THE USE OF SCAFFOLDING IN TEACHING SPEAKING.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

APPROVAL……….…..…………..……….i

DECLARATION……….………....ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………..………..iii

ABSTRACT………...……….…….…v

TABLE OF CONTENTS………....vi

LIST OF TABLES……….………...…..ix

LIST OF APPENDICES……….………..….…..x

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study………..………..1

1.2 Purpose f the Study………..………..5

1.3 Research questions…..………..6

1.4 Definition of the Terms………..6

1.5 Scope of the Study……….7

1.6 Significance of the Study.……….8

1.7 Methodology……….………….8

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction……….……….11

2.2 The Zone of Proximal Development………...…….11

2.3 Scaffolding………..……….12

2.4 Teaching Speaking………...………18

_{2.4.1 Five Fundamental Factors in Planning and Teaching a} Conversation Class………...19

2.4.2 Key Terms in Research on Second Language Speaking………...…………..22

2.4.3 Teachers’ Role...24

2.4.4 Teaching Activity……….……… ..……..25

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction………..26

3.2 Research design………26

3.3 Research Site 3.3.1 Settings………...27

3.3.2 Participants……….…28

3.4 Data Collection Techniques………28

3.4.1 Classroom Observations………..29

3.4.2 Interviews………....30

3.5 Validity and Reliability………30

3.7 Concluding Remark……….………32

CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction………..…33

4.2 Types of Scaffolding………...……….…33

4.3 The Reasons behind the Use of Scaffolding………52

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1Conclusions………...………57

5.2 Suggestions………...…… ...…58

BIBLIOGRAPHY………..………60

APPENDICES………64

LIST OF TABLE

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Observation Sheet; teacher’s observation field notes

In the classroom……….………..………....64

Appendix 2: Guided Interview for Teacher………66

Appendix 3: 1st Classroom Teaching and Learning Transcript………..68

Appendix 4: 2nd Classroom Teaching and Learning Transcript………77

Appendix 5: 3rd Classroom Teaching and Learning Transcript………….……...84

Appendix 6: 4th Classroom Teaching and Learning Transcript………97

Appendix 7: 5th Classroom Teaching and Learning Transcript…………...…...113

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1Background of the study

Speaking as one of four language skills is an act of communication. It plays an important role for learners’ language development. Learners’ oral skills are considered crucial in the process of learners language growth in that communicative competence develops shifting from oral to written mode, spoken language comes first. The reason is that naturally language acquisition is initiated through spoken language, and written language is difficult to develop before mastering spoken language. The spoken form has generally been regarded as the primary form of a language upon which the written form is essentially dependent (Hughes, 2002). What the learners do at the beginning of language learning is doing functional language or language accompanying action. On this context, Yunzhong (1985 as cited in Hughes 2002:133) describes the importance of spoken language. He further argues that:

Many language teachers and educators have come to regard a command of the spoken as the most effective means of gaining a fluent reading knowledge and correct speech as the foundation for good writing. They argue that during all our life we shall probably talk more than we shall write. Therefore, speaking a language is far more important than writing it. They have been prone to the belief that learners of a foreign language ought to familiarize themselves with the global structures of the spoken language, within the context of real communication situations where people listen and react.

Teaching students to speak English as a foreign language is very rewarding and challenging for most English teachers. Speaking is perhaps the most demanding skills for the teacher to teach in a foreign language education (Scott and Ytreberg, 1990). The truth is that for many teachers, the speaking class is actually one of the most difficult to teach well (Folse, 2006). Learners have to master several different elements of language in order to say what they want to: vocabulary, pronunciation, structure, function and so on. When speaking, they need to find out the most appropriate words and correct grammar to convey meaning accurately. They have to be able to say what to whom, when (Nunan, 1999). It is, therefore, the effective conversation teachers must be able to do more than just speak the language well (Folse, 2006). The teachers should be able to treat students in such a way that they are engaged with a series of good speaking tasks. The teachers of English should try hard to take into account many factors when planning a speaking class.

To be a fluent speaker of English, learners need good, functional English models to learn to form comprehensible input. Logically, if a teacher of English wants her/his students to be able to speak English, she /he has to speak English in front of her/his students when carrying out their English lesson. In Indonesian context, the quality of teacher talk is most likely important in a success of learning (Suherdi, 2008). However, simply speaking loudly does not make language comprehensible. It just makes her look silly to her learners (Folse, 2006). Musthafa (2001) contends that many Indonesian teachers of English have publicly admitted in seminars – and this has been supported by his own observation in

many different contexts – that English is seldom used in the classroom. Teachers tend to use Bahasa Indonesia to carry out their English lessons, except perhaps when greeting students before the session begins and ends. In situation such as this, students do not have good, functional English language models to learn from. He further confirmed that it is difficult to imagine how students in this learning environment could develop a good sense of purpose and direction in learning English.

