The students then present this information to the rest of the class in English. Here the teacher may provide written or oral feedback, as appropriate, and the students observing may do the same.

16

3. Language Focus

In focusing the language produced by students, the teachers will create two stages: a. Analysis: Here the focus returns to the teacher who reviews what happened in the task, in regards to language. It may include language forms that the students were using, problems that students had, and perhaps forms that need to be covered more or were not used enough.

b. Practice: The practice stage may be used to cover material mentioned by the teacher in the analysis stage. It is an opportunity for the teacher to emphasize key language.

Within the sections above, learners will complete the task through preparation where in this case they will reduce their troubled feeling in mind or anxiety. They have more time to think how to complete the task in their best way. It is then expected that learners will not be nervous and full of tension in performing their speaking ability. Learners will not be afraid of making mistakes on the series of complicated rules which is very probable to pressure them in performing their speaking ability.

2.2. Review of Related Research

Communication strategy is an interesting topic to be investigated. It is due to the fact that people need communication to interact with others. Moreover, people also need some strategies while they are communicating in order to make their interlocutor understand about what they mean. Therefore, this study has been widely developed by some previous researchers. For example, Bialystok (1990),

17

who analyzed communication strategies for second language use; and Dornyei (1995) outlines an explicit classification of communication strategies.

Another research has been conducted by Yenny (2006). The research is about communication strategies employed by Indonesian English learners based on the length of studies. She finds that there are ten types of communication strategies used by students who have studied English for 6-8 years and there are nine types of communication strategies used by students who have studied English for 9-11 years. So, conclusion can be made for the two different facts. Overall, the writer finds that actually the length time of studies influences the use of communication strategies. So, this different background of exposure to English may result in the one of their choice of the types of communication strategies.

Wei (2011) has investigated Chinese Learners‟ Communication Strategies. The result shows that Chinese students use reduction strategies more often than others. Students with low language proficiency, tend to use reduction strategy more often. However, students with low language proficiency have no define answer on whether to approve the role reduction strategies play in improving oral communicative competence, while students with high language proficiency tend to hold a negative attitude. Besides, Chinese students seldom use achievement strategies. However, they tend to approve the positive role it plays in improving oral communicative competence.

Furthermore, she notes some factors affecting Chinese students‟ achievement strategies include: firstly, the degree to which learners understand the significance of achievement strategy in language learning, secondly, the degree to which

18

learners understand the significance of achievement strategy in language communication, thirdly, the attitude towards language learning, and lastly, the cultural differences. There are many factors affecting the use of communication strategies, such as: a learner‟s level of language proficiency, learner‟s personality, learner‟s communicative experience, learner‟s attitude towards a particular strategy, nature of task, problem source, and communication situations.

Rodriguez and Roux (2012) investigated the use of communication strategies in

the beginner Spanish classroom. The results indicated that class size, seating

arrangements, and learning activity types were also some of the factors that

influenced the communication strategies used.

2.3. Theoretical Assumptions

In another experiment, Lam (2006) examined the impact of CS instruction in Hong Kong. Control and experimental groups received oral lessons. However, in addition to normal instruction, the experimental group received explicit training in strategies of resourcing, paraphrasing, repetition, fillers, self-correction, asking for clarification, and asking for confirmation. The results indicated that the experimental group outperformed the control group on the group discussion tasks. It was found that treatment had a positive impact on raising the awareness of the learners with respect to the range of communication strategies.

Lam‟s (2006) study confirms the results of a study by Nakatani (2005) on the value of awareness raising on strategy use in oral communication. Nakatani provided some evidence that CS training can improve learners‟ performance on

19

proficiency tests. In the study, the control group took a course in oral communication. Besides the course, the experimental group received metacognitive training focused on CSs. The analysis of the scores on the oral proficiency test at the end of the course showed that the experimental group had significantly improved their performance. No significant improvement was observed for the control group. Nakatani concluded that “The lack of a significant improvement in the control group indicates that simply offering students communication practice was not sufficient to develop their speaking ability” (p. 83).

