THE USE OF QUESTIONING TECHNIQUE TO ENHANCE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY
THE USE OF QUESTIONING TECHNIQUE TO ENHANCE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY
Dedy Wahyudi
State Islamic University of Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau, Indonesia [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Due to Questioning and answering as the activities that cannot be separated from Daily communication, the difficulties of speaking English encountered by pre-service English teachers are highly required to be overcome. In addition, they are future English Teachers. This study, therefore, aims at
enhancing students’ speaking ability through Questioning technique and finding out the factors that influence the change of students’ speaking
ability. This study was a classroom action research, which was carried out in two cycles. The freshmen of English Education Department were the participants of the research. Based on the findings, it showed that Questioning Technique could improve students’ speaking ability in terms of accent, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension, in which speaking fluency was the highest improvement of all. Moreover, it led the students to good self confidence and classroom participation. In short, the more the students use questioning technique, the better the students’ speaking ability is.
Keywords: Questioning Technique, Speaking Ability, Enhance.
INTRODUCTION
To speak English well, the students should, therefore, master some
Speaking is one of productive parts of speaking ability such as fluency
skills, which is the ability in using and accuracy. Fluency focuses on
language orally through sound to meaning and spontaneity and accuracy present information, to produce ideas, focuses on vocabulary, grammar, style, and to express meaning for interacting pronunciation of sounds, stress, and with another member of community. In intonation. Low fluency of speaking university level particularly in English will affect the effective communication Education Department, speaking is between speaker and interlocutor in normally taught from the first year up to terms of hesitation, brief utterances, and the second year with different course
message expressed. descriptions and credit hours for each
unclear
Subsequently, low accuracy of speaking semester. The main goal of teaching
leads to poor language production in speaking is to train the students to speak terms of poor vocabulary, poor accent, fluently with good fluency and
and mistakes in basic grammar. On the accuracy. Since they are pre-service
other hand, by having good fluency and teachers, it also prepares them for
accuracy in speaking English, the teaching English in the future time.
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 93 IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 93
and teaching materials. Therefore, the teaching and learning activities done in
Based on the wri ter’s interview speaking class are very important
and teaching experience, it was found factors to lead the students to the better
that most of the students still had a lot speakers. The activities have to give
of difficulties speaking in English. useful contribution for the sake of
Second, particularly in teaching speaking, many of the first year students
improving the students’ speaking ability, particularly in the terms of
of class F of English Education fluency and accuracy. For this reason,
Department of Faculty of Education and teachers are supposed to create a good
Teachers Training of Sultan Syarif atmosphere or a good learning
Kasim State Islamic University of Riau environment by using appropriate were passive in English. It can be
methods, strategies, proved that when they told something or
speaking
techniques, and relevant materials for do oral presentation and discussed about
the remarkable progress of their
a topic, their fluency was low. They
students.
were not able to generate ideas when speaking. As they could not express
possible solution to their ideas due to lack of vocabulary,
The
overcome the problem is by making use they had poor confidence or felt nervous
of questioning technique. Silberman in expressing their ideas. Thus, the
(1996) stated that learning starts with a sentences they produced were brief and
question is the simple strategy to unclear. They also worried about
stimulate question asking, the key to making mistake in speaking English. As
learning. It is also supported by David
a result, they had less courage to speak (2007) that questioning is an important English and it led to poor speaking
aspect of classroom interaction in ESL performance. Moreover, they still made
Classroom. It is also used as a frequent grammatical errors, and
functional or speech act label, and refers produced mispronunciation.
to an utterance that seeks information accent was so influenced by their
Their
(Wu, 1993). It means that through mother tongue that the sentences they
questioning technique the learners can produced were difficult to understand.
seek information related to the topics Consequently, most of them were poor
being discussed in speaking class and in accuracy.
produce well organized ideas and interaction. To support this idea, Brock
In relation to the current fact in in David (2007) in his study discovered
teaching speaking previously clarified, that Classroom Question of whatever
it can be identified that there are two fort is designed to get learners to
factors that c ause students’ poor produce language. In addition, teachers speaking ability. Firstly, from the may create discourse which can produce students themselves, they are lack of
a flow of information form students to vocabulary or ideas, brief sentences or
the teacher and may create a more near- confusing sentences, fear of making
speech. Furthermore, mistakes, grammatical errors, and Questioning plays an important role in mispronunciation.
