STUDENTS’ OBSTACLES IN PRACTICING SPEAKING ENGLISH : A Case Study at Batam Polytechnic.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
This chapters will give an introduction to the study. It begins with the
elaboration on the background why this study is undertaken and followed by the
formulation of the research questions, the purpose, and the significance of the study.
The limitation of the research is also stated in this chapter before it is ended by
describing how this study report is organized.
1.1 The Background of the Research Problem
No one can deny the universality of English. In Indonesia, as in many outside
English-speaking countries, English has become a compulsory component of
education. At many schools and universities, English is chosen as an obligatory
subject for students as English is considered to be a useful tool to access the world
knowledge. The importance of English language teaching is more significant in
Indonesian vocational schools – which prepare their graduates to work – since the
English ability has become a very significant factor in winning the very tight
competition of getting a job in this globalization era.
On the other hand, many people equate the English ability as being able to
speak in English. Many students regard English speaking ability as the measure of
knowing that language. They define fluency as the ability to converse with others,
much more than the ability to read, write, or comprehend oral language. They
1
consider speaking as the most important skill they can acquire, and they assess their
progress in terms of their accomplishments in spoken communication. Nunan
(2000:39) writes, "To most people, mastering the art of speaking, is the single most
important aspect of learning a second or foreign language, and success is measured in
term of the ability to carry out a conversation in the language."
Speaking is a language skill that needs a lot of practices, such as how to
pronounce the words correctly, how to produce grammatically correct, create
logically connected sentences, and so on. In this sense, Thornbury (2006:6) describes
that “Speaking is like another skill, such as driving or playing a musical instrument:
the more practice you get, the more likely it is you will be able to speak.” Most of the
students and almost all English teachers actually know that speaking skill needs to be
developed by doing a lot of practices. Yet in fact, many EFL teachers often find it is
difficult to ask their students to practice speaking English.
Hammer (2001) has found some reasons for this student’s unwillingness to try
to speak in English. One of them is the students’ low self-esteem which may result
part from the lack respect of the teachers and the peers. It is in line with other reasons
found by Johns and Johns, those are; students’ lack of confidence in their ability to
express themselves, and in their ability to formulate ideas in English and to respond
quickly in a discussion (in Flowerdew, 2001). While Nunan (200) and Brown (2001)
mention that one of the problems is the interlocutor’s inability in negotiating meaning
in order to achieve the communicative ends.
2
Dealing with this case in Indonesia context, some researches have touched on
this problem. Lengkanawati (2004) states that even though many people now (since
the reform movement) are not hesitant to speak up, this kind of behavior has not fully
been reflected in the classroom interaction yet. Putra (2004) has investigated the
attitude of six students of Vocational High School of Telecommunication in
Banjarbaru South Kalimantan in performing public speaking of English as a foreign
language through English debate competition. Some of his “extensive findings” have
identified that the students had got mental problems such a fright of making mistakes
during the competition. Warliah (2004) has done another research at SMU N 8
Bandung about students’ reluctance to raise question in the classroom. And she has
also found that most of the students do not raise questions in English classes because
of being afraid of making mistakes. Fitri (2005) has found other obstacles faced by
the third-year students of English Department of UPI following the English speaking
group work, they are; the lack of self-confidence and the lack of vocabulary.
At Batam Polytechnic, as a tertiary vocational school, students have to
accumulate six credits of English out of 110 total credits for a diploma degree.
Students study English in three out of six semesters. During the three semesters, the
English lecturers are supposed to spend most their time and potency in preparing the
speaking program and developing their skill on how to teach and to motivate the
students to speak. Yet, in fact, there are still many students get reluctant to practice
speaking English.
3
Indeed, it has been many times that the teaching of speaking in Batam
Polytechnic faces the students’ low motivation. The class interaction is very
minimum, since most of the students do not give active participations. The students’
passiveness and unwillingness to speak English often almost foil the lecturers’
attempts to use English in the classroom. It is supposed that the students should
transfer what they have learned in class to outside the classroom so that the
knowledge and skills the students acquire in their classrooms can be reinforced and
retained. However, it seems too idealistic to prod the students to speak English
outside the classrooms since even in the English classes most of them still get
reluctant to practice speaking English and remain using Indonesian instead.
Owing to this fact, the researcher was eager to seek what obstacles that have
hindered Batam Polytechnic students from practicing speaking English. The
researcher believed that there must be serious problems behind this reluctance.
Finding the obstacles behind the students’ reluctance to practice speaking English
would provide the lecturers a hint for improving the teaching of speaking in the
campus in the future.
1.2 Research Questions
Based on what has been described above, the research questions are
formulated as follows:
1
What are the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English from the students’
point of view?
4
2
What are the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English from the
lecturers’ point of view?
3
What are the possible solutions to those obstacles?
1.3 The Purpose of the Study
As it is reflected in the research questions above, the purposes of the studies
are stated as follows:
1. To find out the obstacles that hinder the students from practicing speaking
English.
2. To find the English lecturers’ opinions about those obstacles.
3. To find the possible solutions to those obstacles.
1.4 The Significance of the Study
In general, the findings of this study are supposed to contribute informative
data and description about obstacles that hinder the students from practicing speaking
English. In addition, teachers, lecturers, educators, researchers and theorists who deal
with English teaching-learning can take the advantages from the result of this inquiry.
For the English lecturers, as has been outlined in the previous section, the
need of the finding out the real obstacles that hinder the students from practicing
speaking English is just like the need of diagnosing a patient for a doctor. As it is by
doing an appropriate diagnosis, a doctor can give a suitable treatment to the patient,
5
thus, the findings of this research will give the lecturers the apposite information for
taking proper solutions to the students’ reluctance in practicing speaking English.
The findings will also give benefits to the students. Most of the students who
are reluctant to practice speaking English do not really know what problems that
hinder them from doing it. They never ask themselves seriously about it, and nobody
else does either. By knowing their real obstacles, a path that leads to a solution will
be opened.
Likewise, the institution will also know what facilities have to be prepared to
help the English lectures and the students to overcome the difficulties. Thus, the
institution, the English lectures and the students can be bound to work together to
give the solution to the obstacles.
1.5 Research Limitation
This study is done in the context and situation of Batam Polytechnic, therefore
the transferability of its findings would be limited to those locations that have
necessary distinctiveness comparable to the context of Batam Polytechnic.
1.6 Organization of the Reports
This report is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 deals with the
background and the significance of the study.
6
Chapter 2 presents the underlying theories which include relevant researches
and publications concerning the students’ difficulties is speaking English. In addition,
this chapter also discusses what makes a good speaking teaching as well as on what
makes a good speaking learner.
Chapter 3 deals with the research method and explains how the data were
collected and analyzed in the light of theories presented in chapter 2.
In chapter 4, the findings are presented in summary tables to show the kinds
of the obstacles that hinder the students to practice speaking English. The tables also
show the quantification of each kind of obstacles in the form of percentage. These
findings are then interpreted and discussed by relating and comparing them to the
relevant studies discussed in chapter 2. This chapter is ended by proposing some
possible solutions to the obstacles found.
