TEACHING SPEAKING THROUGH STORYTELLING : A Case Study at a Year Ten Class of a MAN in Kendari.

(1)

1.1 Background of the Study

High demand on English proficiency is clearly needed as the result of Science and Technology development. Despite the importance of this language, the fact that many students cannot communicate in English seems to be the common problems in the learning and teaching issue of the classroom context today in Indonesia.

It is revealed from the fact that many EFL teachers complain about their speaking classrooms in which a considerable number of students are not responding actively in speaking exercises. Related to this case, how to motivate the students in the speaking classroom have long been the teachers concerns. Therefore, it is necessary to find out the main factors affecting the students’ participation.

Many factors may affect students negatively in taking part in speaking activities during the teaching experiences. Firstly, the large number of students which usually consist of 40 students or more become problematic. This provides fewer opportunities for them to practice speaking. Richard (2001: 20) states that class size affects the quality of instruction in which it should not exceed fifteen for most language classes. Secondly, students tend to conceal their mistakes and weaknesses to protect themselves from being laughed at, as

(2)

less they improve their speaking skills, and the more they are afraid of doing so. Lastly, most teachers prefer teaching grammar to productive skills, such as speaking and writing. This is supported by Mustafa (2001) and Paul (2003) who explain that many teachers in Asia tend to focus their teaching on grammatical items and knowledge of syntax.

Similar to the description above, Kirkpatrick (2001 in Frandono, 2005: 3) who had conducted a study concerning EFL teaching condition in ASEAN countries found that “The teaching of English in schools in Indonesia and in many other countries of ASEAN has not been successful. Graduates of secondary schools, despite many hours of learning English over several years, often have little English proficiency.” Therefore, one of solutions that the teacher can do to solve the problems mentioned above is by providing students with something different and interesting. Storytelling is the possible choices (Cox, 1999; Harmer, 2001; Jianing, 2007).

Storytelling is one of the techniques that can be used in teaching narrative. Narrative text is one of the text types recommended by the curriculum to be introduced to the learners as stated in one of the competence standards of outcome designed by BSNP (Badan Standard Nasional Pendidikan or Board of Education National Standard) that:

Siswa mampu memahami makna teks lisan pendek berbentuk teks fungsional pendek, percakapan dan teks monolog sederhana berbentuk naratif (narrative, recount, news item) dan deskriptif (report, descriptive, explanation) dalam kehidupan sehari-hari (2006).

(3)

The students are expected to understand the meaning of short oral discourse, conversation, and monologue in the forms of narrative (narrative, recount, news item) and descriptive (report, descriptive, explanation) in daily lives contexts.

Consequently, the primary aim to conduct this study is to look into how speaking is taught through storytelling and what kinds of oral production that the students carried out during the instructional process. This instruction was implemented in the schedule of the teaching of narrative text.

1.2 The research Questions

There were two research questions that the present study sought to answer.

1. How is speaking taught through storytelling?

2. What kinds of oral production did the students carry out during the teaching and learning process?

1.3 The Purpose of the Study

This study was intended to portray some efforts made by the teacher in the classroom when teaching speaking through storytelling. Therefore, this study tried:

(4)

2. To elaborate the oral production that the students carried out during the teaching and learning process.

1.4 The Scope of the Study

This study elaborated the classroom interaction performed by the teacher and students. It involved an EFL teacher and a class of year ten students in one of Islamic Senior High Schools (MAN) in Kendari. The study focused on the ways speaking were taught through storytelling and the kinds of speaking that the students produced during the process of teaching speaking through storytelling.

1.5 The Significance of the study

By conducting this study, there were some expectations aimed to gain as the significance of this study.

a. The result of this study is expected to give contribution towards the enhancement of the quality of teaching productive skills (Gebhard, 2000), especially in the teaching of speaking skill.

b. This study is expected also to enrich the literature review on the teaching of speaking.

(5)

1.6 Definition of Terms

In this study, several terms are regarded as the key to facilitate understanding on this study concept more easily. The key terms are teaching speaking and storytelling which need to be defined in their specific meaning.

Teaching speaking is not separated from other objectives (Brown, 2001; Hughes, 2004; Thorburry, 2005). It means that when we teach speaking, other skills like listening, reading and writing will be involved in the process, we cannot avoid them by teaching speaking skill only separated from other skills. Teaching speaking is also meant that the student are given opportunities to speak in English through activities which allow them to use their imagination and which they feel they are able to do and so gain in confidence (Gebhard, 1996; Harmer, 2001).