Students’ language development depends on what they experience in teaching and learning process. Teachers of English should be able to create meaningful learning activities. How learners acquire a language, Musthafa (2001) suggests that the language learners need ample exposure, engagement, and supports. He, further, elaborates that the most serious challenges facing our English teachers include the issue of exposure to real-life English use, student engagement in real-life communicative activities, and all kinds of environmental supports, which according to research, contribute to the development of learners as communicatively competent users of English for communicative purposes. Learning to speak in a second or foreign language will be facilitated when learners are actively engaged in attempting to communicate (Nunan, 1991).

Language teachers will always look for ways to improve students’ competence and performance; how they can help students to learn English most effectively and efficiently so that they can use the language for real-life purposes. It challenges them, English teachers, to make students learn foreign language successfully. Various teaching methods have been used to improve their classes

and motivate their students. Schools of thought in second language acquisition ranging from structuralism/behaviourism, rationalism and cognitive psychology until constructivism have been taken as approaches. Constructivism assumes that humans generate knowledge and meaning from interaction between students’

experiences and their ideas. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conctructivism

%28learning theory%29). It emphasizes the importance of the learner being actively involved in the learning process. One such strategy is that of scaffolding. Educators and researchers have used the concept of scaffolding as a metaphor to describe and explain the role of adults or more knowledgeable peers in guiding children’s learning and development (Stone, 1998; Wells, 1999; Hammond, 2002; Daniel, 2001 cited in Verenikina, 2003). It refers to support that is designed to provide the assistance necessary to enable learners to accomplish tasks and develop understanding that they would not quite be able to manage on their own (Hammond, 2001). Scaffolding instructions as a teaching strategy comes from Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and his concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD). Vygotsky suggested that adult’s support allows children to operate in the zone of proximal development, the area between what a child can accomplish unaided and what the same child can accomplish with assistance (Hogan and Pressley, 1997). In other word, ZPD is the area in which individual’s optimum learning can occur or space for growth.

Vygotsky as cited in Musthafa (2008) proposes that social interaction profoundly influences cognitive development. According to the sociocultural or social constructivist view, learning is fundamentally a social phenomenon,

requiring both activity and interactivity (Thornbury, 2005:39). He, further, elaborates that in classroom terms, it takes place in cycles of assisted performance, in which learning is collaborative, co-constructed, and scaffolded. Vygotsky as cited in Rose (2008) proposed that all learning takes place in the gap between what a child is able to do independently and what they can do with the support of a teacher. He called this gap where learning takes place the ‘zone of proximal development. He considered learning as closing the gap with scaffolding.

Without the social interaction with other more knowledgeable people, or without teachers’ guidance and help in learners’ ZPD, it will be difficult for learners to develop their knowledge and competence.With the help of adults, learners can do and understand much more than they can on their own (Cameron, 2001). Assistant and support in learners’ Zone of proximal Development is known as scaffolding. By considering such philosophical foundations of language learning in this context, therefore the writer is interested in investigating how English teacher scaffold students’ speaking skills.

1.2Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to investigate scaffolding strategies used by English teachers in improving students’ speaking skills. The study specifically attempts to find out what types of scaffolding to facilitate students in conducting speaking skills in a classroom, to investigate the most frequently applied type of scaffolding, and to investigate the teacher’s pedagogical consideration: the

reasons behind the use of scaffolding strategies in improving learners’ speaking skills.

1.3 Research Questions

1. What types of scaffolding are used by the English teacher during speaking

class?

2. Which type of scaffolding does the English teacher utilize most

frequently?

3. What are the reasons behind the use of scaffolding strategies?

1.4 Definition of Terms

In this study, there are some terms that need to be presented to clarify their meanings namely:

1. Scaffolding refers to teacher assistance and support that is designed to

help learners move towards new skills, concepts, or understandings (Hammond, 2001). In school setting scaffolding is what teachers say and do to enable children to complete complex mental tasks they could not complete without assistance (Pearson and Fielding, 1991, p.842 in Hogan and Pressley, 1997:45).

