T B ING 1101126 Chapter3

Istiqomah Nur Rahmawati, 2014

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter focuses on the process of conducting research. These include Research Design, Research Questions, Research Hypothesis, Population and Sample, Research Setting, Research Instruments, and Research Procedures.

3.1. Research Design

The design of the research was a pre-experimental, a type of research design which only include experimental groups without random sampling (Hatch and Lazaraton, 1994). It was conducted in order to find out the significance of using storytelling technique to improve students’ speaking ability by analyzing the result of the tests as pre-experimental design. (Hatch and Farhady (1982); Hatch and Lazaraton (1994)). The research administered pre-test and post-test to the experimental groups. Then the pre-test scores were analyzed to know their capability of speaking before the treatment. The experimental group was given a treatment using storytelling technique. The design can be illustrated as follows:

Table 3.1. the Research Design T1 X T2

T1 : Pre-test

X : Storytelling treatments T2 : Post-test

There were several reasons for choosing one group pre-test – post-test design to be employed in this study. This design was chosen since it was not feasible to apply true experimental design. The sample of the study was chosen purposively. Thus, one group pre-test – pat-test design was chosen. Besides, it was impossible

to involve control group in the study due to limitation of time and cot which were also became the consideration.

There are two variables in this study which are the independent and dependent variables. Variable according to Hatch and Farhady (1982: 12), ‘is as an attribute of a person or of an object, which varies from person to person or from object to

object.’ they state that independent variable is major variable to be investigated, which is selected, manipulated, and measured by the study. On the other hand, in their opinion, dependent variable is variable to be observed and measure to determine the effect of the independent variable. In line with their opinion, Lane (2003: 1) mentions variables are as ‘properties or characteristics of some event, object, or person that can on different values or amounts. He states when conducting study, experimenters often manipulate variables. He further explains that the variable manipulated by an experimenter is named independent variable and dependent variable is the variable when the experimenter seeks to determine the effect of the independent variable. The independent variable of the study is the implementation of storytelling technique. Meanwhile, the dependent variable of

the study is students’ speaking skill.

The treatment was implemented in five meetings, each lasted for 90 minutes. After the treatments were done, the post-test was given to the experimental group. The post-test scores were analyzed to know their capability of speaking after the treatment. To support the data from the treatment, the questionnaires were also employed in this study to see the responses from the students after being taught using storytelling technique.

3.2.Research Questions

The research questions in this study were:

2. What are the students’ responses towards the implementation of teaching speaking through storytelling?

3.3. Research Hypothesis

Hypothesis, according to Marczyk, DeMatteo, and Festinger (2005: 8), is ‘simply

an educated - and testable – guess to your research question.’ Based on their opinion, it can be concluded that hypothesis is prediction about expected relationship between two variables tested in the research.

Null hypothesis (H0) was used in this study as foundation. The null hypothesis

(H0) in this study is that there is no difference of students’ speaking skill between before and after storytelling treatment. While the alternative hypothesis (HA) in this study is that there is a significant difference of students’ speaking skill

between before and after storytelling treatment.

The statistical analysis of t-test was applied in this study to determine the mean of pre-test scores was different from that of post-test scores; with the level of significance of 0.05. The significance of the test was analyzed by using SPSS 16 for windows.

Table 3.2.

The Characteristics of the Study

Null hypothesis (H0) There is no difference of students’ speaking skill

between before and after storytelling treatment. Alternative hypothesis

(HA)

There is a significant difference of students’

speaking skill between before and after storytelling treatment.

Significant level 0.05

Design One group pre-test – post-test design

Dependent variable Students’ speaking skill.

Measurement Score

Independent variable The implementation of storytelling technique.

Measurement Treatment to the experimental group

3.4. Population and Sample

The population of the study was the students of a university in Bandar Lampung. The sample of the study was the first semester students of English Education. There were eight classes involved in this study as the population and not all of them were considered as sample of this study. This study involved one class from the eighth existing classes. So, it was taken purposively. The sample was taken based on certain consideration.

3.5.Research Setting

The study was conducted in a university in Bandar Lampung. In academic year 2013/2014 the Speaking for General Purpose I had eight classes. However, there were only thirty three students participating in this study or one class due to the constraint of time. The selection of the participants was based on several reasons. First, the students were the freshmen so their ability in general was almost in the same level. Second, this university has not tried storytelling as one of technique in teaching speaking yet. And the last, this university was very welcome the researcher to conduct the study. Considering those reasons, the researcher tried to conduct storytelling as an alternative technique in English teaching, especially in teaching speaking, to the first semester students in this university.

