THE EFFECT OF SNOWBALL THROWING ON STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ACHIEVEMENT.
THE EFFECT OF SNOWBALL THROWING METHOD ON
STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ACHIEVEMENT
A THESIS
Submitted as the Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for
the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
ROSLINDA SIDABUTAR
Registration Number 2113121064
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTEMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
DECLARATION
Except where appropriately acknowledged, this thesis is my own work,
has been expressed through my own words and has not previously been submitted
for assessment.
I understand that this thesis may be screened electronically or otherwise
for plagiarism.
Medan,
Februari 2016
Dora Margaretha Barus
Reg. No. 2113121020
ABSTRACT
Sidabutar, Roslinda. 2113121064. The Effect of Snowball Throwing on Students’
Speaking Achievement. A Thesis. English Department. Faculty of Languages
and Art, State University of Medan. 2015.
This study was focused on the investigation of the effect of using Snowball Throwing
on Students’ speaking achievement. It was conducted by using experimental research
design. The population of this research was grade XI students of SMK Sandhy Putra
2 Medan divided into two groups, namely experimental and control groups. There
were 30 students taken as the sample of the research, 15 students for experimental
group and 15 students for control group. The experimental group was taught by using
Snowball Throwing, while the control group was taught by using lecturing method.
The instrument used to collect the data was oral test where the students were asked to
give their argument in front of the class about the topic or the case given. After the
data were analyzed, it was found that the value of t-observed was 3.848 with the
degree of freedom (df)= 28 at the level of significance (α) 0.05. It means that tobserved was higher than t-table (3.848> 2.048). Thus, the hypothesis is accepted.
The result of this study shows that achievement in teaching speaking by using
Snowball Throwing was higher than using Lecturing Method. It implies that
Snowball Throwing is appropriate to be applied for teaching speaking.
Keywords: Snowball Throwing, Speaking Achievement
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First the writer would like to thank to the Gracious God, Jesus Christ and
Holy Mary for the amazing power, grace and love so the writercan finally finished
her thesis.
During the process of completing this thesis, the writerrealized that she
could not accomplish it without The Blessing of God and supporting from people
around her. Therefore, the writer would like to express her sincere gratitude to:
1. Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Pd., Rector of State University of Medan.
2. Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty,
State University of Medan.
3. Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., the Head of English Department and as
her Thesis Examiner.
4. Dra. Meisuri, M.A., the Secretary of English Department.
5. Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum., Head of English Education
Study Program.
6. Drs. Willem Saragih, Dipl. Appl., M.Pd., her First Thesis Advisor and
Indra Hartoyo, S. Pd., M. Hum., her Second Thesis Advisor.
7. Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed., Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed., and
Prof. AmrinSaragih, M.A., Ph.D., her Thesis Examiners.
8. Drs. Robert Sitompul, the Headmaster of SMK Sandhy Putra 2 Medan
for his permission in allowing the writer to do observation and to collect
the data needed for the thesis.
9. Anita Minceria Simanjuntak, S.Pd., the English Teachers of SMK
Sandhy Putra 2 Medan for helping the writer to collect the data of the
research.
10. Her beloved parents, Muji Sidabutar and Minnauli Sinurat, her
wonderful siblings, Suryadi Sidabutar, Winda Octaviani Sidabutar,
and Martha Lusia Sidabutar, for giving her the greatest love, prayer,
affection, support, and motivation during the process of completing the
thesis.
11. Her close friends, Dera Menra Sijabat, S.Pd., Aryadi Manuel Gultom,
Jetti L. Napitupulu, Dedy Pranata Simangunsong, S.Pd., Norita
Purba, Permadi Pasaribu, and Roberto Tarigan, for sharing the good
things, happiness, and togetherness and for giving her advice, support and
prayer.
12. Her greatest girls, Arnita Sembiring, Devi Sihotang, Dora M. Barus,
Evelin Siahaan, Fitryani Siregar, Harni Gultom,Martina Silalahi, for
giving her support, happiness, unforgettable moment, for sharing about
love and life.
13. Her friends in Reguler Dik B 2011, for their love and togetherness
throughout the four years; Her friends in PPLT SMP N 1 Bandar for the
togetherness and the experiences shared. And also for those who cannot be
mentioned one by one.
ii
The writer realizes that her thesis is still far from being perfect.
