The effectiveness of discussion technique in the student`s mastery of speaking among third year stundents of SMK N 2 Depok

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE

IN THE STUDENTS

’

MASTERY OF SPEAKING

AMONG THIRD YEAR STUDENTS OF SMK N 2 DEPOK

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Sebastianus Bay Dhae Student Number: 081214131

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

i

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE

IN THE STUDENTS

’

MASTERY OF SPEAKING

AMONG THIRD YEAR STUDENTS OF SMK N 2 DEPOK

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Sebastianus Bay Dhae Student Number: 081214131

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA

ii

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE

IN THE STUDENTS

’

MASTERY OF SPEAKING

AMONG THIRD YEAR STUDENTS OF SMK N 2 DEPOK

By

Sebastianus Bay Dhae Student Number: 081214131

Approved by

Advisor

iii

A Sarjana Pendidikan Thesis on

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE

IN THE STUDENTS

’

MASTERY OF SPEAKING

AMONG THIRD YEAR STUDENTS OF SMK N 2 DEPOK

By

Sebastianus Bay Dhae Student Number: 081214131 Defended before the Board of Examiners

on August 15, 2013 and Declared Acceptable

Board of Examiners

Chairperson : C. Tutyandari, S.Pd., M.Pd. ______________ Secretary : Drs. Barli Bram, M.Ed., Ph.D. ` ______________ Member : Agustinus Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A. ______________ Member : Christina Kristiyani, S.Pd., M.Pd. ______________ Member : Drs. Y.B. Gunawan, M.A. ______________

Yogyakarta, 15 August, 2013

Faculty of Teachers Training Education Sanata Dharma University

Dean

v

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, August 5, 2013 The Writer

Sebastianus Bay Dhae 081214131

vi

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN

PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE

IN THE STUDENTS

’

MASTERY OF SPEAKING

AMONG THIRD YEAR STUDENTS OF SMK N 2 DEPOK

beserta perangkat yang diperlukan. Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta

Pada tanggal: 15 Agustus 2013 Yang menyatakan

Sebastianus Bay Dhae

Nama : Sebastianus Bay Dhae Nomor Mahasiswa : 081214131

vii

ABSTRACT

Dhae, Sebastianus bay. 2013. The Effectiveness of Discussion Technique in the Students’ Mastery of Speaking among Third Year Students of SMK N 2 Depok. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

One important concern in learning English as a foreign language is the communicative competence of learners. However, based on my teaching practice

experience, it was found that most of EFL learners were still unable to communicate well although they had been learning English for years. One of the factors that usually cause this problem is students have no chance to express their own ideas or they have no challenge to create new situations in speaking English. Therefore, it is necessary for the teachers to have a technique which provides the opportunities or challenges for students to speak English.

The objective of the research is to investigate whether the use of discussion technique is effective or not in improving students’ mastery of

speaking. This study is categorized as a quasi-experimental research. The total population of participants was divided into two groups of sample: the control group, and the experimental group. The experimental group is XII KA (Kimia Analisis) and the control group is XII TPA (Teknik Permesinan A) from SMK N 2 Depok Yogyakarta. The data were collected using the same test for both groups. The data were in the form of pre-test and post-test. The pre-test was conducted before the treatment and post test was conducted after the treatment. The discussion technique was only applied in XII KA or experimental group. The data of both pre-test and post-test scores from experimental and control groups were analyzed by using inferential statistics. To test the hypothesis, the researcher used t-test.

From the analysis, the result of post test indicates that _�� is higher than the t value at the significant level of 5%, which is. 4.219 > 1.697. The level of significant is 0.00. It is lower than 0.05. It also was found that the mean between pre-test and post-test scores of experimental group was higher than the mean between pre-test and post test scores of the control group (Experimental group= Pre-test 58.87, Post-test 80.64),(Control group= Pre-test 59.60, Post-test 70.6). Furthermore, the standard deviation of the experimental group decreases from 7.63 to 7.43 or the scores of the experimental group from pre-test to post-test are more homogenous. Whereas, the standard deviation of control group from control group increases from 7.51 to 8.64 or the scores of control group from pre-test to post test are more heterogeneous. Based on those statistical results, it can be concluded that discussion technique is effective in improving English speaking skill among students of SMK N 2 Depok Yogyakarta. Moreover, the hypothesis, which states that there is a significant deference in the student’s mastery of

speaking between the students who are taught using discussion technique and those who are taught without using discussion technique is accepted.

viii ABSTRAK

Dhae, Sebastianus bay. 2013. The Effectiveness of Discussion Technique in the Students’ Mastery of Speaking among Third Year Students of SMK N 2 Depok. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Salah satu element penting yang harus diperhatikan di dalam belajar bahasa Inggris adalah kemampuan dalam berkomunikasi dengan menggunakan bahasa Inggris. Namun, belakangan ini banyak siswa yang tidak mampu berkomunikasi menggunakan Bahasa Inggris dengan baik meskipun mereka sudah mempelajarinya bertahun tahun. Salah satu faktor yang menyebabkan masalah ini adalah tidak adanya tantangan bagi siswa untuk menciptakan suasana baru dalam berbicara bahasa Inggris. Oleh karena itu, penting bagi guru untuk menerapkan suatu teknik yang dapat memberikan kesempatan atau tantangan kepada siswa untuk berbicara dalam bahasa inggris.

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk meneliti apakah pengunaan discussion technique efektif dalam meningkatakn kemampuan berbicara siswa. Studi ini dikategorikan sebagai penelitian quasi-experimental. Jumblah total populasi dari peserta penelitian dibagi menjadi dua kelompok yaitu kelompok eksperimental dan kelompok control. Kelompok eksperimental adalah siswa kelas XII KA (kimia analisis) dan kelompok kontrol adalah siswa kelas XII TPA (teknik permesinan A) dari SMK N 2 Depok Yogyakarta. Data dikumpulkan menggunakan tes yang sama untuk kedua kelomplok tersebut dan dalam bentuk nilai pre-test dan post-test. Pre-test dilakukan sebelum pengaplikasian teknik dan pos-test dilakukan setelahnya pengaplikasian teknik. Discussion technique hanya diaplikasikan ada kelompok eksperimental. Data nilai pre-test dan post-test kedua kelompok dianalisa menggunakan statisik inferensial. Guna menguji hipotesis, peneliti menggunakan t-test.

Berdasarkan analisis hasil dari post test, diidentifikasikan bahawa �_� lebih besar dari nilai t pada significant level 5%, yaitu 4.219 > 1.697. level significant-nya adalah 0.00 dimana lebih kecil dari 0.05. Ditemukan juga bahawa perbandingn nilai rata-rata kelompok experimental lebih tinggi dari pada kelompok kontrol post-test (kelompok eksperimental= Pre-test 58.87, Post-test 80.64), (Kelompok kontrol= Pre-test 59.60, Post-test 70.6). Standar deviasi dari kelompok experimental juga turun dari 7.63 ke 7.43. Hal ini menunjukan bahwa nilai kelompok experimental lebih homogen. Semantara itu, standar deviasi pada kelompok kontrol naik dari 7.51 menjadi 8.64 sehinga nilai pada kelompok ini menjadi lebih heterogen. Dengan kata lain, peningkatan rata-rata dari standar deviasi pada kelompok experimental lebih besar daripada kelompok kontrol. Berdasarkan hasil penemuan di atas dapat disimpulkan bahwa teknik diskusi efektif untuk meningkatakan speaking masteri siswa dan hipotesis yang mengatakan bahwa ada perbedaan yang signifikan pada Penguasaan kemampuan berbicara siswa yang diajar mengunakan teknik diskusi dan siswa yang diajarkan tanpa mengunakan teknik diskusi dapat diteriama.

ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to give my deepest gratitude to Jesus Christ for the great blessing, spirit, and motivation during my thesis writing. I thank Him for giving me this beautiful life. Nothing can replace those graces.

I sincerely thank and appreciate my sponsor, Agustinus Hardi Prasetyo, S.Pd., M.A., for his guidance and support so that I could finally finish my thesis. I am so thankful for his patience, suggestions during my thesis writing and willingness to provide his valuable time.

I would like to thank all PBI’s lecturers who are very patient and caring in guiding me during my period of learning in PBI. I learn so many things from them. I would like to thank them for the greatest contribution in my learning process.

My sincerely thanks go to my lovely parents, Agustinus Dhae and Paulina Seko, for their care since the first time I saw this world until I started to build my own life. Nothing can change their true love. They are the best figures who always motivate me to finish this thesis. I am very grateful to have such wonderful parents like them. I also want to thank my lovely sister, Maria Delvina Dhae, for being a good sister to me. I thank her for her motivations and suggestions during my thesis writing as my language consultant. She is the best sister that I have ever had in this world who always stands by me in any situations.

x

My heartfelt thanks are also addressed to Vrizcha Magha Reginna for her love, support and presence during my thesis writing. I thank her for being patient with me whenever I felt upset. Lots of thanks go to her for encouraging me in writing my thesis.

My special thanks also go to my lovely friends Purwo, Leksi, Andreo, Apin, Akun, Egar, Leo, Hendri, Jojon, Dendy, Andre, Agus, and Umbu for the joke, laughter and happiness. I thank them for being nice friends who always help me when I am in trouble. I am very grateful for our friendship.

I would also like to thank Toro, Father Richard, Rengga, Bhe, Kojek, Rob, Bella, Mike, my friend at KKN, my Friends at Sastra Basketball Team, and all of my friends at PBI who cannot mentioned here. I am very thankful for the greatest moments that we have been gone through.

Last but not least, I thank all people whom I cannot mention here who always give their support and help to me.

xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE ……….. i

PAGE OF APPROVAL ………. ii

PAGE OF ACCEPTANCE………. iii

DEDICATION PAGES……….. iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ……….. v

PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI………... vi

ABSTRACT ……… vii

ABSTRAK ... viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………... ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS ……… xi

LIST OF TABLES ……….. xi

LIST OF APPENDICES………. xv

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Research Background ……… 1

1.2 Research Problem ……….. 2

1.3 Problem Limitation ………. 3

1.4 Research Objectives ……….... 3

1.5 Research Benefits ……… 3

1.6 Definition of Terms ………. 5

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 8

xii

2.1.1 Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign

Language………. 8

2.1.2 Communicative Language Teaching ……… 9

2.1.2.1 Discussion Technique ……….. 15

2.1.3 Teaching Speaking ………... 20

2.1.4 Speaking Mastery………. 23

2.2 Theoretical Framework ………. 25

2.2.1 Hypothesis ……… .... 27

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 29

3.1 Research Design ……….... 29

3.1.1. Quasi Experimental Design……….. 29

3.2 Research Setting ……… 31

3.3 Research Participant ……….. 31

3.4 Instrument and Data Collecting Technique …….. 32

3.4.1 Pre-test and Post-test ……… 32

3.4.2 The Validity and Reliability of the Instrument... 32

3.5 Data Analysis Technique ……… 35

3.6 Research Procedure ………... 36

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 38

4.1 Data Description ………... 38

4.1.1 Categorization of the Students’ Speaking Mastery 38 4.1.2 Data of the Experimental Group ……… . 40

xiii

4.1.4 Statistical Data of Experimental Group and

Control Group ……….. 44

4.2 Data Analysis ………. 46

4.2.1 Test of Normality ……….. 46

4.2.2 Test of Homogeneity ……….. 48

4.2.3 Inferential Statistic/Hypothesis Test ………….. 49

4.3 Interpretation of the Findings ………... . 51

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 54 5.1 Conclusions ……… 54

5.2 Recommendations ………... 56

REFERENCES ……….. 58

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table

1. Comparison between Traditional and Communicative Approach…… 10

2. Distribution of the Treatment ……….. 31

3. Blue Print of the Instrument ……….... 33

4. The Category of Students’ Learning Achievement ………. 34

5. Categorization of the Students’ Speaking Mastery ……… 39

6. Descriptive Analysis on the Pre-test Score of the Experimental Group ……… 40

7. Descriptive Analysis on the Post-test Score of the Experimental Group ………... 41

8. Statistical Data of the Pre-test and Post-test Score of the Experimental Group……… 42

9. Descriptive Analysis on the Pre-test Result of the Control Group 43 10. Descriptive Analysis of the Result of the Post-test in the Control Group ……… 43

11. The Statistical Data of the Pre-test and Post-test Scores of the Control Group ……….. 44

12. Statistical data of the Effectiveness of discussion technique ... 45

13. Result of the Test of Normality ………... 47

14. Descriptive Analysis of the Homogeneity Test Result …………... 48

15. The Gain Scores of the Student Speaking Mastery………. 49

16. T-test Result of the Pre-test ………... 50

17. T-test Result of the Post-test ……… 50

xv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Lesson Plan and Resource Book………... 62

Appendix 2: Try-Out Test, Pre-Test, Post-test and Rubric……….. 139

Appendix 3: SPSS Computations………. 156

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

In this part of study, the researcher presents the introduction of the study. There are six things included in the introduction. They are the Research Background, Research Problem, Problem Formulation, Research Objective, Research Benefits, and Definition of Terms.

1.1 Research Background

The development of English as an international language has brought it to be a major language being learned in almost every school institution in Indonesia. In this country, English is considered as a foreign language, and it is a language which is not that simple to be learned. This view leads Indonesian Education Department (Depdikbud) to put English language as a required subject in the school institution, such as in senior high school or vocational school.

Based on the results of the research conducted by Ghozali (1999), high school students are still unable to communicate in English although they have been learning English for more than eleven years. The research concludes that within this period, students learn speaking only within the texts available in the

student’s book. This model makes the students have no chance to express their own ideas, and they have no challenge to create new situations.

The discussion above shows that students must be given opportunities to practice the language they are learning. In other words, teacher’s talk time should

be minimized and students’ talk time must be maximized.In the learning process, discussion is used as a stimulus to develop students’ interest, enthusiasm,

motivation on what is being presented in a particular lesson. Thus, in the study, the writer intends to propose discussion technique, which is a part of Communicative Language Teaching Approach. It is believed that discussion technique can reduce the student’s feeling of being burdened with the English

learning process in the classroom through its activities such as communicating, asking, interpreting, making summary and debating. These activities then can also encourage better speaking skill in communicative contexts.

Nowadays, the successful language class is determined by the situation when the learner can communicate effectively with others. Harmer (1991: 76) states that discussion can help students to practice their speaking well. It can make the students use their language by building sense of community in the classroom, then encourage students to speak because when they are asked to express themselves in a foreign language, they may find some difficulties expressing their intentions.

1.2 Research Problem

The problem in this research can be formulated as follows.

a. Is discussion technique effective to improve student’s mastery of speaking

1.3 Problem Limitation

There are two limitations that the writer has for this research. First, this research is quasi-experimental research; this kind of research is used to know whether discussion technique is effective to improve the speaking mastery. Second, this research focuses on two classes of the third grade of SMA N 2 Depok, Yogyakarta.

1.4Research Objective

Based on the research problem, the objective of this research is to investigate whether the use of discussion technique is effective in improving

students’ mastery of speaking. It is hoped that this research can give good contribution in teaching learning process, especially on the improvement of speaking mastery. This research hopefully can also help teachers to rethink their decisions in choosing the effective technique in order to help students obtain the best achievement.