language acquisition because as Ellis in problems also come from the teacher
Ozcan (2010) claims, language learners who
mostly have the opportunity to inappropriate
speaking
teaching
participate when they are asked a
94 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 94 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
involves the ability to satisfy two indicate the listener understand your
demands, processing main points and to gain the most from
particular
condition and reciprocity condition. The any conversation, focus on listener and
processing condition is concerned with ask questions and listen to the
the speech taking place under time responses. Thus, it achieves the good
pressure, and reciprocity condition is fluency and accuracy of speaking
concerned with interpersonal interaction English.
between speaker and interlocutor. On the other hand, the ability of speaking
Pertaining to the problems English is achieved if speaker and
previously stated, this study, therefore, aims at enhancing students’ speaking interlocutor understand the context of
interaction happening. ability through questioning technique
and finding out the factors which Subsequently, speaking is influence the changes of students’
negotiating intended meanings and speaking ability by using Questioning
adjusting one’s speech to produce the technique.
desired effect on listener (O’Malley and Pierce, 1996). It is used for negotiation
REVIEW OF THE RELATED
to express intended meanings between
THEORIES AND FINDINGS
speaker and hearer in which speaker
1. Concept of Speaking
express the ideas to influence his/her Various definitions of speaking
hearer. It means that in interaction the are stated by some experts. First,
speaker attracts his/her interlocutor’s speaking is a skill involving some kinds
attention to his/her ideas. of production on the part of language
Moreover, speaking is the active user (Harmer, 1985). It means that it is
use of language to express meanings so an ability of producing a language
that other people can make sense of orally. Second, Long and Jack (1987)
them (Cameron, 2004). In speaking, state that speaking is a complex set of
speaker and interlocutor emphasize on abilities
the meaning what each is saying about components; including pronunciation,
in order that they understand one listening, and grammar skills. By
another. It is also supported by Jie mastering the components involved in
(1999) who says that the use of speaking, speakers can produce a good
language is more important than spoken language.
knowing the usage of language. When Then, according to Bygates (in
speaker and hearer are interacting or Nunan, 1987), speaking can be
communicating orally, each focuses on characterized in terms of routines,
the use of the language not the usage of which are conventional ways of
the language. Furthermore, speaking is presenting information which can either
the process of buildings and sharing focus on information or interaction. It
meanings through the use of verbal and means that is a conventional way of
non-verbal symbols, in a variety context communication habitually done by
(Chaney in Kayi, 2006). It means that speaker and interlocutor in order to give
spoken language consists of both verbal or receive information. In other words,
and non-verbal language to share it is a conventional way of interaction
meanings in various contexts between between speaker and hearer. In addition,
speaker and interlocutor.
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 95
Dealing with some theoretical in the terms of speaking in the second definitions above, It can be concluded
language learning, which may result in that speaking is one of productive skills,
the success of both students’ learning which is the ability in using language
and students’ life in the coming time. orally through sound to present
Moreover, Nunan (in Kayi, 2006) information, produce ideas, express
explains that teaching speaking is to meaning for interacting with another
teach ESL learners in: a) Producing the member of community which involves English speech sounds and sound many
components;
including
patterns; b) Using word and sentence pronunciation, listening, and grammar
stress, intonation patterns and the skills both in verbal and non verbal of a
rhythm of the second language; c) variety context.
Selecting appropriate words sentences
2. Teaching Speaking
according to the proper social setting, audience, situation, and subject matter;
Teaching speaking is one of the
d) Organizing their thoughts in a concerns by anyone who is in charge of
meaningful and logical sequence; e) teaching English. Many questions of
Using language as a means of how to make the learners initiate and expressing values and judgments. f) develop self-esteem, how to use
Using the language quickly and appropriate language, and how to
confidently with few unnatural pauses negotiate or interact conversationally,
called as fluency.
may continually appear. As suggested by Brown and Nation (1997) that the
In relation to the previous goal of teaching speaking ability is
explanation, the conclusion can be made communicative efficiency. In teaching
that the primary goal of teaching speaking, the teacher has to emphasize
speaking English is communicative on the efficiency of oral communication
efficiency particularly in language so that the use of the language works
production, which the use of language is well rather than the usage of the
emphasized rather than the usage of language. To support this idea, Hughes
language.