The researcher planned to conduct her research for seven meetings for each class. The research schedule of the treatment was figured out in table 3.

Table 3.3.

Time schedule of the treatment

1 Pre-test 26-9-2013 7.15-8.50 Storytelling Performance

2 Treatment 1 3-10-2013 7.15-8.50 The Very Hungry

Caterpillar

3 Treatment 2 10-10-2013 7.15-8.50 The Very Thirsty

Caterpillar

4 Treatment 3 17-10-2013 7.15-8.50 The Great Big

Enormous Turnip

5 Treatment 4 24-10-2013 7.15-8.50 The Very Busy

Spider

6 Treatment 5 31-10-2013 7.15-8.50 The Little Indian

Boy

7 Post-test and

Questionnaires

7-11-2013 7.15-8.50 Storytelling

Performance and Fill in the questionnaires

3.6.Research Instruments

Fraenkle and Wallen (2007: 113) define instrumentation as the whole process of preparing to collect data in a study. There were three kinds of instruments which were employed in this study. They were materials for pre-test and post-test, scoring rubric for pre-test and post-test, and questionnaire.

The score of the students’ test were used to know the effectiveness of

storytelling technique to improve students’ speaking ability. They were collected through speaking test, pre-test and post-test which were conducted to the experimental group. The speaking test for pre-test was the same with the speaking test for post-test. The scoring system used in the test as adapted from Hadley (2001). It was in the form of rubrics for speaking ability testing which covered accuracy, fluency, vocabulary and pronunciation. The questionnaires were

conducted to obtain data or information about the students’ response to the

implementation of the storytelling technique.

Hutchinson and Waters (198: 108) categorize some elements in designing materials. First, input, it can be a text, dialogue, video recording, diagram or any others. Second, content focus, language is used as a mean of conveying information and feelings about something. Third, language focus, it is to enable the earners to use language, how it works and practices putting it back together again. The last, task, learners use the content and language knowledge they have built up through the unit. Regarding these, the materials were designed related to those elements which were arranged in the lesson plan.

Both pre-test and post-test were in narrative pictures series forms. The stories were retrieved from internet. They were chosen on the basis of topic, length and the interest of the students. These were used since the students were tested to check their speaking ability in telling stories based on the pictures series given. The test was held in 90 minutes. Each student did the oral test for 2 minutes. The pre-test was given in their matriculation class so it would not interrupt their daily schedule for teaching learning process. It was used to find out the starting point of

the students’ speaking ability before the treatments were conducted. Meanwhile

the post-test was conducted after the treatments were done in order to find out the

effect of the use of the storytelling technique to the students’ speaking ability. The treatments for the experimental were carried out by using pre-whilst-post

activities. The main activities were begun with the lecture’s presentation and

ended with individual performance for each student.

Table 3.4.

The Sample of Teaching Procedure

No Teaching Procedure

1 Pre-activities

 The lecturer greets the students.

 The lecturer asks something about the picture series given.

 The lecturer tells the objective of the lesson and explains the activity that the students will do.

consist of 33 students. 2 Whilst activities

 The lecturer presents a song entitled ‘Old Mc Donald had a Farm’

which relate to the topic (The Very Busy Spider).

 The lecturer introduces and sings the song to get the students relax and set a good atmosphere.

 The lecturer tells the story in front of the class.

 The lecturer does questions and answers with the students related to her performance.

 The lecturer encourages ad asks the students in each group to tell the story in turn (practice in small group).

 The lecturer gives the students opportunity to ask something relate to their activity.

3 Post activities

 The lecturer asks the students how they find about the activity and their experience toward the activity.

 The lecturer encourages and gives advice to develop their motivation and self confidence.

 The lecturer give the students time to prepare themselves or act out the story.

 The lecturer ask students to perform in front of the class. 3.6.2. Scoring Rubric for Pre-test and Post-test

The score of the speaking test of students were used to know the effectiveness of

storytelling technique in improving students’ speaking skill. They were collected

through pre-test and post-test which were conducted to the experimental group. The speaking test for pre-test had a similar level of reliability, and level of difficulty with the speaking test for post-test. The scoring system used in the test was adapted from Hadley (2001). It was in the form of rubrics for speaking ability testing which covered accuracy, fluency, vocabulary, and pronunciation. The collected data were calculated and analyzed using the following tabulation.

Table 3.5.