1.5 Research Benefits

The writer hopes that this thesis can give advantages to all readers. It is expected that this research will be able to contribute theoretically and practically on how discussion technique can be used in the learning process of English.Three significances are expected in this present study.

1.5.1 Theoretically

The result of this study is on academic speaking that serves as a technique for students to improve their competence in speaking. It is believed that the discussion technique which is suggested in this research can encourage students to develop their ability in asking, communicating, interpreting, and making summary. In other words, the result can provide a technique that gives a lot of chance for learners to speak.

1.5.2 Practically

a. For the English teachers

The English teacher knows the effective strategy to build a sense of communication in the classroom. In this case, the discussion technique could be the answer because this technique facilitates the students to communicate they are working in. Moreover, teachers can also use some activities in the discussion technique to encourage student to communicate such as problem based discussion or sharing based discussion

b. For the Students

This research can broaden students’ knowledge by learning through discussion, so that it can motivate students to learn and improve their speaking ability. It can also encourage students to master the other skills: listening, reading, and writing. It is expected that the technique can increase the students’ interest

and help them to learn better, so they will not become marginalized, but empowered, autonomous and emancipated.

1.5.3 To the Readers, Course Developers and the Next Researchers

Hopefully, this research can give helpful information to the readers, course developers and the next researchers who conduct the same study. It is also expected that this preliminary study can activate other people to do related studies in this field. It is because this research proposes great suggestions for teaching and learning process. The future researchers can also conduct another analysis through this research point of views.

1.6 Definition of Terms

1.6.1 Communicative Language Teaching

Communication is a continuous process of expression, interpretation, and negotiation (Savignon, 1983: 8). According to rivers, Communicative Language Teaching is

a move from the consideration of language as an accumulation of discrete elements in associative chains to the study of human conceptual and perceptual and perceptual system and a growing interest in the pragmatics of language in situations of use ( as quoted by Ekomunajat (2004: 16).

The teacher sets up a situation that students are likely to encounter in real life (Galloway, 1993: 29). In Communicative Approach or Communicative Language Teaching Approach, learners not only try to understand the grammar but also develop the ability to use language. The aim is not only producing correct sentences but also developing ability to communicate with the language. In this study, Communicative Language Teaching is the approach, which becomes the

basic foundation to develop the innovative way of using language in real life situations.

1.6.2. Speaking Mastery

There are many definitions of speaking that have been proposed by some experts in language learning. “Speaking is using the stated language” (Woodford, 2003: 121). Speaking is also a product of a creative construction of linguistic strings. Speakers make choice of lexicon, structures, and discourse (Brown, 2000: 140). The aspect of spoken English is that it is usually accomplished via interaction with at least one other speaker. In this study, speaking is a creative construction of oral skill of English language that must be mastered well by the students after the discussion technique is applied.

1.6.3. Discussion

“Discuss comes from a Latin word that means „to scatter’. “Discussion refers to one or more meetings of a small group of people who thereby communicate, face to face, in order to fulfill a common and achieve a group goal. The key concepts in the definition are small group and communication.”

(Bormann, 1975: 3). Discussion is an extended communication (often interactive) dealing with some particular topic or an exchange of views on some topics (Lewis, 2008: 32). Discussion technique is also a technique concerning talking about a problem involving two persons or more, in which these persons are concerning the same problem. According to Murcia, “discussions are probably the most commonly used activity in the oral skill class” (Celce-Murcia, 2000: 106), so discussion is one of the activities that encourage students to speak. In this study,

discussion is a technique, which represents extended communication established in pair or group regarding to a particular topic in order to obtain the goal.

8

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the theories, which are used to answer the research questions. This chapter is divided into two major discussions: Theoretical Description and Theoretical Framework. The Theoretical Description includes the important theories, which are related to the topic. Meanwhile, the Theoretical Framework gives the clear explanation about all major relevant theories.

2.1 Theoretical Description

The theoretical description in this study covers theory of teaching and learning English as a foreign language, Communicative Language Teaching, Discussion Technique and Teaching Speaking.

2.1.1 Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language

According to Woodford and Jackson (2003: 56), learning is the activity of attaining knowledge. The understanding of how the learner learns determines

one’s philosophy of education. Moreover, according to Brown (2000: 7), learning is acquiring or getting of knowledge of a subject or a skill by experience or instruction. Language learning is a long and complex way, where the learners explore all their competence to think, feel, and act. From the theories above, we

can conclude that „learning’ is the process of behavior’s change by practice and

Furthermore, according to Brown (2000: 7), teaching is guiding, facilitating learning, enabling the learner to learn, and setting the condition for learning. He also proposes that teaching can be defined as showing or helping someone to learn how to do something, giving instruction, guiding the study of something, providing knowledge, causing to know or understand. Thus, the teacher in teaching EFL has the responsibility of equipping the learners with the skills that they need to pursue in their studies. It is obvious that English teachers are concerned to give the learners detailed guidance of study and help to achieve the goal.

2.1.2 Communicative Language Teaching

Nowadays, Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has been thought as a new way to teach English as a second or foreign language. In a useful survey of communicative language teaching, Quinn as quoted by Nunan, (1988: 26-28) States that there are some differences items between Communicative Approach and Traditional Approach. They are set out in Table 1.

Table 1: Comparison between Traditional and Communicative Approach

No Traditional approach Communicative approach

1. Focus in learning:

Focus is on the language as a structured system of grammatical patterns.

Focus is on communication 2. How language items are selected:

This is done on linguistic criteria alone. This is done on the basis of what language items the learner needs to know in order to get things done. 3. How language items are sequenced:

This is determined on linguistic

grounds. This is determined on other ground, with the emphasis on content, meaning and interest.

4. Degree of coverage:

The aim is to cover the „whole picture’

of language structure by systematic linear progression.

The aim is to cover; in any particular phase, only what the learner needs and sees as important. 5. View of language:

A language is seen as a unified entity with fixed grammatical patterns and a core of basic words.

The variety of language is accepted, and seen as determined by the character of particular

communicative contexts. 6. Type of language used:

Tends to be formal and bookish. Genuine everyday language is emphasized.

7. What is regarded as a criterion of success:

Aim is to have students produce

formally correct sentences. Aim is to have students communicate they are working in. 8. Which language skills are emphasized:

Reading and writing Spoken interactions are regarded as at least as important as reading and writing.

9. Teacher/Student roles:

Tends to be teacher-centered. Is student-centered. 10. Attitude to errors:

Incorrect utterances are seen as deviations from the norms of standard grammar.

Partially correct and incomplete utterances are seen as such rather than just „wrong’.

11. Similarity/dissimilarity to natural language learning:

Reverses the natural language learning process by concentrating on the form of utterances rather than on the content.

Resembles the natural language learning process in that the content of the utterances is emphasized rather than the form.

It can be summarized that with the traditional approach, students are not learning in whole language. They do not know how to communicate with appropriate social language, gestures, or expressions. In brief, they only focus on learning the language as a structured system of grammatical patterns rather than communicating in the culture of the language that has been studied.

In Communicative Approach or Communicative Language Teaching Approach, learners not only try to understand the grammar but also develop the ability to use language. While the learners have to be able to construct grammatically correct structures and concern with linguistic grounds, they also have to do other competences. It is emphasized in Communicative Language Teaching. They must concern in content, meaning, and interest in particular situations. The aim is not only producing correct sentences but also developing ability to communicate with the language. The teacher is not the center of the learning but the students take the main part of the learning process.