Hence, she warmly accept any constructive suggestion from anyone in
order to improve the quality of this thesis. She hopes that the thesis will be
useful for those who read it.
Medan, February 2016
The Writer,
Roslinda Sidabutar
Reg. No. 2113121064
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT .........................................................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES ..............................................................................................vi
LIST OF APPENDIXES ....................................................................................vii
CHAPTER I:INTRODUCTION .......................................................................1
A. Background of Study ..........................................................................1
B. Problem of Study ................................................................................6
C. Objective of Study...............................................................................6
D. Scope of Study ....................................................................................6
E. Significance of Study ..........................................................................6
CHAPTER II:REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...................................................8
A. Theoretical Framework .......................................................................8
1. Speaking........................................................................................8
2. Types of Speaking Performances..................................................10
3. Classroom Speaking Activities .....................................................11
4. Teaching Speaking ........................................................................15
5. Assessment of Speaking................................................................16
6. Snowball Throwing.......................................................................18
7. Teaching Speaking with Snowball Throwing ..............................20
B. Conceptual Framework .......................................................................21
C. Theoretical Hypothesis........................................................................22
CHAPTER III:RESEARCH METHOD...........................................................23
A. Research Design.................................................................................23
B. Population and Sample.......................................................................23
1. Population of the Study................................................................23
2. Sample of the Study .....................................................................24
iv
C. Instrument for Collecting Data...........................................................24
D. Scoring of the test...............................................................................25
E. Procedure of Collecting Data .............................................................27
1. Pre-test..........................................................................................27
2. Treatment .....................................................................................28
3. Post-test ........................................................................................29
F. Validity and Reliability of the Test ....................................................29
1. Validity of The Test .....................................................................29
2. Reliability of The Test..................................................................30
G. Technique of Analyzing Data ............................................................31
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS .............33
A. Data .....................................................................................................33
B. Data Analysis ......................................................................................35
1. Testing Reability ............................................................................35
2. Analysing the Data Using t-test ....................................................36
C. Research Findings ...............................................................................38
D. Discussion ...........................................................................................38
CHAPTER V:CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION......................................40
A. Conclusion ..........................................................................................40
B. Suggestions .........................................................................................40
REFERENCES....................................................................................................41
v
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3.1 Research Design ................................................................................... 23
Table 3.2 FSI (Foreign Service Institute) Weighting Table ................................. 25
Table 3.3 FSI Weighting Table Classification ..................................................... 26
Table 3.4 Teaching Procedure for Experimental and Control Groups................. 28
Table 4.1 The Scores of Experimental Group ...................................................... 34
Table 4.2 The Scores of Control Group ............................................................... 35
vi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
APPENDIX 1. The Result of Pre– Test of Experimental Group ........................ 43
APPENDIX 2. The Result of Post– Test of Experimental Group ...................... 44
APPENDIX 3. The Result of Pre– Test of Control Group .................................. 45
APPENDIX 4. The Result of Post– Test of Control Group................................. 46
APPENDIX 5. The Calculation of Reliability ..................................................... 47
APPENDIX 6. The Calculation of t-test .............................................................. 49
APPENDIX 7.T-table Distribution ...................................................................... 53
APPENDIX 8. Transcript of Pre-test In Experimental Group ............................. 54
APPENDIX 9. Transcript of Post-test In Experimental Group ........................... 58
APPENDIX 10. Transcript of Pre-test In Control Group .................................... 62
APPENDIX 11. Transcript of Post-test In Control Group................................... 65
APPENDIX 12. Lesson Plan Experimental Group.............................................. 69
APPENDIX 13. Lesson Plan Control Group ....................................................... 78
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Study
In learning language, there are two kinds of skills that should be mastered
by the learners namely receptive skills and productive skills. Listening and
reading skills are regarded as receptive skills while writing and speaking are
considered as productive skills. Productive skills consist of producing systematic
verbal utterances to convey meanning. The writer focuses on speaking skill
because it is very important in our daily life. Speaking is one of the abilities to
carry out conversation. Shabani (2013) states that speaking in the foreign
language has always been considered as the most demanding skill to develop in
the learners of the target language compared to such other skills as listening,
reading, and writing. What makes Speaking distinct from the other skills is that
the speaker needs to have a quick access to all the relevant knowledge required to
produce the appropriate language in relatively short lags of time, whereas in other
skills the learners normally have enough time to either match the input with the
existing knowledge.