Some previous studies above prove that CS has been widely developed, while the case of factors affecting the use of CS, including communication situation, has been analyzed. If research on the teachability of CSs has offered no firm conclusions, further research is needed to shed light on the effectiveness of teaching CSs. The mixed findings of the previous research may be partly due to the fact that there are many confounding factors affecting strategy use and that not all of these factors can be controlled in any single study.

What makes conclusions difficult is the design of these studies and the type of tasks used; previous studies have not examined the effect of specific task type on CS use. This is echoed by Rossiter (2003) who observed that although CS training has a significant effect on students‟ performance, the students use more CSs in the object description tasks than in the narrative tasks. Therefore, he suggested that different tasks elicit different CSs and multiple task types should be used in communicative classes.

20

Based on Rossiter‟s suggestions, the researcher considered to conduct research of CSs analysis in different types of task. The research was done in order to find out what types of CSs and their prevalence of Indonesian ELT learners in two types of classroom task. The first class was conducted based on EXCLUSIVE learning principles and the second one was based on TBL‟s. The researcher assumed that there would be difference of CSs types and their prevalence in EXCLUSIVE and TBL-based tasks.

2.4. Prediction of Communication Strategies Applied by Learners

The researcher predicted that the communication strategies would occur in both University ELT subject-matter classes: class taught using EXCLUSIVE and class taught using Task-Based Learning. The communication strategies would occur more frequently during the Task (in Task-Based class) and Simulation (in EXCLUSIVE-based class) stages compared to other stages. The three communication strategies that occur most often in both EXCLUSIVE and TBL-based tasks would be time-gaining strategies, code switching, and appeal for help. The reason was because both tasks require learners‟ analytical and critical thinking to deliver their perception of given theme or case in front of the class. Time-gaining strategy or fillers would be needed in order to make the oral task run smoothly because learners might take some times to analyze the theme on their mind using Bahasa Indonesia while they had to deliver it in English. It was also possible that learners would not be able to concentrate well to analyze the theme. Therefore, they would probably use the hesitation device such as well, umm, uh, and so on.

21

Code switching might be the second most used since learners‟ may feel overwhelmed to deliver their ideas in English due to difficult English vocabularies. Thus, they would switch to Bahasa to „play safe‟ i.e. they will say „satu juta dua ratus ribu‟ instead of „one million and two hundred thousand rupiah‟.

The third most used might be appeal for help. This might happen when learners‟ want to express the English words they forget in English yet still do not want to switch them to Bahasa Indonesia. While they think about the words, they might utter „what is it called‟ or „apa namanya‟ to audience.

III. METHODS

3.1. Designs

This is a non-experimental descriptive study. The researcher used taxonomic analysis as qualitative design. The writer analyzed types of the communication strategies adapted from Dornyei’s taxonomy (1995). In collecting the data, the writer used observation and questionnaire as the instruments.

3.2. Subjects

Subjects in this study were ELT sophomores from University of Lampung. The researcher chose to make them the subject of the study because the ELT students are unique. They are different from other students because they are expected to have both of their spoken and written English skill improve daily. Thus, when they are demanded to be active in the classroom discussion, they have to participate using English.

Therefore, it would be interesting to find out their speaking performance and whether they already apply CS when they speak in English, especially in subject matter classes. The subject matter classes require students to communicate their ideas of topics that are not related to the language with the medium of English. One of the subject matter classes in ELT study program is English Teaching Media (ET Media). These students had 100 minutes ET Media classes per week.

23

The lecturer of ET media taught the students using two models of learning: EXCLUSIVE for A class and Task-Based Learning for B class. There were audience who listened to the assigned group while they were performing in front of the class. The audience was not allowed to interrupt or ask questions in the middle of the subjects’ performance, except when they were already allowed to (i.e. when they were in Q&A session). The subjects had to come in front of the classroom in groups and presented their works.