2. The zone of proximal development is the distance between the actual

development level (of the learner) as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers (Vygotsky, 1978 cited in Hammon, 2001). Vygotsky

proposed that all learning takes place in the gap between what a child is able to do independently and what they can do with the support of a teacher. He called this gap where learning takes place the zone of proximal development (Rose, 2008).

3. Speaking: the action of expressing oneself in speech or giving speeches.

(Concise Oxford Dictionary: 2001). Speaking is the uniquely human act or process of sharing and exchanging information, ideas, and emotions using oral language (Cooper and Moreale, as cited in Fisher and Frey, 2007). In this case, it refers to the students’ speaking.

1.5 Scope of the Study

This study aims at investigating scaffolding strategy used by English teacher in teaching speaking at a Junior High School in Garut regency. More specifically, this study attempts to find out types of scaffolding to facilitate students in conducting speaking skills in a classroom, and to investigate the most applied type of scaffolding and reasoning or theoretical foundations of language learning underpinning his conducting such determinate types of scaffolding. The subjects of this study are an English teacher and the third grade students of a junior high school in Garut.

This research is intended to describe kinds of scaffolding strategies used by an English teacher in teaching speaking at the third grade students of a Junior High School in Garut, and to describe the language learning theories with regard to speaking skills

1.6 Significance of the Study

The notion of scaffolding is nowadays becoming increasingly popular among educators in different areas such as literacy and numeracy, early childhood education and educational psychology for adults (Verenikina, 2003). The result of this study is expected to be a contribution for English teachers to broaden their insight in understanding the concept of scaffolding and the zone of proximal development in language teaching and how they apply the notion in improving speaking skills. Therefore, this study is expected to be beneficial for English teachers in that it can be an inspiration for them on how to help students improve their speaking skills by supporting students to learn English most effectively and efficiently so that they can use the language for real-life purposes.

1.7 Methodology

This study used descriptive method; it employed a qualitative case study design. The researcher used two data collection techniques: direct observation and interviews. The researcher took field notes during his observation. Observation in this study is intended to gain the whole data needed. Furthermore, video camera as well as a tape recorder was also used to help him gain more accurate data. These tools are used in order to attain a clear process of scaffolding strategies used by the teacher during speaking class. Since this is a qualitative study, the researcher need very detailed information that mostly occurs in the classroom. To gather more detailed information that cannot be attained by observation and to cross-check the information found in the observation, the researcher also

employed a guided interview. I analyzed the data obtained as soon as after I had finished conducting the observation and interview. The data were analyzed qualitatively through the following phases: (1) identifying the data, (2) categorizing the data, and (3) interpreting the data. The procedures of this study were described as follows:

The researcher observed the classroom to find out the use of scaffolding for improving students’ speaking skills. He sat behind the students without manipulating and disturbing the teaching and learning process. The researcher observed the class activities by taking notes as well as recording of what is said and what both the teacher and the students do in the classroom. He used video camera and tape recorder as the main instrument for gathering data.

After videotaping, the researcher watched and highlighted the film repeatedly and transcribed them so that the researcher obtains appropriate interpretation. Subsequently, it was confirmed and sent back to the respondents to make sure that it is what the respondent says and means.

To gather more detailed information that cannot be attained by observation and to cross-check the information found in the observation, the researcher also employed a guided interview. He provided some lists of questions before the process of interview began. The interview was carried out in the spare time and he had to make an appointment with the respondent so that he can spare his time for interview.

1.8 Organization of Thesis

The subsequent chapters were organized as follows. Chapter II is the explanation of theories to review related literature. The theories have to do with explanation of Vygotky’s theories: scaffolding and the zone of proximal development, and also speaking skills, which underpins this study. Chapter III describes the research methodology and the design of the study. The research methodology comprises the setting, the participants, data collection techniques, and data analysis. Chapter IV will delineate the research findings concerned with teacher’s scaffolding in improving learners’ speaking skills. Procedures of data collection include classroom observation using video recording and field notes, and interview. Finally, the thesis will be concluded in chapter V, based upon the discussion in chapter IV. In this chapter, the writer will also declare the limitation of the study, and researcher will close the final chapter with recommendations for further research.

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This section will discuss some important elements related to research methodology. The first part begins with the research design and describes how the study was carried out. The second part relates to the participants involved and research setting in the study. The third part is data collection methods. The forth part is the validity and reliability of the study. Subsequently the last part expounds the technique used to analyze the data.