Speaking is the most essential skill since it is the basic of communication.
Every body needs to communicate with others in daily life through speaking. It is
the tool of communication which plays an important role to reveal an attention to
someone else. They need to speak in order to gain information. This skill should
be mastered by learners in order to be successful in learning languages. However,
1
2
it is a bit difficult to learn because in speaking the speaker just has a little time for
planning their utterances as stated by Thonburry (2005).
By speaking, the students can express what is in their mind. They can
convey their ideas, their thoughts, their opinions and exchange the information
with one another. They can also carry out conversation with others because others
will not know what they are thinking about if they do not express or speak up.
Brown (2001: 267) states that when someone can speak a language it means that
he can carry on a conversation reasonably competently. Therefore, speaking is
needed a lot.
The main point in speaking is about how to deliver messages to the
listeners so that they can understand what the speakers mean. In every day
communication, spoken exchanges take place because there is some sort of
information gap between the participants. Thornbury (2005) states in this sense,
speaking is like any other skill, such as driving or playing a musical instrument:
the more practice you get, the more likely it is you will be able to chunk small unit
into larger ones. According to Wallace (2004), the more time students have to
study the facts, a principle or practice a skill, the better they learn. In shorts, that
much more of practice is really needed to enable students to speak up.
Besides, motivation also affectsstudents’ speaking ability. Harmer (2007)
states that when students walk into an attractive classroom at the begining of a
course, it may help to get their motivation for the process going but when they
come to an unattractive place, motivation may not be initiated in this way. So, the
3
teacher has to create a good learning environment to build the students’
motivation in every single learning activity.
The problems that are faced in teaching speaking are the low of
motivation and sometimes the fear of making mistakes when they speak English.
Based on the writer preliminary observation and interview with the english
teacher in SMK SANDHY PUTRA 2, she also found the same problems. The
teacher said that only 40 % students in Perhotelan majority whose scores met
with Minimal Passing Criteria scores (KKM). The Minimal Passing Criteria
scores (KKM) is 70. She found that students were not interested to take part in
the classroom activities. It happened because the method used by teacher did not
motivate students to be active in the learning process that is going on in the
classroom. The teacher just used Lecturing method. The activities just like gives
the example to the students then asked them to create their own and practice it in
front of the class.
Because of that, they had low ability in speaking and difficulty expressing
their ideas in English. They did not have enough courage to speak up and to share
their thoughts because it was uncommon for them to express their opinion orally.
It happened also not because they did not have any knowledge about the material
but just because theywere lack of grammar and they did not know the appropriate
words to say it in English. Thus, they just kept silent because they were afraid of
making mistakes.
In teaching English, there are various kinds of methods needed. To make
the students have strong interest and high motivation in teaching and learning
4
process especially in learning speaking, teacher should apply the best method to
improve students’ speaking ability. Teacher should be able to create the good
atmosphere in learning. The chosen method can make the students enjoy the class,
take part actively in the learning activites, and support the students to take much
more chances to increase their capability in speaking. But in fact, the teacher did
not apply the suitable teaching method like what the writer found during her
internship program.
The activities during the speaking class seem to be boring and less
interactive because the teacher used the monotonous method. It can be seen fom
the speaking activities, which used to be about drilling the materials from text
book, practicing material, creating conversation in pairs and then presenting in
front of the class. It caused the students to feel bored and have low motivation in
joining the speaking class. As stated by Effendi (2005), the failure of teaching
might be caused by the teachers themselves and the techniques of teaching. In this
case the students can study actively if the technique or method used by teachers is
interesting and challenging.
There are some methods that can be applied in improving students’
speaking ability such as Learning Together, STAD, Snowball Throwing, and etc.
From the problem above, the writer tries to apply one of the teaching methods that
is Snowball Throwing. Bayor (2010) states Snowball Throwing is one of the
active learning model which in practice involves a lot of students. It is one of the
cooperative learning model that focuses on group work using discussion in which
every group asks questions to another so that the group will work cooperatively to
5
solve the problem.Farrel and Jacobs (2010) also describe that snowball throwing
is a useful cooperative learning method. It can motivate the students to have good
capability in speaking. When they have high motivation in joining the speaking
class, they will try their best effort to learn about grammar and vocabularies
because they want to be active in all of the speaking activities.
