THE IMPLEMENTATION OF APPROXIMATIVE SYSTEMS OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE IN TEACHING OF SPEAKING SKILL FOR ELEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS OF SMAN 1 KERUAK IN THE SCHOOL YEAR 2010/2011
This chapter, the researcher presents about background of the problems, statement of the problems, objectives of the study, significances of the study, scope and limitation of the study, and definition of key terms.
A. Background of the Problems
One of language skill aspects which are very important in yielding creative, critical and smart future generation is speaking skill. By mastering speaking skill the students will be able to express their thought and feeling intelligently based on the situation and context when they speak about the language.
According to William Nemser (in Ricard, 1997: 55) the language systems represent in a contact situation can be classified in accordance or agreement with their functions as: (1) the target language is that in which communication is being attempted; in the case of a learner it is the language, he is learning when he uses it. (2) The source language is that acting as a source of interference (deviations from norm of the target language), it is normally the learner’s language. (3) An approximative system is the deviant linguistic system actually employed by the learners attempting to utilize or use the target language. Such approximative systems change in character and accordance or agreement with proficiency level, variation is also introduced by learning experience (including exposure to target language script system), communication function, personal learning characteristic, etc.
There are some symbols can be used to be understood the statements above, those are: (1) LT: Target Language, (2) LS: Source Language, (3) La’ S: An approxiamtive System and (4) La1...n: Indices referring to systems at successive or continuous stages of proficiency. John Lotz, (in Richard, 1971: 55).
It means that, the learners who study about the other language, so it will be their second language. For example, the learners who study about English language therefore it is as the target language.
According to John Lotz, William W. Gage (in Ricard, 1997: 56), in identifying a specific type of La, the name of the LS precedes or first that of the LT: Thus “Indonesia-English” refers to La typical of native speakers of Indonesian communicating imperfectly in English. That can be assumpted into three folds are: (1) Learner speech at a given time is patterned product of linguistic system, La distinct from LS and LT internally structure. (2) La’s at successive stages of learning form an evolving or development series. La1...n the earliest occurring when a learner first attempts to use LT (merger or combine the achievement of perfect proficiency is rare for adult learners). (3) In given contact situation, the La’s of learners at the same stage of proficiency roughly in the same form with major variations thinking that able to distinguish the language in learning experience. The speech of a learner, according to the assumption above is structural organized in manifesting the order and cohesiveness of a system.
It is very significant to be learnt because: First, direct and systematic examination of learner speech is largely neglected. Classroom teacher, while aware of general patterns in learners’ behavior and often taking them into account in their teaching is rarely attempted comprehensive studies of these regularities within a linguistic framework. Second, such investigation is also prerequisite for the validation of both the strong and weak claims of the contrastive approach. Third, it can be shown that the direct examination of La is required as well by the suppositions of the contrastive approach itself. The last, La’s merit or good attitude examination in their own right. Having interest for general linguistic theory comparable on the one hand to child language and on the other to the language of victims of certain types of speech disorder, as dependent systems forming evaluative gradations toward specific languages but falling outside the normal dialectical and stylistic scope and of these languages. William Nemser, (Richards, 1971: 56)
The final context for that study of interlanguage phenomena is the learning of English in countries where English is studied as a foreign language in formal settings (such as the school), and where English is not normally a language of instruction but simply a branch of study. In foreign language contexts, the English lesson is the occasion or chance to bring a sample of American or British life into the classroom, and the lessons are about life and people in English-speaking countries, (www.language systems com). In second language contexts, the content of the school course is usually local, and learners begin to learn English without necessarily knowing or caring what life is like in England or America. The learner is generally not satisfied until he or she eradicates traces of his or her foreign accent, though for practical purposes, this may not be possible due to the limited time available in the school course. Limitation to the acquisition of standard English in the foreign language settings are hence not socially imposed limitation, which is encountered with the analysis of domestic dialects; in the foreign language setting limitations are rather individual, reflecting personal differences in motivation, perseverance, aptitude and so on. There are no societal limits to the leaner’s progress in English. In reality those who do acquire accent less English in a foreign language context probably do so because of unique personal opportunities, rather than because of the school program, (www.language systems com).
Someone can be able to communicate by using English language after they have learnt; it can be learnt in the other course especially in the school where the students can focus their study to learn it. The aim at school is not only for looking the scores or marks but also school is learning for life and gets the knowledge as many as possible in free time or any other time.