A storyteller and education practitioner in PREL’s Pacific Center for the Art’s and Humanities in Education, Gere (1992), defines storytelling as the act of using language and gesture in colorful ways to create scenes in the mind of the listener. Storytelling in EFL context is defined as the process whereby teachers present texts in the form of telling stories to facilitate comprehension or students retell texts in a new construction to develop integrative skills (Yuling, 2004, Yuling010@hotmail.com). Further, Yuling explains that storytelling emphasizes a positive, collaborative, and supportive classroom

(6)

climate in which students could develop skills in listening, speaking, reading, and writing.

From the above definitions, it can be inferred that teaching speaking through storytelling aimed to enrich students’ language learning experience which focused on their speaking skill, although other skills such as listening, reading, and writing were involved during the process. In this case, the use of story is considered helpful to provide models and contexts to guide the students when practicing to use the language through storytelling. Story is also helpful to stimulate their imagination, avoid boredom, and have them gain self confidence when they have lived through the story. However, the roles of teacher in this context are still important to determine the students’ achievement optimally.

1.7 Methodology

This chapter presents general description of conducting this study in terms of the data collection technique. The main instrument of gathering the data in this study is the classroom observation, and the other instrument is students’ questionnaires. In doing the observation, the researcher acted as the participant observer in which she performed real teaching and the observation as well. However, it was rather difficult to do this at the same time. To avoid biases in such situation, the researcher was helped by assistants who was taking field note and recording the teaching process. MP3 and digital camera were

(7)

used as the recorder. Questionnaires were delivered after the instructional process in order to obtain supporting data from the students’ viewpoints about the instruction. A more detailed description is presented in Chapter Three.

1.8Outline of the Thesis

There are some subsequent chapters which cover this thesis. Chapter 2 displays relevant literature concerning the theories that shape this study. Chapter 3 outlines the design and methodology of the study. This includes a description of the research site and the participants, the techniques of data collections and analyses. Chapter 4 involves reporting and discussing the data findings from the observation and students’ questionnaires. Chapter 5 draws some conclusions found from the data analysis process. This offers some information and suggestions concerning the focus of this study.

(8)

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses aspects related to research methodology. It covers the research design, the site, and participants of the study, data collection, and data analysis.

3.1 The Research Design

This study uses a qualitative approach which is considered appropriate to observe the process of teaching speaking through storytelling. A qualitative approach portrays any recurring phenomena in the observation field, describes them, reports and gives further analysis and elaboration as well as interpretation (Alwasilah, 2002; Kitao & Kitao, 2002). In this study, the qualitative case study (Merriam, 1998) was conducted to investigate classroom activities and kinds of oral production that were carried out by the students when the teaching of speaking through storytelling was implemented. This is in line with Nunan (1992) who explains that the study of an individual language learner is a case, and that the same can be said for the study of an individual classroom. This was supported by Merriam (1998: 19) who stated that a case study design is employed to gain an in-depth understanding of the situation and meaning for those involved; and that the interest is in process rather than outcomes, in context rather than a specific variable.

(9)

To obtain the needed data, two techniques of data collection were used in this study, classroom observation and questionnaire. In this context, classroom observation was conducted to look into some activities performed in teaching speaking through storytelling and kinds of oral production that the students carried out during the teaching and learning process. Questionnaire was administered to students after the teaching and learning process in order to obtain the supporting data from their viewpoints. MP3, a digital camera, and field note were used to record the activities and situation which occurred during the process.

3.2 The Research Site

This study was conducted at one of Madrasah Aliyah Negeri in Kendari. For ethical reason, the school name is not mentioned. This school has seven year ten classes in academic year of 2008/2009. One of these classes had been chosen as the research site for the study. Choosing this school enables the researcher to have easy access because she is one of the teacher staffs. Therefore, she has been familiar with the school and the students. Being familiar with the students, it is expected that there will be natural performance in the instructional process during this study (Emilia, 2005).

As a ‘Madrasah Model,’ this school has been expected to have the capability to develop students’ speaking proficiency. Hence, to realize this

(10)

expectation, many ways and strategies have been done, i.e. when introducing the concept of narrative text, storytelling is used in teaching speaking skill.

3.3 Participant

The participants of this study were an EFL teacher and students of a year ten class who were chosen as purposive sampling (Creswell, 1994; Merriam, 1998). There were 31 students whose ages were between 14 and 16 years old participating in this study. The reasons for choosing these participants were that (1) the students in this age might have more interested in stories (Paul, 2003; Jianing (2007); Harmer, 2001); (2) almost all students in this class (X3) were on the same levels, in terms of their eagerness to participate during the learning as indicated in the preliminary study.

