1

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background One of the aims of teaching English is to enable the learners to communicate information effectively in spoken English (Brown and Yule, 1983). So, teaching spoken English is success if the students can speak fluently. However, speaking skill is very complex. Many skills must be mastered. It requires not only pronunciation, intonation, stressing, vocabulary, grammar, and/or structure but also the use of gestures and some other body movement. In line with this, Widdowson (1985) further explains that the act of speaking normally in the course of natural communicative interaction involves not only the use of vocal organs to produce sounds, but also the use of gestures, the movement of the muscles of the face, and indeed of the whole body. From the states above, we can see that how hard students to speak English with a grammatical sentence, good pronunciation, and good gesture if they just speak it in the classroom to get a good score from the English teacher while in Indonesia, especially in Tolitoli, there are many kinds of ethnics and mother-tongues that they use in their daily communicative acts. Another factor that caused students laziness to speak English is their shyness. They do not have self confidence to communicate in English. So, although they like to study English but their ability in speaking performance is still bad. Besides, as speaking is difficult, some effort is required from the teacher because the teacher is the person who mostly responsible of the learners speaking ability in the foreign

language (Baso Jabu, 2008:96). The teacher must be creative in teaching speaking, if a speaking activity loses steam, the teacher may need to jump into Role-Play, ask more discussion questions, clarify the instructions, or stop an activity that is too difficult or boring. The teacher must make the students understand that the aim of speaking is communicating ideas and that does not always require perfect English. In the speaking class, the teacher must break the silence and get students communicate with any English words they can use, correct or not, and selectively address errors that block communication. When the researcher observed the class setting of this study, it was found that many times the teaching of speaking was only in such a way that require the students to practice reading the dialogues provided in the textbook without giving the students autonomy to share out their ideas based on real context as such the representative communicative context as they really find in their daily life. Therefore this problem should be solved by implementing the more effective strategy that may assists the students to speak out their ideas. One of language teaching strategies that may assist the students to be able to express their ideas in their own words is that by implementing Role-Play Strategy. This strategy offers some strength, such as to increase students interest in learning activities, fosters increasing students vocabulary mastery English, helps students developing their skills in oral communication, enhance students satisfaction with their learning experience, increase students creativity in express their ideas in their own words, and engage the students to participate.

1.2 Problem Statement Based on the background above, the researcher formulates one problem statement as follows:

Can the use of Role-Play improve the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Tolitoli speaking ability?

1.3 Objective of the Research This research aims at investigating whether the use of Role-Play can improve the second year students of SMP Negery 2 Tolitoli speaking ability or not.

1.4 The Significance of the Research The findings of this research are expected to be meaningful contributions for the English teachers or readers and especially for the second year students of SMP 2 Tolitoli, in 2009/2010 academic year. It is also expected to be a meaningful contribution for the English teachers in general.

1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Research The scope of this research is restricted to the teaching of speaking by implementing RolePlay strategy to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Tolitoli, in 2009/2010 academic year. Considering the teaching of speaking should take eight meetings for one semester, in this study the treatment was only done in four meetings.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE This part of comprises five main subparts that is considered important in relation to the focus of the study: motivation, speaking learning theories, cooperative learning, Role-Play strategy. 2.1 Motivation According to Houghton Mifflin (1997), motivation is typically defined as the forces that account for the arousal, selection, direction, and continuation of behavior. In relation to this, Slavin (1994) also adds that motivation is mentioned as one of the most important components in learning. It is needed to make the students actively involved in the activity of learning. Based on the statement above, motivation has important role in learning process. So, a good teacher should give motivation to his/her students by creating an interesting class atmosphere. According to Skinner, supplying the correct answer and being informed by the program in the correct answer may motivate the students go on the next frame of learning; and as the students works through the program, the desired terminal behavior is progressively shaped. Skinner adds that many behavioral learning theorist devised techniques of behavior modification on the assumption that students are motivated to complete a task by being promised a reward of some kind.

Glasser (1986) argues in control theory in the classroom and The Quality School (1990) that for people to succeed at life in general, they must first experiences success in one important aspect of their lives. For the most children, that one important part should be school. However, the traditional approach to evaluating learning, which emphasizes comparative grading (commonly called grading on the curve), allows only a minority of students to achieve As and Bs and feel successful. The self-worth of the remaining students (who may be quite capable) suffers, which depresses their motivation to achieve on subsequent classroom tasks (Convington, 1985). Cooperative goal structures are characterized by students working together to accomplish shared goals. As it is beneficial for the individual and vice versa, students in cooperative groups can obtain a desired reward (such as a high grade or a feeling of satisfaction for a job well done) only if the other students in the other group also obtain the same reward, cooperative goal structures are characterized by positive interdependence. Also, all groups may receive the same rewards, provided they meet the teacher criteria for mastery (Johnson et al, 1994; Johnson et al, 1995; Slavin, 1995).

2.2 Speaking Learning Theories The term speaking itself according to Oxford (2000) is being willing to be friendly towards somebody, especially after an argument. The term of speaking itself, according to Brown (2001), is an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing and receiving and processing information. Its form and meaning are dependent on the context in which it occurs, including the participants themselves, their collective experiences, the physical environment and the purposes for speaking. It is often spontaneous, open-ended, and evolving.

Speaking is used for many different purposes, and each purpose involves different skills. Each of these different purposes for speaking implies knowledge of the rules that account for how spoken language reflects the context or situation in which speech occurs. The participants involved and their specific roles and relationships, and the kind of activity the speakers are involved in. Kang discusses a number of factors that needed to be considered in planning a speaking course. She refers to the influence of age, listening ability, sociocultural knowledge, and affective factors on the ability to speak a second or foreign language, and introduces the useful model developed by Canale and Swam to account for the components of speaking.