The research by using Snowball Throwing to solve students’ problem has
been done by some researchers. Nurzannah (2014) found that the improvement of
the students’ speaking skill is significant after applying Snowball Throwing
method. Deni found that there was improvement in students’ speaking ability by
using Snowball Throwing and they could perform a good speaking on all posttests. However, the statistically significant differences of the score results of the
two cycles were found on the Posttest 2, where about 83.33% of the students
reached the school minimum standard of English subject in speaking ability in
narrative text. Moreover, the students’ activeness during the Snowball Throwing
Model treatment also improved from one meeting to another.
Snowball throwing encourages the students’ active speaking participation
in the classroom, because this method contains a rich communication where
students must be active. That is why the writer chooses this method to improve
students’ speaking ability in Vocational High School SANDHY PUTRA 2
MEDAN.
6
B. Problem of Study
The problem of the study is formulated as follows : “Does Snowball
Throwing method significantly affect the students’ speaking achievement?”
C. Objective of Study
In relation to the problem, the objective of the study is to investigate the
effect of Snowball Throwing method on students’ speaking achievement.
D. Scope of Study
In stratified educational curriculum (KTSP 2006), it is stated that the
students must be able to speak English fluently to give and aks their ideas, opinion
or argument. Therefore, this study is limited only on the students’ achievement in
speaking to show interpersonal and transactional language through Snowball
Throwing in vocational high school. Snowball Throwing is assumed to be an
effective method to solve the problem rather than other methods in teaching
speaking.
E. Significance of Study
The findings of this study are expected to be useful :
Theoretically :
For English teachers as an alternative method for teaching speaking.
Practically :
1. To assist students to improve their speaking skill.
7
2. To help researcher who wants to develop all information and knowledge and
for those who are interested to conduct a research in increasing English
speaking skill.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
This study deals with using Snowball Throwing on Students’ Speaking
achievement. Based on the research finding, the writer concludes that there is a
significant effect of using Snowball Throwing on students’ speaking achievement.
This can be seen from the calculation of t-test at the level significance 0.05: tobserved (3.848) is higher than t-table (2.048). Therefore, the hypothesis that is
formulated as “Snowball Throwing method significantly affect students’ speaking
achievement" is accepted.
B. Suggestion
In relation to the conclusion above, the writer points out some suggestions.
The first, it is suggested to the English teachers to find suitable method and
effective media for teaching speaking. The teacher can apply Snowball Throwing
for developing students’ speaking achievement as an alternative to other teaching
method. The second, it is suggested to English learners to be brave and more
active to speak up and improve their ability in English class by appliying
Snowball Throwing. And the third, it is also suggested to other researchers who
want to apply Snowball Throwing in teaching learning process to carry out further
research in a different skill.
40
41
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald. 2002. Intoduction to Research in Education. Singapore: wardswirth.
Bashir, M., et al (2011). Factor Effecting Students’ English Speaking Skills.
British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences.Vol.2 No.1 (2011)
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching By Principle: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy: (Second Edition). San Francisco: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2004). Teaching By Principle: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy: (Second Edition). San Francisco: Longman.
Cohen, E. G., et al (2004). Teaching Cooperative Learning: The Challenge for
Teacher Education. USA: State University of New York Press
Farrell, T. S. C., and Jacobs, M. G. (2010). Essentials for Successful English
Language Teaching. Great Britain: Continuum.
Fisher, D. And frey, N. (2007). Checking for Understanding- Formative
Assessment Techniques for Your Classroom. Virginia: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical Language Teaching. Great Britain: Hodder
Education
Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching (Third Edition).
New York: Longman.
Hudges, R. (2002). Teaching and Researching Speaking. Edinburgh: Cambridge
University Press.
Hudges, A. (2003). Testing For Language Teachers (Second Edition). United
Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Istarani. (2012). 58 Model Pembalajaran Inovatif. Medan: Media Persada.
Luoma, S. (2009). Assessing Speaking. Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press
Pachler, N. And Redondo, A. (2007). A practical guide to Teaching Modern
Foreign Languages in the Secondary School. New york: Routledge.
Pye, D. Greenall, S. (1996). Listening and Speaking Skill. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
42
Richard, J. C. (2008). Teaching Listening and Speaking: From Theory to Practice.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thornbury, S. (2005). How to Teach Speaking. London: Longman.