“Teachers of foreign language have long known that mastery of the mechanics of a language do not ensure the ability to use language for communication” (Savignon, 1983: 67). This circumstance needs an effective concept, method or technique to make the learner capable to master the language for communication. The development of communicative approach in the classroom can be a good solution.

The basic concept in the Communicative Approach or Communicative Language Teaching is learners-centered. The teacher should not dominate the process of the language teaching learning. It is aimed that learners can

communicate effectively and appropriately based on the context given. Brown (2001: 43) describes the characteristics of Communicative Language Teaching as follows.

a. The goal of classroom is focused on grammatical, discourse, functional linguistic, and strategy of communicative competence.

b. The aspect of language, which is the language technique, is used to engage learners in the functional use of language for meaningful purposes.

c. Communicative technique underlies the fluency and accuracy, in which fluency is more important than accuracy in order to engage learners in the language use.

d. The students who are in communicative class must use language productively and perceptively.

e. Students focus on understanding their style of learning and the autonomous learning.

f. Teachers act as a facilitator or guide, so the students will learn through genuine linguistic interaction with others.

Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening more or becoming active facilitators of their students' learning. A teacher needs to set up the exercise, but because the students' performance is the goal, the teacher must step back and observe, sometimes act as referee or monitor. A classroom during a communicative activity is far from quiet, however. The students do most of the speaking, and frequently the scene of a classroom during a communicative exercise is active, with students leaving their seats to complete a

task. Because of the increased responsibility to participate, students may find they gain confidence in using the target language in general. Students are more responsible managers of their own learning.

Communicative Language Teaching can be interpreted to many aspects.

Adapted from the familiar “inverted pyramid” classroom model proposed by Celce-Murcia, it shows how, through practice and experience in an increasingly wide range of communicative contexts and events, learners gradually expand their communicative competence, consisting of grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociocultural competence, and strategic competence. Moreover, all components are interrelated (Celce Murcia, 2000: 17). She further explains the importance of the overall level of communicative competence; rather, an increase in one aspect interacts with other aspects to produce a corresponding increase in an overall communicative competence.

Figure 1.Components of Communicative Competence

(Adopted from Celce-Murcia, 2000: 17)

CONTEXTS So cio cult ura l G ra mm a tica l Dis co urs e Str a teg ic Co mm un ica tiv e Co mp et ence

It can be explained in four aspects of communicative competence as follows.

a. Grammatical competence

It is a concept place that includes increasing expertise in grammar like morphology, syntax, and vocabulary. In order to convey meanings, EFL learners must understand how words are segmented into various sounds and how sentences are stressed in particular ways. It enables learners to use and understand English language accurately and fluently.

b. Discourse Competence

It has the aim to hold the communication together in a meaningful way. It applies cohesion and coherence in communicative competence. In communication, production of language requires ability to perceive and process stretches of discourse. Therefore, the learner should acquire a large structure and discourse markers to express ideas, show relationship of time, indicate cause, contrast and emphasize.

c. Sociocultural competence

Knowledge of language alone does not adequately prepare learner for effective and appropriate use of the target language. So, learners must have the competence to know what is expected socially and culturally by users of target language. Although we have yet to provide satisfactory description of grammar, we are even further from an adequate description of sociocultural rules of appropriateness. And yet we use them to communicate successfully in many

different contexts of situation cultural awareness rather than cultural knowledge thus becomes increasingly important.

d. Strategic competence

It is the way learners manipulate the language in order to meet the communicative goal. It also refers to ability to know when and how to take the floor, how to keep a conversation going, and how to terminate conversation.

It can be summarized that Communicative Language Teaching is generally an accepted norm in the field of foreign language teaching and learning. Communicative Language Teaching makes use of real-life situations that necessitate communication. Using this approach, the teacher can set up a situation that students are likely to encounter in real life. Additionally, applying these aspects means that teaching and learning become far more than a series of grammar lessons and vocabulary lists.

2.1.2.1 Discussion Technique

Communicative Language Teaching implies that learning a language takes place during the communication among members of the society. Learning a language means learning to communicate with others. People can communicate when they have discourse competence. The development of the concept of communication competence as it relates to language teaching can be traced to sources, one theoretical, the other practical (Savignon, 1983: 10). In other words, learning to communicate is learning a language discourse. This is in line with what people and students usually think of language learning; to be able to use the language for communication. Unfortunately, many students do not feel that

English language learning is important. For them, language learning is something they have to do because it is a part of the school curriculum. Because of this, there needs to be a way of teaching that will make them interested and make them master the language. There are many ways to promote oral skill in the EFL classroom that can be implemented: discussion, speeches, role plays, conversations, audio taped oral dialogue journals, and other accuracy based activities.

“There are some communicative activities which aim to encourage students to speak. One of these activities is discussion,” (Harmer, 1991: 122).

According to Murcia, “discussions are probably the most commonly used activity in the oral skill class” (Celce-Murcia, 2000: 106), so discussion is one of the activities that encourage students to speak. In the class, students are usually invited to have the discussion with the teachers and other students in which the concern is on the particular topic or problem. The kind of discussions which is usually used is group discussion. Group discussion refers to one or more meetings of a small group of people who thereby communicate, face to face, in order to fulfill a common and achieve a group goal. The key concepts in the definition are small group and communication (Bormann, 1975: 3). The main purpose of using discussion is to develop critical thinking, democratic attitude, cognitive ability, and socio-emotional attitude (Celce-Murcia, 2000: 115). Furthermore, those are formulated as follows.

a. To develop students’ ability in asking, communicating, interpreting, and

b. To develop students’ attitude towards the school, the teacher, and the subject

they are learning.

c. To develop students’ ability in overcoming the problems and developing their self-concept more positively.

d. To increase students’ ability in giving opinion, and

e. To develop students’ attitude towards controversial.

According to Bormann, “discussion is considered to be serious and systematic talk about a clearly particular topic. Discussion is task-oriented. It has a common purpose and is striving for common goals” (Bormann, 1975: 3). Based on that condition, the purpose of the talk in a group discussion is to communicate.

Furthermore, through the discussions, students are also creating positive peer relationship. According to Jones (1998: 93), peer relationships influence

students’ achievement in several ways. First, peer attitudes toward achievement

affects students’ academic aspirations and school behavior. Second, the quality of peer relationships and personal support in classroom affects the degree to which

students’ personal needs are met and, subsequently, their ability to be productively

involved in the learning process. Third, peer relationship can directly affect achievement through cooperative learning activities.

There are some criteria for good discussions. The discussions will run well and reach the aim if they fulfill some requirements. The supporting and interesting situation must be created in order to achieve good discussion. Students will be more involved with and motivated to participate in the discussion if they are

is in line with the principle of students taking responsibility for their own learning (Celce-Murcia, 2000: 106).

Moreover, Harmer (1991: 124) states that there are three types of discussion activity. They are buzz group, controversial topic, and debate. First, buzz group is discussion where the students are in groups of three or four (the number is unimportant). Frequently the teacher may ask them to think all possible things that they are discussing. The example might be the students are going to read a text about hobbies. The teacher puts them into groups for a session about two minutes. They should think about kinds of hobby that they can figure out. They could be put into buzz discussion to think of as many activities as possible. It can form the prelude to a larger discussion session.

Second, controversial statements are good discussion provokers. The students are given the following statements about a particular topic and told that they have to circle the number which best reflects their agreement or disagreement with the statement (0 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree). When they have done the activity, they compare their answers in pairs and then groups. They have to agree with a score. It is for consensus activity. This technique is a good example of using a small task to provoke discussion.