3.2 Research Design

Relevant to the subject, the purpose and the research questions in chapter I, this study employed naturalistic qualitative research design, which means that the researcher did not manipulate or interfere with the classroom activities, but work with the case specifically as the design point of qualitative research (Silverman, 2005). Denzim and Lincoln (2004 cited in Duhita, 2005) defined qualitative research as a multi-method in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researcher studies phenomenon in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. Patton (2001 as quoted in Golafshani, 2003) also assert that qualitative research uses a naturalistic approach that seeks to understand phenomena in context specific settings, such as real world settings, where the researcher doesn’t attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest. Therefore, instead of manipulating the

activities, the researcher focused this study on observation, in identifying and describing the role of the teacher in supporting students learning: the use of scaffolding during speaking class.

This qualitative research design is embracing characteristics of a case study. A case study has been chosen because this study was carried out in “intensive descriptions and analysis of a single unit or bounded system” (Meriam, 1998; Stake, 1985 cited in Emilia, 2005), which is “employed to gain an in depth understanding of the situation and meaning for those involved”(Meriam, 1998, p. 19). Thus, the research focused in this study concerned on the use of scaffolding in improving students’ speaking skills.

3.3 Research Sites 3.3.1 Settings

This research was conducted in a class of a Junior Secondary School in Garut regency, West Java. There were a number of reasons for choosing this school. First, it had something to do with accessibility; the school authorities (in this case, the headmaster and teachers) welcomed the researcher to conduct this study in their school. Second, the familiarity of the class condition enabled the researcher to comprehensively conduct the study. The researcher has been familiar with the school environment because he had ever been teaching at the school. Third, from the researcher’s view, this school has good atmosphere for learners’ language development in that one of the English teacher actively encourage students by giving ample exposure with real life English use.

3.3.2 Participants

The participants of this research were the English teacher and his third year students of a Junior High School in Garut Regency. The teacher has been teaching English for more than twelve years. He gained his undergraduate degree (S1) from the English Department of the faculty of teacher training and education of a private university in Garut. He had experiences with regard to English language teaching; he attended the national seminar of competence-based curriculum; he initiated to join the Desentralized-Based Education traning program. He held the education certificate (sertifikat pendidik) through joining The Education and Training for Teacher Profession (Pelatihan dan Latihan Profesi Guru/PLPG). The respondents were chosen purposefully based on the

research topic. In this research, the respondents were the third year students and an English teacher first semester in academic year 2010/2011. The number of the students was 40 students as excellent class in that school. According to Patton (1990 as cited in Maxwell,1996) that qualitative paradigm ‘ignores the fact that most sampling in qualitative research is neither probability nor convenience sampling but falls into a third category: purposeful sampling.’

Based on the statement above, it was concluded that in order to get closer to the process of learning activities in the classroom, it was better to choose a respondent based on the conditions involved and the local values in its process. 3.4 Data collection Techniques

Travers (2001, p. 2) states that here are five main method employed by qualitative researchers: observation, interview, ethnographic fieldwork, discourse

analysis and textual analysis. As outlined above, this research employed a qualitative research, using one of those techniques of data collection above, “and conducted not only at the conclusion of the study, but also in an ongoing way” (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2002 cited in Emilia, 2005a, p. 10). The main qualitative data which were used in this research was types of scaffolding will be collected through classroom observation and videotaping. Then, to uncover theoretical foundations of language learning underpinning the English teacher’s conducting such determinate types scaffolding, or additional information about the data, interview also have done by the researcher.

3.4.1 Classroom Observations

The main observer of this research is the researcher himself, in which the researcher acted as a non-participant observer. Observation was conducted in five meetings first semester academic year 2010/2011. The researcher was sitting behind the students without manipulating the teaching and learning process. The class was observed around the English teaching and learning process. These activities were intended to identify types of scaffolding used by The English teacher. The researcher observed the class activities by taking notes as well as recording of what was said and what both the teacher and the students did in the teaching and learning process. The researcher also wrote observation notes immediately after each session, in order to keep “the memory of the observation is still fresh”(Van Lier, 1988: 241 in Emilia, 2005a).

The researcher used video camera as the main instrument for gathering the data. It can function both for videotaping and audio-taping.

3.4.2 Interview

To find out theoretical foundations of language learning underpinning his conducting such determinate kinds of scaffolding, the English teacher was interviewed. Interviews were conducted as semi-structured interview and in-depth interview, in which the questions developed were mainly based on the observations. The subject was asked about his opinion not only the reason for choosing the most frequently applied types of scaffolding but also assumption in terms of development of his theoretical knowledge that inspires his teaching. To avoid difficulties in expressing himself, all interviews were conducted in Indonesian and they were tape-recorded.