Wallace, T. et al. (2004). Teaching Speaking, Listening and Writing. France:
Typhon.
STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ACHIEVEMENT
A THESIS
Submitted as the Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for
the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
By:
ROSLINDA SIDABUTAR
Registration Number 2113121064
ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTEMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2016
DECLARATION
Except where appropriately acknowledged, this thesis is my own work,
has been expressed through my own words and has not previously been submitted
for assessment.
I understand that this thesis may be screened electronically or otherwise
for plagiarism.
Medan,
Februari 2016
Dora Margaretha Barus
Reg. No. 2113121020
ABSTRACT
Sidabutar, Roslinda. 2113121064. The Effect of Snowball Throwing on Students’
Speaking Achievement. A Thesis. English Department. Faculty of Languages
and Art, State University of Medan. 2015.
This study was focused on the investigation of the effect of using Snowball Throwing
on Students’ speaking achievement. It was conducted by using experimental research
design. The population of this research was grade XI students of SMK Sandhy Putra
2 Medan divided into two groups, namely experimental and control groups. There
were 30 students taken as the sample of the research, 15 students for experimental
group and 15 students for control group. The experimental group was taught by using
Snowball Throwing, while the control group was taught by using lecturing method.
The instrument used to collect the data was oral test where the students were asked to
give their argument in front of the class about the topic or the case given. After the
data were analyzed, it was found that the value of t-observed was 3.848 with the
degree of freedom (df)= 28 at the level of significance (α) 0.05. It means that tobserved was higher than t-table (3.848> 2.048). Thus, the hypothesis is accepted.
The result of this study shows that achievement in teaching speaking by using
Snowball Throwing was higher than using Lecturing Method. It implies that
Snowball Throwing is appropriate to be applied for teaching speaking.
Keywords: Snowball Throwing, Speaking Achievement
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First the writer would like to thank to the Gracious God, Jesus Christ and
Holy Mary for the amazing power, grace and love so the writercan finally finished
her thesis.
During the process of completing this thesis, the writerrealized that she
could not accomplish it without The Blessing of God and supporting from people
around her. Therefore, the writer would like to express her sincere gratitude to:
1. Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Pd., Rector of State University of Medan.
2. Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., the Dean of Languages and Arts Faculty,
State University of Medan.
3. Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., the Head of English Department and as
her Thesis Examiner.
4. Dra. Meisuri, M.A., the Secretary of English Department.
5. Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum., Head of English Education
Study Program.
6. Drs. Willem Saragih, Dipl. Appl., M.Pd., her First Thesis Advisor and
Indra Hartoyo, S. Pd., M. Hum., her Second Thesis Advisor.
7. Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed., Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed., and
Prof. AmrinSaragih, M.A., Ph.D., her Thesis Examiners.
8. Drs. Robert Sitompul, the Headmaster of SMK Sandhy Putra 2 Medan
for his permission in allowing the writer to do observation and to collect
the data needed for the thesis.
9. Anita Minceria Simanjuntak, S.Pd., the English Teachers of SMK
Sandhy Putra 2 Medan for helping the writer to collect the data of the
research.
10. Her beloved parents, Muji Sidabutar and Minnauli Sinurat, her
wonderful siblings, Suryadi Sidabutar, Winda Octaviani Sidabutar,
and Martha Lusia Sidabutar, for giving her the greatest love, prayer,
affection, support, and motivation during the process of completing the
thesis.
11. Her close friends, Dera Menra Sijabat, S.Pd., Aryadi Manuel Gultom,
Jetti L. Napitupulu, Dedy Pranata Simangunsong, S.Pd., Norita
Purba, Permadi Pasaribu, and Roberto Tarigan, for sharing the good
things, happiness, and togetherness and for giving her advice, support and
prayer.
12. Her greatest girls, Arnita Sembiring, Devi Sihotang, Dora M. Barus,
Evelin Siahaan, Fitryani Siregar, Harni Gultom,Martina Silalahi, for
giving her support, happiness, unforgettable moment, for sharing about
love and life.
13. Her friends in Reguler Dik B 2011, for their love and togetherness
throughout the four years; Her friends in PPLT SMP N 1 Bandar for the
togetherness and the experiences shared. And also for those who cannot be
mentioned one by one.
ii
The writer realizes that her thesis is still far from being perfect.
Hence, she warmly accept any constructive suggestion from anyone in
order to improve the quality of this thesis. She hopes that the thesis will be
useful for those who read it.