(2003) mentions, objective of teaching
3. Concept of Questioning Technique
spoken language is the development of the ability to interact successfully in that
To understand what Questioning language, and that this involves
technique is, some definitions are either comprehensions as well as production.
directly or indirectly quoted, which are In other words, teaching speaking aims
then reviewed. First, Hussain (2003) to enhance the capability of interaction
states that questioning is the single most in comprehending and producing the
influential teaching act and the trend has language.
hardly changed over the years. Orlich, et.al (1985) added that the Questioning
In addition, Kayi (2006) states technique can be utilized as a helpful
that teaching speaking is a very tool to arrange concepts of certain
important part of second language information that will be delivered. It
learning that the ability to communicate means that it can be used in order to
in a second language clearly and have well organized information and to efficiently contributes to the success of have well organized speech in speaking
the learner in school and success later in English. It enables the students to speak
every phase of life. It means that English mastery is particularly essential
96 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
English with good fluency and accuracy produce the language orally, it has due to well arranged concepts.
many benefits in teaching and learning activities, which are discussed in
Second, in order to teach well, it accordance with some experts. First,
is widely believed that one must be able David (2007) recommended that
to question well. Asking good questions Display questions should be more
fosters interaction between the teacher
English Language and his/her students. It also has been classroom as means of improving known that it is possible to transfer
exploited in
participation and factual knowledge and conceptual
classroom
involvement of learners or questioning understanding through the process of
behavior should be exploited as a way asking questions (Brualdi, 1998). It
of promoting classroom interaction in means that students and teacher can ESL instruction. It can be concluded interact with each other related to the
that Questioning technique is a good topic being discussed. As a result, it
way of enhancing learner classroom leads to communicative fluency.
interaction especially in speaking In addition, Qashoa (2013) states
course.
that one of the most common and prominent classroom activities are the
Brock in David (2007) and Van act of teacher questioning. It can be
lier in Shomoossi (2004) note that stated that the teacher has to be able to
classroom questions of whatever sort ask questions in order to have a better
are designed to get learners to produce teaching and learning interaction and
language.
students’ participation. As supported by In different view, Brock in
Questioning plays an important role in Shomoossi (2004) explains the role of language acquisition because as Ellis in
questions in second language learning Ozcan (2010) claims, language learners
in the classroom environment, which mostly have the opportunity to
referential questions in particular participate when they are asked a
increase the amount of learner output; question. It means that it is used to
therefore, an increased use of referential motivate and involve students in
questions by teachers may create teaching and learning activities
discourse which can produce a flow of especially in teaching speaking Course.
information from students to the Finally, it can be concluded that
teacher, and may create a more near- Questioning technique is a tool of
normal speech.
stimulating the students’ participation in In relation to explanation above,
the classroom. Particularly in speaking Questioning technique has many course, the learners know what and how
advantages of learning a language, to participate in speaking English since
particularly in learning speaking. It can they understand about the topic being
be employed as tools to generate a lot of discussed. It gradually produces a good
ideas for the sake of producing a spoken language with high fluency and
language orally in achieving good accuracy.
fluency and good accuracy. Thus,
4. The Benefit of using Questioning
making use of Questioning technique
technique
before speaking leads the learners to speak fluently.
As Questioning technique is a good way of helping the students
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 97
5. Purposes of
Questioning
and elaborate on what a student has
Technique
said; (b) students can openly express their ideas through answering teacher
Using Questioning technique has questions; (c) asking questions enhance
many purposes as discussed by some theoreticians. First, teachers ask
students’ interest and keep them actively involved; (d) the act of
questions for several reasons (Morgan questioning let students benefit from
and Saxton in Brualdi: 1998): various explanations of the material by
a. The act of asking questions helps the peers; (e) questioning is a good tool teachers keep students actively
for evaluating student learning and involved in lessons;
reviewing and the lesson as necessary;
(f) asking questions enables teachers to students have the opportunity to
b. While answering
questions,
control class discipline and student openly express their ideas and
behavior.
thoughts; From the
c. Questioning students enables other questioning discussed above, it can be
purposes of
students to
hear
different
concluded that questioning can be explanations of the material by separated from teaching the language, their peers;
d. Asking questions helps teachers to in order to get the students involved in
especially in teaching speaking course
pace their lessons and moderate the communicative activities.