Meanwhile, the empiric study on the field shows almost same phenomena. This case shows that the speaking skill of senior high school students is very low level. The diction is still poor; they often use ineffective sentence and confusing grammar.
Try to see the condition of the school now, it still assumed as a load activity by some students in the classroom. So, there is no special research that study about it, but as far as researcher observation the populations of XI.B students in the classroom 33 students, they are only handled by one teacher, they consist of 10 male and 23 female. They are still low in understanding of English language because in conducting the teaching and learning process some students permit to get out but they go to the canteen while the other study in the classroom, after studying will be finish they back without knowing by their teacher, at least 40% are active and 60% are not active. In interviewing with some students in the classroom, they talk with variation languages based on their mother tongue and combining with Indonesia language in teaching and learning process is running well. The last problem is students have not complete and good facility in their school. So, it will be difficult to be taught them in teaching speaking skill.
Based on the above phenomenon, the writer wants to implement of approximative systems of foreign language in teaching speaking skill for eleventh grade students of SMAN 1 Keruak in the school year 2010/2011.
B. The Statement of the Problem
The statement that can be formulated by the researcher in this study is: How is the implementation of approximative systems of foreign language in teaching of speaking skill for eleventh grade students of SMAN 1 Keruak in the school year 2010/2011?
C. Objective of the Study
The objective of this research is to find out the implementation of approximative systems of foreign language in teaching of speaking skill for eleventh grade students of SMAN 1 Keruak in the school year 2010/2011.
D. Significances of the Study
The significant of the study can be theoretically and practically.
The result of the study may give the information in acquiring English; this research also informs the readers that there are many ways of students in teaching speaking skill.
The result of this study is expected to be used either in the classroom or out of the class as one of the class and the subject for students in teaching speaking skill.
E. Scope and Limitation
The target of this study is investigating the implementation of approximative systems of foreign language in teaching of speaking skill. Properly speaking in this case, by using the approximative systems of foreign language for the first year students of SMAN 1 Keruak. Furthermore, this study attempts to describe the students speaking. Where the scope and limitation of the study are limited to the subject and object research.
The research subject is limited at the eleventh grade students of SMAN 1 Keruak in the school year 2010/2011.
The research object is limited on the students’ achievement in speaking skill by using approximative systems of foreign language for the learners.
F. Definition of Key Terms
To avoid problem misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the research finding, the researcher would like to explain and define the key terms are used.
a) Approximative system is the deviant linguistic system actually employed by the learner attempting to utilize the target language. Such approximative system changes in character and accordance with proficiency level; variation is also introduced by learning experience (including exposure to target language script system communication function, personal learning characteristics, etc. William Nemser (in Richard, 1971: 58). To be clear, there are some symbols can be used to be understood the statements above, those are: LT: Target Language, LS: Source Language, La’ S: An approxiamtive System and (4) La1...n: Indices referring to systems at successive or continuous stages of proficiency. William Nemser (in Richard, 1971: 56). It means that, the learners who study about the other language, so it will be their second language for example, the learners who study about English language therefore it is as the target language.
In identifying a specific type of La, the name of the LS precedes or first that of the LT: thus “Indonesia-English” refers to La typical of native speakers of Indoneisa communicating imperfectly in English.
b) A foreign language is a language is not spoken by the people of a certain place. It is also a language not spoken in the native country of the person referred to, i.e. an English speaker living in Japan can say that Japanese is a foreign language to him or her, http : // en, Wikipedia. Org).
c) Speaking skill is the process by which humans acquire to perceive, produce and use words to understand and communicate or people learn a second language in addition to their native languages, it refers to what the learner does, it does not refer to the teacher does for working on language teaching, http//:Wikipedia. language acquisition.com
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
In this chapter, the writer presents about the Approximative Systems of Foreign Language, the Concepts of Approximauive Systems, the Factors of Approximative Systems, and Evidence for the Systematic Nature of The Stages of Foreign Language Acquisition, Speaking Skill, the Concept of Speaking Skill, the Factors Which Influence Speaking, the Technique of Teaching Speaking Skill, Relevant Study, and Theoretical Framework.