Scoring Rubric for Storytelling Pre/Post-test Accuracy

A 4.5 – 5.0

show exceptional control of required grammar concepts and correctness in variety of context

B 4.0 – 4.4

make some grammar mistakes that do not effect meaning C

3.5 – 3.9

makes more serious mistakes that often give unintended meaning, although generally adequate

D 3.4 – 3.1

meaning generally obscured by grammar mistakes, very poor control of a wide range of concepts

E below 3.0

meaning completely obscured by grammar mistakes, totally inadequate control

Fluency A 4.5 – 5.0

normal, ‘thoughtful’ delay in formulation of thought in speech, language flows, extended discourse

B 4.0 – 4.4

take longer than necessary to organize thought C

3.5 – 3.9

speech somewhat disjointed because of pause, language spoken is very halting

D 3.4 – 3.1

painful pauses make speech hard to flow E

below 3.0

speech totally disjointed, long pause interrupt flow of fluency and meaning

Vocabulary A 4.5 – 5.0

very conversant with vocabulary required B

4.0 – 4.4

vocabulary mistakes generally do not affect meaning C

3.5 – 3.9

adequate, although more serious mistakes give unintended meaning D

3.4 – 3.1

meaning frequently obscured by minimal/inadequate vocabulary E

below 3.0

meaning totally obscured, inadequate vocabulary

Pronunciation A

4.5 – 5.0

correct pronunciation and intonation, very few mistakes, almost native-like B

4.0 – 4.4

some mispronunciation, meaning is still clear C

3.5 – 3.9

pronounced foreign accent D

3.4 – 3.1

meaning frequently obscured by poor pronunciation E no effort at all and sound often incomprehensible

below 3.0

Accuracy ______________x4 = Pronunciation __________x6 =

Fluency _______________x3 = Vocabulary ____________x7 =

Adapted from Hadley, A.O. (2001).

Since the study implemented to measure the speaking skill, the test was in the form of oral test (individual storytelling performance). The advisors were also asked for help to look at the content and format of the instrument and judge whether or not it was appropriate. In terms of the reliability of the test, the interrater was used in which raters are required to make judgments on the language produced by the students. The scores of the two raters were calculated using SPSS 16 for Windows Program.

Since this study employed with pre-experimental design, the result of pre-test was used to know the basic skill of participants. The result of post-test was compared to seek the significant difference before and after the treatment given. It was intended to see if there was an influence of using storytelling in teaching speaking.

3.6.3. The Questionnaires

The questionnaires were conducted to obtain information about the students’

responses to the implementation of the technique. The questionnaires were

applied to know the students’ responses towards the use of storytelling in teaching

speaking. The questionnaires were delivered to the students after the post-test was conducted. There were 33 sheets of questionnaires distributed. In terms of reliability, the questionnaires were analyzed for their internal consistency. For the effective measurement and performance test scored using more than two options like Likert-Scales. 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.

The questionnaires were also validated by consulting to the expert to have validity. Then, the responses of the students to the questionnaires were analyzed by computing the response frequencies then converting them into percentages.

Number of students choosing certain option x 100% Total number of the students (33)

3.7.Research Procedures 3.7.1. Pre-test

The pre-test was carried out at September 28th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m. in the experimental group to identify the students’ ability in speaking. Therefore, it was given in the matriculation class to find the students’ basic skill or ability before they get the treatment. To get more information from students about the way they retell the story in English, the researcher was equipped with recording tool to record the activities being held in the class. But, unfortunately, the tool was not able to be used due to the electricity problem. Therefore, the researcher could not make documentations (video recording) for pre-test. The test material was in the form of storytelling performance. Pre-test scores were supposed to serve as controlled variable to identify the ability of the students in speaking before giving the treatment about storytelling. The following was the guideline of the pre-test.

Direction:

1. There are five picture series available. 2. Choose one of them.

3. How would you tell the story to your friend? 4. The time allocation is about 2-3 minutes.

5. Your scoring will be measured by your lecture using scoring sheet adapted from Hadley, A.O. (2001).

 Picture series 1 (The Very Hungry Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 2 (The Very Thirsty Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 3 (The Great Big Enormous Turnip) --- see appendix.  Picture series 4 (The Very Busy Spider) --- see appendix.

 Picture series 5 (The Little Indian Boy) --- see appendix. Figure 3.1.

Guide for pre-test

3.7.2. Experimental Group Treatment

A series of treatment was given to the experimental group where the treatments were given for five meetings. In this study, the treatment used storytelling technique in teaching speaking.

The first treatment was conducted on October 4th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m. The material given in the first treatment was about a story entitled The Very Hungry Caterpillar. The second treatment was conducted on October 11th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The material given in this treatment was still about the caterpillar but in this time the title changed into The Very Thirsty Caterpillar. So the content of the story was still the same with the previous story but the vocabulary was changed from the name of foods into the name of beverages. The third treatment was The Great Big Enormous Turnip, it was conducted on October 18th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The next treatment was implemented on October 25th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The material given in that time was The Very Busy Spider. The

last treatment was implemented on November 1st 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The students in that time learnt about the story entitled The Little Indian Boy.