Third, debate is also suitable. Students are given a controversial preposition such as Yogyakarta must be free from beggars. They are then put into two groups, which have to prepare arguments either in favor the preposition or against the preposition. When the arguments are ready, the teams elect a first and second person who makes formal speeches to argue their case. All the other

students can then take part with short interventions. At the end of the discussion, the teacher can organize a free vote to see whether the proposition wins or not.

According to Arends, there are also other types of discussion and the approach chosen that are included in the effective classroom discussion.

a. Recitation exchange b. Problem-based discussion

c. Sharing-based discussion (Arends, 1997: 211)

The first approach is recitation exchange. It uses direct instruction. It has a brief question and answer session about assigning task. The teacher gives specific instruction first to the students. The second approach is problem-based discussion. It is about memorizing and understanding some materials. The next step is the teacher provides a question and answer session about assigning task. It engages students in higher and order thinking. It motivates their intellectual investigation. The last approach is sharing-based discussion. It is about sharing the student’s common experiences. They must have different opinions based on their experiences.

It can be summarized that discussion is a technique, which is used by teacher to achieve some goals in the teaching learning process. Discussion

improves student’s thinking and helps them construct their own understanding of

academic context. It also promotes involvement and engagement of the students. They take responsibility for their own learning and do not depend on the teacher. In addition, discussion is used by teacher to help students learn important

communication skills and thinking processes. They can learn to state ideas clearly, to listen to others, to speak or to respond to others, and to ask good questions.

2.1.3 Teaching Speaking

The technique used in teaching learning of speaking should be based on

the students’ need and the objective of the language learning. The process of

learning and teaching of English speaking is influenced by the time allocations and the activities available in the class. In addition, the teacher should choose the appropriate activity done in the classroom. The activity in the learning and teaching process are absolutely needed. Harmer (1991: 46) says that there are three stages in teaching speaking. There are introducing the new language, practice, and communicative activity. “In terms of oral communication, one needs to learn when it is appropriate to speak, in which circumstance, how to gain the right to speak, how and when to invite someone else to speak and so on”. (Nunan, 1989: 44).

Furthermore, teaching a foreign language for the students who are already accustomed to use their first language or mother tongue is not an easy work. Speaking a foreign language will be well-developed if the students have to have much practice. The students in a foreign language class will not learn to speak fluently merely by hearing speech. The teacher needs to give the students more opportunities throughout their years of study and to develop greater in encoding their thoughts. The core of good thinking is the ability to solve the problems. It is in line with Celce-Murcia (2000).

What academic English second language students need most is extensive authentic practice in class participation, such as taking part in discussions, interacting with peers and professor, and asking and

answering question. ….With academic adults, practice in activities

such as leading and taking part in discussions and giving oral report is needed to be done (Celce-Murcia, 2000: 105).

A final feature, which characterizes the current English Language classroom, is that students are encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning. No longer is learning seen as a one-way transfer of knowledge from teacher to student but today we understand that students learn from teachers, from classmates, and from the world outside the classroom. In addition, the more learners seek opportunities, the more likely he or she will learn to use the language. In the oral skill classroom, students should be allowed and encouraged to initiate communication when possible, to determine the content of their responses or contributions, and evaluate their own production and learning progress. If the teacher wants the learners to be able to converse in English, they need to make the classroom become a conversational place. If the learners do not talk naturally during the course of each lesson, it is hardly surprising when they can still hardly speak at all after several years of English classes. Davies and Pearse (2002: 82) say that there are some clear implications here for teaching.

a. Try to create a relaxed atmosphere in your classes so that most learners are not frightened of speaking in front of the rest of the class. And do so many speaking activities as possible in pairs and groups, so that the learners can speak English without the rest of the class listening.

b. Expose the learners as much as possible to naturally pronounced speech, and also integrate some pronunciation work into your lessons. They will not learn to pronounce intelligibly, or to develop speaking skills in general, if they do not hear enough natural speech.

c. Accustom the learners to combining listening and speaking in real time, in natural interaction. Perhaps the most important opportunity for this is in the general use of English in the classroom.

For most students in Indonesia, learning speaking is a difficult skill that they have to master. It might happen because the students in Indonesia do not have sufficient time to practice their English. They learn speaking only in their school. In Indonesia English is one of the compulsory lessons. In line with Harmer and

Clark’s theories, the students in Indonesia have to be helped with that way in order to have good speaking ability. They really need teachers to help them in learning speaking. Teachers have a big role for them to build an environment which is suitable to the process of learning English.

In conclusion, speaking is one of the central elements of communication. The teacher should provide learners with opportunities for meaningful communicative behavior about relevant topics. This requires the teacher to give

guidance for the learner’s needs. The teacher also has to create a relax atmosphere in the classroom and encourage the students to speak naturally using the language, in order to make the students accustomed to the language.

2.1.4 Speaking Mastery

For most people, the ability to speak a language is synonymous with knowing that language since speech is the most basic means of human

communication. Nevertheless, “speaking in a second or foreign language has often been viewed as the most demanding of the four skills” (Bailey and Savage

as quoted by Celce Murcia, 2000: 103). The most difficult aspect of spoken English is that it is usually accomplished via interaction with at least one other

speaker. This means that a variety of demands are accumulated: monitoring and

understanding the other speaker(s), thinking about one’s own contribution,

producing that contribution, monitoring its effect, and so on. This is one reason why many of us are shocked and disappointed when we use our second or foreign language for the first time in real interaction: “We had not been prepared for spontaneous communication and could not cope with all of its simultaneous demands” (Celce-Murcia, 2000: 103). To solve it, we need to master the speaking skill well.

Galloway (1993: 12) says that successful oral communication involves describing

a. The ability to articulate phonological features of the language apprehensively.

b. Mastery of stress, rhythm, and intonation patterns. c. An acceptable degree of fluency.

d. Skills in negotiation meaning.

e. Conversational listening skills (successful conversation requires a good listener as well as good speaker).

f. Skills in knowing about and negotiation purpose for conversation, using appropriate conversational formulae and filters.

g. Skills in the management of interaction. h. Skills in taking short and long speaking turns. i. Transactional and interpersonal skill.

In other words, these are the measurements for a person who have mastered speaking skill. In line with this concept, Common European Framework of Reference (CEF) has also formulated functional competence that must be mastered regarding to speaking or communication function. They divided into two categories, which are macrofunction and microfunction. Macrofunction is chunk of spoken or written language serving the same functional purpose such as

description, narration, commentary, explanation and demonstration. Whereas, microfunction is related to the individual action in the interaction such as inviting and apologizing. There are six man categories included in microfunction.

a. Giving and asking for factual information, e.g. describing, reporting, asking;

b. Expressing and asking about attitude, e.g. agreement/disagreement, knowledge/ignorance, ability, permission;

c. Suasion, e.g. suggesting, requesting, and warning;

d. Socializing, e.g. attracting attention, addressing, greeting;

e. Structuring discourse, e.g. opening, summarizing, changing the theme, closing;

f. Communication repair, e.g. signaling non-understanding, appealing for assistance, paraphrasing; (Council of Europe as quotated by Louma, 2004: 33-34).

When the students have good functional competence, it can help them to communicate well. Furthermore, there are some criteria that can be measured

based on the students’ performance. They are presented as follows. a. Structural criteria. They are accuracy, fluency and appropriateness

b. Communicative criteria. How communication and utterances take place effectively (Littlewood, 1981: 90)

Before students start their performances, the teachers should tell what criteria being used to measure the performances. It is used to make the students focus on what criteria that should be mastered at that time.