3.4 Preliminary Study

The preliminary study was conducted for two weeks, from 3rd to 17th of August, 2008. In this phase, the researcher performed real teaching in some classes including the class where this study would be conducted. This was done in the effort to establish rapport between the researcher and the participants (Alwasilah, 2002) prior to the main study because a good rapport was needed for a successful storytelling procedure, as Carol Birch said, "Storytelling is not about performance but about relationships. The storyteller is the bridge between people in the seats and the world of story" (cited in Wilder, 2000,

(11)

http://www.callofstory.org/en/archive/articles). This was also conducted in order that the validity and reliability of the research may be gained optimally (Alwasilah, 2002) Therefore, in this study, questionnaire was tried out by having the students to fill it out after the teaching process.

Several findings got from the questionnaires after the teaching process. These findings were important as consideration for the main study as the following:

1. Most students (68% from 25 students) expected that the stories were selected by the teacher because from the reasons they wrote, it was revealed that they were busy with home works from other teachers, and they believed that the teacher could choose the stories which fit their needs and levels.

2. 44% of the students preferred working in groups because they could share the problem more easily as well as they felt more confident working together. Whereas, 52% of the students preferred to listen to stories told by the teacher. However, most of them preferred that the teacher used no English during the whole lesson.

3. 60% of the students were interested in the storytelling technique, but 30% of them felt nervous to retell the story.

(12)

3.5 Main Study

Based on the information from the preliminary study, the researcher then made revision both in the implementation of the teaching and the questionnaire. This was done as an ongoing process until the main study was conducted from the 4th to the 19th of February 2009.

3.5.1 Teaching Procedure

In the instructional process of teaching speaking through storytelling involved two sessions of teaching procedures. In these two sessions, speaking was taught integrated with other skills, listening, reading, and writing.

In the first session, the teaching process was conducted in which teacher told a story while students were listening. When the students seemed to understand the story content, they were asked to identify the narrative structures of the story they had just listened and then voluntarily retold the story in their own words as the speaking tasks.

In the second session, students sat in groups of five to discuss a story given with available picture. In this process, each group needs to understand an incomplete story given through reading task. After that, they discussed and re-created the end of the story guided by the picture. This task involved writing activities as students re-created the story. All group members then practice telling their re-created story to the class as the speaking task. To avoid few

(13)

students dominating the activities, each group member was chosen randomly as the group representative.

Assessment on the students’ performances was done as an ongoing process (Croker, 1999) either when they retold the teacher’s story or when they presented the result of the group discussion through storytelling. Information about students’ social interactions was also available during the discussion. In this case, the teacher used the speaking format criteria designed by BSNP (2004) as indicated in Chapter Two.

3.5.2 Stories

As indicated in Chapter Two, the stories used in this study were selected by the teacher. In session one, the story which the teacher told is derived from Derewianka’s Book (1990). It is chosen for some considerations. Firstly, it is a kind of mystery tale which may attract students’ curiosity. Secondly, the structure of the story is considered clear to represent the structure of narrative text. Thirdly, the character and plot of the story is simple and suitable for the students’ level; and the last, the story is short that it can be presented in two hours of lesson period. In session two, the teacher used Hill’s collection Stories for Reproduction (1972) for elementary and intermediate level, published by Oxford University Press. As indicated in Chapter Two, the reasons for choosing the Hill’s collections stories were that they were

(14)

considered fit with the High School students in terms of the topic or content which is contextual, and the language is not too difficult or too easy. The stories provided also some communicative pictures. In addition, at the end of each story, there is a surprising event which is likely to make the text more

engaging. The stories used in this study were displayed in Appendix 5.

3.6 Data Collection Technique

Classroom observation and questionnaire were used as the data collection techniques of this study.

3.6.1 Classroom Observation

This study employed participant observation where the teacher was also the researcher of this study (Kitao & Kitao, 2002; Merriam, 1998). As the participant observer, the researcher was involved in the setting’s central activities to reveal depth information (Merriam, 1998: 100; Creswell, 1994: 150). The purpose of such observation enables the researcher to “discern ongoing behavior as it occurs and to make appropriate notes about its salient features” (Cohen & Manion, 1994: 110). However, by employing participant observation, it was rather difficult for the researcher to perform two activities at once. In this case, she was assisted by two assistants who acted as the cameraman and the field note taker in order to reduce biases and avoid missing

(15)

important events during the observation process (Cohen & Manion, 1994: 112).

Classroom observation was conducted in a year ten class which consisted of 31 students. The observation was held for five meetings from 4th to 18th of February 2009. The first meeting on 4th of February was done to introduce the teaching program to the students. In this meeting, the researcher acted as the teacher who continued the last material that the students had learnt from the prior teacher. It aimed to make this study run naturally in which the students regarded the researcher as their teacher instead of the stranger. Therefore, this meeting was not recorded yet to avoid unnatural behavior of the students.