2.2.1 The Purpose of Speaking The basic assumption in any oral interaction is that the speakers want to communicate ideas, feelings, attitudes, and information to the listener. Rivers (1981) explicitly states that through speaking one expresses emotions, communicates intentions, reacts to other persons and situations, or influences other human being. Stating opinion clearly in speaking supported by sufficient reasons will enable the speaker to reach the goal of his/her speech to satisfy others. The functions of spoken language are interactional and transactional. The primary intention of the former is to maintain social relationship, whereas that of the latter is to convey information and ideas. In fact, much of our daily communication remains interactional. Being able to interact in a language is essential. Therefore, language instruction should provide learners with opportunities for meaningful communicative behavior about relevant topics by using learner-learner interaction as the key to teaching language for communication because communication derives essentially from interaction (Rivers, 1987).

2.2.2 Students Problems in Speaking Participation Speaking a language is especially difficult for foreign language learners because effective oral communication requires the ability to use the language appropriately in social interactions. Diversity in interaction involves not only oral communication, but also paralinguistic elements of speech such as pitch, stress, and intonation. In addition, nonlinguistic elements such as gestures and body language/facial expression, and so on may accompany speech or convey message directly without accompanying speech. In addition, there is tremendous variation cross-culturally and cross-linguistically in the specific interpretation of gestures and body language (Brown, 1994). The difficulties of speaking, as Brown (2001) stated, are caused by what he calls with affective factors and interaction effect. Affective factors refer to the learners anxiety over the risk of blurting things out that are wrong, stupid and incomprehensible. The language ego that informs people you are what you speak makes the learners reluctant to be judged by the listeners. Furthermore, Ur (1996: 121) cites four problems that comprise: (1) inhibition: worried about making mistakes, fearful of criticism or losing face, or simply shy of the attention that their speech attracts, (2) nothing to say: can not think of anything to say, (3) low or uneven participation: because of the tendency of some learners to dominate, others speak very little or not at all, and (4) mother tongue use: learner prefers to use mother language than target language in class. Of the various problems that could be the cause of the learners difficulties in speaking activities as cited above, it is obvious that the problems come from different factors. Burns and Joyce (1997), then, try to generalize the factors into three groups, namely: cultural factors,

linguistic factors, and psychological or affective factors. They conclude that by reviewing factors that can affect language learning and by attempting to identify the underlying reasons for students reluctance to speak in class will help teachers to create the most positive environment for these learners. To get foreign English language learners to participate or speak is not easy. It needs creativity of the teacher to create an activity and materials that can provide and motivate them to speak. In relation to this, Curran in Bowen (1985) suggests to apply a waiting time until the spirit moves someone to utter a word or phrase or sentence. However, Bowen (1985) argues that classroom time is too valuable to spend very much of it quietly waiting. Probably, the easiest way is to ask students to speak, and if necessary tell him what to say. It is so much better than waiting for an uncertainty.

2.2.3 The Teaching of Speaking Skill The most important feature of a classroom speaking activity is to provide an authentic opportunity for the students to get individual meanings across and utilize every area of knowledge they have in the second or foreign language. They should have the opportunity and be encouraged to become flexible users of their knowledge, always keeping the communicate goal in mind (Marianne Celce and Murcia Elite Olshtain, 1984). To the grade VIII students of Junior High, the teaching of speaking aims to enable the students to express ideas by using transactional-interpersonal expression, expressing ideas as responses based on descriptive, recount, and narrative text to interact with their environment. Allen (1977) claims that students are truly speaking only when they are generating their own sentences. This implies that the ability to speak is measured by the ability of the learners to interact with others, expressing themselves orally. Then, if learners are to learn

about the form of spoken language as well as to gain practice in using spoken language, teachers need to provide activities for teaching speaking which focus on both these aspects. The followings are a few of some possible techniques to teach speaking adopted from Klippels (1984) practical resource book. They are interviews, games, jigsaw tasks, think-pair and share activities, ranking exercises, discussions, values clarification, problem solving activities, what if, role-play, and simulations. These techniques enable the learners to learn the form of the spoken language as well to have a direct classroom practice in communicative interaction. The following are other possible techniques to teach speaking adopted from Marianne Celce and Murcia Elite Olshtain. They are Role-Play, Group Disscussion, Using the Target Language outside the classroom, Using the learners input, Feedback, and Looking at authentic Speech in the form of Written Transcripts. Finally, the teaching of spoken language in the classroom is often perceived as a very difficult task for both the teacher and the students. Most of the teaching materials based on the communicative approach claim to present real communication in authentic situation but are in fact still heavily based on description of written English (Yule, 1995).

2.2.4 Assessing Speaking Skill Shohamy (1983) found significance differences in the scores on oral tests that represented different discourse styles and genres (e.g. an interview versus a reporting task). In another study, Shohamy, Reves, and Bejarano (1986) found that a test takers performance on the interview, which represent a specific oral discourse style, could not be used to make a valid prediction of test taker performance on other oral discourse styles such as discussions and oral reports, or of variety of speech act, as exemplified in Role-Play situation.

10

2.3 Cooperative Learning Cooperative learning is a group learning strategy that involves students to work collaboratively to achieve their aim (Eggen and Kauchak, 1986). The cooperative learning is arranged in an effort to increase students participation, facilitate students to be a leader and making a decision in group, and giving a chance to the students to interact and study together in various backgrounds of them. Cooperative Learning comes from John Dewey and Herbert Thelan (in Ibrahim,2000) views that state education in the democratic society must be teach the democratic process directly. Cooperative act seem as a basic of the democracy, and the school seem as the laboratory to develop democracy act.

2.3.1 Advantages of Cooperative Learning There are three aims of cooperative learning; they are academic result of study, the acceptance in the various backgrounds, and developing of social skill (Ibrahim, et al, 2000). In second or foreign language, theorist purpose several advantages for Cooperative Learning: increased students talk, more varied talk, a more relaxed atmosphere, greater motivation, more negotiation of meaning, and increased amounts of comprehensible input (Liang, Mohan, & Early, 1998; Olsen & Kagan, 1992). 2.4 Role- Play Strategy According to Gillian Porte (Oxfordn, 1987) Role-Play is any speaking activity when You either put Yourself into somebody elses shoes, or when You stay in Your own shoes but put Yourself into an imaginary situation.