3.3. Procedures

The procedures of the research were: 3.3.1. Planning

 Determining the subjects and observing the condition of the classroom.

 Asking the lecturer before the process to know the usual instruction.

 Discussing the material, assignments, and rundown of learning activity with the lecturer.

3.3.2. Application

 Doing observation during the learning speaking process through the conversations and taking notes to all of the important events and all the problems that may occur. Thus, the researcher acted as a non-participant observer.

 After recording short dialogues based on EXCLUSIVE Learning and TBL model, the writer distributed the questionnaire to the students in order to know their knowledge and responses of communication strategies.

24

3.3.3. Reporting

 Analyzing the data by classifying the communication strategies using Dornyei’s taxonomy.

 Making the reports about the findings.

3.4. Data Collecting Technique

In collecting the data, the writer used the following techniques: 3.4.1. Natural Discourse Data

Generally, the data gathered from production instruments can be divided into two main categories: “Natural discourse data” and “Elicited data” (Félix-Brasdefer, 2007). To obtain “Natural discourse data”, social interaction can be observed in natural situations and recorded using audio or video-taped recordings (Félix-Brasdefer, 2007). In this study, the researcher was a non-participant observer and the students, or the observants, participated naturally in classroom discussion without any demand to perform situational interaction. Therefore, there was no elicited but natural discourse data.

3.4.2. Recording

Students’ performance in both models of learning was recorded by mobile phone.

3.4.3. Questionnaires

Immediately following the completion of the task, participants reported their task behaviors by filling out the questionnaire of communication strategies.

This study adopted a questionnaire of communication strategies which is mainly based on the Oral Communication Strategy Inventory (OCSI) designed by

25

Nakatani (2006). The questionnaire consisted of 32 items of 8 factors for coping with speaking problems and 26 items of 7 factors for coping with listening problems experienced during the communicative task. On a five-point scale ranging from “never” to “always”, participants circled the response which indicated how often they use the strategy described.

According to Nakatani (2006), the reliability of the 32 items addressing strategies for coping with speaking problems was examined by Cronbach's alpha, and the alpha for these 32 items was .86, which indicated a highly acceptable internal consistency. Also, Nakatani's inventory was originally designed for college students. And yet, it was examined in a simulated communicative test for EFL students. Therefore, the OCSI is suitable to be employed in this study to survey on the frequency of certain strategies used by the participants when they communicate with others. Since the participants are English major college students, all items in the questionnaire were written in English.

3.4.4. Transcribing

After recording, the writer made the transcription. However, it should be done in detail. Everything that the students say and do in the conversation should be transcribed. It was aimed to get more valid data about the activity done by the participants. It was also needed to help the researcher in analyzing the data coming from the activities.

3.4.5. Coding

The next step was coding, which is categorizing the finding of CSs into Dornyei’s taxonomy as follows:

26

Table 3.1. Coding of CS

No. Communication Strategies Code

1.

2.

3.

Avoidance Strategies

 Message Abandonement

 Topic Avoidance Compensatory Strategies

 Circumlocation

 Approximation

 Use of All-Purpose Words

 Word Coinage

 Nonlinguistic Signals

 Literal Translation

 Foreignizing

 Code-Switching

 Appeal for Help

Stalling or Time-Gaining Strategies

 Using fillers or hesitation device

MA TA C APP UW WC NS LT F CS AH TG 3.4.6. Analyzing

After coding, the researcher counted numbers and percentages of CSs occur during EXCLUSIVE and Task-Based speaking activities. This should be done to find out significant differences of CS in those two learning models.

3.5. Data Analysis

The writer used descriptive research in analyzing all data from the observation, the interview, and the questionnaire.