A. Approximative Systems of Foreign Language
The language systems represent in a contact situation can be classified in accordance or agreement with their functions as: (1) The target language is that in which communication is being attempted, in the case of a learner it is the language he is learning when he uses it, (2) The source language is that acting as a source of interference (deviations from norm of the target language), it is normally the learner’s language, (3) An approximative system is the deviant or ignore linguistic system actually employed by the learners attempting to utilize or use the target language. Such approximative systems change in character and accordance or agreement with proficiency level, variation is also introduced by learning experience (including exposure to target language script system), communication function, personal learning characteristic, etc. Clearly, there are some symbols can be used to be understood the statements above, those are: (1) LT: Target Language, (2) LS: Source Language, (3) La’ S: An approxiamtive System and (4) La1...n: Indices referring to systems at successive or continuous stages of proficiency. William Nemser, (in Richard, 1971: 56). It means that, the learners who study about the other language, so it will be their second language for example, the learners who study about English language therefore it is as the target language.
1. The Concepts of Approximative Systems
Selinker emphases not just the existence of interlanguage but also where it comes from. He looks for it is origin in the processes through which the mind acquires a second language. L2 learning differs from first language acquisition in that it is seldom completely successful, 5 percents of L2 framers have ‘absolute success’ in his view. The L2 ‘fossilizes’ at some point short of the knowledge of the native speaker, for example ‘German Time–Place order after the verb in the English IL of German speakers’. SeIinker (1972) proposes that the lucky 5 percent of successful L2 learners take advantage of a ‘latent language structure’ in the mind like that used in first language acquisition, that is to say the LAD. The 95 percent of learners who are less successful rely on a psychological structure also latent in the brain and activate when one attempts to learn a second language, but distinct from the latent language structure. Interlanguage therefore attempts to explain the fossilization in the L2 learner’s system noted by both Nemser and Selinker. Both interlanguage and approximative system lay stress on the change in the learner’s language system over time. According to Selinker (1972), the difference between interlanguage and Nemser’s approximative system is that interlanguage does not necessarily converge on the target language.
Selinker, (1972) claims that interlanguage depends on five central processes these are parts of the latent psychological structure:
a. Language transfer, in which the learner projects features of the L1 on to the L2.
b. Overgeneralization of L2 rules, in which the learner tries to use L2 rules in ways which it does not permit.
c. Transfer of training, when teaching creates language rules that are not part of the L2, as when a teacher’s over-use of “he” discourages the students from using “she”.
d. strategies of L2 learning, such as simplification, for example when the learner ‘simplifies’ English so that all verbs may occur in the present continuous, yielding sentences such as “I’m hearing him”.
e. Communication strategies, such as when the learner omits communicatively redundant grammatical items and produces “It was nice, nice trailer, big one”, leaving out “a”.
The crucial insight contributed by Selinker is not the actual processes that he puts forward, but his insistence that an explanation is called for in terms of the processes and properties of the mind. He postulates not only an independent grammar but also a psychological mechanism for creating and using it. Transfer is only one of at least five processes involved in interlanguage in the individual mind. Selinker (1972) is also ambiguous about whether the five processes are for the creation of interlanguage or for its use, witness remarks such as ‘He would like to hypothesis these five processes are processes which are central to second language learning, and that each process forces fossil sable material upon surface IL utterances. (Corder, 1978, p.71: http : // w.w.w. teaching styles online.com).
2. The Factors of Approximative Systems
The small amount of research and speculation about learners’ approximative systems term from Nemser, (in Richards, 1971: 3) Suggests that seven factors may influence and characterize these second language learners systems. These factors are discussed bellows:
1. language Transfer
The first factor is language transfer. Sentences in the target language may exhibit inferences from the mother tongue. Predicting errors by comparing the linguistic systems and the target language. George, (in Ricards, 1971: 5) finds that one-third of the deviant sentences from second language learners could be attributed to language transfer.
2. Intralingual Interference
The second factor, intralingual interference by (Richards, 1970: 6), refers to items produced by the learner which reflect not the structure of mother tongue, but generalizations based on partial exposure to target language.
3. Sociolinguistic Situation
The third factor is the sociolinguistic situation. Different settings for language use result in different degrees and types of language learning. These may be distinguished in terms of the effects of the socio-cultural setting on the learner’s language in term of relationship holding between the learner and the target language community and the respective linguistic markers of these relations and identities. Included here are thus the effects of the learner’s particular motivations for learning the second language as well as the effects of the socio-cultural setting.
The distinctions of compound /co-ordinate bilingualism, Wein-reich, 1953, Ervin and Osgood, 1954, Lambert 1961 (in Richard, 1971: 7) rests upon an assumption that different setting for language learning may motivate different processes of language learning. For example, two languages may be learned in the same socio-cultural setting or in two different setting.