11

2.4.1 Advantages of Role-Play Jeremy Harmer advocates the use of Role-Play for the following reasons : (1) It is fun and motivating quitter students get the chance to express themselves in a more forthright way; (2) The world of classroom is broadened to include the outside world-thus offering a much wider range of language opportunities. In addition to these reason, students who will at some point travel to an English-speaking country are given a chance to rehearse their English in a safe environment. Real situations can be created and students can benefit from the practice. Next, Gillian Porter Laddouse (1987) also states that if the teacher believes that the activity will work and the necessary support is provided, it can very successful. However, if the teacher is not convinced about the validity of Using Role-Play the activity will fall flat on its face just as you expected it to. He also add that the joy of Role-Play is that students can become anyone they like for a short time. Jeremy Harmer (Longman 1989) says that Role-Play can be a lot of fun if you still feel reluctant to use it in the class. He suggests us begin to integrate it slowly. He says why not extends an appropriate reading or listening from a course book and turn it into a Role-Play? You may be pleasantly surprised by the result!

12

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

3.1 Method and Design Method and design are the two inseperated parts in a research, however to be more clear they probably better to be explained separatedly. 3.1.1 Method This is an experimental research. It aims to find out whether or not the use of Role-Play can improve students speaking performance. 3.1.2 Design This research involved one group of students with pre-test and post-test design. The design of this research can be described as follow: E= T1 X T2

Where : E T1 X T2 = Experiment = Pre-test = Treatment = Post-test

13

3.2 Variables and Operational Definition 3.2.1 Variable This research consists of two variables, namely: Independent variable is teaching speaking through Role-Play Intervening variable is the classroom activities. It refers to the treatments Dependent variable is the students speaking

3.2.2 Operational Definition Teaching is a process of transferring the knowledge Speaking is more than just a way of making conversation; we use spoken language for a variety of reasons in daily life Role-play is an activity when students try to act a dialog and make it like in real situation

3.3 Population and Sample 3.3.1 Population The population of this research was the second year students of SMP 2 Tolitoli, in 2009/2010 academic year. The population consists of 4 classes, and each class consists of 40 students. Therefore, the total number of population was about 160 students. 3.3.2 Sample This research applied cluster sampling technique. The researcher took one class as a sample of this research. Therefore the total number of sample was 40 students.

14

3.4 Instrument of the Research In this research, the writer used observation, speaking tests, and questionnaire as the instruments of collecting data. In the observation, the researcher used the materials taken from the SMP English curriculum. In the pre-test, the researcher used a script of dialog for assess the students ability in speaking and the researcher used speaking test assessment by Heaton (1988:100) that consisted in three aspect, namely : Accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility. In the treatment, the researcher used a script of dialog that written by the researcher but for assess the students ability, the researcher still used the speaking assessment rubric by Heaton (1988:100). In the post-test, the researcher used the same dialog as in the pre-test and still used the speaking assessment rubric proposed by Heaton. The questionnaire was used to find out the students feeling toward the implementation of Role-Play strategy in their class. 3.5 Procedure of Data Collection The procedure in collecting data can be described as follows: 3.5.1 Pre-test The pre-test intended to know the previous mastery of students in speaking before giving the treatment. To do the test, a meeting with 80 minutes was allocated. 3.5.2 Treatment The treatments were given to the students after they had done pre-test. The procedure of treatment can be described as follows:

15

First, The dialog were distributed to the students; then the students were assigned to ask the meaning of sentences that they did not understand in the dialog; next, the students were divided in some pairs, then the students were asked to practice the dialog based on their role. After that, the researcher made some corrections on each students mispronunciation and misstress in speaking activity. Finally, the researcher gave chance to the students to ask some questions which were not clear for them. The treatments took place for six meetings (6 x 80 minutes). 3.5.3 Post-Test This test was administered to the students after the treatments. Based on the test result it is intended to know whether the students have different achievement or not in speaking, after giving them some treatments, they were tested for about 80 minutes.

6. Technique of Data Analysis In this research, the data obtained from the instruments result based on three components of speaking. They are accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility. Then the researcher tabulated the data based on the rating score in the scoring of compositions as follows: Accuracy 5-6 Excellent to very good 3-4 Good to average 1-2 Fair to poor Fluency 5-6 Excellent to very poor 3-4 Good to average 1-2 Fair to poor

16

Comprehensibility 5-6 Excellent to very poor 3-4 Good to average 1-2 Fair to poor (Adopted from Heaton, 1988:100) Before analyzing the data, it is necessary to describe the statistical procedure used to find out the students speaking ability. In the speaking test, the researcher used one type of speaking test. The students played the dialog provided. To know the score of each respondent on one type of test, the writer classified them into fair to poor to very good score based on the rating score above. Then, the students score of each component was found by calculating their total score of every item then divided by the total number of items. To analyze the data, the researcher used scale 1-6, scoring rate for each component. The lower score was 1 and the highest score was 6. This score was found by calculating the three scores of the speaking components. To compute the mean score of the students ability, the researcher applied the following formula :

Where : X N = Mean score = total score of respondent = The number of respondent (L.R. Gay, 1986:298)

17

Then the result of the computation is classified into three classifications as follows: 5-6 classified as excellent to very good 3-4 classified as good to average 1-2 classified as fair to poor Furthermore, to find out the mean of the differences score of students, the researcher applied the following formula :

Notation : D N = the mean of the difference score = the sum of differences score = the total number of sample (Gay, 1981:332)

18

While to find out the significance differences between pre-test and post-test, the writer applied the formula below :

Where: X1 X2 n1 n2 S1 S2 S12 S22 r x y = The average value of pre-test = The average value of post-test = The number of sample of pre-test = The number of sample of post-test = Standard of deviation of pre-test = Standard of deviation of post-test = Varian of pre-test = Varian of post-test = Correlation with pre-test and post-test = (x1-x) = (y1-y) (Sugiyono, 2010: 122)

19

Finally to know the standard deviation between pre-test and post-test, the researcher applied the following formula: S2= S2 X N