student behavior; and
e. Questioning students helps teachers
6. Application
of Questioning
to evaluate student learning and
Technique
revise their lessons as necessary. There are some steps of using
Second, Hussain (2003) added Questioning technique that can be several possible reasons of Questioning
applied in teaching, which are suggested that are (a) to encourage learners to talk;
by experts. According to Hussain, the (b) to signal an interest in hearing what
questioning technique can be worked as learners feel and think; (c) to stimulate
in the following:
interest and awaken curiosity; (d) to
a. Ask the question. encourage problem- solving approach to
The teachers should state the que thinking and learning; (e) to help
stion clearly and concisely. If a learners externalize and verbalize
question is complicated, it may be knowledge learning; (f) to encourage necessary to rephrase it. It is thinking
aloud and
exploratory
imperative that the question is stated approaches to task; (g) to help learners
first before naming the learner to to learn from each other; (h) to monitor
learning; and (i) to deepen le arner’s thinking level and increase their ability
respond.
b. Pause.
to conceptualize. After asking a question, pausing is important so that everyone has time
Third, Brown, Wragg, Cotton, to think. Waiting time is essential
Richard and Morgan in Qashoa (2013) when asking high-level question.
state the following functions that the teacher questioning serves in the
c. Call on the learner by name. classroom which are (a) asking
Learners should be randomly questions helps teachers to follow up
selected to answer the questions so
98 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 98 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
7. Related Findings
answer. There are some findings of studies
d. Listen to the answer. related to the use of Questioning
A good technique that teachers can technique in teaching English as in the use to ensure that the learners are
following:
attentive is to ask another learner to First, David (2007) investigated
respond to the answer given. Teacher’s Questioning Behavior and
e. Emphasize the correct answer. ESL Classroom Interaction Pattern. It The teachers could ask probing
was found from this study that there questions to have the respondents'
was a difference in the distribution of response clarified, to support a
Displays Questions and Referential point, or to extend their thinking.
Question in ESL Classroom, Teacher used more of Display question than
In different ways, Wahyudi Referential Questions, Referential
(2013) notes that questioning technique question created less classroom
can be practiced by using throwing and interaction than Display question. In
catching the ball, in which a student Summary, questioning behavior affects
throws a ball while giving a question at ESL classroom interaction. By using the same time and another student Questioning technique before speaking, catches the ball by answering the given the learners can produce good fluency question. The steps of the activity; a) in English since they can generate many the class is divided into a number of ideas from the questions given by groups (up to the number of students); teacher or classmates.
b) teacher prepares some balls based on the number of groups; c) the students
Second, the study by Shomoossi stand up and make circle in each group;
(2004) was about the effect of teachers’
d) each group is given a ball; e) teacher questioning behavior on EFL classroom gives some instruction what to do; f) the
interaction. Its finding indicated that students in the group will take a turn to
Display questions were used by the throw and catch the ball or ask a
frequently than question and answer the question; g) the
teachers
more
Referential Question because the question can be specified by the teacher
amount of classroom interaction caused (related to the given topic).
by Referential questions is much greater than Display questions. Therefore,
Furthermore,
questioning
most, not all, referential questions technique can be practiced through face
create more interaction in the classroom to face talk which facilitate the students
than display questions do. By having to ask questions with each other
much vocabulary obtained through Dealing with the theories of
Questioning technique before speaking, Questioning technique particularly in
the learners have good courage or teaching speaking, it can be concluded
confidence to speak English without that there are five steps of Questioning
worrying of making mistakes. technique that can be applied in
In the third study, Long and Sato teaching speaking such as: ask the
in Wu (1993) examined the forms and question, pause, call on the learner by
name, listen to the answer and functions of ESL teachers’ questions by
comparing them with questions found in emphasize the correct answer.
real-life discourse. They concluded that:
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 99
(1) ESL teachers ask more display second semester students’ speaking questions than referential question; and
ability. As Mills (2000) states that (2) ESL Teachers ask more display
classroom action research is a questions than native speakers in
systematic acquiring done by teachers informal conversation with non-native
(or other individuals in teaching speakers outside the classroom.