There were three steps in giving treatment with storytelling. The first was preparation. In this step, the researcher began preparing the students to speak by giving them the picture series with storyline or script in it that would be discussed. Then she did modelling and reinforcing. In this step the researcher introduced a model of storytelling performance. Next, the researcher discussed how to tell a story fluently and attractively. In the second step, constructing, the researcher asked the students to seat in groups of four or five. The researcher then asked the groups to practice retelling the story among them based on their own version. After that, she asked the students to perform their story in front of the class voluntarily. It seemed that was not all groups could perform the storytelling due to the limitation of the time. In the last step, closing, the students eventually had many difficulties in pronouncing some words correctly and expressing the story confidently during the individual performance. She motivated the students to be more confident and correct their mispronunciations.

3.7.3. Post-test

After doing the treatment for five times, the researcher conducted the post-test. It was held at November 8th 2013 for the experimental group at 7.30-09.00 a.m. It was basically conducted similarly as the pre-test. The post-test guideline and story were still the same with the pre-test guideline and story. The pre-test was used to measure how effective the treatment of storytelling technique when it was given to the students. The post-test items were equal to that of in the pre-test. The following was the guideline of the post-test.

Direction:

1. There are five picture series available. 2. Choose one of them.

4. The time allocation is about 2-3 minutes.

5. Your scoring will be measured by your lecture using scoring sheet adapted from Hadley, A.O. (2001).

 Picture series 1 (The Very Hungry Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 2 (The Very Thirsty Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 3 (The Great Big Enormous Turnip) --- see appendix.  Picture series 4 (The Very Busy Spider) --- see appendix.

 Picture series 5 (The Little Indian Boy) --- see appendix. Figure 3.2. Guide for Post-test

3.7.4. The Questionnaires

The use of questionnaires in this study was intended to find out the students’ responses towards the implementation of teaching speaking through storytelling. Having done the storytelling to the experimental group, the researcher gave to the students the questionnaires dealing with the treatment. It was conducted right after the researcher finished doing the post-test in the class at November 8th 2013 for the experimental group

The questionnaires were used in this study consisted of 15 questions. Those questions consisted of questions related to teaching learning speaking that they had been experienced before the research was conducted and the teaching learning speaking through storytelling technique.

3.8.Clarification of Key Terms

To avoid the possibility of misinterpretation to the study here are some terms that should be clarified.

1. Effectiveness

Effectiveness in this context is indicated by the measures of speaking sill before and after the implementation of storytelling technique.

The term of students in this context is the students of the first semester of English Department in a university.

3. Storytelling

Storytelling technique is the language learning technique based on the coordination of narrative text and action (gestures, voice, and mimics) 4. Speaking skill

below 3.0

Accuracy ______________x4 = Pronunciation __________x6 = Fluency _______________x3 = Vocabulary ____________x7 =

Adapted from Hadley, A.O. (2001).

Since the study implemented to measure the speaking skill, the test was in the form of oral test (individual storytelling performance). The advisors were also asked for help to look at the content and format of the instrument and judge whether or not it was appropriate. In terms of the reliability of the test, the interrater was used in which raters are required to make judgments on the language produced by the students. The scores of the two raters were calculated using SPSS 16 for Windows Program.

Since this study employed with pre-experimental design, the result of pre-test was used to know the basic skill of participants. The result of post-test was compared to seek the significant difference before and after the treatment given. It was intended to see if there was an influence of using storytelling in teaching speaking.

3.6.3. The Questionnaires

The questionnaires were conducted to obtain information about the students’ responses to the implementation of the technique. The questionnaires were applied to know the students’ responses towards the use of storytelling in teaching speaking. The questionnaires were delivered to the students after the post-test was conducted. There were 33 sheets of questionnaires distributed. In terms of reliability, the questionnaires were analyzed for their internal consistency. For the effective measurement and performance test scored using more than two options like Likert-Scales. 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.

The questionnaires were also validated by consulting to the expert to have validity. Then, the responses of the students to the questionnaires were analyzed by computing the response frequencies then converting them into percentages.