In chapter 5, the conclusions of this study are provided and suggestions for the
English lecturers, for the students, and for further research are proposed.
7
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
This chapter begins with the discussion on the research method followed by
the choice of the research site and the participant. Further more, it talks about the
techniques of collecting as well as the validity of the data. This chapter finally ends
with an elaboration on the techniques of the data analysis.
3.1 The Research Method
This study is descriptive and qualitative in nature since it focuses on
observing, interpreting, and understanding the collected data to find the real obstacles
that hinder the students from practicing speaking English. Qualitative study in nature
is conducted inductively, meaning that the study begins from data collected from the
field and analyzed (Cresswell, 1984). Descriptive method, because this method
characterized by attempting to describe characteristics and events that exist (Kamil,
1985). The researcher decided to use this method since his intension was to obtain a
thick description about the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English.
In particular, this study employed a case study method considering that this is
the most appropriate method in investigating the phenomenon of the students’
reluctance to practice speaking English. Meriam (1998) states that a qualitative case
study is an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single instance,
phenomenon, or social unit. She also explains that a case study is a process, which
38
tries to describe and analyze some entities in qualitative, complex and comprehensive
terms not infrequently as it, unfolds over a period of time.
3.2 The Research Site
The study was conducted at Batam Polytechnic. The researcher chose this
university because it is one of the favorite universities is Batam and it is easy to
access since the researcher has been working there for years.
3.3 The Participants and the Samples
The participants were the second semester of Batam Polytechnic students
consisting of 270 students. Those students were divided into nine classes – those
were thirty students in each class, based on their English ability level. The students’
English ability was leveled by using TOEIC model test.
English was only taught in the first until to the third semester in Batam
Polytechnic. Hence, in the even period semester in which the data was taken, it was
only the second semester classes which were taking English course. The fourth and
the sixth semesters had no more English course. The other reason why the second
semester students were chosen was because the fourth semester students have already
got attachment program, while the sixth semester students have got busy with their
final project.
The sampling techniques applied was purposive sampling in which based on
the specific purpose of the research, the researcher used personal judgment to select
39
the samples (Fraenkel, 2001). Since the purpose of the research was to find out the
obstacles in practicing speaking English, with the help of the English lecturers, the
researcher chose the ten least active students in practicing speaking English from
each of the nine classes. Hence, from those 270 participants, ninety students (33.3%)
were selected to become the respondents of the research.
3.4 The Techniques of Collecting Data
In qualitative research the trustworthiness and authenticity of the data
collection play a very important role (Guba, 1981; Lincoln & Guba 1985 as cited in
Musthafa, 2000). Hence, in collecting the data the researcher applied questionnaires
and interviews.
The questionnaires were distributed to the ten least active students in
practicing speaking English from each class to browse in and elicit their ideas and
reasons why they get reluctant to do the practice. To get a more comprehensive data,
the English lecturers were then interviewed to get their perception about the student’s
obstacles as well as to search out their opinion about how overcome the obstacles.
3.5 Validity
In order to enhance and maximize the trustworthiness of the research result, the
researcher applied some strategy as follows: Firstly, the questionnaires were
distributed to the ten least active students in practicing speaking English from each
40
class in order to elicit the obstacles that hinder them from doing the practice. After
that, to get a more valid data, the English lecturers were also interviewed to get their
perception about the student’s obstacles in the absence of the students.
3.6 The Techniques of Data Analysis
In analyzing the collected data, the researcher took the followings the steps:
Firstly, the analysis was done by identifying the students’ opinion about their
obstacles in practicing speaking English from their answers to the questionnaire
questions.
Secondly, after collecting the findings, categorization was made based on the
source of the obstacles. There were three categories of obstacles that explain the
Batam Polytechnic students’ reluctance to practice speaking English; obstacles
related to the students themselves, obstacles related to lecturer, and obstacles related
to environment. However, some of the obstacles were overlapping since some
students had more than one barrier in practicing speaking English.
Thirdly, the quantification was made. This was done by quantifying the
frequencies of each obstacle, obstacles subcategories, and obstacles categories in the
form of percentage.
Then, the first until to the third steps were employed with the lecturers’
opinions about the students’ obstacle from the interview data.
41
After that, the data about obstacles from the students’ point of view and from
the lecturers’ point of vies were compared in which they were the same and different.
Both the students and the lecturers had the same opinion about the students’
limitations in vocabulary and grammar as the main obstacles for the student to
practice speaking English. They also had the same opinion about the obstacles related
to environment. Yet, they had different opinion about the students’ limitation in
pronunciation and about the obstacles related to the lecturer.
Next, each of the obstacles was analyzed using the theories presented in
chapter 2 to see how it hindered the students from practicing speaking English.
Finally, the lecturers’ opinions about the future improvement of the speaking
teaching in Batam Polytechnic were analyzed using the theories presented in chapter
2 to find out the possible solutions to each of the obstacles.
42
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
Based on the research findings, the study comes to the following conclusions:
Firstly, the study found three categories of obstacles that explain the Batam
Polytechnic students’ reluctance to practice speaking English from the students’s
point of view: the obstacles related to the students themselves (98.89%), the obstacles
related to the lecturers (10.00%), and the obstacles related to the environment
(2.22%).
Secondly, The study found also found the same categories of obstacles from
the lecturers’ point of view; obstacles related to the students themselves (100%),
obstacles related to lecturers (66.67%), and obstacles related to environment
(33.33%).
There were similarities and differences between the students and the lecturers
in viewing the obstacles related to the students themselves. Both the students and the
lecturers had the same opinion about the students’ limitations in vocabulary and
grammar as the main obstacles for the student to practice speaking English. These
two limitations did not enable the students to produce sentences for expressing their
ideas. The students also worried about their mispronunciation. Yet, the lecturers had
different opinion about this case. They did not think that the student’s pronunciation
had to resemble the native one. Realizing their limitations, the students got afraid of
97
making mistakes. It made them anxious and shy to be laugh. And because they did
not want to take this risk, they finally stopped practicing speaking English and just
kept silent or remained speaking Indonesian instead.
The students and the lecturers also had different opinion about the obstacles
related to the lecturer. The students felt that the lecturers didn’t give them enough
time to practice speaking English and that the the lecturers should not teach them
fully in English. Yet, the lecturers thought that the allotted time for English class was
limited while the class was too big. They insisted on using fully English since they
wanted to give the model to the students.
The students and the lecturers had the same opinion again in viewing the
obstacles related to the environment. The students complained about the fully
Indonesian speaking environment and the lack of the partner to practice speaking
English. The lectures said that it was the easiness of the students to give up speaking
English that caused these two problems.