learning environment) to gather information about the subsequently
In the fourth study, Al-muani improve the way of their particular (2013) analyzed the use of referential schools operate how they teach and how and display questions in classroom well the students learn. In another way, discourse and studied the quantity and Mettetal (2001) states that classroom quality of the learner talk which action research is a systematic enquiry occurred with these questions. The with the goal informing practice in a findings indicated that referential particular situation. Thus, it is a way for questions would increase learner talk instructors to discover what works best and promote more interaction between in their own classroom situation, learners and the teacher. Referential allowing informed decision about question will always produce more and teaching. To support this idea, Burns longer responses. (1999) states that the application of
Referring to the findings above, it facts findings in the classroom action can be concluded that Questioning
research is the practical problem solving technique can increase the students’
in social situation with a view to speaking ability, which increase
improve the quality of action within it learners’ talk and the learners and
that involves the collaboration and teacher’s interaction. It gradually build
cooperation of researching, practitioner up students’ confidence, develop a lot
and laymen. Similarly, Johnson (2005) of ideas, decrease students’ worry,
concludes that classroom action create interesting and enjoyable class,
research is the process of study or real improve the students’ comprehension,
school or classroom situation to activate students’ prior knowledge, and
understand and improve the quality of stimulate them to use their knowledge
instruction. In different way, Suwartono to interact one another.
(2014) classroom action research is the Though the research about
research in which the researcher Questioning technique have been done,
involves directly in the setting of the it is important that more studies need to
problems experiencing.
be conducted in order to solve the Because this study was designed problem
to improve the quality of teaching and Therefore, the writer would like to carry
in teaching
speaking.
learning activities particularly in out a classroom action research about
teaching speaking class at Faculty of the use of questioning technique to
Education and Teachers Training of improve student’s speaking ability
Sultan Syarif Kasim State Islamic through.
University of Riau, the researcher
METHOD OF RESEARCH
applied a collaborative classroom action research that the researcher and
The type of the research used in collaborator became a team and work this study is a classroom action research
together for solving the problems in which aims at explaining whether
order to improve students’ speaking. Questioning technique can improve the
100 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
The participants of this research begin work another, the original is are the first semester students of class F
redefined and cycle is repeated. of English Education Department of
Furthermore, there are some steps Faculty of Education and Teachers
of cyclical process done in a classroom Training of Sultan Syarif Kasim State
action research according to Kemis and Islamic University of Riau in 2015/2016
Robin (1988), Madya (2006), and academic year. There were twenty-nine
Arikunto, et al (2007), they are plan, students, twenty-five female and 4 male Action, Observation and Reflection. students, which graduated from either This research has been done in two public or private high school. They had cycles by using questioning technique some speaking problems namely; lack to improve the students’ speaking of vocabulary or ideas, brief sentences ability; each cycle had four meetings; or confusing sentences produced, fear of each meeting with the allocation of time making mistakes, grammatical errors,
2 x 50 minutes.
and mispronunciation.
Moreover,
lecturer and collaborator are primarily There were two steps done by the involved in this research. The lecturer is
researcher in analyzing the data as the person who teaches speaking course,
follows:
and the collaborator is the person who
1. Quantitative Data teaches the same subject in another
After assessing the test given to class.
through oral This research was conducted at
the
students
by using the the first semester students of Class F of
presentation
proficiency description of testing English Education Department of
oral ability, the data were Teacher training and Education Faculty
quantitatively analyzed. To assess of Sultan Syarif Kasim State Islamic
students’ oral presentation, the oral University of Riau. It is located at H.R
language scoring rubric was used as Soebrantas Street Km.15, Panam,
adopted from Hughes (2005). Then, Pekanbaru, Riau.
after the data of students’ speaking ability which were assessed based
The key instrument of this study on oral language scoring rubric, the
was the researcher who gathered the data were analyzed and categorized
data from the checklist of observation, in rating scale. The rating scale was
field notes/ recordings and the test in adopted from Leo (2006) which are every step of two cycles. Those all deal
86 – 100 = A (very good), 71 – 85 with teaching and learning activities in
C speaking class.