Medan, February 2016
The Writer,
Roslinda Sidabutar
Reg. No. 2113121064
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT .........................................................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES ..............................................................................................vi
LIST OF APPENDIXES ....................................................................................vii
CHAPTER I:INTRODUCTION .......................................................................1
A. Background of Study ..........................................................................1
B. Problem of Study ................................................................................6
C. Objective of Study...............................................................................6
D. Scope of Study ....................................................................................6
E. Significance of Study ..........................................................................6
CHAPTER II:REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...................................................8
A. Theoretical Framework .......................................................................8
1. Speaking........................................................................................8
2. Types of Speaking Performances..................................................10
3. Classroom Speaking Activities .....................................................11
4. Teaching Speaking ........................................................................15
5. Assessment of Speaking................................................................16
6. Snowball Throwing.......................................................................18
7. Teaching Speaking with Snowball Throwing ..............................20
B. Conceptual Framework .......................................................................21
C. Theoretical Hypothesis........................................................................22
CHAPTER III:RESEARCH METHOD...........................................................23
A. Research Design.................................................................................23
B. Population and Sample.......................................................................23
1. Population of the Study................................................................23
2. Sample of the Study .....................................................................24
iv
C. Instrument for Collecting Data...........................................................24
D. Scoring of the test...............................................................................25
E. Procedure of Collecting Data .............................................................27
1. Pre-test..........................................................................................27
2. Treatment .....................................................................................28
3. Post-test ........................................................................................29
F. Validity and Reliability of the Test ....................................................29
1. Validity of The Test .....................................................................29
2. Reliability of The Test..................................................................30
G. Technique of Analyzing Data ............................................................31
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS .............33
A. Data .....................................................................................................33
B. Data Analysis ......................................................................................35
1. Testing Reability ............................................................................35
2. Analysing the Data Using t-test ....................................................36
C. Research Findings ...............................................................................38
D. Discussion ...........................................................................................38
CHAPTER V:CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION......................................40
A. Conclusion ..........................................................................................40
B. Suggestions .........................................................................................40
REFERENCES....................................................................................................41
v
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3.1 Research Design ................................................................................... 23
Table 3.2 FSI (Foreign Service Institute) Weighting Table ................................. 25
Table 3.3 FSI Weighting Table Classification ..................................................... 26
Table 3.4 Teaching Procedure for Experimental and Control Groups................. 28
Table 4.1 The Scores of Experimental Group ...................................................... 34
Table 4.2 The Scores of Control Group ............................................................... 35
vi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
APPENDIX 1. The Result of Pre– Test of Experimental Group ........................ 43
APPENDIX 2. The Result of Post– Test of Experimental Group ...................... 44
APPENDIX 3. The Result of Pre– Test of Control Group .................................. 45
APPENDIX 4. The Result of Post– Test of Control Group................................. 46
APPENDIX 5. The Calculation of Reliability ..................................................... 47
APPENDIX 6. The Calculation of t-test .............................................................. 49
APPENDIX 7.T-table Distribution ...................................................................... 53
APPENDIX 8. Transcript of Pre-test In Experimental Group ............................. 54
APPENDIX 9. Transcript of Post-test In Experimental Group ........................... 58
APPENDIX 10. Transcript of Pre-test In Control Group .................................... 62
APPENDIX 11. Transcript of Post-test In Control Group................................... 65
APPENDIX 12. Lesson Plan Experimental Group.............................................. 69
APPENDIX 13. Lesson Plan Control Group ....................................................... 78
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Study
In learning language, there are two kinds of skills that should be mastered
by the learners namely receptive skills and productive skills. Listening and
reading skills are regarded as receptive skills while writing and speaking are
considered as productive skills. Productive skills consist of producing systematic
verbal utterances to convey meanning. The writer focuses on speaking skill
because it is very important in our daily life. Speaking is one of the abilities to
carry out conversation. Shabani (2013) states that speaking in the foreign
language has always been considered as the most demanding skill to develop in
the learners of the target language compared to such other skills as listening,
reading, and writing. What makes Speaking distinct from the other skills is that
the speaker needs to have a quick access to all the relevant knowledge required to
produce the appropriate language in relatively short lags of time, whereas in other
skills the learners normally have enough time to either match the input with the
existing knowledge.