Finally, the study found that the possible solution to the sudents’ limitation
English skill is by teaching them more on vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation
for communicative purposes. The possible solution to the students’ inability to
manage their emotion is by encouraging them to practice speaking English and
facilitating them to do it by creating a relation that is built on trust and respect that
leads them feeling capable, competent and creative. And the possible solution to the
students’ obstacle related the environment is by setting clear guidelines in which the
98
significance of speaking English is stressed and the permissible condition of when to
use Indonesian is clarified.
The findings shows that, in general, the lecturers have done their role quite
well, yet they still need to keep encouraging the students practice speaking English
and to teach them more on vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation for
communicative purposes.
5.2 Recommendation
5.2.1 For the English Lecturers
It is recommended that: first, the lecturers should keep encouraging the
students practice speaking English. The students should be given more time and
opportunities to speak. The lecturers should speak less and the students need to speak
more. Second, the lecturers need to teach the students more on vocabulary, grammar,
and pronunciation. Yet, these skills should be taught for communicative purposes.
Third, the lecturers should not to laugh at the students’ mistakes or let other students
laugh at them. The lecturer may laugh with the students but not at them. It will create
a relation that is built on trust and respect and that leads to students’ feeling capable,
competent and creative. Fourth, the lecturers need to consider about reducing the
number of the students in English classes. Yet, they need to discuss with the Batam
Polytechnic management, since it relates with the institution financial policy and
capability.
99
5.2.2 For Further Research
The students’ reluctance to practice speaking English has become a serious
dilemma in ESL/EFL teaching. This problem needs a holistic solution which should
involve students, educators, education institution, and researchers. This study is a part
of them by having found the obstacles that hinder the students from doing the
practice. Yet, since the research was only done in only one site – Batam Polytechnic,
it is recommended then to the other researchers to do further and wider studies that
involved more than one campus or school.
100
Table of Contents
Page
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………….
i
Preface……………………………………………………………………………… ii
Acknowledgement ......…………………………………………………………….. iii
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………….. iv
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………. vii
List of Appendices ………………………………………………………………… ix
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………
1
1.1 The Background of the Research Problem……………………………………... 1
1.2 Research Questions……………………………………………………………..
4
1.3 The Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………….
5
1.4 The Significance of the Study…………………………………………………..
5
1.5 Research Limitation ……………………………………………………………
6
1.6 Organization of the Report……………………………………………………...
6
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE……………………...
8
2.1 The Concept and the Elements of Speaking …………………………………...
8
2.2 What a Speaker Does ………………………………………………………….. 10
2.3 What Makes Speaking Difficult………………………………………………... 12
2.4 Shyness and Anxiety in Speaking……………………………………………… 13
2.5 What Makes a Good Speaking Teaching………………………………………. 16
2.5.1 Using a Communicative Approach………………………………………. 16
2.5.2 Teaching Vocabulary for a Communicative Purpose……………………. 18
2.5.3 Teaching Grammar a Communicative Purpose………………………….. 21
2.5.4 Teaching Pronunciation a Communicative Purpose……………………... 24
2.5.5 Playing the Teacher Roles Well..………………………………………… 30
2.5.6 Creating a Positive Classroom Environment…………………………….. 32
2.5.7 Handling The Students’ Use of Mother Tongue…….……………. …….. 33
2.5.8 Increasing Students’ Self Confidence …………………………………… 35
2.7 What Makes a Good Speaking Learner….…………………………………….. 36
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY …………………………………………. 38
3.1 The Method Research …………………………………………………………. 38
3.2 The Research Site ……………………………………………………………… 39
3.3 The Participants .……………………………………………………………….. 39
3.4 The Techniques of Collecting Data ……………………………………………. 40
3.5 Validity ….……………………………………………………………………... 40
3.6 The Techniques of Data Analysis ……………………………………………... 41
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS........................... 43
4.1 The Students’ Obstacles in Practicing Speaking English from The Students’
and The Lecturers’ Point of View…………………....………………………… 43
4.1.1 Obstacles Related to Students Themselves………..……………………... 45
4.1.1.1 Lack of English Competences …………………………………… 46
4.1.1.1.1 Lack of Vocabulary Competence ……………………… 48
4.1.1.1.2 Lack of Grammar Competence………………………… 50
4.1.1.1.3 Lack of Pronunciation Competence……………………. 52
4.1.1.2 Inability to Manage Emotion…………………………………….. 54
4.1.1.2.1 Nervousness …………………………………………… 56
4.1.1.2.2 Anxiety…………………………………………………. 57
4.1.1.2.3 Lack of Self Confidence……………………………….. 59
4.1.1.2.4 Shyness…………………………………………………. 60
4.1.1.2.5 Laziness/Lack of Motivation…………………………… 61
4.1.1.2.6 Boredom………………………………………………... 63
4.1.2 Obstacles Related to the Lecturer………………………..………………. 64
4.1.2.1 Limited Time to Practice…………………………………………. 66
4.1.2.2 Fully English Teaching…………………………………………... 69
4.1.3 Obstacles Related to Environment……………………….……………..... 72
4.1.3.1 Limited English Input…………………………………………… 73
4.1.3.2 Lack of Partner to Practice ……………………………………... 74
4.2 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles……………………………………….... 75
4.2.1 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles Related to Self………………….. 75
4.2.1.2 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Vocabulary……... 76
4.2.1.2 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Grammar……….. 81
4.2.1.3 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Pronunciation….. 84
4.2.1.4 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Inability to Manage
Their Emotion................................................................................. 89
4.2.2 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles Related to the Lecturer ………… 91
4.2.3 The Possible Solution to Obstacles Related to the Environment ……….. 95
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………. 97
5.1 Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………. 97
5.2 Recommendations …………………………………………………………….. 99
5.2.1 For the English Lecturers………………………………………………… 99
5.2.2 For the Further Research………………………………………………… 100
BIBLIOGRAPHY
List of Tables
Page
Table 4.1
The Distribution of Respondents' Obstacles Categories
from the Students’ Point of View …………….……………………………………. 44
Table 4.2
The Distribution of Respondents' Obstacles Categories
from the Lecturers’ Point of View …………….…………………………………... 44
Table 4.3
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Students Themselves
from the Students’ Point of View …………….……………………………………. 45
Table 4.4
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Students Themselves
from the Lecturers’ Point of View …………….…………………………………... 46
Table 4.5
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Feeling of
Lacking of English Ability from the Students’ Point of View …………….………. 47
Table 4.6
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Feeling of
Lacking of English Ability from the Lecturers’ Point of View …………….…….. 47
Table 4.7
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Inability to
Manage Emotion from the Students’ Point of View ……………………….……… 55
Table 4.8
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Inability to
Manage Emotion from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……………………….……... 55
Table 4.9
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Lecturer
from the Students’ Point of View ………………………….…………….……….. 65
Table 4.10
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Lecturer
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ………………………….…………….………. 65
Table 4.11
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Environment
from the Students’ Point of View ………………………….…………….……….. 72
Table 4.12
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Environment
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ………………………….…………….………. 72
List of Appendices
Appendix I:
Sample of Student Questionnaire
Appendix II:
Lecturers Interview Script
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Atkinson, D. (1987). “The Mother Tongue in the Classroom: A Neglected
Resources?” EFL Journal. 41, (4), 37-52.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles – An interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Castillo, L. (1990). “L2 Pronunciation Pedagogy: Where have We been? Where are
We Headed? The Language Teacher . 14, (10), 3-7.