In EFL teaching, all aspects above need special attention and instruction. In order to provide the effective speaking, it is necessary for teachers of EFL to carefully examine the factors that underlie speaking effectiveness. It will gradually help learners speak fluently and appropriately.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

To answer the research questions, there are some theories, which are considered as a helpful foundation. It appropriately provides good understanding about the required technique, which would be observed and investigated in the study and gives clear view about its influence on the required skills.

Since the scope of the research is in the field of teaching and learning English as a foreign language, it is important to understand the concept and theory of it, so the researcher can figure out the innovative way in equipping the learners with the require technique. It helps researcher to conduct the appropriate plan in doing the research in which it can also develop learners to get and acquire the knowledge, so they will improve better.

Furthermore, the theory of Communicative Language Teaching is used as the foundation to understand the appropriate concept in developing language teaching especially to use a language as means of communication. In this concept, students not only learn to construct grammaticality correct structures and concern with linguistic ground but also concern on the content, meaning, and interest in particular situations.

Discussion technique is a technique that would be investigated in the research, which is a part of Communicative Language Teaching. Since it is the core point of this research, so the theory of discussion technique must be used. Discussion technique is a technique concerning talking about a topic or a problem involving two persons or more, in which these persons are concerning the same topic or problem. The exercises are in written and oral work but the emphasis is

on oral work. As a consequence, they can get some alternative answers to the problem they are discussing through this talking. Some students find it easier to speak if there is some framework for conservation. Discussion is aimed to actively

create students’ own utterances, using their own understanding and imagination. Therefore, through discussion the language classroom can create a relaxing atmosphere, accustom learners to speaking in natural interaction, organize oral work and avoid any obsession with accuracy. It also encourages incidental classroom speaking, gives learners’ expression that they need, and exploit every

opportunity for speaking. If there is an opportunity to speak more, the learner can develop their self confidence, mental, and ability to speak. There is also mutual feedback from their classmates and their teacher so the speaking error can be corrected. In conclusion, through discussion in the context of Communicative Language Teaching, the problems that occur in speaking can be solved. The learners can also develop their speaking ability through discussion.

Since in this research, the aims is to know whether the discussion technique can improve speaking skill or not, so it is needed to acquire the concept of speaking itself. Learning to speak a foreign language requires more than knowing its grammatical and semantic rules. Learners must also acquire the knowledge of how native speakers use the language in the context of structured interpersonal exchange. It has many factors that interact with one another. Therefore, it is difficult for English as foreign language (EFL) learners to speak the target language fluently and appropriately. In order to provide effective guidance in developing competent speakers of English, it is necessary to examine

the factors affecting learners’ oral communication, components underlying

speaking proficiency, and strategies used in communication.

Speaking a language is especially difficult for foreign language learners because effective oral communication requires the ability to use the language appropriately in social interactions. The problems involve not only verbal communication, but also pitch, stress, and intonation. In addition, non linguistic elements such as gestures and facial expression may affect understanding of the communication. In this study, speaking is a creative construction of oral skill of English language that must be mastered well by the students after the discussion technique is applied.

EFL learners need explicit instruction in speaking like in any language skill that generally has to be learned and practiced. Evidently, in practice, the factors that facilitate the production of spoken language are not supported with practices. However, it can be developed by assigning students general topics to discuss or by getting them to talk on certain subjects. The problems in speaking can be solved by discussion activity.

In a conclusion, it is believed that each theory above can help the researcher in identifying whether the chosen technique, which is discussion

technique, can improve students’ speaking mastery or not.

2.2.1 Hypothesis

On the basis of what is discussed in the theoretical description and the theoretical framework, the writer proposes a research hypothesis: “There is a significant difference in the student’s mastery of speaking between the students

who are taught using discussion technique and those who are taught without using discussion technique.”

29

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researcher discusses the methodology of this study in order to answer the research question, which is mentioned in Chapter I. This chapter is divided into six parts. They are the Research Design, Research Setting, Research Participant, Instruments and Data Gathering Technique, Data Analysis Technique, and Research Procedure.

3.1 Research Design

3.1.1 Quasi Experimental Design

Bluman (2012: 45) states that quasi experimental design is a research design which is quite often applied in education where the groups have already been formed. This type of research does not include the use of random assignment. There are two groups being compared in this type of research.

a. Control Group. Control group is a group in experiment research design, which is not manipulated by the treatment.

b. Experimental Group. Experimental group is a group in experiment research design, which is manipulated by the treatment.

This study is categorized as a quasi-experimental research design, in which classical pretest- posttest were used. There are two variables in this study, which are dependent and independent variables. The independent variable is discussion technique. The dependent variable is the students’ speaking mastery. The total

population of participants was randomly divided into two groups of sample: the control group, and the experimental group. The experimental group was taught using the discussion technique and the control group was taught without using the discussion technique.

In the experimental group, the students were asked to form a group and discussed the particular topics. The chosen topics were interesting and controversial, so the students are encouraged to develop their critical thinking, cognitive ability, and socio emotional attitude. The activities were focused on encouraging students to speak. The students were also invited to give opinion, make summary, and interpret the topic. Moreover, each group also presented the result of the discussion and the rest of a group had a chance to ask questions and give comments or feedbacks.

The researcher compared the pretest results with the posttest results from both groups. Any difference between the two samples is assumed to be the results of the experiment.

3.2 Research Setting

The study was conducted in SMK N 2 Depok, Yogyakarta. It is located in Mrican, Depok, Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. It was done in the months October to December 2012.

This study involved students of the third grade of SMK N 2 Depok. There are 272 students divided into eight classes. Every class has 30-37 students. They are in the 2012/2013 academic year.

The researcher chose two classes of the third grade of SMK N 2 Depok based on their characteristics as participants of the research. They had fulfilled the same requirements to be the students of SMK N 2 Depok in 2012/2013 academic year. Besides, they were of the same age and school environment. The classes were XII KA (Kimia Analisis) and XII TPA (Teknik Permesinan A).. Class XII KA has 31 students and XII TPA has 32 students. Therefore, the number of the sample is 63. Meanwhile, class XII TAV (Teknik Audio Video) is a sample class of the try-out before the research was applied. Table 2 below presents the distribution of the treatment.

Table 2. Distribution of the Treatment

No. Class Group Treatment Number of the students 1. XII KA Experimental Classroom

discussion method

31 2. XII

TPA

Control Non-classroom discussion method

32 Total of the students 63

3.4 Instrument and Data Gathering Technique

The research instruments used in this study were pre-test and post- tests. 3.4.1 Pre-test and Post-test

The pre-test was the speaking test, which was based on what the students had gotten from the school. The speaking items tested were taken from the School-based Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan) for the third grade students of vocational schools. The topic was taken from competence standard and basic competence of the third grade of vocational schools. The topic was determined by the researcher.

b. Post-test

The post-test was the second speaking test, which was rewritten based on the first test. It was done when the treatment had been given. The topic was also taken from competence standard and basic competence of third grade of vocational schools. The test was given after the treatment. The number of items of the both test, pre-test and post-test are the same.

3.4.2 The Validity and Reliability of the Instrument a. The Validity of the Instrument

A test is valid if it measures what it is supposed to measure. Before the instrument was used, the validity of the instruments was determined .The test instrument employes content validity. “To measure the effectiveness, content validity can be applied by comparing the instruments with the materials plan”

(Sugyono, 2010:353). Table 2 shows the blue-print of the instrument based on the School-based Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan) for the third grade students of vocational schools.