3.5 Validity and Reliability

Validity according to Maxwell (1986:87) relates to the correctness and credibility of a description, conclusion, explanation, interpretation, or other sort of accounts. Therefore, to maintain and gain a more valid and accurate data, Meriam (1988) also proposes that there are some strategies that can be used to ensure the validity of investigation such as triangulation, member checks, and observation. In this study, the researcher used observation and interview as my method. In conducting observation, the teaching and learning process was videotaped, and He also took field note. Then, interview was recorded.

He also provided a rich, thick, detailed and complete description that could provide a full and revealing picture of what was going on in the classroom. Video recording of the classroom observation was transcribed so I could get clear picture

of what exactly happened in the classroom during speaking class. And also, the recorded interview was transcribed for further analysis.

3.6 Data Analysis

In this research, the researcher applied inductive analytical approach (Alwasilah, 2002). It means that the data analysis began while data were being gathered. As the characteristic of qualitative research, the analyses were tentative and provisional throughout the study and only become comprehensive one when the data were completely collected (Meriam, 1998). Ongoing data analyses and interpretation were based on data mainly from observations.

First, the researcher observed the teaching and learning process by using video recording and if possible he wrote some field notes. After each videotaping of five meetings, the researcher watched and highlighted the film repeatedly and transcribed them. The researcher categorized what the English teacher did and said during speaking class into eleven categories. Subsequently the researcher computed each category for its frequency. So, it was found some kinds of scaffolding the English teacher utilized and their frequency. The most frequently applied type of scaffolding was doing elicitation.

Subsequently, such determinate kinds of scaffolding were made as the basis for interview. The English teacher was interviewed to gain his theoretical foundations of language learning underpinning his conducting such kinds of scaffolding.

3.7 Concluding Remark

The purpose of this study was to investigate scaffolding strategies utilized by the English teacher in improving learners’ speaking skills. It was a qualitative research under characteristic of case study which employed a naturalistic paradigm and used an analytic induction method. To compile the data, the researcher utilized multiple techniques and tools such as audio-videotaping, field note, and interview. Subsequently the data obtained from the instruments were presented and analyzed in the next chapter to answer the preceding research questions.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Having elaborated and analyzed the aforementioned findings, this chapter puts forward conclusions of the present study and proposes some suggestions. First, the conclusions are developed on the basis of research analysis and its findings. Second, the suggestions are directed to those who are interested in the issues addressed here and are willing to carry out further studies.

5.1 Conclusion

This study was supposed to find out scaffolding strategies utilized by the English teacher in improving learners’ speaking skills. From the results and and findings in previous chapter, several conclusion can be drawn.

There appeared to be some evidence of scaffolding during speaking class, namely: offering explanation, verifying and clarifying students understanding, modeling, game, drilling, doing elicitation, work in pairs, stating goal, gesture,

error correction, and motivating.

The most frequently applied type of scaffolding was doing elicitation. It was done because of several pedagogical considerations: theoretical foundations of language learning underpinning such determinate types of scaffolding. The fact is that the students lack of opportunities to use English both in the classroom and outside of calss; they communicate in Sundanese and Bahasa Indonesia. The students who were reluctant and highly infrequently communicating in English needed teacher’s support and assistant. Doing elicitation was considered effective, successful, feasible for learners’ language acquisition.

There appeared to be some reasons behind the use of scaffolding. Firstly, language learners need opportunities to acquire the target language and get involved in meaningful communicative events. They need exercises which enable them to attain communicative objectives of the curriculum, engagement in communication, and require the use of such communicative processes as information sharing, negotiation of meaning, and interaction. Secondly, language learners need an enjoyable and more relax classroom learning atmosphere. Most of the students did not like speaking English or having English conversation lesson. This call for a serious attention in that fluency, which is the final goal of classroom teaching and learning, can only be achieved through communication. To reach this, Young (1991, as cited in Pang & Liu, 2006) claims that It requires the English teachers to create a friendly and low-anxiety classroom learning environment in which the students can communicate with each other freely in the target language. Thirdly, to foster language learners’ development, the language learners need a great deal of exposure to real-life English use. It is the language the teachers use in the classroom as the major source of comprehensible target language input. It is important for language learners to listen to as much English in meaningful context.

5.2 Suggestions

The findings of the present study offer some suggestion for further research in the same field of inquiry and teachers.