Celce-Muria, M. (1987) Teaching Pronunciation as Communication. Washington,
D.C.: TESOL.
Cohen, A. (1977) “Redundancy as a Tool in Listening Comprehension”. TESOL
Quarterly , 16, (1), 71-77.
Cresswell, J. W. (1984). Research Desining: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches.
London: SAGE Publications
Crystal, D. (1995). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Doyon, P. (2000). Shyness in the Japanese EFL class: Why It is a Problem, What It
is, what Causes It, and What to Do. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.jaltpublications.org/tlt/articles/2000/01/doyon. [February 2009].
Eldridge, J. (1996). “Code-Switching in a Turkish Secondary School”. ELT Journal.
50, (4), 25-39.
English Club. Com. (2009). English Speaking. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.
englishclub.com/speaking/language-skills.htm [February 2009].
Fitri, D. I. (2005). Students’ Perception on Group Work Method in Speaking IV
Subject: A Descriptive Study on the Third-year Students of English
Department of UPI. Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished paper).
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Franenkel, J. R. and Norman E. W. (2001). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Education. New York: Hill Inc.
Fraser, H. (1999). “ESL pronunciation teaching: could it be more effective?”
Australian Language Matters, 7 (4). [Online]. Retrieved http://wwwpersonal,une.edu.au/~hfraser/docs/HFLanguageMatters.pdf [April 2009].
Gilbert, J. (1995). Pronunciation Practices as an Aid to Listening Comprehension.
San Diego: Dominic Press.
Harbord, J. (1992). “The Use of Mother Tongue in the Classroom”. ELT Journal. 46,
(4), 67-78.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex: Longman.
Highland Council Education. 2009. What makes a good teacher? [Online].
Retrieved: http://www.highlandschools-virtualib.org.uk/ltt/inclusive_enjoyable/
teacher.htm. [February 2009].
Johnson, K. (2001). An Introduction to Foreign Language Teaching. Essex:
Longman.
Kamil, M. L., et al. (1985). Understanding Research in Reading and Writing.
Toronto: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implication. New York:
Longman.
Kurtus, R. (2001). Overcome the Fear of Speaking to Group. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://www.school-for-champions.com/speaking/fear.htm. [February 2009].
Laroy, C. (1995). Pronunciation. New York: OUP
Lefkoe, M. (2007). End Your Fear Of Public Speaking In Four Hours. [Online].
Retrieved: http://www. speakingwithoutfear.com/ [February 2009]
Lengkanawati, N. S. (2004). “How Learners from Different Cultural Backgrounds
Learn a Foreign Language”. Asian EFL Journal. 6. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://Asian-efl-journal.com [February 2009].
Lynch, L. M. (2005). Grammar Teaching: Implicit or Explicit?. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Grammar-Teaching:-Implicit-or-Explicit?&id=89342
[July 2009].
Maniruzzaman. M. (2009). Teaching Efl Pronunciation: Why, What and How?.
[Online]. Retrieved: http://www.streetdirectory.com/ [July 2009].
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An interactive Approach. New
Delhi: SAGE Publication.
McKenzie, J. (2007). The Wired Classroom [Online]. Retrieved: http://members.
shaw.ca/priscillatheroux/teacherrole.html [February 2009].
Merriam, S. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A qualitative Approach. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Morgan, R. (2002). Developing Teaching Style. [Online].
http://www.creativeteachingsite.com/teach3.htm. [February 2009].
Retrieved:
Morley, J. (1991). “The Pronunciation Component in Teaching English to Speakers
of Other Language”. TESOL Quarterly 25, (1), 51-74.
Musthafa, B. (2000). Judging Qualitative Educational Research: Some Essential
Criteria. Unpublished paper. Postgraduate Program of Indonesian University of
Educational.
Myntti, C. (2006).
Class Atmosphere.
[Online]. Retrieved: http://www1.
umn.edu/ohr/teachlearn/tutorials/syllabus/expectations/atmosphere.html
[February 2009].
National University of Singapore. (2007). Shyness: Factors. [online]. Retrieved:
http://www.nus.edu.sg/uhwc/counselling/selfhelp/shy02.html [February 2009].
Noteboom, S. (1983) Is speech production controlled by speech perception?
Dordrecht: Foris.
Nunan, D. (2000). Language Teaching Methodology. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.
Pennington, M. (1989). “Teaching Pronunciation from the Top Down”. RELC
Journal, 20, (1), 21-38.
Purcell, E. and Suter, R. (1980). “Predictors of pronunciation accuracy: A
Reexamination”. Language Learning. 30, (2), 271-87.
Putra, C. D. (2004). Performing Public Speaking Skill: A Case Study of Six Students
of Vocational High School of Telecommunication in Banjarbaru South
Kalimantan. Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished thesis).
Richards, J., C. and Lockhart, C. (1999). Reflective Teaching in Second Language
Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., C. and Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching:an
anthology of current practice. New York: Cambridge.
Scarcella, R. and Oxford, R. L. (1994). “Second Language Pronunciation: State of the
Art in Instruction”. System. 22, (2), 221-230.
Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Suter, R. (1976) “Predicators of Pronunciation Accuracy in Second Language
Learning”. Language Learning. 26, 233-53.
Thanasoulas, D. (2002). Motivation and Motivating in EFL. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://www.englishclub.com/tefl-articles/motivation-motivating-efl.htm
[February 2009].
The University of Texas at Dallas. (2007). Self-Help: Overcoming Social Anxiety.
[online].
Retrieved: http://www.utdallas.edu/counseling/selfhelp/socialanxiety.html [February 2009].
Thompson, S., Taylor, K. & Gray, G. (2001). “Pronunciation with an Eye on Multiple
Intelligences.
[Online].
Retrieved:
http://www.soundsofenenglish.org/
Presentations/WATESOL2001/multipleintelligencesactivities.htm [May 2009].
Thornbury, S. (2002). How to Teach Vocabulary. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Thornbury, S. (2006). How to Teach Speaking. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
University of Central Florida. (2007). Diversity & Atmosphere. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://www.fctl.ucf.edu/teachingandlearningresources/classroommanagement/di
versityandatmosphere/index.php [February 2009].
Walker, R. (2001). “Pronunciation for international intelligibility.” English Teaching
Professional, 21, 19-26.
Warliah, E. (2004). Students Reluctance to Raise Question in the Classroom (A Case
Study at SMU N 8 Bandung). Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished thesis).
Wilkins, D.A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Arnold.
Wong, R. (1987). Teaching Pronunciation: Focus on English Rhythm and Intonation.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
INTRODUCTION
This chapters will give an introduction to the study. It begins with the
elaboration on the background why this study is undertaken and followed by the
formulation of the research questions, the purpose, and the significance of the study.