Table 3. Blue Print of the Instrument

No Standard competence

Basic Competence

Indicator Item

b. The Reliability of the Instruments

Considering the validity of the instruments, the reliability of the instruments should be found before it is applied. Reliability means that the extent of the test provides consistent results when it is used in similar circumstances. A reliable test should measure the instrument consistently. A test is reliable if it provides consistent and stable indication of the characteristics being investigated. To know the reliability of the test, the Test-retest formula is applied. The formula is:

�

=

_{[n X}n Xi Yi− Xi ( Yi ) i

2_{− ( X}

i)2 I n Yi 2 − Y1)2]

� = reliability coefficient � = total scores of TAV test 1 � = total scores of TAV test 2

(Sugiyono, 2010: 356)

The researcher employed SPSS 16.0 program 2007 edition to analyze the reliability of the test. The computation showed that the reliability coefficient for try out 1 is 0.0892 (see Appendix II), the reliability coefficient for tryout II is

1 3.

Communicate in English on

intermediate level

3. 3

Presenting the report

3. 4

Recognizing the use of user manual

1. Recognizing the elements of the report

2. Creating a report 1. Recognizing the elements of user manual.

2. Creating a user manual

1,2,3,4,5

0.890 (see Appendix II), if the instrument test refers to the value of reliability coefficient (α > r table), the research instrument can be regarded as reliable.

3.5 Data Analysis Technique

To find out the category of learning achievement for the pre- and the post-test results, the researcher used the ideal mean and the ideal standard deviation. Nurgiyantoro (1988: 395) states that for the achievement test, the ideal mean is 60% from the highest score and the ideal standard deviation is 25% from the ideal mean.

There were 10 items of the oral test in the form of questions. It was a test, which has the value 10 for the correct answer or based on the rubric of the speaking performance. So, in this research the highest score for the test is 100. The ideal mean is 60% x 100 = 60. The ideal standard deviation is 25% of 60 equal to 15. Thus the category of students’ speaking mastery can be put according to:

Table 4. The Category of Students’ Learning Achievement

Score class Category

90 < Excellent 75 – 89 very good 60 – 74 Good 45 – 59 Poor 30 – 44 very poor

> 29 extremely poor

The data from the procedure of data collecting show the score of test before the treatment and after the treatment. The score of test, which is made after the treatment, indicates whether there is an improvement in speaking skill or not.

The statistics used in the data analysis in the quantitative research are descriptive and inferential analysis.

a. The Descriptive Analysis

The descriptive analysis of the variables under this study is based on their computation of the mean, standard deviation, and the lowest and highest scores.

The formula for the computation of the meanis

� = �¡ �

Me = mean

�¡ = total scores

N = the number of students (Sugiyono, 2010: 49)

The formula of standard deviation is:

= (�¡−� )²

� −1

= Standard deviation

� = mean

� −1 = degree of freedom

(Sugiyono, 2010: 49) b. Test of Normality

Test of normality is used to determine whether the distribution of scores is normal or not. It indicates the discrepancy between the obtained frequencies and the expected frequencies. In this case, chi square statistic formula can be used.

х

2

₌

�−� 2

� х 2 _{= Chi square}

O = Obtained frequency E = Expected frequency

(Weinbergh and Schumaker, 1969: 212) c. Test of Homogeneity

The test of homogeneity aims at knowing or not the sample variance is homogeneous, that is whether the scores of one group have homogeneous variance with the scores of the other groups or not. For this, the F-test is applied. The F-test formula is as follows.

F

=

�

� �

MST = Mean square treatment/Between groups MSe = Mean Square error/Within groups (Santosa and Ashari, 2005:68)

d. Inferential Statistics/Hypothesis Test

In the inferential statistics, the researcher utilized the statistical t-test. The test was utilized to uncover the difference between the scores of the speaking skill test obtained in the pre-test and those in the post-test.

T-test formula:

t0 = � −�

�_� ²₊+_{� −} �₂² _�1+1 �

� = mean of X1

� = mean of X2

n = the number of students in control group n = the number of students in treatment group (Suharto, 2002:70)

The sources were two classes in the third year of SMK 2 Depok, Yogyakarta. There were two tests given, pre-test and post-test. First was pre-test. It was conducted to know the speaking mastery of the students before they got the treatment. The second was post-test. It was conducted to know the speaking skill of the students after they got the treatment. The treatment was conducted in eight meetings for the experimental group and control group. The treatment had two meetings per week. The duration of each meeting was ninety minutes. The researcher discussed the time with Mrs. Yohana, the English teacher of SMK N 2 Depok. The experimental group was on Monday and Tuesday while the control group was on Tuesday and Saturday. The researcher followed the school schedule in conducting the treatment.

The Pre-Test was conducted on Tuesday, 16th October 2012 for the experimental group and on Saturday, 20th October 2012 for the control group. The implementation of the treatment to the experimental group was done in the months October to November 2012. Meanwhile, the Post-Test was conducted on Tuesday, 27th November 2012 for the experimental group and on Saturday, 8th December 2012 for the control group. Both classes had different time schedules for the English subject.

38

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is organized into three sections. The sections are the Data Description, Data Analysis, and Interpretation of the Research Findings. The data were obtained from the pre- test and post- test scores of the experimental group and the pre- test and post- test scores of the control group

4.1 Data Description

The data description discusses the result of the test. It describes the test scores of the students of the experimental group and control group. The researcher conducted the pre-test and then posttest. Before the post-test is conducted, there is different treatment which is applied in the experimental group and control group. In the experimental group the students were accepted discussion technique which encourage them to speak with the activity such as critical thinking, cognitive ability, and so on (see the lesson plan in the appendix 1). The data mainly involve the mean and the standard deviation of the students’ scores. The data are

computed by using the SPSS 16.0 2007 edition. As mention before, there are pre-test and post-pre-test in this research.

4.1.1 Categorization of the Students’ Speaking Mastery

The researcher used the ideal mean and the ideal standard deviation to

determine the category of the students’ speaking mastery for the pre-test and the post-test results. The ideal mean can be determined by 60% of the possibly

highest score, while the ideal standard deviation is 25% of the ideal mean (Nurgiyantoro, 1988: 365). For example, there are 10 performance criteria on the speaking test checklist. Every performance has maximum score of 10, so the total performances has 100 maximum scores. For example, student X does 80 of them during his or her performances. The writer determines that student X’s performance is translated into a score of 80 percent: (80 x 10): 10 = 80%. In other words, student X demonstrates 80 percent of the desired performance criteria.

The students were given 10 items of the speaking achievement test. It was an objective test, which involved oral questions. So, in this research, the highest score for the test is 100. The ideal mean is 60% x 100= 60. The ideal standard deviation is 25% of 60 equals to 15. Thus, the category of students’ speaking

mastery can be put according to the table below.

Table 5. Categorization of the Students’ Speaking Mastery

Score class Category

 90 Excellent 75 – 89.9 very good 60 – 74.9 Good 45 – 59.9 Poor 30 – 44.9 very poor

 29.9 extremely poor (Nurgyantoro, 1988:365)

The researcher also considers some categorization such as functional competence, performance, speak act, criteria, and object to formulate the speaking rubric in order to measure student’s mastery of speaking.

4.1.2 Data of the Experimental Group

a. Data of the Pre-test Scores of the Experimental Group

There were 10 items of speaking test in the pre-test. The possibly of highest score is 100. The data of pre-test scores showing the highest score is 70 while the lowest score is 31. The mean of the score is 58.87. The following table illustrates the descriptive analysis on the pre-test scores of the experimental group.