: Standard deviation : The sum of convert score : The total number of sample

20

CHATER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter consists of two main parts. The first part is the presentation of the findings of the research and the other part is the discussion of the findings. 4.1 Findings 4.1.1 The Students score based on the three Components of Speaking In this activity, the scores of the students were observed based on three components of speaking. The data were tabulated by referring to the scoring system adopted from Heaton (1988:100). a. Score 5-6 is classified as excellent to very good b. Score 3-4 is classified as good to average c. Score 1-2 is classified as fair to poor
Table 1 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on the Accuracy Components

Frequency No. Classification Range Pre-Test 1. 2. 3. Total Excellent to very good Good to Average Fair to Poor 5-6 3-4 1-2 1 30 2 33 Post-Test 16 16 1 33

Percentage Pre-Test 3,04% 90,90% 6,06% 100% Post-Test 48,48% 48,48% 3,04% 100%

21

The table above shows that in the pre-test, there was 1 (3,04%) students get excellent to very good, 30 (90,90%) students get good to average, and 2 (6,06%) students get fair to poor. Therefore the mean score of the students ability in speaking accuracy component is 3,39. It is classified as good to average. The result of post-test indicates that there are 16 (48,48%) students get excellent to very good, 16 (48,48%) students get good to average, and 1 (3,04%) students get fair to poor. Therefore, the mean score of the students after giving treatment become 4,24. It is classified as excellent to very good. It is found that there is a significant difference between the results of pretest and post-test.
Table 2 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Fluency Components

Frequency No. 1. 2. 3. Total Classification Excellent to very good Good to Average Fair to Poor Range 5-6 3-4 1-2 Pre-Test 1 29 3 33 Post-Test 14 18 1 33

Percentage PostPre-Test Test 3,04% 42,42% 87,87% 9,09% 100% 54,54% 3,04% 100%

Table 2 above shows that in the pre-test, there are 1 (3,04%) students get excellent to very good scores, 29 (87,87%) students get good to average score, and 3 (9,09%) students get fair to poor score. Therefore, the mean score of the students ability in speaking fluency component in pre-test is 3,30. It is classified as good to average. The post-test indicates that there are 14 (42,42%) students get excellent to very

22

good scores, 18 (54,54%) students get good to average scores, and 1 (3,04%) students get fair to poor score. Therefore, the mean score of the students after giving treatment becomes 4,27. It is classified as excellent to very good. It means that there is a significant difference between the result of pre-test and post-test.
Table 3 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Comprehensibility Components

Frequency No. Classification Range Pre-Test 1. 2. 3. Total Excellent to very good Good to Average Fair to Poor 5-6 3-4 1-2 5 25 3 33 Post-Test 9 23 1 33

Percentage Pre-Test 15,15% 75,75% 9,10% 100% Post-Test 27,27% 69,69% 3,04% 100%

The table 3 above shows that in the pre-test , there are 5 (15,15%) students get excellent to very good score, 25 (75,75%) students get good to average score, and 3 (9,10) students get fair to poor scores. Therefore, the mean score of the students ability in speaking comprehensibility component on pre-test is 3,69. It is classified as good to average. The post-test indicates that there are 9 (27,27%) students get excellent to very good , 23 (69,69%) students get good to average score, and 1 (3,04%) student gets fair to poor score. Therefore, the mean score of the students after giving treatment becomes 4,15. It is classified as good to average. It means that there is a significant difference between the result of pre-test and post-test.

23
Table 4 Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Three Components Observed

Frequency No. Classification Range Pre-Test 1. 2. 3. Total Excellent to Very Good Good to Average Fair to Poor 13-18 7-12 1-6 4 27 2 31 Post-Test 21 11 1 100%

Percentage Pre-Test 12,12% 81,81% 6,07% 100% Post-Test 63,63% 33,33% 3,04% 100%

From the table above, pre-test shows that there are 4 (12,12%) students got excellent to very good, 27 (81,81%) students got good to average, and 2 (6,07%) got fair to poorscore. The mean score of the students speaking ability for three components observed: Accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility. The students score on pre-test was 10,39 classified as good to average. The score can be shown below:

= 10,39 On the table above the post-test shows that there are 21 (63,63%) students get excellent to very good score, 11 (33,33%) students get good to average, and 1 (3,04%) students gets fair to poor score.

24

The mean score of the students ability in speaking for three components Accuracy, Fluency, and Comprehensibility is 12,6. The calculation can be described as follows:

Based on the data above, the writer can conclude that before being given treatments, the students speaking ability is 10,39 classified as good to average score and after they are given the treatments the students speaking ability improved becomes 12,6. It is classified as excellent to very good score. It means that there is significant difference between the result of pre-test and post-test. a. Mean Score and Standard Deviation Having calculated the result of the students pre-test and post-test, the mean score and standard deviation of the students speaking ability are presented in following table:
Table 5 Mean Score and Standard Deviation of the Students Pre-test and post-test

Mean Score Pretest (X1) Posttest (X2) 10,39 12,6

Standard Deviation 2,164 2,33

Table 5 above shows the statistical summary of the students mean score and standard deviation both in pre-test and post-test.

25

The mean score of the students pre-test is 10,39 which is classified as good to average with standard deviation 2,164 and the mean score of the students post-test is 12,6 which is classified as excellent to very good. b. Test of Significance To know the level of significance between the pre-test and post-test, the writer used ttest analysis on the level of significance 0,05 with degree with freedom (df)= n-1, where n= number of subject (33). The t-test statistical analysis for non independent sample is applied. The following table shows the result of the t-test calculation: Variable X1-X2 T-test value 6,332 T-table value 1,691

Based on the calculation above, the value of t-test (6,332) was greater than the value of t-table (1,691). c. Hypothesis Testing To find out the degree of freedom (df), the researcher used the following formula: Df Df Df = N-1 = 33-1 =32

For the level of significance (P) 0,05 and df 33, then the value of t-table is 6,332. Whereas the value of the t-test was greater than t-table 1,691 (6,332 1,691). It means that the hypothesis (Ho) is rejected and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted.