Speaking is the most essential skill since it is the basic of communication.
Every body needs to communicate with others in daily life through speaking. It is
the tool of communication which plays an important role to reveal an attention to
someone else. They need to speak in order to gain information. This skill should
be mastered by learners in order to be successful in learning languages. However,
1
2
it is a bit difficult to learn because in speaking the speaker just has a little time for
planning their utterances as stated by Thonburry (2005).
By speaking, the students can express what is in their mind. They can
convey their ideas, their thoughts, their opinions and exchange the information
with one another. They can also carry out conversation with others because others
will not know what they are thinking about if they do not express or speak up.
Brown (2001: 267) states that when someone can speak a language it means that
he can carry on a conversation reasonably competently. Therefore, speaking is
needed a lot.
The main point in speaking is about how to deliver messages to the
listeners so that they can understand what the speakers mean. In every day
communication, spoken exchanges take place because there is some sort of
information gap between the participants. Thornbury (2005) states in this sense,
speaking is like any other skill, such as driving or playing a musical instrument:
the more practice you get, the more likely it is you will be able to chunk small unit
into larger ones. According to Wallace (2004), the more time students have to
study the facts, a principle or practice a skill, the better they learn. In shorts, that
much more of practice is really needed to enable students to speak up.
Besides, motivation also affectsstudents’ speaking ability. Harmer (2007)
states that when students walk into an attractive classroom at the begining of a
course, it may help to get their motivation for the process going but when they
come to an unattractive place, motivation may not be initiated in this way. So, the
3
teacher has to create a good learning environment to build the students’
motivation in every single learning activity.
The problems that are faced in teaching speaking are the low of
motivation and sometimes the fear of making mistakes when they speak English.
Based on the writer preliminary observation and interview with the english
teacher in SMK SANDHY PUTRA 2, she also found the same problems. The
teacher said that only 40 % students in Perhotelan majority whose scores met
with Minimal Passing Criteria scores (KKM). The Minimal Passing Criteria
scores (KKM) is 70. She found that students were not interested to take part in
the classroom activities. It happened because the method used by teacher did not
motivate students to be active in the learning process that is going on in the
classroom. The teacher just used Lecturing method. The activities just like gives
the example to the students then asked them to create their own and practice it in
front of the class.
Because of that, they had low ability in speaking and difficulty expressing
their ideas in English. They did not have enough courage to speak up and to share
their thoughts because it was uncommon for them to express their opinion orally.
It happened also not because they did not have any knowledge about the material
but just because theywere lack of grammar and they did not know the appropriate
words to say it in English. Thus, they just kept silent because they were afraid of
making mistakes.
In teaching English, there are various kinds of methods needed. To make
the students have strong interest and high motivation in teaching and learning
4
process especially in learning speaking, teacher should apply the best method to
improve students’ speaking ability. Teacher should be able to create the good
atmosphere in learning. The chosen method can make the students enjoy the class,
take part actively in the learning activites, and support the students to take much
more chances to increase their capability in speaking. But in fact, the teacher did
not apply the suitable teaching method like what the writer found during her
internship program.
The activities during the speaking class seem to be boring and less
interactive because the teacher used the monotonous method. It can be seen fom
the speaking activities, which used to be about drilling the materials from text
book, practicing material, creating conversation in pairs and then presenting in
front of the class. It caused the students to feel bored and have low motivation in
joining the speaking class. As stated by Effendi (2005), the failure of teaching
might be caused by the teachers themselves and the techniques of teaching. In this
case the students can study actively if the technique or method used by teachers is
interesting and challenging.
There are some methods that can be applied in improving students’
speaking ability such as Learning Together, STAD, Snowball Throwing, and etc.
From the problem above, the writer tries to apply one of the teaching methods that
is Snowball Throwing. Bayor (2010) states Snowball Throwing is one of the
active learning model which in practice involves a lot of students. It is one of the
cooperative learning model that focuses on group work using discussion in which
every group asks questions to another so that the group will work cooperatively to
5
solve the problem.Farrel and Jacobs (2010) also describe that snowball throwing
is a useful cooperative learning method. It can motivate the students to have good
capability in speaking. When they have high motivation in joining the speaking
class, they will try their best effort to learn about grammar and vocabularies
because they want to be active in all of the speaking activities.