The learners’ language may vary according to the fourth factor, the modality of exposure to target language and modality of production. Production and perception may involve acquisition of two partially over lapping systems. Nemser’s research suggests that two different systems may be internalized in the target language depending on the modality. He finds that in the productive modality, phonological replacements differed depending on whether the learner is imitating utterances he hears or producing speech spontaneously. Nemser,(in Richard,1971: 8).
The fifth factor which may affect the approximative system of the second language learner is his age. Some aspects of the child’s learning capacities change as he grows older and these may affect language learning. The child’s memory spans increase age. He acquires a greater number of abstract concepts, and he uses these to interpret his experience. Lenneberg (in Richard, 1967: 11) notes a period primary language acquisition, postulated to be biologically determined, beginning when the child starts walking and continuing until puberty.
6. Succession of approximative systems
The sixth factor concerns the lack of stability of the learner’s approximative systems. Such systems are usually unstable in given individuals. Since here is invariably continuing improvement learning the target language. Because the circumstances from individual language learning are never identical. The acquisition of new lexical, phonological and syntactic items varies from one individual to another. Whinnom, (in Richard, 1971: 12) since most studies of second language learners systems have dealt with the leaner‘s production rather than his comprehension of language, the question also arises as to whether the grammar by which the learner understands speech is the same as that by which he produces speech, since as we see above, modality may the influence the type of system developed.
7. Universal Hierarchy of difficulty
Unlike the factors characteristic of approximative systems so far. The seventh factor receives little attention in the literature of second language acquisition. This factor is concerned with the inherent difficulty for man of certain phonological, syntactic or semantic and structure. Some forms may be inherently difficult to learn no matter what the background of the learner.
The concept of difficulty may be presumed to affect the learner’s organization of what he perceives (for which the term learning strategy may be useful) and the organization of what the produces (for which the term communication strategy may be used). Focusing on learning strategies direct attention to the cues which learner uses to identify elements in the new language. As Torrey, (in Richards, 1971: 13) comments, many aspects of language learning are very difficult to analyze into specific responses even where it is possible the responses are various and at different level (one item may belong to two level in one language and four in another) degrees of learning will be examined in term of specific instances rather than with the general category of responses. What the learner finds difficult will also depend on the degree and nature of what has acquired of the second language.
In short, the seven factors discussed above suggest that the approximative systems of language learners are much richer in linguistic, pedagogic, and social significance than heretofore suspected. While approximative system of language learners may be studied as entities worthy of attention in and of themselves, the results of such study should also provide feedback to language teaching practice and to general linguistic theory. (Corder, 1978, p.71: http : // w.w.w. teaching styles online.com).
3. The Evidence for the Systematic Nature of the Stages of Foreign Language Acquisition
In presenting evidence for the reality and structural autonomy this La’s or approximative systems, it should be pointed out the language students, while of special interest here, represent a minority among La users. Moreover, learner systems are by definition transient, while effective language teaching implies preventing, or postponing as long as possible the formation of permanent intermediate systems and subsystem (deviant phonological and grammatical structures). Nevertheless, it is clear that evidence for La is abunduction of given target language by learners sharing the same native language. This angularity, in fact forms a principal basis for the belief that comparison of La and LT provides information essential to pedagogic strategy. Such characteristics constitute the foreign accent typical of learners as well as of other bilinguals sharing the same mother tongue, i.e. speaker of the same attempting to communicate in a given LT. William Nemser, (in Richard, 1971: 58).
Evidence suggests that the speech behavior of language learners may be structurally organized and that the contact situation should therefore be described not only by reference to the source (SL) and target (TL) languages of the learner, but also by reference to a learner system (AL). Investigation of such learner systems is crucial to the development of contrastive analysis theory and to its application to language teaching. However, these systems also merit investigation in their own right through their implications for general linguistic theory. Experimental and informal observation of the contrastive approach in its present form reveal serious limitations, in part because learner behavior cannot be exhaustively described without reference to the AL. Theoretical and practical considerations therefore converge to suggest the direct and systematic examination of such learner speech, viewed within the general framework of the current theory. Such investigation would (1) provide attested information, of immediate utility in teaching and course development, on patterns of learning behavior for the principal structures of the target languages; (2) permit further assessment of the current suppositions of contrastive analysis; and (3) make possible a preliminary description of AL, thus progressing toward a reformulated contrastive approach. www.languaesystem.come).