There were two lesson plans which were used for the two sessions of the teaching program as mentioned in the main study. They were displayed in Appendix 1.

Basically, this study was carried out in line with the student’s schedule in teaching and learning activity after being consulted with the English teacher who handled the class of X3 where this study was conducted. The research schedule is displayed in Appendix 6.

3.6.1.1 Recording

Recording process employed in this study was consisted of audio and video recording. Audio-recording was done by using MP3 player that the

(16)

researcher relied on very much as the main to provide the data needed. This tool recorded what the teacher and the students said in their interaction during the teaching and learning process. This aimed to obtain data regarding the way teacher explained the activities which the students would perform, motivated the students to speak, and the way she told story. This also aimed to get the data of the ways students did the storytelling. Video-recording which was run by a cameraman can facilitate the researcher to record activities that the teacher and students did during the instruction. This is to follow what Bogdan and Biklen (1992) have explained that an audio recorder can create the illusion that research is effortless, and video recorder can describe the real situations, even every second of the activities but not in detail for all participants. Hence, the researcher used these two instruments in order to obtain more complete data, because the more complete the recording, the easier it is to analyze the data.

3.6.1.2 Fieldnotes

Since the main instrument of this study was relied on audio and video recorder which provided detailed activities and conversation between the teachers and students during the teaching and learning process, fieldnote taking was employed to note the setting and the observer commentaries. The comments were about the factual descriptions of what was going on, the

(17)

setting, the participants and the activities done by the teacher and students (Merriam, 1998:106).

Fieldnote taking in this case may provide additional data or information that captured anything at a particular time. Although the researcher was assisted by a partner, she sometimes took some notes and comments on the occurance that she considered important. Fieldnote taking results are displayed

in Appendix 4.

3.6.2 Questionnaire

Questionnaire was delivered to the students after the whole teaching process had been conducted. There were 31 sheets of questionnaires distributed but only 28 were returned back. The type of questions designed in the questionnaire is the mixture of closed and open ended type (Nunan, 1992: 143). It aimed to facilitate the participants to respond to the questions more easily and accurately, so that they reflect what the participants want to say (Nunan, 1992). The questionnaire and the data obtained are displayed in Appendix 3.

3.7 Data Analysis

The analysis technique employed in this study consisted of three activities which cover activities in categorizing, validating, and interpreting the data (Hopkin, 1985: 107 in Nuraeni, 2008: 53). Similarly, Miles and Huberman

(18)

(1984 in Silverman, 2005) explain three ongoing activities concerning this process, data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing or verification. However, those activities were not done separately, as Creswell (1994: 153) suggests that “the data analysis is conducted simultaneously with data collection, data interpretation, and narrative reporting writing.” In this study, the three processes were done soon after the first observation was conducted as explained in the following.

3.7.1 Data Categorization

After recording classroom activities and interaction in the observation, the transcription was done by watching and listening to the audio and video-recording for several times in the act of providing categorization. This was done continuously from the second observation to the end of the program in order to avoid the missing data (Alwasilah, 2002; Krueger, 1998). In the first observation, the data analysis was only from the field note because recording was not done yet.

When analyzing the observation transcripts and questionnaire results, the coding and categorization were constructed as follows:

1. Coding

• Obs (Observation data) • Que (Questionnaire data)

(19)

2 Categorization

Research Focus Categories Data Resources

1. The ways speaking are taught through storytelling.

2. Kinds of oral production that the students carry out during the teaching of speaking through storytelling.

• Activies before the storytelling.

• Activities during the story. • Activities after the story. • Extensive or Monologue • Transactional • Responsive • Imitative • Observation • Questionnaire • Observation

3.7.2 Data Validation

To maintain validity and gain a more valid and accurate data, Merriam (1998) proposes some strategies that can be used to ensure the validity of investigation such as triangulation. In the present study, the data were obtained from two sources, observation and questionnaire. Hence, the analysis of the data from these two techniques may confirm the emerging findings (Merriam, 1998: 204). This was aimed at enhancing the validity of the study to get a ‘true’ fix on a situation by combining different ways of looking at different findings(Silverman, 2005: 212).

(20)

Another effort of validating the data findings in the present study is by recording the teaching process using multiple instruments, audio and video recorder as well as field note. Conducting the preliminary study was another effort to achieve the data validation (Alwasilah, 2002).

3.7.3 Data Interpretation

In the present study, the act of transcribing all the interaction between teacher and students during the process of teaching speaking through storytelling was done in the effort of obtaining clear picture of what exactly happened in the classroom during the instruction process. In this case, inductive analytical approach (Alwasilah, 2002) was employed by which the data analysis was begun while being gathered. As the characteristics of qualitative research, the analysis was tentative and provisional throughout the study and only become comprehensive once when the data were completely collected (Merriam, 1998).