Number of students choosing certain option x 100% Total number of the students (33)

3.7.Research Procedures

3.7.1. Pre-test

The pre-test was carried out at September 28th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m. in the experimental group to identify the students’ ability in speaking. Therefore, it was given in the matriculation class to find the students’ basic skill or ability before they get the treatment. To get more information from students about the way they retell the story in English, the researcher was equipped with recording tool to record the activities being held in the class. But, unfortunately, the tool was not able to be used due to the electricity problem. Therefore, the researcher could not make documentations (video recording) for pre-test. The test material was in the form of storytelling performance. Pre-test scores were supposed to serve as controlled variable to identify the ability of the students in speaking before giving the treatment about storytelling. The following was the guideline of the pre-test.

Direction:

1. There are five picture series available. 2. Choose one of them.

3. How would you tell the story to your friend? 4. The time allocation is about 2-3 minutes.

5. Your scoring will be measured by your lecture using scoring sheet adapted from Hadley, A.O. (2001).

 Picture series 1 (The Very Hungry Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 2 (The Very Thirsty Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 3 (The Great Big Enormous Turnip) --- see appendix.  Picture series 4 (The Very Busy Spider) --- see appendix.

 Picture series 5 (The Little Indian Boy) --- see appendix. Figure 3.1.

Guide for pre-test

3.7.2. Experimental Group Treatment

A series of treatment was given to the experimental group where the treatments were given for five meetings. In this study, the treatment used storytelling technique in teaching speaking.

The first treatment was conducted on October 4th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m. The material given in the first treatment was about a story entitled The Very Hungry Caterpillar. The second treatment was conducted on October 11th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The material given in this treatment was still about the caterpillar but in this time the title changed into The Very Thirsty Caterpillar. So the content of the story was still the same with the previous story but the vocabulary was changed from the name of foods into the name of beverages. The third treatment was The Great Big Enormous Turnip, it was conducted on October 18th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The next treatment was implemented on October 25th 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The material given in that time was The Very Busy Spider. The

last treatment was implemented on November 1 2013 at 9.00-10.30 a.m.. The students in that time learnt about the story entitled The Little Indian Boy.

There were three steps in giving treatment with storytelling. The first was preparation. In this step, the researcher began preparing the students to speak by giving them the picture series with storyline or script in it that would be discussed. Then she did modelling and reinforcing. In this step the researcher introduced a model of storytelling performance. Next, the researcher discussed how to tell a story fluently and attractively. In the second step, constructing, the researcher asked the students to seat in groups of four or five. The researcher then asked the groups to practice retelling the story among them based on their own version. After that, she asked the students to perform their story in front of the class voluntarily. It seemed that was not all groups could perform the storytelling due to the limitation of the time. In the last step, closing, the students eventually had many difficulties in pronouncing some words correctly and expressing the story confidently during the individual performance. She motivated the students to be more confident and correct their mispronunciations.

3.7.3. Post-test

After doing the treatment for five times, the researcher conducted the post-test. It was held at November 8th 2013 for the experimental group at 7.30-09.00 a.m. It was basically conducted similarly as the pre-test. The post-test guideline and story were still the same with the pre-test guideline and story. The pre-test was used to measure how effective the treatment of storytelling technique when it was given to the students. The post-test items were equal to that of in the pre-test. The following was the guideline of the post-test.

Direction:

1. There are five picture series available. 2. Choose one of them.

4. The time allocation is about 2-3 minutes.

5. Your scoring will be measured by your lecture using scoring sheet adapted from Hadley, A.O. (2001).

 Picture series 1 (The Very Hungry Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 2 (The Very Thirsty Caterpillar) --- see appendix.  Picture series 3 (The Great Big Enormous Turnip) --- see appendix.  Picture series 4 (The Very Busy Spider) --- see appendix.

 Picture series 5 (The Little Indian Boy) --- see appendix. Figure 3.2. Guide for Post-test

3.7.4. The Questionnaires

The use of questionnaires in this study was intended to find out the students’ responses towards the implementation of teaching speaking through storytelling. Having done the storytelling to the experimental group, the researcher gave to the students the questionnaires dealing with the treatment. It was conducted right after the researcher finished doing the post-test in the class at November 8th 2013 for the experimental group

The questionnaires were used in this study consisted of 15 questions. Those questions consisted of questions related to teaching learning speaking that they had been experienced before the research was conducted and the teaching learning speaking through storytelling technique.

3.8.Clarification of Key Terms

To avoid the possibility of misinterpretation to the study here are some terms that should be clarified.

1. Effectiveness

Effectiveness in this context is indicated by the measures of speaking sill before and after the implementation of storytelling technique.

The term of students in this context is the students of the first semester of English Department in a university.

3. Storytelling

Storytelling technique is the language learning technique based on the coordination of narrative text and action (gestures, voice, and mimics) 4. Speaking skill