26

4.2 Discussion Based on the presentation of findings, the researcher presents some interpretations of findings in order to explain in detail as follows: a. The Students Speaking Ability by Implementing Role-Play The description of the data collected by implementing Role-Play as explained in the previous section showed that the students ability in speaking is improved. It is supported by the means score of students on pre-test is 10,39 classified as good to average, and the mean score of students on post-test is 12,6 classified as excellent to very good classification. b. The Students Speaking Ability Based on the Three Components The result of the students pre-test and post-test based on the three components of speaking can be described as follows: One the component of accuracy in the pre-test, there is 1 (3,04%) student gets excellent to very good score, and most of them 30 (90,90%) get good to average, while the component of accuracy in the post-test, the data shows that there are 16 (48,48%) students get excellent to very good score. Therefore, there is a significant difference between the result of pre-test and posttest. It is proved greater than the mean score on pre-test, namely 12,6. The component of fluency, 1 (3,04%) student get excellent to very good and most of them get 29 (87,87%) students get good to average. While the component of fluency in the posttest, the data show 14 (42,42%) students get excellent to very good and most of them 18 (54,54%) also get good to average score. Therefore, there ias a significant difference between the result of pre-test, namely 3,30 (good to average classification) improve on post-test 4,15 (excellent to very good classification).

27

The component of comprehensibility, there are 3 (9,10%) students get fair to poor scores in pre-test. However in the post-test, there is 1 (3,04%) student gets fair to poor score. Therefore, there is a significant difference between the result of pre-test, namely 3,69 (good to average classification) improved on post-test 4,15 (excellent to very good). Seeing the comparison of the students pre-test and post-test in each component of speaking, the researcher can conclude that there was improvement of the students ability in speaking from each component of speaking after presenting materials by implementing RolePlay. Therefore, the mean score of the students on pre-test is 10,39 classified as good to average score and post-test is 12,6 classified into excellent to very good score. It indicates that the mean score of the students on post-test get higher after presenting treatment material. In other words, the mean score of the students on pre-test less than post-test. The standard deviation of the students pre-test is 2,164 and post-test ias 2,33. Both of the standard deviations describe that the distance of each score of the students near one another. It indicates that their ability in speaking is almost very closed together. The value of the t-test is greater than t-table (6,3321,691). Based on the t-test, the researcher found that there was significant difference between the result of pre-test and post-test. In other words, the students ability in speaking develop or improve after giving them treatment materials by implementing Role-Play.

28

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion Based on the result of the data analysis in the previous chapter, the researcher would like to conclude that the students speaking ability at second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Tolitoli is improved after giving them some treatments by implementing Role-Play. There is a significant difference between the result of pre-test and post-test, where the mean score of posttest is 12,6. It is higher than the mean of pre-test, namely 10,39. From the data above, the writer can draw a conclusion that the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Tolitoli in academic year of 2009-2010 have a good ability in speaking by implementing Role-Play. 5.2 Suggestion The researcher would like to give some suggestions concerning the teaching of speaking by implementing Role-Play as follows: a. To improve the students speaking ability, the English teacher should give speaking practice as frequently as possible to enhance students competence in speaking. b. The English teacher should consider the effectiveness of using Role-Play in teaching speaking. c. The researcher also suggests to the English teacher to be more creative in teaching speaking. They can use many different methods and techniques and one of those methods is Role-Play.

29

d. Finally the researcher realizes that this skripsi is still imperfect. However, she really hopes that this skripsi can give meaningful contribution for the teaching of English as well as others.

30

REFFERRENCES Celce Marianne & Olshtain Elite Murcia. 1989. Discourse and Context in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gay, L.R.1990. Educational Research. Singapore: Macmillan Publishing Company. Gillian Porte Ladouse. 1987. Role-Play. (http://www.contentheadright.com.). Downloaded on February 5, 2010. Goh, C.M.,Christine. 2007. Teaching Speaking in the Classroom. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Harrison Andrew. 1986. A Language Testing Handbook. Hongkong: Macmillan Publisher Ltd. Jabu Baso. 2008. English Language Testing. Makassar : State University of Makassar. Jeremy Harmer (Longman 1989). The Practice of English Language Teaching. (http://www.contentheadright.com). Downloaded on February 5,2010. Luoma Sari. 2005. Assessing Speaking Volume 9, Number 3. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2010. Motivation. (en. Wikipedia.org./wiki/motivation). Downloaded on February 8, 2010.

31

Appendix 1 Model of Role-Play Sheet In the Kitchen Mum : Nigel, close the fridge, please. Nigel : Yes, mum. Mum : Teas ready. Give me your cups. Are you hungry? Nigel : Yes, I am. I want some cereal. Mum : Cereal? Karen, is there any cereal left in the cupboard? Karen : Yes, there are some cornflakes. Here you are. Nigel : Thanks. Pass me the milk, please. Mum : Heres your milk. Dont forget the toast. Its burning. Karen : Just in time. Butter, mum? Mum : No, thanks. Pass me the marmalade. Karen : Jeremys hungry too Nigel : Lets give him some toast and butter Mum : Butter? No, lets give him some milk

32

Appendix 2 TREATMENT Mum : Vony, close the door, please. Vony : Yes, mum. Mum : Are you hungry? Vony : Yes, I am. I want some bread. Is there any breads in the kitchen Mum? Mum : Yes, there is some. Lets go in the kitchen and make some toasts. Vony : Wheres the bread, mum? Mum : in the table Vony : Pass me the butter mum Mum : Here it is Vony : Lias hungry too Mum : Lets give Him some toast

33

Appendix 3 Post-Test Lia Neni Lia Neni Lia Neni : Open the fridge, please. : Yes, Lia : Is there any cheese in the fridge, Lia? :No, You must buy it in the market. : How about oranges and egg? : Oh, there is not oranges and egg here. You also must buy it. Dont forget some tomatoes and fish, please. Lia Neni : Ok! Ill go to supermarket now. Bye : Bye