Despite the fact that this study provides evidence of the issue being investigated and might be useful for basic information for further research, the finding is not exhaustive since a limited number of observations were merely allowed to be conducted due to the factors provided for conducting this study. This study only covers very limited areas and discusses certain points. This study only took five the classroom observation. Other phenomenon could be found if the classroom observation were done more than five meetings. In relation to the number of students and classes involved in this study, it would be good if the class used as the samples more than one teacher and 40 students in one class. Therefore, further studies are needed for comprehensive understanding about scaffolding strategies in accordance with L2 speaking.

REFERNCES:

Alwasilah, A. C. 2002. Pokonya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: P T Dunia Pustaka Jaya.

Cameron, L. 2001. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cook, V. 2008. Second Language Learning and Lanugage Teaching. London: Hodder Education, part of Hachette Livre UK.

Cotteral, S. & Cohen, R. 2003. Scaffolding for Second Language Writer: producing an academic essay. ELT journal: Volume 57/2 April 2003. Oxford University Press.

Dolya, G. 2007. Vygotsky in Action in The Early Years. The ‘Key to Learning’ curriculum. Great Britain: Routledge.

Duhita, R. A. 2005. The Implementation of Conference in The Process of Writing at EFL Classroom. A Thesis: Bandung.

Emilia, at al. (2005a). The Place of Critical Thinking in Brunei Educatinal System: A case Study. Project Proposal of SEASREP Grant, Application, Regional Collaboration Grant.

Ersoz, A. 2000. From ‘Six Games for the EFL/ESL Classroom. The Internet TESL journal, Vol. VI, No. 6, June 2000. Available at:

http://www.teflgames.com/why.html. Accessed in October 14th 2011. Musthafa, B. 2010. Five Pillars of Teaching to Young learners in Indonesia. The

presentation in The 57th TEFLIN International Conference. Bandung,

November 1 – 3, 2010. Indonesia University of Education.

Gibbons,P. 2002. Scaffoding Language Scaffolding Learning. Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainsream Classroom. Portsmouth:

Heinemann.

Folse, K. S., 2006. The Art of Teaching Speaking. Michigan: The University of Michigan.

Frey, F. & Nancy, D. 2007. Checking for Understanding.Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Galea, S. F. & Nair, P. 2008. The Use of Scaffolding Strategies among ESL Learners in The Comprehension of Literary Text. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching. Volume 4/ number 2, October 2008.

Hadley, A. O. 2001. Teaching Language in Context. Urbana: Heinle & Heinle, a division of Thomson Learning, Inc.

Hammond, J. 2001. Scaffolding: teaching and learning in language and literacy education. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association.

Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hogan, K. & Pressley, M.1997. Scaffolding Student Learning; Instructional Approach & Issues. Canada: Brookline Books, Inc.

Hughes, R. 2002. Teaching and Researching Speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Karra, M. 2006. Second Language Acquisition: Learners’ Error and Error Correction in Language Teaching. Availabe at:

http://www.proz.com/translation-articles/articles/633/ Accessed in October 7th 2011.

Lynch, L.M. 2008. English Language Error Correction - A Key Language Skills

Development Tool. Available at:

http://ezinearticles.com/?English- Language-Error-Correction---A-Key-Language-Skills-Development-Tool&id=1195768

Martinez, S.G. 2006. Should we correct our students’ error in l2 learning? Encuntro. Journal of Research and Innovation in the Language Classroom Revista de investgacion e innovacion en la clase de lenguas.

Maxwell, J.A. 1996. Qualitative Research Design. An Interactive Approach. California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Musthafa, B. 2001. Communicative Language Teaching in Indonesia: Issues of Theoretical Assumptions and Challenges in Classroom Practice. English Quarterly; A Publication of Canadian Council of Teachers of English Language Arts, Vol 33, Number 1 & 2, 2001.

Musthafa, B. 2008. Teaching English to Young Learners. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.

Nunan, D. 1989. Understanding Language Classrooms. A guide for teacher-initiated action. Cambridge: Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd. Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. A text book for teachers.

Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.

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

Pinter, A. 2006. Teaching Young Languge Learners. New York: Oxford Univrsity Press.

Richards, J. C. & Rogers, T. S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C. & Renandya, W. A. 2002. Methodolody in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rose, D. 2008. Reading to Learn. Accelerating learning and closing the gap.

Melbourne: Catholic Education Office Melbourne.

Scott, W.A & Ytreberg, L.H. 1990.Teaching English to Children. London: Pearson Education Limited.

Suherdi, D. (2002a). Discourse Analysis in Classroom Research. Bandung: English Department UPI.