The limitation of the research is also stated in this chapter before it is ended by
describing how this study report is organized.
1.1 The Background of the Research Problem
No one can deny the universality of English. In Indonesia, as in many outside
English-speaking countries, English has become a compulsory component of
education. At many schools and universities, English is chosen as an obligatory
subject for students as English is considered to be a useful tool to access the world
knowledge. The importance of English language teaching is more significant in
Indonesian vocational schools – which prepare their graduates to work – since the
English ability has become a very significant factor in winning the very tight
competition of getting a job in this globalization era.
On the other hand, many people equate the English ability as being able to
speak in English. Many students regard English speaking ability as the measure of
knowing that language. They define fluency as the ability to converse with others,
much more than the ability to read, write, or comprehend oral language. They
1
consider speaking as the most important skill they can acquire, and they assess their
progress in terms of their accomplishments in spoken communication. Nunan
(2000:39) writes, "To most people, mastering the art of speaking, is the single most
important aspect of learning a second or foreign language, and success is measured in
term of the ability to carry out a conversation in the language."
Speaking is a language skill that needs a lot of practices, such as how to
pronounce the words correctly, how to produce grammatically correct, create
logically connected sentences, and so on. In this sense, Thornbury (2006:6) describes
that “Speaking is like another skill, such as driving or playing a musical instrument:
the more practice you get, the more likely it is you will be able to speak.” Most of the
students and almost all English teachers actually know that speaking skill needs to be
developed by doing a lot of practices. Yet in fact, many EFL teachers often find it is
difficult to ask their students to practice speaking English.
Hammer (2001) has found some reasons for this student’s unwillingness to try
to speak in English. One of them is the students’ low self-esteem which may result
part from the lack respect of the teachers and the peers. It is in line with other reasons
found by Johns and Johns, those are; students’ lack of confidence in their ability to
express themselves, and in their ability to formulate ideas in English and to respond
quickly in a discussion (in Flowerdew, 2001). While Nunan (200) and Brown (2001)
mention that one of the problems is the interlocutor’s inability in negotiating meaning
in order to achieve the communicative ends.
2
Dealing with this case in Indonesia context, some researches have touched on
this problem. Lengkanawati (2004) states that even though many people now (since
the reform movement) are not hesitant to speak up, this kind of behavior has not fully
been reflected in the classroom interaction yet. Putra (2004) has investigated the
attitude of six students of Vocational High School of Telecommunication in
Banjarbaru South Kalimantan in performing public speaking of English as a foreign
language through English debate competition. Some of his “extensive findings” have
identified that the students had got mental problems such a fright of making mistakes
during the competition. Warliah (2004) has done another research at SMU N 8
Bandung about students’ reluctance to raise question in the classroom. And she has
also found that most of the students do not raise questions in English classes because
of being afraid of making mistakes. Fitri (2005) has found other obstacles faced by
the third-year students of English Department of UPI following the English speaking
group work, they are; the lack of self-confidence and the lack of vocabulary.
At Batam Polytechnic, as a tertiary vocational school, students have to
accumulate six credits of English out of 110 total credits for a diploma degree.
Students study English in three out of six semesters. During the three semesters, the
English lecturers are supposed to spend most their time and potency in preparing the
speaking program and developing their skill on how to teach and to motivate the
students to speak. Yet, in fact, there are still many students get reluctant to practice
speaking English.
3
Indeed, it has been many times that the teaching of speaking in Batam
Polytechnic faces the students’ low motivation. The class interaction is very
minimum, since most of the students do not give active participations. The students’
passiveness and unwillingness to speak English often almost foil the lecturers’
attempts to use English in the classroom. It is supposed that the students should
transfer what they have learned in class to outside the classroom so that the
knowledge and skills the students acquire in their classrooms can be reinforced and
retained. However, it seems too idealistic to prod the students to speak English
outside the classrooms since even in the English classes most of them still get
reluctant to practice speaking English and remain using Indonesian instead.
Owing to this fact, the researcher was eager to seek what obstacles that have
hindered Batam Polytechnic students from practicing speaking English. The
researcher believed that there must be serious problems behind this reluctance.
Finding the obstacles behind the students’ reluctance to practice speaking English
would provide the lecturers a hint for improving the teaching of speaking in the
campus in the future.
1.2 Research Questions
Based on what has been described above, the research questions are
formulated as follows:
1
What are the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English from the students’
point of view?
4
2
What are the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English from the
lecturers’ point of view?
3
What are the possible solutions to those obstacles?
1.3 The Purpose of the Study
As it is reflected in the research questions above, the purposes of the studies
are stated as follows:
1. To find out the obstacles that hinder the students from practicing speaking
English.
2. To find the English lecturers’ opinions about those obstacles.
3. To find the possible solutions to those obstacles.
1.4 The Significance of the Study
In general, the findings of this study are supposed to contribute informative
data and description about obstacles that hinder the students from practicing speaking
English. In addition, teachers, lecturers, educators, researchers and theorists who deal
with English teaching-learning can take the advantages from the result of this inquiry.
For the English lecturers, as has been outlined in the previous section, the
need of the finding out the real obstacles that hinder the students from practicing
speaking English is just like the need of diagnosing a patient for a doctor. As it is by
doing an appropriate diagnosis, a doctor can give a suitable treatment to the patient,
5
thus, the findings of this research will give the lecturers the apposite information for
taking proper solutions to the students’ reluctance in practicing speaking English.
The findings will also give benefits to the students. Most of the students who
are reluctant to practice speaking English do not really know what problems that
hinder them from doing it. They never ask themselves seriously about it, and nobody
else does either. By knowing their real obstacles, a path that leads to a solution will
be opened.
Likewise, the institution will also know what facilities have to be prepared to
help the English lectures and the students to overcome the difficulties. Thus, the
institution, the English lectures and the students can be bound to work together to
give the solution to the obstacles.
1.5 Research Limitation
This study is done in the context and situation of Batam Polytechnic, therefore
the transferability of its findings would be limited to those locations that have
necessary distinctiveness comparable to the context of Batam Polytechnic.
1.6 Organization of the Reports
This report is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 deals with the
background and the significance of the study.
6
Chapter 2 presents the underlying theories which include relevant researches
and publications concerning the students’ difficulties is speaking English. In addition,
this chapter also discusses what makes a good speaking teaching as well as on what
makes a good speaking learner.
Chapter 3 deals with the research method and explains how the data were
collected and analyzed in the light of theories presented in chapter 2.
In chapter 4, the findings are presented in summary tables to show the kinds
of the obstacles that hinder the students to practice speaking English. The tables also
show the quantification of each kind of obstacles in the form of percentage. These
findings are then interpreted and discussed by relating and comparing them to the
relevant studies discussed in chapter 2. This chapter is ended by proposing some
possible solutions to the obstacles found.
In chapter 5, the conclusions of this study are provided and suggestions for the
English lecturers, for the students, and for further research are proposed.