34

Appendix 4 Questionaire Tentang Respon Siswa pada Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris dengan strategi Role-Play Petunjuk 1. Tidak perlu menulis nama atau identitas anda pada lembaran ini! 2. Isilah angket ini secara terbuka dan apa adanya. Jawaban anda tidak ada kaitannya dengan penilaian terhadap mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Apapun jawaban anda tidak menambah atau mengurangi nilai! 3. Berilah tanda pada kolom yang teersedia sesuai pilihan anda tanpa pengaruh teman! Keterangan : SS : Sangat Setuju S : Setuju TS : Tidak Setuju STS : Sangat Tidak Setuju

No. PERNYATAAN 1 2 1 Saya merasa senang belajar dengan strategi Role-Play 2 Saya merasa lebih mudah memahami materi bacaan dengan strategi Role-Play Saya merasa lebih rileks, santai, dan bermain tapi tetap serius dan penuh perhatian mengikuti pembelajaran bahasa Inggris dengan strategi RolePlay Saya berpendapat bahwa kemampuan berbahasa Inggris saya akan meningkat dengan strategi RolePlay Penerapan strategi Role-Play dapat membantu peningkatan kemampuan seluruh siswa dikelas saya Persentase jawaban siswa

SS 3

S 4

TS 5

STS 6

4 5

35

Appendix 5 Rubric for Speaking Performance Assessment

Score Accuracy 6 Pronunciation is only; slightly influenced by the mother-tongue. Two or three minor grammatical and lexical errors 5

Fluency Speaks without too great an effort with a fairly wide range of expression. Searches for words occasionally but only one or two unnatural pauses Pronunciation is slightly Has to make an effort at influenced by the mothertimes to search for words. tongue. A few minor Nevertheless, smooth grammatical and lexical delivery on the whole and errors but most utterances only a few unnatural are correct pauses Pronunciation is still Although he has make an moderately influenced by effort and search for words, the mother tongue but no there are not too many serious phonological errors. unnatural pauses. Fairly A few grammatical and smooth delivery mostly. lexical errors but only one Occasionally fragmentary or two major errors causing but succeeds in conveying confusion the general meaning. Fair range of expression Pronunciation is influenced Has to make an effort for by the mother-tongue but much of the time. Often no serious phonological has to search for the errors. Several grammatical desired meaning. Rather errors, some which cause halting delivery and confusion fragmentary. Range of expression often limited Pronunciation seriously Long pauses while he influenced by the mothersearches for the desired tongue with errors causing a meaning. Frequently breakdown in fragmentary and halting communication. Many delivery. Almost gives up basic grammatical and making the effort at times. lexical errors. Limited range of expression

Comprehensibility Easy for listener to understand the speakers intention meaning. Very few interruption or clarification required The speakers intention and general meaning are fairly clear. A few interruptions by the listener for the sake of clarification are necessary Most of what the speaker says is easy to follow. His intention is always clear but several interruptions are necessary to help him to convey the message or to seek clarification

The listener can understand a lot of what is said, but he must constantly seek clarification. Cannot understand many of the speakers more complex or longer sentences Only small bits (Even usually short sentences and phrases) can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone who is used listening to the speaker

36

Serious pronunciation errors as well as many basic grammatical and lexical errors. No evidence of having mastered any of the language skills and areas practiced in the course

Full of long and unnatural pauses. Very halting and fragmentary delivery. At times gives up making the effort. Very limited range of expression

Hardly anything of what is said can be understood. Even when the listener makes a great effort or interrupts, the speaker is unable to clarify anything he seems to have said

(Adopted by Heaton, 1988:100)

37

Appendix 6 TREATMENT MATERIALS 1st Meeting

-

The students are given about Role-Play strategy Grouping the students Distributing the dialog Giving instruction and students task Giving the students opportunity to ask some questions that are not clear for them Ask the students to act the dialog Leading students when they find problems Doing assessment

2nd Meeting Giving explanation to the students about a good acting based on Role-Play strategy Ask the students to act the dialog again based on Role-Play strategy Leading the students when they found problems Doing assessment

3rd Meeting - Ask the students to make a dialog by their group - Help the students when they find problems in making the dialog - Ask students to act the dialog by a good intonation, pronunciation, and expression

38

-Doing assessment 4th Meeting Ask the students to memorize their dialog Ask the students to act the dialog Leading the students when they found problems Doing assessment

5th Meeting Distribute a dialog to the students Giving them an opportunity to ask about the dialog Ask them to act the dialog with their group Doing assessment

6th Meeting Giving the students opportunity to ask some questions that are not clear for them, especially the process of Role-Play strategy Distribute the questionnaire about their response when they learning speaking by using Role-Play strategy

39

Appendix 7. Data of Pre-Test

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 SUM

Name AJ ALY APL CF DS FSL FI FRS HSD HSI ISK MGF MLD MS MI MA NA NE NH NL PRS RR RA RFD RFK RSK SKR SKM TCS WHY YN YL YLN

Accuracy 4 4 3 4 5 3 3 3 4 4 1 3 4 4 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 112

Fluency 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 3 3 4 1 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 5 3 4 3 3 109

Comprehensibility 4 4 3 4 5 2 4 4 5 4 2 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 5 3 5 5 3 4 3 4 122

Score 12 12 9 12 14 7 11 10 12 12 4 9 11 12 6 10 11 10 9 11 9 11 9 11 9 13 9 13 14 9 12 9 11 343

40

Appendix 8 The step of finding the mean score and standard of deviation of Pre-Test 1. Finding the mean score

2. Finding the standard deviation S2 =

= 4,6837 S = 2,164

41

Appendix 9 The step finding the interval class of pre-test 1. The first step is finding the highest score and the lowest score to set up the interval, it is: The highest score was 14 The lowest score was 4 The range of the interval of class (R) R= the highest score the lowest score = 14 4 = 10 2. The second step is to set amount the interval of class K = 1 + 3,3 log N K = 1 + 3,3 log 33 K = 1 + 3,3 (1,5) K = 5,95 K=6 3. The third score is finding the wide of the interval of class (P) P = R/K = 10/6 = 1,6. So, P was 2