Suherdi, D. 2006. Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Semiotic Approach. Bandung: UPI Press.

Suherdi, D. 2008. Mikroskop Pedagogik: Alat Anaisis Proses Belajar mengajar. Bandung: UPI Press.

Susilowati, Y. 2006. Teacher’s Scaffolding Talk in English Classes of SMA

Smith, T. (2001). Concise Oxford English Dictionary (tenth edition) on CD Rom Version 1.1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thanasoulas, D. 2002. Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VIII, No. 11, November 2002. Available at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Thanasoulas-Motivation.html

Accessed in October 1st 2011.

The Free Encyclopedia: Constructivism (learning theory) [online] available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_%28learning_theory%29.

Accessed in October 14th 2011.

Traver, 2001. Qualitative Research through Case Study. London: Sage Publication.

Thornbury, S. 2005.How to Teach speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Uberman, A. 1998. From ‘The use of Games For Vovabulary Presentation and

Revision. ‘Forum’ Vol. 36, No. 1. January-March 1998. Available at: http://www.teflgames.com/why.html. Accessed in October 14th 2011. Verenikia, I. 2003. Understanding Scaffolding and the ZPD in Educational

Research. Proceedings of The Joint AARE/NZARE Conference, 2003 - aare.edu.au. (online). Available at: http://www.aare.edu.au/03pap/ver 0382.pdf.

……...Drilling. Retrieved from (http://jobs.languagelink.ru/tefl

clinic/practical_teaching/drilling/Accessed in October 1st 2011.

……...Social Development Theory (Vygotsky). Retrieved from

http://www.learning-theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html Accessed in January 4 th 2012.

2

There appeared to be some reasons behind the use of scaffolding. Firstly, language learners need opportunities to acquire the target language and get involved in meaningful communicative events. They need exercises which enable them to attain communicative objectives of the curriculum, engagement in communication, and require the use of such communicative processes as information sharing, negotiation of meaning, and interaction. Secondly, language learners need an enjoyable and more relax classroom learning atmosphere. Most of the students did not like speaking English or having English conversation lesson. This call for a serious attention in that fluency, which is the final goal of classroom teaching and learning, can only be achieved through communication. To reach this, Young (1991, as cited in Pang & Liu, 2006) claims that It requires the English teachers to create a friendly and low-anxiety classroom learning environment in which the students can communicate with each other freely in the target language. Thirdly, to foster language learners’ development, the language learners need a great deal of exposure to real-life English use. It is the language the teachers use in the classroom as the major source of comprehensible target language input. It is important for language learners to listen to as much English in meaningful context.

5.2 Suggestions

The findings of the present study offer some suggestion for further research in the same field of inquiry and teachers.

3

Despite the fact that this study provides evidence of the issue being investigated and might be useful for basic information for further research, the finding is not exhaustive since a limited number of observations were merely allowed to be conducted due to the factors provided for conducting this study. This study only covers very limited areas and discusses certain points. This study only took five the classroom observation. Other phenomenon could be found if the classroom observation were done more than five meetings. In relation to the number of students and classes involved in this study, it would be good if the class used as the samples more than one teacher and 40 students in one class. Therefore, further studies are needed for comprehensive understanding about scaffolding strategies in accordance with L2 speaking.

1

REFERNCES:

Alwasilah, A. C. 2002. Pokonya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: P T Dunia Pustaka Jaya. Cameron, L. 2001. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Cook, V. 2008. Second Language Learning and Lanugage Teaching. London: Hodder Education, part of Hachette Livre UK.

Cotteral, S. & Cohen, R. 2003. Scaffolding for Second Language Writer: producing an academic essay. ELT journal: Volume 57/2 April 2003. Oxford University Press.

Dolya, G. 2007. Vygotsky in Action in The Early Years. The ‘Key to Learning’ curriculum. Great Britain: Routledge.

Duhita, R. A. 2005. The Implementation of Conference in The Process of Writing at EFL Classroom. A Thesis: Bandung.

Emilia, at al. (2005a). The Place of Critical Thinking in Brunei Educatinal System: A case Study. Project Proposal of SEASREP Grant, Application, Regional Collaboration Grant.

Ersoz, A. 2000. From ‘Six Games for the EFL/ESL Classroom. The Internet TESL journal, Vol. VI, No. 6, June 2000. Available at:

http://www.teflgames.com/why.html. Accessed in October 14th 2011.

Musthafa, B. 2010. Five Pillars of Teaching to Young learners in Indonesia. The presentation in The 57th TEFLIN International Conference. Bandung, November 1 – 3, 2010. Indonesia University of Education.