Table 6. Descriptive Analysis on the Pre-test Score of the Experimental Group

Mean SD Median Mode Max Scores

Min Scores

Numbers of items 58.87 7.63 60 61 70 31 31 Based on the table above, the mean of the pre-test of the experimental group is 58.87. According to the table of the category of students’ speaking mastery, it is

in the poor category because it lies between the numbers of 45 – 59.9. Thus, the

students’ speaking mastery of the experimental group before using the discussions technique can be categorized as poor.

b. Data on the Post-test Scores of the Experimental Group

The experimental group is the group, which received the treatment (discussion technique) in the English teaching learning process. The use of the discussion technique was conducted in the eight meeting with different topics in each meeting. After the technique was applied, the post test is later held. There were 10 items of oral skill in the post-test. The possibly of the highest score is 100. The data of the post-test scores show that the highest score is 93.00 while the lowest score is 58.00. The mean of the score is 80.64. The following table

illustrates the descriptive analysis on the post-test scores of the experimental group.

Table 7. Descriptive Analysis on the Post-test of the Experimental Group

Mean SD Median Mode Max

scores scores Min Items 80.64 7.43 80.00 80.00 93.00 58.00 31 Based on the table above, the mean of the post-test of the experimental group is 80.64. According to the table of the category of students’ speaking mastery, it is in the very good category because it lies between the numbers of 75 – 89.9. Thus,

the students’ speaking mastery of the experimental group after using discussions technique can be categorized as very good. Based on the number of the students of experimental group that have high speaking score, the pre-test gets 64.5% and the post-test get 96.8 %. It can be concluded that the number of the students of the experimental group that have high speaking scores increase 32.3%.

c. Comparison between the Pre-test and Post-test Scores of Students of the Experimental Group

The table below describes the statistical data of the pre-test and post-test scores of the students speaking mastery of the experimental group. The statistical data consist of the information about the number of cases, the sum of scores, mean, and standard deviation.

Table 8. Statistical data of the Pre-test and Post-test Scores of the Experimental Group

The mean of pre-test and post-test increases from 58.87 to 80.64, if it is consulted

to the table of categorization, then it is clear that the students’ speaking mastery

improves from the poor to the very good category, because after applying the discussion technique, the mean of the post-test scores lies between the numbers of 75-89.9.

Furthermore, the standard deviation of pre-test in the experimental group is 7.63 and the standard deviation of post-test in the experimental group is 7.43. It

decreases from 7.63 to 7.43. It can be concluded that the scores of the

experimental group from pre-test to post-test are more homogenous. 4.1.3 Data of the Control Group

a. Data on the Pre-test Scores of the Control Group

The data of the pre-test and post-test of the control group were obtained by using the same test as the experimental group. There were 10 items of oral skill in

the pre-test. The possibly of the highest score is 100. The data of the pre-test scores show the highest score is 72 while the lowest score is 37. The mean of the score is 59.40. The following table illustrates the descriptive analysis on the pre-test scores of the control group.

Data Pre-test Post-test

Number of cases 31 31 Sum of scores 1825 2500

Mean 58.87 80.64

Table 9. Descriptive Analysis on the Pre-test Result of the Control Group

Based on the table, the mean of the pre-test scores of the control group is 59.40.

According to the table of the category of students’ speaking mastery, it is in the poor category because it lies between the numbers of 45 – 59.5. So, it can be

concluded that the students’ speaking mastery of the control group is poor. b. Data of the post-test result of the control group

There were 10 items of oral skill in the post-test. The possibly of the highest score is 100. The data of the post-test scores show the highest score is 89 while the lowest score is 52. The mean of the score is 71.09. The following table illustrates the descriptive analysis on the post-test scores of the control group.

Table 10. Descriptive Analysis of the Result of the Post-test in the Control Group

The table above shows that the mean of the score is 70.65. If it is checked with the table of the categorization of the students speaking mastery, it is in the good category because it lies in the number of 60 – 74.9. In other words, the students’

speaking mastery of the control group is good. Based on the number of the students of control group that have high speaking score, the pre-test gets 59.4% and the post-test gets 87.5%. It can be concluded that the number of the students that have high speaking score increases 28.1%.

Mean SD Median Mode Max

scores

Min scores

Items

59.40 7.51 60 59 72 37 32

Mean SD Median Mode Max

scores

Min scores

Items

c. Comparison between the Pre-test Scores and the Post-test Scores of the Control Group

The table below illustrates the statistical data in the pre-test and post-test

scores of the students’ speaking mastery on the control group. The statistical data

consist of the information about the number of cases, sum of scores, mean, and standard deviation.

Table 11. The Statistical Data of the Pre-test and Post-test Scores of the Control Group

Data Pre-test Post-test

Number of cases 32 32 Sum of scores 1901 2261

Mean 59.60 70.65

SD 7.51 8.46

The mean of pre-test and post-test increases from 59.60 to 70.65. If it is consulted to the table of categorization, then it is clear that the students’ speaking mastery increases from poor category to good category because the means of the post-test scores lies between the numbers of 60 – 74.9.

Moreover, the standard deviation of pre-test in the control group is 7.51 and the standard deviation of post-test in the control group is 8.46. It increases from 7.51 to 8.46. It can be concluded that the scores of the control group from pre-test to post-test are more heterogeneous.

4.1.4 Statistical Data of the Experimental Group and the Control Group

This research involves two groups (experimental group and control group). Both of them received the pre-test and the post-test. The table below describes the statistical data of the Experimental Group and the Control Group.

Table 12. Statistical Data of the Effectiveness of Discussion Technique

Data Experimental Group Control Group

Number of cases 31 32 Sum of score 2500 2261

Mean 80.64 70.65

SD 7.43 8.46

The table above shows that there is a difference between the scores of the experimental and the control group. The mean of the students who were taught by using the discussion technique (experimental group) is 80.64, while the mean of the students who were not taught by using discussion technique (control group) is 70.65. It confirms that the mean of the experimental group is higher than the control group. In other words, it can be concluded that the improvement of speaking mastery in the experimental group in which the discussion technique is applied is higher than in the control group in which the discussion technique is not applied. It also shows that a discussion technique is effective to improve the effectiveness of students’ speaking mastery.

The number of the students of the experimental group who have high speaking scores increases 32.2%, while the number of the students of the control group who have high scores increases 28.1%. It confirms that the increasing number of the students who have high speaking scores in the experimental group is higher than the control group.

The standard deviation of the experimental group decreases from 7.63 to 7.43 or the scores of the experimental group from pre-test to post-test are more homogenous. While, the standard deviation of the control group increases from

7.51 to 8.46 or the scores of the control group from pre-test to post-test are more heterogeneous. It can be concluded that the scores of the experimental group become homogenous while the scores of the control group become heterogeneous.

4.2 Data Analysis

To find out there is a significance different or not which happens to the

student’s mastery of speaking between the students’ who were taught using discussions technique and those who were not taught using discussion technique , the t-test was applied. Before the t-test was operated, the pre analysis testing was applied in this research. The pre analysis testing included test of normality and test of homogeneity. The discussion of the pre analysis testing is as follows. 4.2.1 Test of Normality

The normality test is used to know whether the distribution of scores is normal or not. In this case, the chi – square technique is employed. The distribution is said to be normal if obtained Chi-square value (x o2) is lower than

the critical value (x t2) with the significance level of 5% and (dƒ) equals with n –1.

174

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pair 1 PostTestKA 80.6452 31 7.43213 1.33485

PostTestTPA 70.8065 31 8.56512 1.53834

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.

Pair 1 PostTestKA & PostTestTPA 31 -.314 .085

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

175

Hypotheses Test

T-TEST PAIRS=PreTestKA WITH PreTestTPA (PAIRED)

/CRITERIA=CI(.9500)

/MISSING=ANALYSIS

.

T-Test

[DataSet0]

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pair 1 PreTestKA 58.8710 31 7.63213 1.37077

PreTestTPA 59.3548 31 7.63129 1.37062

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.

176

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

177

APPENDIX 4