Ongoing data analysis and interpretation were based on data mainly from observation and questionnaire. In this case, the activities of both teacher and students that occur during the teaching of speaking through storytelling were obtained from observation and supported by the data from questionnaire, while, the kinds of oral production which the students carried out during the

(21)

process were obtained from observation through audio and video-recording. The result from both data collection were directly compared and interpreted.

In categorizing the data finding, some process of selecting, focusing, simplifying the data into the research foci or research questions was done. This enabled the researcher to interpret the data based on the central themes of this study and the related theory, and then concluded the finding. In the conclusion process, some activities were done such as, deciding what the data meant, explaining them and also providing some possible configurations on the findings (Miles and Huberman, 1984:22 in Silverman, 2005:176).

3.8 Concluding Remarks

This chapter has presented a brief discussion of methodology in conducting the study including the research design, site, participants, data collection techniques, and data analyses. Process of data analyses or interpretation of the data findings will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. The next chapter will also present the conclusions and suggestions related to the results of the study.

(22)

This chapter covers the conclusion of the research findings based on the questions proposed in chapter one. Some suggestions are also addressed to the present study for further research, and for those who are willing to use the findings for EFL teaching and learning.

5.1 Conclusion

Findings of this research are based on the research questions concerning how speaking is taught through storytelling. Therefore, some activities performed by teacher and students before, during, and after the storytelling are elaborated to portray the way speaking was taught through storytelling. This chapter also covers the kinds of oral productions that the students carried out during the learning process. By looking into the activities occurred during the process and the kinds of oral production that the students carried out during their learning, it can be seen the strengths and weaknesses of teaching speaking through storytelling.

Analysis of observation and questionnaire data shows that teaching speaking through storytelling in this study is conducted integratedly with other

(23)

skills, namely listening, reading, and writing skills. It indicates that speaking cannot be taught separatedly from other skills.

Other results show that storytelling was performed by both the teacher and students. Teacher’s storytelling was aimed at stimulating students’ listening comprehension; and through the students’ storytelling and story retelling; it is aimed at stimulating their speaking skill. Through group discussion, students’ reading and writing skills are also stimulated, particularly when they were asked to understand and re-created the story given.

The data from observation and questionnaire also indicate that the students performed storytelling and story retelling enthusiastically despite the limited vocabulary. It is due to their understanding on the story content motivates them to talk. In this case, what many experts stated about storytelling that can enhance student’s motivation to get engaged in the speaking activities is proved. However, teacher’s role is also crucial in such teaching program to provide language models, to stimulate and motivate students to speak more and to design the tasks and activities which are suitable for the students’ needs and levels of competence, and the like.

Other limitations of this study are that students still used their native language, Bahasa Indonesia, during the discussion process. It is due to their unfamiliarity with English when communicating with one another as well as

(24)

their limited English. In addition, the teaching foci are still limited on fluency rather than accuracy as seen when the teacher did not correct too much on the students’ grammatical error during their telling although she aimed to reduce distraction on their concentration and effort in finishing the story; and to avoid loosing motivation interest because of too much correction.

The finding of the second problem also indicates that the speaking types which the students produced are still limited, in the sense that those speaking were produced due to the teacher who took the initiation to ask questions rather than the students. This made the instruction tended to be a one-way direction and more teacher-centered. However, they did not lose the opportunities to practice their speaking as indicated when they performed storytelling or when they worked in groups to re-create the end of the story and when they were chosen randomly to report the result of group discussion. These also show the evidence that student-centered was also implemented in this teaching program.

From the observation data, it is indicated that the oral production that the students carried out during the learning process include extensive or monologue, transactional, responsive, and imitative. These speaking productions rely on the tasks and activities that the teacher designs for the students learning. In this study, the extensive and transactional types were produced saliently.

(25)

Besides, speaking is the focus of this teaching program, however, interpersonal oral production in which students interact one another by using colloquial language naturally and spontaneously is not gained yet. It is caused by the nature of storytelling activities which involve monologue speaking dominantly and the students’ limited English which could not facilitate them to carry out the interpersonal dialogue during the learning.

5.2 Limitations of the Study

As indicated by the previous chapters, there are some limitations of this study. First of all that the time allocation of the teaching speaking through storytelling was very short so that there were still many students in the teaching program cannot speak during the process. Consequently, the result was still far from expectation. As a matter of fact, regarding the students’ limited English, such teaching program should be done much longer to gain the teaching and learning objective optimally.