Gibbons,P. 2002. Scaffoding Language Scaffolding Learning. Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainsream Classroom. Portsmouth:

Heinemann.

Folse, K. S., 2006. The Art of Teaching Speaking. Michigan: The University of Michigan.

Frey, F. & Nancy, D. 2007. Checking for Understanding.Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

2

Galea, S. F. & Nair, P. 2008. The Use of Scaffolding Strategies among ESL Learners in The Comprehension of Literary Text. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching. Volume 4/ number 2, October 2008.

Hadley, A. O. 2001. Teaching Language in Context. Urbana: Heinle & Heinle, a division of Thomson Learning, Inc.

Hammond, J. 2001. Scaffolding: teaching and learning in language and literacy education. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association.

Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hogan, K. & Pressley, M.1997. Scaffolding Student Learning; Instructional Approach & Issues. Canada: Brookline Books, Inc.

Hughes, R. 2002. Teaching and Researching Speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Karra, M. 2006. Second Language Acquisition: Learners’ Error and Error Correction in Language Teaching. Availabe at:

http://www.proz.com/translation-articles/articles/633/ Accessed in October

7th 2011.

Lynch, L.M. 2008. English Language Error Correction - A Key Language Skills Development Tool. Available at:

http://ezinearticles.com/?English- Language-Error-Correction---A-Key-Language-Skills-Development-Tool&id=1195768

Martinez, S.G. 2006. Should we correct our students’ error in l2 learning? Encuntro. Journal of Research and Innovation in the Language Classroom Revista de investgacion e innovacion en la clase de lenguas.

Maxwell, J.A. 1996. Qualitative Research Design. An Interactive Approach. California: Sage Publications, Inc.

3

Musthafa, B. 2001. Communicative Language Teaching in Indonesia: Issues of Theoretical Assumptions and Challenges in Classroom Practice. English Quarterly; A Publication of Canadian Council of Teachers of English Language Arts, Vol 33, Number 1 & 2, 2001.

Musthafa, B. 2008. Teaching English to Young Learners. Bandung: Indonesia University of Education.

Nunan, D. 1989. Understanding Language Classrooms. A guide for teacher-initiated action. Cambridge: Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd. Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. A text book for teachers.

Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.

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

Pinter, A. 2006. Teaching Young Languge Learners. New York: Oxford Univrsity Press.

Richards, J. C. & Rogers, T. S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C. & Renandya, W. A. 2002. Methodolody in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rose, D. 2008. Reading to Learn. Accelerating learning and closing the gap.

Melbourne: Catholic Education Office Melbourne.

Scott, W.A & Ytreberg, L.H. 1990.Teaching English to Children. London: Pearson Education Limited.

Suherdi, D. (2002a). Discourse Analysis in Classroom Research. Bandung: English Department UPI.

Suherdi, D. 2006. Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Semiotic Approach. Bandung: UPI Press.

Suherdi, D. 2008. Mikroskop Pedagogik: Alat Anaisis Proses Belajar mengajar. Bandung: UPI Press.

Susilowati, Y. 2006. Teacher’s Scaffolding Talk in English Classes of SMA Negeri 1 Ungaran.The 54th TEFLIN International Conference 2006.

4

Smith, T. (2001). Concise Oxford English Dictionary (tenth edition) on CD Rom Version 1.1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thanasoulas, D. 2002. Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VIII, No. 11, November 2002. Available at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Thanasoulas-Motivation.html

Accessed in October 1st 2011.

The Free Encyclopedia: Constructivism (learning theory) [online] available at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_%28learning_theory%29.

Accessed in October 14th 2011.

Traver, 2001. Qualitative Research through Case Study. London: Sage Publication.

Thornbury, S. 2005.How to Teach speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Uberman, A. 1998. From ‘The use of Games For Vovabulary Presentation and

Revision. ‘Forum’ Vol. 36, No. 1. January-March 1998. Available at:

http://www.teflgames.com/why.html. Accessed in October 14th 2011.

Verenikia, I. 2003. Understanding Scaffolding and the ZPD in Educational Research. Proceedings of The Joint AARE/NZARE Conference, 2003 - aare.edu.au. (online). Available at: http://www.aare.edu.au/03pap/ver 0382.pdf.

……...Drilling. Retrieved from (http://jobs.languagelink.ru/tefl

clinic/practical_teaching/drilling/Accessed in October 1st 2011. ……...Social Development Theory (Vygotsky). Retrieved from

http://www.learning-theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html