3.5.1. Validity of the Data

The writer used triangulation in order to make the data to be more valid. Bogdan and Biklen (1982:74) also state that successful outcome of a participant observation study in particular, but other forms of qualitative research as well, relies on detailed, accurate, and extensive field notes. The data are considered to

27

be field notes; this term refers to all the data collected including field notes, interview transcript, official documents, and other materials. In this research, the writer used a type of triangulation which is called cross-sectional time triangulation. Cross-sectional data is collected with time-related processes from different groups at one point in time.

2. Model of Data Analysis

In order to show widespread use of CSs, the researcher analyzed the audio recordings from the observation. In this way, the researcher first transcribed the data and then identified the communication strategies that occur. The next step in analyzing the data to develop the categories of analysis for coding the communication strategies. Different types of communication strategies identified in this study were coded into table of twelve types of CSs based on Dornyei’s taxonomy. The taxonomy was selected because the categories seemed clearly explained and a more recent as it was developed from previous CS taxonomies from Tarone, Faerch, and Kasper. Frequency forms were designed to classify the communication strategies that occurred when the classroom activities were being held.

The writer did the qualitative description in analyzing the data from the observation note and the questionnaire that was conducted to probe their perceptions of communication strategies and the use of certain strategies when communicating with others. It means that the writer would describe all collected data and problems found in the field and referring to the previous research about CSs mentioned in the second chapter.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1. Conclusions

Referring to the discussion of the research in the previous chapter, the researcher comes to this following conclusion:

1. There were seven types of communication strategies produced by students of ELT learning subject matter at University of Lampung: Message Abandonment, Topic Avoidance, Use of All-Purpose Words, Non-Linguistic Signals, Code Switching, Appeal for Help, and Time Gaining. 2. Communication strategies occurred more frequently under EXCLUSIVE

Learning. It stimulated 8.83% more of CS than the class that taught using Task-Based Learning. Communication strategies were most used during Task Cycle (in TBL class) and Simulative stage (EXCLUSIVE class) where they are demanded to perform in L2. CSs used in both models of learning when the students need time to think of the correct L2 word (time-gaining), need some device to make them remember (non-linguistics device), need help from the interlocutors—whether it’s really necessary or not (appeal for help), cannot remember the word, phrase, or even structure so they use general word (use of all purpose words), or even when they give up speaking in L2 (message abandonment, topic avoidance, code

41

switching).

5.2. Suggestions

Based on the conclusion above, the writer gives some suggestions as follow: 5.2.1. Suggestions for the Teachers

1. Students in Indonesia may not aware about CSs. It would be better for lecturers or teachers to introduce and train them since CSs are helpful to improve students’ speaking performance since students would be able to overcome their problems in communicating in English.

2. From this study, it is proven that CS training could be done even in subject-matter classes where English is the medium of communication. Teacher may use EXCLUSIVE and Task-Based Learning for classroom discussion if they want to train seven types of communication strategies that occur during the observation of the study. They may use different models of learning if they want to train other types of CS.

5.2.2. Suggestions for Further Research

1. This study investigated the use of CSs in subject matter classes using TBL and EXCLUSIVE models of learning. Future research can try to focus investigating the use of CSs in one model, for example, CSs only in TBL or CSs only in EXCLUSIVE. Therefore, the results will be more in details.

42

2. In this research, the writer has used classroom discussion as the technique to analyze CSs. Further research can use other activities to get more data about the use of CSs, such as describing things, role play, interview, and so on.

3. This study has subjects from the same level of study. It could be a good idea if further research can investigate the difference of CSs use in different level of study but using the same model of learning.

4. Further research can investigate CSs in one of the models of learning from this study (TBL or EXCLUSIVE) and its relation to other factors affecting the use of CSs such as class size and seating arrangement.

REFERENCES

Abdurrahman, Tarmini W., Kadaryanto, B. 2012. Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Tematik Berorientasi Kemampuan Metakognitif untuk Membentuk Karakter Literate dan Awareness Bagi Siswa Sekolah Dasar di Wilayah Rawan Bencana. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Sains (SPNS) 2012, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, November 3rd, 2012.