= B (good), 56 – 70 =
(Fair), and 10 – 55 = D (Poor). Pertaining to classroom action
2. Qualitative Data research, Ur (1997) states that it is
The data gathered from based on a cycle of investigation, action observation checklist, field notes, and reinvestigation such as a problem is and test through oral presentation identified, relevant data are gathered were presented in most qualitative and recorded, practical action is description as suggested by Gay and suggested that might solve the problem, Airasian (2000) that there are some
a plan of action is designed, the plan is steps can be done such as data
implemented, results are monitored and
reading/memoing, recorded, and if the original problem
managing,
classifying, and interpreting.The has been solved, the researchers may
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 101 IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 101
fluency, and comprehension, which was researcher is writing the report of
done by three raters. The base score of the research. The data which were
the students’ speaking ability indicated managed, read, classified, and
that two of 29 students were categorized interpreted are written in the form of
in the good level of speaking ability,
a report in order to describe the seven students were categorized in the study and its finding.
fair level of speaking ability and the others were categorized in the poor
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
level of speaking ability. It means that
A. Findings
6.89% of the students were categorized Before carrying out the research,
as good students, 24.1% of the students the researcher and collaborator gave
were categorized as fair students, and speaking test to the students in order to
69% of the students were categorized as know the base score at the starting
poor students. The result of students’ point. The speaking test was assessed
test in each indicator is displayed as in based on oral language scoring rubric in
the following table:
Table1. The Base Score of the Students’ Speaking ability
The Number of Students (29) Rating quality/Percentage
No Indicator
Very
% Good % Fair
From the table above, it shows was due to the influence of their mother that the students’ speaking ability
tongue or their tendency of using their before conducting classroom action
mother tongue. Next, some of them research was not good. First, in term of
spoke unclearly so it influenced the accent, there were no student
meaning of the words pronounced, categorized into the level of very good,
misinterpretation. four students or 13.79% of the students
which
led to
Moreover, they made a lot of repetition categorized into the level of good, seven
in pronouncing words because they students or 24.13% of the students
were not sure whether the words they categorized into the level of fair and
pronounced were correct or not. eighteen students or 62.06% of the
Second, in term of grammar, there students categorized into the level of
poor. The level of the students’ was no student obtaining the level of very good, one student or 3.44% of the
speaking ability in term of accent can be students who was in the level of good,
illustrated that the students still had seven students or 24.13% of students
difficulty in speaking English in term of who were in the level of fair, and
accent. It was found that they were twenty-one students or 72.41% of unable to pronounce words well, which
102 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 102 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
10.34% of the students who were in the made many grammatical mistakes when
level of good, six students or 20.68% of speaking English. Since they had
the students who were in the level of studied grammar for a long time, most
fair, and twenty students or 68.96% of of them could not control their
the students who were in the level of sentences, which their sentences were
poor. It indicated that the students’ not complete, so it broke the meaning
comprehension about the topic being what they said. They also use incorrect
talked was poor. It was caused by the tenses, which they were not able to use
prior knowledge or background appropriate tenses in accordance with
knowledge which was possessed by the the usage. Then, incorrect prepositions
students.
were done by them. Finally, the average score of
Third, in term of vocabulary, there students speaking ability before were no students obtaining the level of
conducting classroom action research of very good and good, eight students or
every indicator was 45 in term of 27.59% of the students who was in the
accent, 44 in term of grammar, 47 in level of fair, and twenty-one students or
term of vocabulary, 49 in term of 72.41% of the students who were in the
fluency, and 45 in term of level of poor. It means that the students’
comprehension. It means the total of vocabulary when speaking English was
means for each indicator was 46. After poor, they were difficult to express and
analyzing the data from the test, the to communicate ideas. Their lack of
researcher concluded that the level of vocabulary influenced the sentences
stu dents’ speaking ability before they produced, which were simple. It
conducting the research was poor. The also broke their fluency. Furthermore,
students did have difficulties in they had problem in choice of words.
speaking English because all indicators Many
of speaking were categorized in the inappropriate choice of words.
level of poor. On the other hands, the speaking teaching technique previously
Fourth, in term of fluency, there used was to change. Consequently, in
were no students who were in the level of very good, three students or 10.34%
order to improve the students’ speaking ability in terms of accent, grammar,
of students who were in the level of
fluency and good, twelve students or 41.38% of the
vocabulary,
comprehension, the researcher made students who were in the level of fair,
plans of activities done in the first cycle and fourteen students or 48.28% of the
speaking through students who were in the level of poor.