42

Appendix 10 The data of Post-Test No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 SUM Name AJ ALY APL CF DS FSL FI FRS HSD HSI ISK MGF MLD MS MI MA NA NE NH NL PRS RR RA RFD RFK RSK SKR SKM TCS WHY YN YL YLN Accuracy Fluency 4 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 4 5 5 4 2 2 3 4 5 4 4 5 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 6 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 4 140 141 Comprehensibility 4 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 3 3 5 6 5 5 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 6 5 4 3 4 137 Score 13 15 13 15 15 13 12 10 13 13 6 11 13 13 9 11 15 17 14 15 14 13 9 10 11 13 11 12 17 15 13 11 13 418

43

Appendix 11 The step of finding the mean score and standard of deviation of post-test 1. Finding the mean score

2. Finding the standard deviation S2 = S2 = S2= S2 = S2 = 5,427 S = 2,33

44

Appendix 12. The step finding the interval class of post-test 1. The first step is finding the highest score and the lowest score to set up the interval, it is: The highest score was 17 The lowest score was 6 The range of the interval of class (R) R = the highest score the lowest score = 17 6 = 11 2. The second step is to set up amount the interval of class K = 1 + 3,3 log N K = 1 + 3,3 log 33 K = 1 + 3,3 (1,5) K = 1 + 4,95 K = 5,95 K=6 3. The third step is finding the wide of the interval of class (P) P = R/K = 11/6 = 1,83. So, P was 2

45

Appendix 13. The Normality Analysis Pre-Test Interval 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15 SUM Fo 1 2 9 10 9 2 33 Fh 0,891 4,4649 11,2629 11,2629 4,4649 0,891 (fo-fh) 0,109 -2,4649 -2,2629 -1,2629 4,5351 1,109 (fo-fh)2 0,01 6,075 5,120 1,5949 20,567 1,229 0,01 1,3606 0,4545 0,14 4,606 1,3793 7,9504

Appendix 14 The Normality Analysis Post-Test

Interval 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 SUM

Fo 1 2 7 13 8 2 33

Fh 0,891 4,4649 11,2629 11,2629 4,4649 0,891

(fo-fh) 0,109 -2,4649 -4,2629 1,7371 3,5351 1,109

(fo-fh)2 0,01 6,075 18,1723 3,0175 12,4969 1,22988 0,01 1,3606 1,6 0,26 2,79 1,380 7,4

46

Appendix 15. Table of correlation with pre-test and post-test Score Pre-Test (x) 12 12 9 12 14 7 11 10 12 12 4 9 11 12 6 10 11 10 9 11 9 11 9 11 9 13 9 13 14 9 12 9 11 10,39 Score PostTest (y) 13 15 13 15 15 13 12 10 13 13 6 11 13 13 9 11 15 17 14 15 14 13 9 10 11 13 11 12 17 15 13 11 13 12,6

Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 SUM

x-x 1,61 1,61 -1,39 1,61 3,61 -3,39 0,61 -0,39 1,61 1,61 -6,39 -1,39 0,61 1,61 -4,39 -0,39 0,61 -0,39 -1,39 0,61 -1,39 0,61 -1,39 0,61 -1,39 2,61 -1,39 2,61 3,61 -1,39 1,61 -1,39 0,61

y-y 0,4 2,4 0,4 2,4 2,4 0,4 -0,6 -2,6 0,4 0,4 -6,6 -1,6 0,4 0,4 -3,6 -1,6 2,4 4,4 1,4 2,4 1,4 0,4 -3,6 -2,6 -1,6 0,4 -1,6 -0,6 4,4 2,4 0,4 -1,6 0,4

X2 2,59 2,59 1,9 2,59 13,03 11,49 0,37 0,15 2,59 2,59 40,83 1,93 0,37 2,59 19,27 0,15 0,37 0,15 1,93 0,37 1,93 0,37 1,93 0,37 1,93 6,8 1,93 6,8 13,03 1,93 2,59 1,93 0,37 149,76

Y2 0,16 5,76 0,16 5,76 5,76 0,16 0,36 6,76 0,16 0,16 43,56 2,56 0,16 0,16 12,96 2,56 5,76 19,36 1,96 5,76 1,96 0,16 12,96 6,76 2,56 0,16 2,56 0,36 19,36 5,76 0,16 2,56 0,16 175,48

Xy 0,644 3,864 -0,556 3,864 8,664 -1,356 -0,366 1,014 0,644 0,644 42,174 2,224 0,244 0,644 15,804 0,624 1,464 -1,7 -1,946 1,464 -1,946 0,244 5,004 -1,586 2,224 1,044 2,224 -1,566 15,884 -3,336 0,644 2,224 0,244 99,358

47

Appendix 16. The step to finding the correlation with pre-test (x) and post-test

48

The applying of t-test

t=

= -6,332

49

TABLE OF CONTENT HALAMAN JUDUL MOTTO PENGESAHAN UJIAN SKRIPSI PENGESAHAN PEMBIMBING ABSTRACT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LIST OF CONTENT LIST OF TABLE i ii iii iv v

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1.2 Problem Statement 1.3 Objective of the Research 1.4 Scope of the Research CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Motivation 2.2 Speaking Learning Theorist 2.2.1The Purpose of Speaking 2.2.2 Students Problems in Speaking Participation 2.2.3 The Teaching of Speaking Skill 2.2.4 Assessing Speaking Skill 2.3 Cooperative Learning 4 5 6 6 8 9 10 1 2 3 3

50

2.3.1 Advantages of Cooperative Learning 2.4 Role-Play Strategy 2.4.1 Advantages of Role-Play CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Method and design 3.1.1 Method 3.1.2 Design 3.2 Variable and Operational Definition 3.2.1 Variable 3.2.2 Operational Definition 3.3 Population and Sample 3.3.1 Population 3.3.2 Sample 3.4 Instrument of the Research 3.5 Procedures of Data Collection 3.5.1 Pre-Test 3.5.2Treatment 3.5.3 Post-Test 3.6 Technique of Data Analysis CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