Bialystok, E. 1990. Communication Strategies. Oxford: Blackwell.

Bogdan and Biklen. 1982. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Method. Boston: Allin and Bacon Inc.

Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Byrne, D. 1991.Teaching Oral English. New York: Longman.

Canale, M. & Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.

Corder, P. 1981. Error analysis and interlanguage. UK: Oxford University Press. Corder, S. P. 1983. Strategies in Communication. In C. Fæ rch and G. Kasper (Eds.),

Strategies in Interlanguage Communication (pp. 15-19). Harlow, UK: Longman

Dörnyei, Z. 1995. On the Teachability of Communication Strategies. TESOL Quarterly. Dörnyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. 1997. Communication strategies in a second language:

Definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning, 47, 173-210.

Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. 1983. On identifying communication strategies in interlanguage production. in Faerch, C. And Kasper, G. (eds.): Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London: Longman.

Felix-Brasdefer, J. Cesar. 2007. Natural speech vs. Elicited data: A comparison of natural and role play request in Mexican Spanish. Spanish in Context, 4(2): 159-185

Lado, R. 1961. Language Testing: The Construction and Use of Foreign Language Tests. London: Longman.

Lam, W.Y.K. 2006. Gauging the effects of ESL Oral Communication Strategy Teaching: A Multi-method Approach. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, Vol.3. No.2, 142-157.

Lazarton, A. 2001. Teaching oral skills. In Celce-MurciaM., (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 103–116). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Littlemore, J. 2003. ‘The communicative effectiveness of different types of

communication strategy.’ System 31: 331-347.

Malihah, N. 2010. The Effectiveness of Speaking Instruction through Task-Based Language Teaching. Register, Vol. 3 No. 1, 85-101.

McDonough, J. & Shaw, C. 2003. Materials and methods in ELT: a teacher’s guide. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Murad, T. 2009. The Effect of Task-Based Language Teaching on Developing Speaking Skills among the Palestinian Secondary EFL Students in Israel and Their

Attitudes towards English. Irbid: Yarmuk University, Unpublished Script. Nakatani, Y. 2005. The effects of awareness-raising training on oral communication

strategy use. Modern Language Journal, Vol. 89 No. 1, 76-91.

Nakatani, Y. 2006. Developing an oral communication strategy inventory. Modern Language Journal, 90, 151-168.

Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language Teaching & Learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Rababah, G. 2003. An Investigation into the Strategic Competence of Arab Learners of English at Jordan Universities. University of Newcastle, Ph.D Dissertation. Richards, L. 2005. Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. London: Sage

Publication, Inc.

Rivana, 2013. Differences of Communication Strategies Used by Extrovert Student and Introvert Students in English Speaking Activities at the Second Grade of SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung. Bandar Lampung: Universitas Lampung, Unpublished Script.

Rodríguez Cervantes, C. and Roux Rodriguez, R. 2012. The use of communication strategies in the beginner EFL classroom. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, Vol.6 No. 1, 111-127.

Rossiter, M. J. 2003. It’s like chicken but bigger: Effects of communication strategy in the ESL classroom, Canadian Modern Language Review, 60, 105-121.

Santi, S.A. 2013. Implementing EXCLUSIVE Learning Model in Improving Students’ Speaking Skill at the First Grade of SMA Negeri 9 Bandar Lampung. Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung, Unpublished Script.

Spolsky, B. 1999. Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Susilawati, A. 2007. The Effect of Learning Strategy Training : Socio Affective Strategy in Improving speaking. Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung, Unpublished Script.

Tarone, E., Cohen, A.D., and Dumas, G. 1976. A closer look at some interlanguage terminology: A framework for communication strategies. In C. Færch and G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. Harlow: Longman. Tarone, E. 1977. Conscious communication strategies in interlanguage: A progress

report. In H. D. Brown, C. A. Yorio & R. C. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL 77 (pp. 194-203). Washington, DC: TESOL.