by
teaching
Questioning Technique. It can be concluded that most of the
students had poor fluency in speaking
1. The extent to which questioning
English. It was caused by lack of
technique could improve the
vocabulary mastery and the knowledge
students’ speaking ability
of the topic being talked. In addition, As it was previously clarified, this
when they spoke English, their speeches research was carried out in two cycles, were short. They also spent much time each cycle had four meetings.
to think of what to say. Fifth, in term of comprehension,
there was no student who was in the
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 103 IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 103
stimulate
students’ active involvement in the practice of
the
At the first meeting of this cycle, the topic discussed was about “Self- questioning. Most of students got
Introduction”. In the beginning activity, motivated to participate, in which they were busy and noisy doing the activities
teacher began the lesson by writing the because they enjoy doing it. The
topic on the board and the list of students showed that the use of
questions related to the topic, for Questioning Technique were good example: “What is your name?” The because they were easy to speak about collaborator observed teaching learning the topic since they knew what to say or process. From the data obtained in ask and they could develop their ideas. observation checklist and field notes,
there were some notes taken from the At the third meeting, the topic in teaching and learning activity. Most of
this meeting was about “Practice students involved in the activity because
questioning and answering through it was not new for them, the domination
throwing and catching the ball”. By of the lecturer was high to explain the
using a ball a student throws a ball questions, the students still got some
while giving a question at the same time examples from the lecturer, they were
and another student catches the ball by asked to answer the questions. Then,
answering the given question. In this they were invited to do presentation in
activity the lecturer divided the class front of the class. However, the students
into five groups, had the students stand could not speak comfortably in their
up and make circle in each group, gave presentation because most of them
a ball for each group, and gave some relied on the list of the questions made
instruction what to do, which the or they tended to read it which looked
students in the group took a turn to like reading instead of speaking, and
throw and catch the ball or ask a most of the students made mistakes in
question and answer the question. Based grammar and pronunciation from
on the data gathered, it could be noted presentation. After the presentation, the
that the domination of lecturer was students were given some corrections
small in this activity, it means that the related to their presentation. It seems
students were very active to practice that the students had difficulty in terms
questioning and answering. They could of grammar when speaking English or
ask and answer the questions fluently or they could not speak correctly and they
they felt enjoyed speaking English were busy with the list of questions.
though they could not control it. It showed that the students still made a lot
At the second meeting, the topic was about “Let’s know each other”. of grammatical errors in questioning
and answering.
Based on the observation checklist and field note, there were some activities
At the fourth meeting, the topic that could be described. The lecturer
a classmate” was wrote the topic on the board in starting
“Describing
discussed. There were several things the lesson, explained about the
noted such as the lecturer prepared the statements on the boxes and gave some
list of questions related to the topic, examples of how to formulate the
explained the list of questions related to questions from statements. Then, he
the topic, gave example to the students, distributed a piece of paper related to
some of whom were randomly asked statements in the boxes in order to
referring to the list of question, they
104 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 104 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
questions merely. When they were questioning and answering through face
doing presentation, the teacher recorded to face talk before they were invited to
their voice in order to assess their do presentation by describing his/her
speaking ability in each of the speaking classmate. From their presentation, it
indicators. The students’ speaking was still found that grammar and
ability was assessed. After analyzing pronunciation problems were still with
and calculating the data. them. However, the students could have
From the result of the test, it was good fluency without worrying about
obtained that eight of 29 students were making mistakes.
categorized into the good level of At the end of this cycle, the
speaking ability, fourteen students were lecturer administered a speaking test to
categorized into the fair level of assess the students’ speaking progress
speaking ability and seven were in one cycle after applying Questioning
categorized in the poor level of Technique. In doing the test, the
speaking ability. It means that 27.6% of students were given a topic “Describing
the students were categorized into good an Object”. Then, each student was to
students, 48.3% of the students were prepare themselves by making their
categorized into fair students, and own questions. In taking turn of
24.1% of the students were categorized presentation, they were called based on
as poor students. The result of students’ the number of attendance list. Before
test in each indicator is displayed as in doing the presentation, the teacher told
the following table:
Table 2. The Analysis of the Students’ Speaking ability in the First Cycle
The Number of Students (29) Rating quality/Percentage
No Indicator
Very
% Good
% Fair % Poor %
The table 2 shows that the The level of the students’ students’ speaking ability in the term of
speaking ability in term of accent accent was poor. There was no student
revealed that there was a little change of who was in the level of very good, eight
the students’ result in term of accent if it students or 27.59% of the students were
was compared with the result of the in the level of good, fourteen students or
st udents’ accent before conducting this 48.27% of the students who were in the
research. Four students achieved the level of fair and seven students or
level of good, but in cycle one there 24.13% of the students who were in the
were five students, only seven students level of poor.