7
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
This chapter begins with the discussion on the research method followed by
the choice of the research site and the participant. Further more, it talks about the
techniques of collecting as well as the validity of the data. This chapter finally ends
with an elaboration on the techniques of the data analysis.
3.1 The Research Method
This study is descriptive and qualitative in nature since it focuses on
observing, interpreting, and understanding the collected data to find the real obstacles
that hinder the students from practicing speaking English. Qualitative study in nature
is conducted inductively, meaning that the study begins from data collected from the
field and analyzed (Cresswell, 1984). Descriptive method, because this method
characterized by attempting to describe characteristics and events that exist (Kamil,
1985). The researcher decided to use this method since his intension was to obtain a
thick description about the students’ obstacles in practicing speaking English.
In particular, this study employed a case study method considering that this is
the most appropriate method in investigating the phenomenon of the students’
reluctance to practice speaking English. Meriam (1998) states that a qualitative case
study is an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single instance,
phenomenon, or social unit. She also explains that a case study is a process, which
38
tries to describe and analyze some entities in qualitative, complex and comprehensive
terms not infrequently as it, unfolds over a period of time.
3.2 The Research Site
The study was conducted at Batam Polytechnic. The researcher chose this
university because it is one of the favorite universities is Batam and it is easy to
access since the researcher has been working there for years.
3.3 The Participants and the Samples
The participants were the second semester of Batam Polytechnic students
consisting of 270 students. Those students were divided into nine classes – those
were thirty students in each class, based on their English ability level. The students’
English ability was leveled by using TOEIC model test.
English was only taught in the first until to the third semester in Batam
Polytechnic. Hence, in the even period semester in which the data was taken, it was
only the second semester classes which were taking English course. The fourth and
the sixth semesters had no more English course. The other reason why the second
semester students were chosen was because the fourth semester students have already
got attachment program, while the sixth semester students have got busy with their
final project.
The sampling techniques applied was purposive sampling in which based on
the specific purpose of the research, the researcher used personal judgment to select
39
the samples (Fraenkel, 2001). Since the purpose of the research was to find out the
obstacles in practicing speaking English, with the help of the English lecturers, the
researcher chose the ten least active students in practicing speaking English from
each of the nine classes. Hence, from those 270 participants, ninety students (33.3%)
were selected to become the respondents of the research.
3.4 The Techniques of Collecting Data
In qualitative research the trustworthiness and authenticity of the data
collection play a very important role (Guba, 1981; Lincoln & Guba 1985 as cited in
Musthafa, 2000). Hence, in collecting the data the researcher applied questionnaires
and interviews.
The questionnaires were distributed to the ten least active students in
practicing speaking English from each class to browse in and elicit their ideas and
reasons why they get reluctant to do the practice. To get a more comprehensive data,
the English lecturers were then interviewed to get their perception about the student’s
obstacles as well as to search out their opinion about how overcome the obstacles.
3.5 Validity
In order to enhance and maximize the trustworthiness of the research result, the
researcher applied some strategy as follows: Firstly, the questionnaires were
distributed to the ten least active students in practicing speaking English from each
40
class in order to elicit the obstacles that hinder them from doing the practice. After
that, to get a more valid data, the English lecturers were also interviewed to get their
perception about the student’s obstacles in the absence of the students.
3.6 The Techniques of Data Analysis
In analyzing the collected data, the researcher took the followings the steps:
Firstly, the analysis was done by identifying the students’ opinion about their
obstacles in practicing speaking English from their answers to the questionnaire
questions.
Secondly, after collecting the findings, categorization was made based on the
source of the obstacles. There were three categories of obstacles that explain the
Batam Polytechnic students’ reluctance to practice speaking English; obstacles
related to the students themselves, obstacles related to lecturer, and obstacles related
to environment. However, some of the obstacles were overlapping since some
students had more than one barrier in practicing speaking English.
Thirdly, the quantification was made. This was done by quantifying the
frequencies of each obstacle, obstacles subcategories, and obstacles categories in the
form of percentage.
Then, the first until to the third steps were employed with the lecturers’
opinions about the students’ obstacle from the interview data.
41
After that, the data about obstacles from the students’ point of view and from
the lecturers’ point of vies were compared in which they were the same and different.
Both the students and the lecturers had the same opinion about the students’
limitations in vocabulary and grammar as the main obstacles for the student to
practice speaking English. They also had the same opinion about the obstacles related
to environment. Yet, they had different opinion about the students’ limitation in
pronunciation and about the obstacles related to the lecturer.
Next, each of the obstacles was analyzed using the theories presented in
chapter 2 to see how it hindered the students from practicing speaking English.
Finally, the lecturers’ opinions about the future improvement of the speaking
teaching in Batam Polytechnic were analyzed using the theories presented in chapter
2 to find out the possible solutions to each of the obstacles.
42
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
Based on the research findings, the study comes to the following conclusions:
Firstly, the study found three categories of obstacles that explain the Batam
Polytechnic students’ reluctance to practice speaking English from the students’s
point of view: the obstacles related to the students themselves (98.89%), the obstacles
related to the lecturers (10.00%), and the obstacles related to the environment
(2.22%).
Secondly, The study found also found the same categories of obstacles from
the lecturers’ point of view; obstacles related to the students themselves (100%),
obstacles related to lecturers (66.67%), and obstacles related to environment
(33.33%).
There were similarities and differences between the students and the lecturers
in viewing the obstacles related to the students themselves. Both the students and the
lecturers had the same opinion about the students’ limitations in vocabulary and
grammar as the main obstacles for the student to practice speaking English. These
two limitations did not enable the students to produce sentences for expressing their
ideas. The students also worried about their mispronunciation. Yet, the lecturers had
different opinion about this case. They did not think that the student’s pronunciation
had to resemble the native one. Realizing their limitations, the students got afraid of
97
making mistakes. It made them anxious and shy to be laugh. And because they did
not want to take this risk, they finally stopped practicing speaking English and just
kept silent or remained speaking Indonesian instead.
The students and the lecturers also had different opinion about the obstacles
related to the lecturer. The students felt that the lecturers didn’t give them enough
time to practice speaking English and that the the lecturers should not teach them
fully in English. Yet, the lecturers thought that the allotted time for English class was
limited while the class was too big. They insisted on using fully English since they
wanted to give the model to the students.
The students and the lecturers had the same opinion again in viewing the
obstacles related to the environment. The students complained about the fully
Indonesian speaking environment and the lack of the partner to practice speaking
English. The lectures said that it was the easiness of the students to give up speaking
English that caused these two problems.
Finally, the study found that the possible solution to the sudents’ limitation
English skill is by teaching them more on vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation
for communicative purposes. The possible solution to the students’ inability to
manage their emotion is by encouraging them to practice speaking English and
facilitating them to do it by creating a relation that is built on trust and respect that
leads them feeling capable, competent and creative. And the possible solution to the
students’ obstacle related the environment is by setting clear guidelines in which the
98
significance of speaking English is stressed and the permissible condition of when to
use Indonesian is clarified.