Wei, L. 2011. A Study of Chinese English Learner’s Attitude and Reported Frequency of Communicative Strategies. Sweden: Kristianstad University, Unpublished Script. Willems, G. 1987. Communication strategies and their significance in foreign language

teaching. System, 15, 351-364.

Yenny, 2006. Communication Strategies Employed by Indonesian English Learners Based on the Length of Studies. Surabaya: Universitas Kristen Petra, Unpublished Script.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1. Conclusions

Referring to the discussion of the research in the previous chapter, the researcher comes to this following conclusion:

1. There were seven types of communication strategies produced by students of ELT learning subject matter at University of Lampung: Message Abandonment, Topic Avoidance, Use of All-Purpose Words, Non-Linguistic Signals, Code Switching, Appeal for Help, and Time Gaining. 2. Communication strategies occurred more frequently under EXCLUSIVE

Learning. It stimulated 8.83% more of CS than the class that taught using Task-Based Learning. Communication strategies were most used during Task Cycle (in TBL class) and Simulative stage (EXCLUSIVE class) where they are demanded to perform in L2. CSs used in both models of learning when the students need time to think of the correct L2 word (time-gaining), need some device to make them remember (non-linguistics device), need help from the interlocutors—whether it’s really necessary or not (appeal for help), cannot remember the word, phrase, or even structure so they use general word (use of all purpose words), or even when they give up speaking in L2 (message abandonment, topic avoidance, code

41

switching).

5.2. Suggestions

Based on the conclusion above, the writer gives some suggestions as follow: 5.2.1. Suggestions for the Teachers

1. Students in Indonesia may not aware about CSs. It would be better for lecturers or teachers to introduce and train them since CSs are helpful to improve students’ speaking performance since students would be able to overcome their problems in communicating in English.

2. From this study, it is proven that CS training could be done even in subject-matter classes where English is the medium of communication. Teacher may use EXCLUSIVE and Task-Based Learning for classroom discussion if they want to train seven types of communication strategies that occur during the observation of the study. They may use different models of learning if they want to train other types of CS.

5.2.2. Suggestions for Further Research

1. This study investigated the use of CSs in subject matter classes using TBL and EXCLUSIVE models of learning. Future research can try to focus investigating the use of CSs in one model, for example, CSs only in TBL or CSs only in EXCLUSIVE. Therefore, the results will be more in details.

42

2. In this research, the writer has used classroom discussion as the technique to analyze CSs. Further research can use other activities to get more data about the use of CSs, such as describing things, role play, interview, and so on.

3. This study has subjects from the same level of study. It could be a good idea if further research can investigate the difference of CSs use in different level of study but using the same model of learning.

4. Further research can investigate CSs in one of the models of learning from this study (TBL or EXCLUSIVE) and its relation to other factors affecting the use of CSs such as class size and seating arrangement.

REFERENCES

Abdurrahman, Tarmini W., Kadaryanto, B. 2012. Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Tematik Berorientasi Kemampuan Metakognitif untuk Membentuk Karakter Literate dan Awareness Bagi Siswa Sekolah Dasar di Wilayah Rawan Bencana. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Sains (SPNS) 2012, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, November 3rd, 2012.

Bialystok, E. 1990. Communication Strategies. Oxford: Blackwell.

Bogdan and Biklen. 1982. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Method. Boston: Allin and Bacon Inc.

Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Byrne, D. 1991.Teaching Oral English. New York: Longman.

Canale, M. & Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.

Corder, P. 1981. Error analysis and interlanguage. UK: Oxford University Press. Corder, S. P. 1983. Strategies in Communication. In C. Fæ rch and G. Kasper (Eds.),

Strategies in Interlanguage Communication (pp. 15-19). Harlow, UK: Longman

Dörnyei, Z. 1995. On the Teachability of Communication Strategies. TESOL Quarterly. Dörnyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. 1997. Communication strategies in a second language:

Definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning, 47, 173-210.

Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. 1983. On identifying communication strategies in interlanguage production. in Faerch, C. And Kasper, G. (eds.): Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London: Longman.

Felix-Brasdefer, J. Cesar. 2007. Natural speech vs. Elicited data: A comparison of natural and role play request in Mexican Spanish. Spanish in Context, 4(2): 159-185

Lado, R. 1961. Language Testing: The Construction and Use of Foreign Language Tests. London: Longman.

Lam, W.Y.K. 2006. Gauging the effects of ESL Oral Communication Strategy Teaching: A Multi-method Approach. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, Vol.3. No.2, 142-157.

Lazarton, A. 2001. Teaching oral skills. In Celce-MurciaM., (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 103–116). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Littlemore, J. 2003. ‘The communicative effectiveness of different types of communication strategy.’ System 31: 331-347.

Malihah, N. 2010. The Effectiveness of Speaking Instruction through Task-Based Language Teaching. Register, Vol. 3 No. 1, 85-101.

McDonough, J. & Shaw, C. 2003. Materials and methods in ELT: a teacher’s guide. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Murad, T. 2009. The Effect of Task-Based Language Teaching on Developing Speaking Skills among the Palestinian Secondary EFL Students in Israel and Their

Attitudes towards English. Irbid: Yarmuk University, Unpublished Script. Nakatani, Y. 2005. The effects of awareness-raising training on oral communication

strategy use. Modern Language Journal, Vol. 89 No. 1, 76-91.

Nakatani, Y. 2006. Developing an oral communication strategy inventory. Modern Language Journal, 90, 151-168.

Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language Teaching & Learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Rababah, G. 2003. An Investigation into the Strategic Competence of Arab Learners of English at Jordan Universities. University of Newcastle, Ph.D Dissertation. Richards, L. 2005. Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. London: Sage

Publication, Inc.

Rivana, 2013. Differences of Communication Strategies Used by Extrovert Student and Introvert Students in English Speaking Activities at the Second Grade of SMAN 10 Bandar Lampung. Bandar Lampung: Universitas Lampung, Unpublished Script.

Rodríguez Cervantes, C. and Roux Rodriguez, R. 2012. The use of communication strategies in the beginner EFL classroom. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, Vol.6 No. 1, 111-127.

Rossiter, M. J. 2003. It’s like chicken but bigger: Effects of communication strategy in the ESL classroom, Canadian Modern Language Review, 60, 105-121.

Santi, S.A. 2013. Implementing EXCLUSIVE Learning Model in Improving Students’ Speaking Skill at the First Grade of SMA Negeri 9 Bandar Lampung. Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung, Unpublished Script.

Spolsky, B. 1999. Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Susilawati, A. 2007. The Effect of Learning Strategy Training : Socio Affective Strategy in Improving speaking. Bandar Lampung: University of Lampung, Unpublished Script.

Tarone, E., Cohen, A.D., and Dumas, G. 1976. A closer look at some interlanguage terminology: A framework for communication strategies. In C. Færch and G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. Harlow: Longman. Tarone, E. 1977. Conscious communication strategies in interlanguage: A progress

report. In H. D. Brown, C. A. Yorio & R. C. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL 77 (pp. 194-203). Washington, DC: TESOL.

Wei, L. 2011. A Study of Chinese English Learner’s Attitude and Reported Frequency of Communicative Strategies. Sweden: Kristianstad University, Unpublished Script. Willems, G. 1987. Communication strategies and their significance in foreign language

teaching. System, 15, 351-364.

Yenny, 2006. Communication Strategies Employed by Indonesian English Learners Based on the Length of Studies. Surabaya: Universitas Kristen Petra, Unpublished Script.