got the level of fair before and this cycle did too, and the students who were in
IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017 | 105
106 | IJIELT , Vol. 3 No. 1 June 2017
the level of poor decreased; eighteen students were in the level of poor before research but in this cycle, there were seventeen students. However, the students still had difficulty in speaking in term of accent because the words they pronounced were dominated by their mother tongue. In other words, they were not able to pronounce the words appropriately. Then, the students were also not so careful in pronouncing the words, so the influence of mother tongue was big.
In term of grammar, the table 2 above shows that there was no student obtaining the level of very good, four students or 13.79% of the students who were in the level of good, sixteen students or 55.17% of students who were in the level of fair, and nine students or 31.03% of students who were in the level of poor. It means that Questioning Technique could improve grammar if it was compared with the students’ grammar before conducting the research. Before conducting this research, one student achieved the level of good but in cycle one there were four students, only seven students got the level of fair before but this cycle there were sixteen students, and the students who were in the level of poor decreased; twenty-one students were in the level of poor before but in this cycle, there were only nine students. However, it was not satisfactory yet because the students still made many grammatical mistakes when speaking English.
In term of vocabulary, it indicated that there were two students or 6.90% of the students obtaining the level of very good, eleven students or 37.93% of the students who were in the level of good, fourteen students or 48.27% of the students who were in the level of fair, and two students or 6.70% of the
students who was in the level of poor. It means that there was a lot of improvement in term of vocabulary which was made by the students. If it was compared with the students’ vocabulary before conducting the research, no students got the level of very good but this cycle there were two students, there was no student obtaining the level of good but this cycle had eleven students, there were eight students in the level of fair but this cycle had fourteen students, and there were twenty-one students in the level of poor but this cycle had two students only. It means that the improvement made by the students in term of vocabulary in this cycle was satisfactory enough.
In term of fluency, it shows that there were one student or 3.44% of the students who was in the level of very good, ten students or 34.48% of the students who were in the level of good, fifteen students or 51.72% of the students who were in the level of fair, and three students or 10.34% of the students who were in the level of poor. It can be stated the students’ fluency when speaking English in this cycle was so improved compared with the students’ fluency before conducting a research. Before conducting the research, no student achieved the level of very good but this cycle had one student, three students were in the level of good but this cycle had ten students, twelve students got the level of fair but this cycle had fifteen students, and fourteen students were in the level of poor and this cycle had three students. It means that the students’ fluency made big improvement because the student had known the vocabulary they would use and they did not spent much time to think. In conclusion, the improvement of the students’ fluency was satisfactory.
In term of comprehension, it cycle had twelve students, and twenty shows that there was no student who
students were in the level of poor but was in the level of very good and five
this cycle had seven students. It means students or 17.24% of students who
that the students made good progress in were in the level of good, twelve
term of comprehension because they students or 41.37% of the students who
understood what they wanted to say. were in the level of fair, and seven
They knew the ideas and it leads to their students or 24.14% of the students who
speaking fluency.
were in the level of poor. It can be Furthermore, the average score of
inferred that there was good change in the students’ speaking ability in all the students’ comprehension in this indicators were 54 in term of accent, 56 cycle if it was compared with the
students’ comprehension before doing in term of grammar, 67 in term of vocabulary, 70 in term of fluency, and
the research, which only three students
58 in term of comprehension. The chart obtained the level of good before but
of the score of the st udents’ speaking this cycle had five students, there were
ability can be seen as follows: six students in the level of fair but this
Chart 1: The Average Score of the Students’ Speaking ability In the First Cycle
Very good (86-100) Vocabulary
Fluency
67 Good (71-85) Grammar
56 Fair (56-70) Accent
54 Poor (10-55)