In terms of research methodology, the limitation of this study is that it involved a small number of students. Whereas in fact, to make the findings more convincing, the study should involved more students with different levels. Therefore, further study is needed to get comprehensive and convincing results.

(26)

5.3 Suggestions an recommendations

Some suggestions related to the process and findings of this study need to be considered for further research.

In spite of the fact that the stories used in the teaching program of this study can fulfill the criteria of the students’ needs in terms of the difficulty levels, the content, and student’s age, as indicated in the findings, nevertheless, it would be more interesting and challenging for them when the story are selected by themselves in order that they can be involved in a meaningful learning process optimally.

Conducting a teaching where storytelling is used as a tool or technique demands the teacher’s ability and creativity to use any kinds of strategy more flexible. It means that the teacher needs to take the learning objectives, the materials, the students’ needs, age, and levels into some consideration when planning to conduct such teaching and learning.

Using storytelling in the teaching program also needs the teacher to provide challenging tasks and activities proportionally for the students. Nevertheless, the tasks should not neglect their needs and level of competences. In the case of students’ English ability is considered sufficient, teacher can used student-centered approach optimally to give students a wide opportunity to develop and enrich their language skills and learning.

(27)

With reference to the findings, it is recommended that it would be important if the storytelling technique is trained to other EFL teachers in order to be implemented in their teaching practice. Besides, using storytelling in EFL classroom would be effective and helpful to develop students’ language skills if it is implemented gradually and continuously as an ongoing process in the language learning. Therefore, the teaching of speaking through storytelling should be done much longer in order to gain the learning objective more optimal, particularly when the learner’ English levels are still low.

Also, further research on using storytelling in the teaching program is still open widely for developing other language skills, such as listening, reading, and writing as well as developing the students’ vocabulary, appreciation on literature, and critical thinking.

(28)

Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.1 Background of the Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.2 The research Questions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.3 The Purpose of the Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4 The Scope of the Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5 The Significance of the study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.6 Definition of Terms ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.7 Methodology ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.8 Outline of the Thesis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1 The Nature of speaking ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.2 Stimulating Oral Interaction in the ClassroomError! Bookmark not defined. 2.3 Teaching Speaking ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4 Teacher’s Role in the Speaking Classroom .... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.5 Teacher’s Strategies in Teaching Speaking through Storytelling ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.5.1 Direct Strategy ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.5.2 Group Work... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.5.3 Performance Activities ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.6 Speaking and Other Skills ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

(29)

2.8 Narrative text ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9 Storytelling in the Teaching Practice ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.1 Activities Before the Story ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.2Activities During the Story ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.3Activities After the Story ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.10 Storytelling in the Speaking Classroom ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.10.1 Choosing Stories ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.10.2 Working with Stories ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11 Concluding Remarks ... Error! Bookmark not defined. Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.1 The Research Design ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2 The Research Site ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3 Participant ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.4 Preliminary Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.5 Main Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.5.1 Teaching Procedure ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.5.2 Stories ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.6 Data Collection Technique... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.6.1 Classroom Observation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{3.6.1.1 Recording} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{3.6.1.2 Fieldnotes} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.6.2Questionnaire... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.7 Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.7.1 Data Categorization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.7.2 Data Validation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.7.3Data Interpretation ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

(30)

4.2 The Ways Speaking are taught through storytelling .... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.1 Activities Before the Storytelling ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _4.2.1.1_{Explaining Tasks and Activities} ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

_{4.2.1.2 Recalling students’ prior knowledge}. Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.2 Activities During the Storytelling ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{4.2.2.1 Using mime and gesture} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{4.2.2.2 Intonation and pronunciation} ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

_{4.2.2.3 Giving Synonyms of Difficult Words}Error! Bookmark not defined.

_{4.2.2.4 Drawing picture} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.3 Activities After the Storytelling ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{4.2.3.1 Retelling the Teacher’s Story} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{4.2.3.2 Working in Group} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{4.2.3.3 Guiding Students to Infer Meaning from the Context} ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

_{4.2.3.4 Telling the Story} ... Error! Bookmark not defined. _{4.2.3.5 Giving feedback} ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

_{4.2.3.6 Assessing Students’ Speaking Performance} ... Error! Bookmark not

defined.

_{4.2.3.7 Giving Motivation (Teacher’s Activities)} ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.3 Kinds of Oral Production during the Process Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.1 Extensive or Monologue... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.2 Transactional (Dialogue) ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.3 Responsive ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.4Imitative ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Error! Bookmark

not defined.

(31)

! "

(32)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alwasilah, A. Chaedar A. (2002). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.

Aiex, N. K. (1988). Storytelling: Its Wide-Ranging Impact in the Classroom. Retrieved from: http://hcil.cs.umd.edu/../2001-24.html. Accessed on April 10th, 2009.