The findings shows that, in general, the lecturers have done their role quite
well, yet they still need to keep encouraging the students practice speaking English
and to teach them more on vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation for
communicative purposes.
5.2 Recommendation
5.2.1 For the English Lecturers
It is recommended that: first, the lecturers should keep encouraging the
students practice speaking English. The students should be given more time and
opportunities to speak. The lecturers should speak less and the students need to speak
more. Second, the lecturers need to teach the students more on vocabulary, grammar,
and pronunciation. Yet, these skills should be taught for communicative purposes.
Third, the lecturers should not to laugh at the students’ mistakes or let other students
laugh at them. The lecturer may laugh with the students but not at them. It will create
a relation that is built on trust and respect and that leads to students’ feeling capable,
competent and creative. Fourth, the lecturers need to consider about reducing the
number of the students in English classes. Yet, they need to discuss with the Batam
Polytechnic management, since it relates with the institution financial policy and
capability.
99
5.2.2 For Further Research
The students’ reluctance to practice speaking English has become a serious
dilemma in ESL/EFL teaching. This problem needs a holistic solution which should
involve students, educators, education institution, and researchers. This study is a part
of them by having found the obstacles that hinder the students from doing the
practice. Yet, since the research was only done in only one site – Batam Polytechnic,
it is recommended then to the other researchers to do further and wider studies that
involved more than one campus or school.
100
Table of Contents
Page
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………….
i
Preface……………………………………………………………………………… ii
Acknowledgement ......…………………………………………………………….. iii
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………….. iv
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………. vii
List of Appendices ………………………………………………………………… ix
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………
1
1.1 The Background of the Research Problem……………………………………... 1
1.2 Research Questions……………………………………………………………..
4
1.3 The Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………….
5
1.4 The Significance of the Study…………………………………………………..
5
1.5 Research Limitation ……………………………………………………………
6
1.6 Organization of the Report……………………………………………………...
6
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE……………………...
8
2.1 The Concept and the Elements of Speaking …………………………………...
8
2.2 What a Speaker Does ………………………………………………………….. 10
2.3 What Makes Speaking Difficult………………………………………………... 12
2.4 Shyness and Anxiety in Speaking……………………………………………… 13
2.5 What Makes a Good Speaking Teaching………………………………………. 16
2.5.1 Using a Communicative Approach………………………………………. 16
2.5.2 Teaching Vocabulary for a Communicative Purpose……………………. 18
2.5.3 Teaching Grammar a Communicative Purpose………………………….. 21
2.5.4 Teaching Pronunciation a Communicative Purpose……………………... 24
2.5.5 Playing the Teacher Roles Well..………………………………………… 30
2.5.6 Creating a Positive Classroom Environment…………………………….. 32
2.5.7 Handling The Students’ Use of Mother Tongue…….……………. …….. 33
2.5.8 Increasing Students’ Self Confidence …………………………………… 35
2.7 What Makes a Good Speaking Learner….…………………………………….. 36
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY …………………………………………. 38
3.1 The Method Research …………………………………………………………. 38
3.2 The Research Site ……………………………………………………………… 39
3.3 The Participants .……………………………………………………………….. 39
3.4 The Techniques of Collecting Data ……………………………………………. 40
3.5 Validity ….……………………………………………………………………... 40
3.6 The Techniques of Data Analysis ……………………………………………... 41
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS........................... 43
4.1 The Students’ Obstacles in Practicing Speaking English from The Students’
and The Lecturers’ Point of View…………………....………………………… 43
4.1.1 Obstacles Related to Students Themselves………..……………………... 45
4.1.1.1 Lack of English Competences …………………………………… 46
4.1.1.1.1 Lack of Vocabulary Competence ……………………… 48
4.1.1.1.2 Lack of Grammar Competence………………………… 50
4.1.1.1.3 Lack of Pronunciation Competence……………………. 52
4.1.1.2 Inability to Manage Emotion…………………………………….. 54
4.1.1.2.1 Nervousness …………………………………………… 56
4.1.1.2.2 Anxiety…………………………………………………. 57
4.1.1.2.3 Lack of Self Confidence……………………………….. 59
4.1.1.2.4 Shyness…………………………………………………. 60
4.1.1.2.5 Laziness/Lack of Motivation…………………………… 61
4.1.1.2.6 Boredom………………………………………………... 63
4.1.2 Obstacles Related to the Lecturer………………………..………………. 64
4.1.2.1 Limited Time to Practice…………………………………………. 66
4.1.2.2 Fully English Teaching…………………………………………... 69
4.1.3 Obstacles Related to Environment……………………….……………..... 72
4.1.3.1 Limited English Input…………………………………………… 73
4.1.3.2 Lack of Partner to Practice ……………………………………... 74
4.2 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles……………………………………….... 75
4.2.1 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles Related to Self………………….. 75
4.2.1.2 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Vocabulary……... 76
4.2.1.2 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Grammar……….. 81
4.2.1.3 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Lack of Pronunciation….. 84
4.2.1.4 The Possible Solution to the Students’ Inability to Manage
Their Emotion................................................................................. 89
4.2.2 The Possible Solution to the Obstacles Related to the Lecturer ………… 91
4.2.3 The Possible Solution to Obstacles Related to the Environment ……….. 95
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………. 97
5.1 Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………. 97
5.2 Recommendations …………………………………………………………….. 99
5.2.1 For the English Lecturers………………………………………………… 99
5.2.2 For the Further Research………………………………………………… 100
BIBLIOGRAPHY
List of Tables
Page
Table 4.1
The Distribution of Respondents' Obstacles Categories
from the Students’ Point of View …………….……………………………………. 44
Table 4.2
The Distribution of Respondents' Obstacles Categories
from the Lecturers’ Point of View …………….…………………………………... 44
Table 4.3
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Students Themselves
from the Students’ Point of View …………….……………………………………. 45
Table 4.4
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Students Themselves
from the Lecturers’ Point of View …………….…………………………………... 46
Table 4.5
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Feeling of
Lacking of English Ability from the Students’ Point of View …………….………. 47
Table 4.6
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Feeling of
Lacking of English Ability from the Lecturers’ Point of View …………….…….. 47
Table 4.7
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Inability to
Manage Emotion from the Students’ Point of View ……………………….……… 55
Table 4.8
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Inability to
Manage Emotion from the Lecturers’ Point of View ……………………….……... 55
Table 4.9
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Lecturer
from the Students’ Point of View ………………………….…………….……….. 65
Table 4.10
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Lecturer
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ………………………….…………….………. 65
Table 4.11
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Environment
from the Students’ Point of View ………………………….…………….……….. 72
Table 4.12
The Distribution of Obstacles Subcategories Related to Environment
from the Lecturers’ Point of View ………………………….…………….………. 72
List of Appendices
Appendix I:
Sample of Student Questionnaire
Appendix II:
Lecturers Interview Script
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Atkinson, D. (1987). “The Mother Tongue in the Classroom: A Neglected
Resources?” EFL Journal. 41, (4), 37-52.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles – An interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Castillo, L. (1990). “L2 Pronunciation Pedagogy: Where have We been? Where are
We Headed? The Language Teacher . 14, (10), 3-7.