B. Speaking Skill
In this part describes about the concept of speaking skill, the factors which influence speaking and technique of teaching speaking.
1. The Concept of Speaking Skill
According to Chomsky, (in Brown, 2008: 33) Speaking skill is the capability to other the articulation to express, to state or deliver though, opinion and wish to the other person. The People who know a language called as speaker of the language. Speaking includes all other kinds of knowing and many activities of foreign language learners are primary interest to speak.
Classroom activities that develop learners skill to express themselves through speak, it seems that an important component of language skill. The students face many problems in learning this skill, so that the teacher should help the students to solve this, such as; giving students some instructions by using easy language, avoid using beyond language than your students and keeping the students use the target language.
Therefore, as the foreign language learners are demonstrated for many decades, but as an English teachers have to keep in mind that the student unable to predict the all because the student and retaining. So that way, they need to know new words, structures, and concepts.
Richard and Rodgers, (in Rohaniah, 2008: 8) proposes seven factors that will help to formulate an approach to teach of foreign language for the learners as adopted from theoretical on each factor and will be able to design classroom technique these are:
a. Students’ cognitive learning process
Virtually all of the students processing with respect to the second language itself are in focal, controlled mode for review of cognitive process and some classrooms application. Therefore, the teacher can expect to engage in plenty of repetition of a limited numbers of word, phrase, and sentences.
b. Students’ creativity
The ultimate goal of learning a language is to be able to comprehend and produce it in unlearned situation, which demands receptive and productive creativity. At the foreign language learners, the learners can be creative only within the confines of a highly controlled repertoire of language.
c. Teacher talk
In the second language situation, especially multilingual classes, teacher use of a student native language is seldom an issue. In foreign language situation, it becomes an option. The rule of thumb here is usually to restrict classroom language to English unless some distinct advantages are gained by the use of their native language.
d. Authenticity of language
The language that students expose to should, according to principle of CLT be authentic language is not just because in this case is the learners will predict what the instrument talk about. To make sure utterances are limited to short, simple phrase, this, the students are repetition needed opportunity to practice their new language.
e. Fluency and accuracy
Fluency is a goal at this level but only within limited utterance lengths, fluency does not have to apply only to long utterance. Attention to accuracy should center on particular grammatical and phonological, or discourse elements that are being practical. On the other hand, the English teachers need to correct some selected grammatical and phonological errors. So that way, the students don’t fall into the trap of assuming that pronunciation work (on phonemes, phonemic patterns, intonation, rhythm, and stress) is very important in this case.
Short, some mechanical techniques are appropriate and other drilling. Group and pair activities are excellent techniques as long as they are structured and clearly defined with specific objectives. So, technique is very important because at this level the students are limited language capacity.
Grammar in the classroom is another issue. A typical of foreign language learners’ level will deal at the outset with appropriate verb forms, personal pronouns, definite and indefinite article, singular and plural noun, and simple sentence in progressing of grammatical topic from simple to complex. Therefore, an inductive approach to grammar with suitable examples and patterns will be more effective.
2. The Factors Which Influence Speaking
Speaking has some current issues moral communication that will help the student to provide some perspectives to be more practical consideration which will explants more in teaching pronunciation work in communicative, interactive courses of study. According to Morrow, (in Zamzam, 2005/2006) states that communicative approach is almost everything that is done with a communicative intents or sharp.
Accuracy and fluency, all language performs centers on the distinction between accuracy and fluency. It is now very clear that fluency accuracy are important goals to pursue in CTL (Communicative Language Teaching) while fluency may in many communicative language course be an initial goal in language teaching, accuracy is achieved to some extents by allowing the students to focus on the elements of phonology, grammar, and discourse in their oral circle output.
3. The Technique of Teaching Speaking
In teaching oral communication the writer does the instruction for students’ attention to express their speaking skill in implementing of approxiamtive systems of foreign language that will be created in form of groups work talking. After that, they will discuss with their friends and from each groups will has representation to talk about the material is being taught it is conducted repeatedly. The researcher also helps students to talk about what the material to be taught. Then, the researcher necessary to give them the treatment that what they are able to express the material in form of picture and also the picture must be related with their material to be taught. Through this case, between the researcher and learners will be easier to do this activity.