Arends, Richard L. Learning to Teach (Belajar Untuk Mengajar). Seventh Edition. New York: McGraw Hill Company. Translated into Bahasa Indonesia by PUSTAKA PELAJAR.

Black, Paul & Dylan William. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. (Assessment in Education, vol. 5 no. 1 March 1998) London: School of Education, Kings College. Download from: http://classroom_learning.htmlin Dec. 2008.

Brandi-Muller, Justine. (2005). Retelling Stories. Accessed on 5th of May from: http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/13282.

Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (Second Edition). San Fransisco: Longman. Brown, H. Gouglas. (2004). Language Assessment. A Principles and

Classroom Practice. New York: Pearson Education Inc. .

BSNP. (2004). Panduan Penyusunan Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi (KBK). Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.

BSNP. (2006). Panduan Penyusunan Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan

Pendidikan Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah.

Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.

Chastain, Kenneth. (1976). Developing Second-Lnguage Skills: Theory to Practice (Second Edition). Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing.

(33)

Chaudron, Craig. (1988). Second Language Classroom. research on Teaching and Learning. Hawaii: Cambridge University Press.

Christie, Frances. (2005). Language Education in the Primary Years. Sydney: University of New South Wells Press.

Colon-Villa, Lilian. (1997). Storytelling in an ESL Classroom. Accessed in June 12nd, 2009 from:

http://findarticle.com/p/articles/mi_qa3666/is_1997/ai/.

Cohen, Louis, Lawrence Manion. 1994. Research Method in Education. London and New York: Routledge.

Cox, Carole. (1999). Teaching Language Art. A Student- and Response-Centered Classroom (Third Edition). Needham Heights: Viacom Company.

Creswell, John W. (1994). Research Design Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches. California: SAGE Publication.

Croker, Robert. (1999). Fundamental of Ongoing Assessment. JALT Testing and Evaluation SIG Newsletter Vol. 3, No. 1 April 1999 (p. 8-12). Retrieved from: www.jalt.org/test/car_1.htmin Nop. 22nd, 2008. Davis, B. G. (1993). Tools for Teaching. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publisher.

Retrieved from http://teaching.berkeley.edu/../teaching.html. Accessed on April 9th, 2009.

Davis, Myra A. & Phyllis NeSmith. (2000). Education Standards: Can Storytelling Have an Impact on Curriculum and Testing? Appeared in the March/April 2000, issue of Storytelling Magazine, pgs. 12-14.

Accessed in December 2008 from:

(http://www.callofstory.org/en/archive/articles.asp?id=article.1.a.1). Deacon, Brad & Tim Murphey. (2001). Deep Impact Storytelling. Accessed in

April 2009 from: http://eca.state.gov/forum/vols/vol39/no4/p10.htm.

Derewianka, Beverly. (1990). Exploring How Texts Works. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association.

(34)

Doyon, Paul. (1999). Telling Stories: Using Input and Output to Develop Both Fluency and Accuracy in Spoken Discourse. Asahi University. Accessed on April 24th, 2009 from: http://www.jalt-publications.org/tit/articles/1999/04/doyon.

Eggins, suzanne. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics, Second Edition. London: Continuum International publishing Group. Ellis, Rod. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Emilia, Emi. (2005). A Critical Genre-Based Approach to Teaching Academic Writing in a Tertiary EFL Context in Indonesia (a Thesis, Vol. 1). Melbourne: Deakin University.

Emilia, Emi. (2008). Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Florez, MarryAnn Cunningham. (1999). Improving Adult English Language Learners’ Speaking Skills. ERIC Digest. National Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education Washington DC.

Frandono, David. (2005). Strategy Inventory for Language Learning in Speaking (A Thesis). Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. Gebhard, Jerry G. (2000). Teaching English as a Foreign or Second Language:

a Teacher self-development and Methodology Guide. Michigan: the University of Michigan.

Gere, Jeff. (1992). Storytelling Tools for the Classroom (an Article Journal). Honolulu: Pacific Resources for Education and Learning (PREL)

Accessed in Dec. 2008 from:

www.prel.org/products/pr_/storytelling.htm.

Gibbons, Pauline. (1993). Learning to Learn in a Second Language. Portsmouth NH: HEINEMANN.

Grugeon, E. & Paul Gardner. (2000). The Art of Storytelling for Teachers and Pupils. Retrieved from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/The-Art-of-Storytelling. Accessed in April 17th, 2009.

(35)

Harmer, Jeremy. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (Third Edition). Harlow: Longman.

Hill, L. A. (1973). Stories For Reproduction, Series 1 and 2 and Elementary and Intermediate Levels. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hughes, Rebecca. (2002). Teaching and Researching Speaking. United Kingdom: Pearson Education.