Celce-Muria, M. (1987) Teaching Pronunciation as Communication. Washington,
D.C.: TESOL.
Cohen, A. (1977) “Redundancy as a Tool in Listening Comprehension”. TESOL
Quarterly , 16, (1), 71-77.
Cresswell, J. W. (1984). Research Desining: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches.
London: SAGE Publications
Crystal, D. (1995). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Doyon, P. (2000). Shyness in the Japanese EFL class: Why It is a Problem, What It
is, what Causes It, and What to Do. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.jaltpublications.org/tlt/articles/2000/01/doyon. [February 2009].
Eldridge, J. (1996). “Code-Switching in a Turkish Secondary School”. ELT Journal.
50, (4), 25-39.
English Club. Com. (2009). English Speaking. [Online]. Retrieved: http://www.
englishclub.com/speaking/language-skills.htm [February 2009].
Fitri, D. I. (2005). Students’ Perception on Group Work Method in Speaking IV
Subject: A Descriptive Study on the Third-year Students of English
Department of UPI. Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished paper).
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Franenkel, J. R. and Norman E. W. (2001). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Education. New York: Hill Inc.
Fraser, H. (1999). “ESL pronunciation teaching: could it be more effective?”
Australian Language Matters, 7 (4). [Online]. Retrieved http://wwwpersonal,une.edu.au/~hfraser/docs/HFLanguageMatters.pdf [April 2009].
Gilbert, J. (1995). Pronunciation Practices as an Aid to Listening Comprehension.
San Diego: Dominic Press.
Harbord, J. (1992). “The Use of Mother Tongue in the Classroom”. ELT Journal. 46,
(4), 67-78.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Essex: Longman.
Highland Council Education. 2009. What makes a good teacher? [Online].
Retrieved: http://www.highlandschools-virtualib.org.uk/ltt/inclusive_enjoyable/
teacher.htm. [February 2009].
Johnson, K. (2001). An Introduction to Foreign Language Teaching. Essex:
Longman.
Kamil, M. L., et al. (1985). Understanding Research in Reading and Writing.
Toronto: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implication. New York:
Longman.
Kurtus, R. (2001). Overcome the Fear of Speaking to Group. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://www.school-for-champions.com/speaking/fear.htm. [February 2009].
Laroy, C. (1995). Pronunciation. New York: OUP
Lefkoe, M. (2007). End Your Fear Of Public Speaking In Four Hours. [Online].
Retrieved: http://www. speakingwithoutfear.com/ [February 2009]
Lengkanawati, N. S. (2004). “How Learners from Different Cultural Backgrounds
Learn a Foreign Language”. Asian EFL Journal. 6. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://Asian-efl-journal.com [February 2009].
Lynch, L. M. (2005). Grammar Teaching: Implicit or Explicit?. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Grammar-Teaching:-Implicit-or-Explicit?&id=89342
[July 2009].
Maniruzzaman. M. (2009). Teaching Efl Pronunciation: Why, What and How?.
[Online]. Retrieved: http://www.streetdirectory.com/ [July 2009].
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An interactive Approach. New
Delhi: SAGE Publication.
McKenzie, J. (2007). The Wired Classroom [Online]. Retrieved: http://members.
shaw.ca/priscillatheroux/teacherrole.html [February 2009].
Merriam, S. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A qualitative Approach. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Morgan, R. (2002). Developing Teaching Style. [Online].
http://www.creativeteachingsite.com/teach3.htm. [February 2009].
Retrieved:
Morley, J. (1991). “The Pronunciation Component in Teaching English to Speakers
of Other Language”. TESOL Quarterly 25, (1), 51-74.
Musthafa, B. (2000). Judging Qualitative Educational Research: Some Essential
Criteria. Unpublished paper. Postgraduate Program of Indonesian University of
Educational.
Myntti, C. (2006).
Class Atmosphere.
[Online]. Retrieved: http://www1.
umn.edu/ohr/teachlearn/tutorials/syllabus/expectations/atmosphere.html
[February 2009].
National University of Singapore. (2007). Shyness: Factors. [online]. Retrieved:
http://www.nus.edu.sg/uhwc/counselling/selfhelp/shy02.html [February 2009].
Noteboom, S. (1983) Is speech production controlled by speech perception?
Dordrecht: Foris.
Nunan, D. (2000). Language Teaching Methodology. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.
Pennington, M. (1989). “Teaching Pronunciation from the Top Down”. RELC
Journal, 20, (1), 21-38.
Purcell, E. and Suter, R. (1980). “Predictors of pronunciation accuracy: A
Reexamination”. Language Learning. 30, (2), 271-87.
Putra, C. D. (2004). Performing Public Speaking Skill: A Case Study of Six Students
of Vocational High School of Telecommunication in Banjarbaru South
Kalimantan. Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished thesis).
Richards, J., C. and Lockhart, C. (1999). Reflective Teaching in Second Language
Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., C. and Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching:an
anthology of current practice. New York: Cambridge.
Scarcella, R. and Oxford, R. L. (1994). “Second Language Pronunciation: State of the
Art in Instruction”. System. 22, (2), 221-230.
Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Suter, R. (1976) “Predicators of Pronunciation Accuracy in Second Language
Learning”. Language Learning. 26, 233-53.
Thanasoulas, D. (2002). Motivation and Motivating in EFL. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://www.englishclub.com/tefl-articles/motivation-motivating-efl.htm
[February 2009].
The University of Texas at Dallas. (2007). Self-Help: Overcoming Social Anxiety.
[online].
Retrieved: http://www.utdallas.edu/counseling/selfhelp/socialanxiety.html [February 2009].
Thompson, S., Taylor, K. & Gray, G. (2001). “Pronunciation with an Eye on Multiple
Intelligences.
[Online].
Retrieved:
http://www.soundsofenenglish.org/
Presentations/WATESOL2001/multipleintelligencesactivities.htm [May 2009].
Thornbury, S. (2002). How to Teach Vocabulary. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Thornbury, S. (2006). How to Teach Speaking. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
University of Central Florida. (2007). Diversity & Atmosphere. [Online]. Retrieved:
http://www.fctl.ucf.edu/teachingandlearningresources/classroommanagement/di
versityandatmosphere/index.php [February 2009].
Walker, R. (2001). “Pronunciation for international intelligibility.” English Teaching
Professional, 21, 19-26.
Warliah, E. (2004). Students Reluctance to Raise Question in the Classroom (A Case
Study at SMU N 8 Bandung). Bandung: UPI Library (unpublished thesis).
Wilkins, D.A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Arnold.
Wong, R. (1987). Teaching Pronunciation: Focus on English Rhythm and Intonation.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.