10 10 11

12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15

51

4.1 Findings 4.2 Discussions CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion 5.2 Suggestion

20 20

28 28

REFFERENCES APPENDICES Appendix 1 Pre-Test Appendix 2 Treatment Appendix 3 Post-Test Appendix 4 Questionnaire Appendix 5 Rubric for Speaking Performance Assessment Appendix 6 Treatment Materials Appendix 7 Data of Pre-Test Appendix 8 Mean Score and Standard Deviation of Pre-Test Appendix 9 The Step Finding the Interval Class of Pre-Test Appendix 10 Data of Post-Test Appendix 11 Mean Score and Standard Deviation of Post-Test Appendix 12 The Step Finding the Interval Class of Post-Test Appendix 13 The Normality Analysis Pre-Test Appendix 14 The Normality Analysis Post-Test Appendix 15 The Data of t-Test

30 31 31 32 33 34 35 37 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 45 46

52

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ROLE-PLAY STRATEGY TO IMPROVE STUDENTS SPEAKING PERFORMANCE (A STUDY AT THE SECOND YEAR STUDENTS OF SMP NEGERI 2 TOLITOLI)

SKRIPSI
Presented to State University of Madako In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Sarjana in English Language Education

By Diyenti Rusdin NIM 40060014

UNIVERSITY OF MADAKO GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

SEPTEMBER 2010

53

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ROLE-PLAY TO IMPROVE STUDENTS SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

SKRIPSI

OLEH DIYENTI RUSDIN NIM 40060014

UNIVERSITAS MADAKO TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY ENGLISH DEPARTMENT 2010

54

This is to certify the Sarjanas skripsi of Diyenti Rusdin has been approved by the skripsi Advisors for further approval by the Board of Examiners.

Tolitoli,.. Advisor I

Asri, S.Pd NIP.

Tolitoli,. Advisor II

Jupriadi, S.Pd NIP..

55

APPROVAL SHEET This is to certify that Sarjanas skripsi of Diyenti Rusdin has been approved by the Board of Examiners as the requirement for the degree of Sarjana in English Language Education.

Yamon Sudamara, S.Pd, M.Pd, Chair

Asri, S.Pd,

Member

Jupriadi, S.Pd

, Member

Acknowledge by Head English Department

Approved by Dean, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education

Yamon Sudamara, S.Pd, M.Pd NIP. 0905116901

Drs. Abdul Muluk, M.Pd NIP. 0911116201

56

ABSTRACT Rusdin Diyenti, 2010. The Effectiveness of Role-Play to Improve Students Speaking Performance. Skripsi, English Language Education Department FKIP Madako University. Supervisors: (I) Asri, S.Pd, (II) Jupriadi,S.Pd. This skripsi presents the effectiveness of Role-Play to improve students speaking performance at the second year students of SMPN 2 Tolitoli. This study is done since the students low speaking ability in speaking skill. The research design belongs to an experimental one. The study aims at investigating whether Role Play Strategy is effective to improve the students speaking performance or not. The instruments of collecting data are test, observation, and questionnaire. The observation is used to find out the data about the process of doing the treatments, the speaking test is used to obtain data in order to find out the effect of the implementation of Role-Play, and the questionnaire is used to elicit the data about the students feeling towards the implementation of Role Play Strategy. It is found that : (1) the implementation of Role-Play can improve the students interaction and participation in speaking class activities; and (2) Role-Play strategy is one of the strategies that can be implemented in the teaching of English at Junior High School because most of the students feel relax and easier to understand the material.

57

PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN TULISAN

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:

Nama NIM Jurusan/Program Studi Fakultas/Program

: Diyenti Rusdin : 4006 0014 : Bahasa Inggris : Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan

Menyatakan dengan sebenarnya bahwa skripsi yang saya tulis ini benar-benar merupakan hasil karya saya sendiri; bukan merupakan pengambil alihan tulisan atau pikiran orang lain yang saya akui sebagai hasil tulisan atau pikiran saya sendiri. Apabila dikemudian hari terbukti atau dapat dibuktikan skripsi ini hasil jiplakan, maka saya bersedia menerima sanksi akadenik maupun sanksi hukum atas perbuatan tersebut.

Tolitoli, Yang membuat pernyataan,

Tanda tangan

Diyenti Rusdin

58

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Alhamdulillahi Rabbil Alamin, the writer praises his highest gratitude to Allah SWT who has given His love, blessing, and mercy to her in completing this skripsi. Salam and salawat are due to the highly chosen prophet, Muhammad SAW, His families and followers until the end of the world. The writer realizes that this skripsi would have never been completed without the assistance of a number of people. Therefore, the writer would like to express her deepest appreciation and thanks to those people who have helped in completing this skripsi, especially to the writers beloved parents, Rusdin Godang and Nur Hasanah (Alm) who always pray, motivate, educate, and provide countless materials during her study. The writers deep appreciation to her first consultant, Asri, S.Pd and her second consultant, Jupri, S.Pd. They spent much time to give guidance, correction, and suggestion to her during the process of writing of this skripsi. Next, the greatest thanks also go to Yamon Sudamara, S.Pd, M.Pd as the Head of English Department of Madako University, and all lectures and staff of English Education Department of Madako whose names could not be mentioned one by one for their supporting and appreciation in the writers academic process. The writers special thanks go to her younger brother Yosep Roybel and younger sister Triyella Oktabella, who never got bored of giving motivation. The writer would also like to give appreciation to the second year students of SMP Negeri 2 Tolitoli in academic year of 2009/2010 who have participated well in the research process. The research would not be finished without their participation.

59

Many thanks also go to the headmaster, vice headmaster, all teachers, and staff of SMPN Negeri 2 Tolitoli for their permission, guidance, and help to the writer during her research experiment in the school. The writer does not forget to give her deepest appreciation to all of her friends that she cannot mention their names one by one for their motivation and help to the writer.

May Allah the Almighty God always be with us, Amin.

Tolitoli, Agustus 2010

The writer

60

LIST OF TABLE

Table

Page

Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Accuracy Component Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Fluency Components Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Comprehensibility Component Frequency and Rate Percentage of the Students Speaking on Three Components Observed Mean Score and Standard Deviation of the Students Pretest and Posttest 24 23 22 21 20