Jianing, Xu. (2007). Storytelling in the EFL Speaking Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XIII, No. 11, November 2007. From: http://iteslj.org/.

Killen, Roy. (1998). Effective Teaching Strategies. Lesson from Research and Practice. Katoomba: Social Science Press.

Kitao, S. Kathleen. & Kenji Kitao. 2002. Approaches to Social Science Research: Communication and Language Teaching/Learning. Tokyo: EICHOSHA ltd.

Kozlovich, Beth-Ann. (2001). Helping Kids Tell Their Own Stories (an Article Journal). Honolulu: PREL. Accessed in January 2008 from: www.prel.org/products/pr_/storytelling.htm.

Krashen, Stephen D. (1982). Principle and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Pergamon Institute of English.

Krueger, Ricahard A. (1998). Analyzing and Reporting Focus Group Results. California: Sage Publication.

Mead, Nancy A. & Donald L. Rubin. (1985). Assessing Listening and Speaking Skils. ERIC Digests.

Merriam, Sharan B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Mustafa, Bachrudin. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching in Indonesia. Issue of Theoretical Assumption and Challenges in the Classroom Practice. Journal of Southeast Asian Education. No.2, Dec. 2001.

(36)

Mustafa, Bachrudin. (2008). Teaching English to Young Learners: Principles & Techniques. Bandung: School of Postgraduate Studies (SPs) Indonesia University of Education (UPI).

Nunan, David. (1988). The Learner-Centered Curriculum. A Study in Second Language Teaching. Glasgow: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, David. (1989). Designing Task for the Communicative classroom. Glasgow: Cambridge University Press.

___________________. Understanding Language Classroom. A Guide for Teacher-Initiated Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nunan, David. (1990). Designing Task for the Communicative Classroom.

Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, David. (1991). Language Teaching Methodology. A Textbook for Teachers. London: Prentice hall.

Nunan, David. (1992). Research Method in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, David. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Nuraeni, E. (2008). Keefektifan Strategi Penceritaan, Pembacaan, dan Pengekspresian Cerita (PPPC) sebagai Upaya Penggugah Respons Siswa (PTK dalam Pembelajaran Apresiasi Sastra (A Thesis). Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Paul, David. 2003. Teaching English to Children in Asia. Hong Kong: Pearson Longman Asia ELT.

Peck, Sabrina. (2001). Developing Children’s Listening and Speaking in ESL in Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Edited by Marianne Celce-Murcia. Boston: Heinle & Heinle, Thompson Learning.

Oxford, Rebecca L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What every teacher should know. US: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

(37)

Reece, Ian & Stephen Walker. (1997). Teaching Training and Learning. A Practical Guide. Third Edition. Sunderland: Business Education Publishers Limited.

Reilly, Ryan Egan. (2007). Storytelling: Pathway to Literacy (A Thesis). US: The Evergreen State College. Accessed in May 2009 From: http://archieves.evergreen.edu/mastertheses/2007/pdf.

Richard. Jack C. & Charles Lockhard (1994). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. Richard, Jack C. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching Today (an

E-Book). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from://www.cambridge.com.mx/../jack-CD.pdf.

Rusdi. (2005). The Power os Storytelling in the Teaching of English. “Empowering English teachers Through Current Practice.” Internasional Seminar and Workshop 3-4 Juni 2005. English Department Faculty of Language, Art and Literature, State University of Padang.

Saville-Troike Muriel. 2006. Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shepard, Aaron. (1990). Telling Your Story (Part 3). Arcata: Simple Production. Accessed on April 24th, 2009 from: www.aaronshep.com/storytelling.

Silverman, David. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications ltd.

Thornbury, Scott. (2005). How to Teach Speaking. Longman Pearson Educated Limited.

Wilder, William. Information for Storytellers. Appeared in the

November/December 2000 issue of Storytelling World/Storytelling Magazine, pgs. 12-20). Accessed on 5th May, 2009 from:

(http://www.callofstory.org/en/archive/articles.asp?id=article.2.f.4). Williams, Joanna P. (2001). Strategic Processing of Text: Improving Reading

(38)

Library Reference Search 2003 – 2004. From: http://www.ericdigest.org/2001-4/reading.html.

Wright, Andrew. (1995). Storytelling with Children (Resource Books for Teachers). New York: Oxford University Press.

Yuling. (2004). Storytelling for Enriching EFL Classes. Accessed on 12th December 2008 from: Yuling010@hotmail.com.

Zaro, Juan Jesus & Sagrario Salaberri (1995). Storytelling (A Handbook for the English Classroom). Oxford: Macmillan Heinnemann English Language Teaching.

(1)