3. Informal interview is less formal rather that structured and semi-structured
interview. In this kind of interview, the interview and the interviewee have casual conversation, and usually there will be no specific or sequence of the
questions. 4.
Retrospective interview refers to the interview activity in which the interviewer will try to recall the interviewee‟s memory happened in the past
and ask him or her to reconstruct it. In this research, semi structured interview was used so that the data gained
could be controlled in such a way in order not to make them too broad. This semi- structured interview was conducted with the English teacher and the research
respondents. The data which was gained from the teacher provided information about students‟ speaking performance and the background knowledge to the
researcher. In doing this particular interview, the researcher used English. On the other hand, the data which was gained from the research respondents was used to
categorize the students monitor performance Monitor over-users, under-users, and optimal-users. Moreover, this data would support the result from the
questionnaire. In this interview, the researcher used bahasa Indonesia so that it would be easier for them to understand the content of each question in the
interview itself. The interview guide for the English teacher and research respondents were provided in Appendix N.
3.6 Data Analysis Method
Data analysis method refers to the method that was used to analyze the gained data. After giving score to the students‟ speaking performance and
analyzing the result from the questionnaire and the interview, the students‟
monitor performance was analyzed quantitively. The researcher used percentage formula proposed by Ali 1993:186, in which he says that in order to be able to
get the percentage of certain score, the gained score can be divided with the total gained score and times 100. The quantitive formulation that was used to analyze
the students‟ monitor performance was as follow:
n E =
x 100 N
E = The students‟ monitor performance of speaking in percentage. n = The total number of Students who does the monitor performance.
Optimal-user, over-user, and under- user. N = The total number of students.
Adapted from Ali, 1993:186
The steps of analyzing the data were as follow: 1.
Making transcription of students‟ speaking test. 2.
Giving scores to the students‟ speaking performance based on the each aspects in the scoring guide.
3. Finding total score of the students‟ speaking test.
4. Analyzing the results of the questionnaire that is given to the students after
having speaking test. 5.
Giving interview to the students about the results of questionnaire. 6.
Analyzing the collected data by matching the results with the characteristics of the variation in Krashen‟s Monitor Hypothesis Monitor
Optimal-users, over-users, or under-users. 7.
Classifying the students speaking performance based on the variation in Krashen‟s Monitor Hypothesis Monitor Optimal-users, over-users, or
under-users. 8.
Analyzing the students‟ monitor performance by using the quantitative formula above.
In order to help the assessor give score to the students speaking performance, the researcher used a rubric score containing four aspects of
speaking, they are: Grammar-Vocabulary, Discourse Management, pronunciation, and interactive communication. The score of each aspect would be combined to
formulate the total score. Detail information was presented in Appendix F.
CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