The research by using Snowball Throwing to solve students’ problem has
been done by some researchers. Nurzannah (2014) found that the improvement of
the students’ speaking skill is significant after applying Snowball Throwing
method. Deni found that there was improvement in students’ speaking ability by
using Snowball Throwing and they could perform a good speaking on all posttests. However, the statistically significant differences of the score results of the
two cycles were found on the Posttest 2, where about 83.33% of the students
reached the school minimum standard of English subject in speaking ability in
narrative text. Moreover, the students’ activeness during the Snowball Throwing
Model treatment also improved from one meeting to another.
Snowball throwing encourages the students’ active speaking participation
in the classroom, because this method contains a rich communication where
students must be active. That is why the writer chooses this method to improve
students’ speaking ability in Vocational High School SANDHY PUTRA 2
MEDAN.
6
B. Problem of Study
The problem of the study is formulated as follows : “Does Snowball
Throwing method significantly affect the students’ speaking achievement?”
C. Objective of Study
In relation to the problem, the objective of the study is to investigate the
effect of Snowball Throwing method on students’ speaking achievement.
D. Scope of Study
In stratified educational curriculum (KTSP 2006), it is stated that the
students must be able to speak English fluently to give and aks their ideas, opinion
or argument. Therefore, this study is limited only on the students’ achievement in
speaking to show interpersonal and transactional language through Snowball
Throwing in vocational high school. Snowball Throwing is assumed to be an
effective method to solve the problem rather than other methods in teaching
speaking.
E. Significance of Study
The findings of this study are expected to be useful :
Theoretically :
For English teachers as an alternative method for teaching speaking.
Practically :
1. To assist students to improve their speaking skill.
7
2. To help researcher who wants to develop all information and knowledge and
for those who are interested to conduct a research in increasing English
speaking skill.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
This study deals with using Snowball Throwing on Students’ Speaking
achievement. Based on the research finding, the writer concludes that there is a
significant effect of using Snowball Throwing on students’ speaking achievement.
This can be seen from the calculation of t-test at the level significance 0.05: tobserved (3.848) is higher than t-table (2.048). Therefore, the hypothesis that is
formulated as “Snowball Throwing method significantly affect students’ speaking
achievement" is accepted.
B. Suggestion
In relation to the conclusion above, the writer points out some suggestions.
The first, it is suggested to the English teachers to find suitable method and
effective media for teaching speaking. The teacher can apply Snowball Throwing
for developing students’ speaking achievement as an alternative to other teaching
method. The second, it is suggested to English learners to be brave and more
active to speak up and improve their ability in English class by appliying
Snowball Throwing. And the third, it is also suggested to other researchers who
want to apply Snowball Throwing in teaching learning process to carry out further
research in a different skill.
40
41
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald. 2002. Intoduction to Research in Education. Singapore: wardswirth.
Bashir, M., et al (2011). Factor Effecting Students’ English Speaking Skills.
British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences.Vol.2 No.1 (2011)
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching By Principle: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy: (Second Edition). San Francisco: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2004). Teaching By Principle: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy: (Second Edition). San Francisco: Longman.
Cohen, E. G., et al (2004). Teaching Cooperative Learning: The Challenge for
Teacher Education. USA: State University of New York Press
Farrell, T. S. C., and Jacobs, M. G. (2010). Essentials for Successful English
Language Teaching. Great Britain: Continuum.
Fisher, D. And frey, N. (2007). Checking for Understanding- Formative
Assessment Techniques for Your Classroom. Virginia: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical Language Teaching. Great Britain: Hodder
Education
Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching (Third Edition).
New York: Longman.
Hudges, R. (2002). Teaching and Researching Speaking. Edinburgh: Cambridge
University Press.
Hudges, A. (2003). Testing For Language Teachers (Second Edition). United
Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Istarani. (2012). 58 Model Pembalajaran Inovatif. Medan: Media Persada.
Luoma, S. (2009). Assessing Speaking. Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press
Pachler, N. And Redondo, A. (2007). A practical guide to Teaching Modern
Foreign Languages in the Secondary School. New york: Routledge.
Pye, D. Greenall, S. (1996). Listening and Speaking Skill. United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
42
Richard, J. C. (2008). Teaching Listening and Speaking: From Theory to Practice.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thornbury, S. (2005). How to Teach Speaking. London: Longman.
Wallace, T. et al. (2004). Teaching Speaking, Listening and Writing. France:
Typhon.