C. Relevant Study
In this part, the researcher states the closely-related study which is relevance with this study in some cases, such described bellows:
Siti Maulida Nopriyana conducts a study with the title”The Implementation of Pragmatic Approach in Increasing Students’ Speaking Ability for the Eighth Grade of SMPN 4 Selong In the School Year/2010“. The study is attempted to find out the implementation of pragmatic approach in teaching speaking ability for the eighth grade of SMPN 4 Selong in the school year 2009/2010. The researcher’s design of the study is Classroom Action Research (CAR) that is aimed at describing how pragmatic approach increase students’ speaking ability for the eighth grade of SMPN 4 Selong in the school year 2009/2010.
The finding of Siti Maulida Nopriyana study is concluded that the mean score of cycle I and II are 63 and 65, 6 and the result of observation pointed that the teaching and learning process is very active. Those results prove that the pragmatic approach able to be implemented to the students’ in increasing speaking skill.
After knowing the relevant study above, these studies are the same with my research in research design that is using Classroom Action Research (CAR). However, Siti Maulida Nopriyana study uses pragmatic approach to increase students ‘speaking ability and the researcher’s study uses approximative systems of foreign language in the same teaching.
D. Theoretical Framework
When the teaching and learning process conducted in the classroom, the teachers are expected to create variation model of presenting the materials. It might be in form of the strategies or the techniques used in order the learning process will be more attractive and challenging for the students. The teachers also should not be monotonous in the teaching and learning process. In speaking class, the teachers can create a good condition that might involve students’ participation in any kinds of class activity; therefore they will be active and desire to talk.
In this case, the researcher will implement the approximative systems of foreign language to teach their speaking skill. He will arrange the table inform of grouping, minimal in one group five persons. After giving the task they will discuss about the material and after that they will be asked to talk about what they have discussed in turn form. After that the students will be asked to discuss the material that is given by the researcher then they will tray to make some concepts individually based on the material being taught in the classroom.
This chapter, the researcher presents some discussions about Research Design, Participants of the Study, Instrument of the Study, Technique of Data Collection and Technique of Data Analysis.
A. Research Design
This research, the researcher designed a method that was used in the research is the Classroom Action Research (CAR).
The Classroom Action research (CAR) is also defined as one of problem solving strategies in which uses the action, and the process of skill development to detect and solve the problems. Hopkins, (in Wiriaatmadja, 2008: 66). It could be concluded that the Classroom Action Research has purposes to solve the problems and it is reflective. In this case, the researcher and the teacher built collaboration in learning activity until the researcher got the same reason and understanding about the problem. So the research was done in the effort of the implementation of approximative systems in teaching speaking skill.
This Classroom Action Research (CAR) was completely done through several cycles. Each cycle comprises several integrated points such as students’ learning achievement, the teachers’ teaching procedures (lesson plan, teachers’ action, observation and the last was the reflection stage where a teacher paid much attention on the present results for the sake of preparing the next cycles.
According to Hopkins, (in Wiriaatmadja, 2008: 66) this research conducted in two cycles. The stages that were done each cycle are as follow:
In this step, the researcher also prepared the instruments such as materials, syllabus, lesson plan, worksheet, learning scenario, technique and the instrument to observe and evaluate the teaching and learning process.
Syllabus is a set of teaching and learning activity in which contains some materials will be taught in a number of each meeting. The components of syllabus are competence standard (SK), based competence (KD), materials, learning activity, indicators, evaluation, time allocation and learning source. The materials were given in this study were three kinds of tense namely: Simple present, past tense and present continuous tense. For the first cycle, the materials of these tenses are using paragraph in form of narrative and descriptive texts. The second cycle was taught in form of narrative texts that the students talked are the story talks about. The theme varied but refers to the tense.
b. Lesson Plan
Lesson plan (RPP) is adopted from syllabus as it aims at teaching and learning process to reach based competence (KD). It is arranged in every based competence (KD) in one meeting even more. The components are the same as syllabus. However, lesson plan is completed with subject identity, method and steps in teaching and learning activity.
c. Students’ Worksheet (LKS)
It is given to know students’ achievement of the materials being taught. It consisted of competence standard (SK), based competence (KD), summary of material, instrument to observe and some questions.
After knowing the problem faced by the students of SMAN 1 Keruak for eleventh grade students who have low scores in speaking, the researcher conducted the action that has been planned. The action was aimed at solving the problem that has been made-up. Therefore, the teacher and the researcher played group work in implementing of approximative systems in teaching and learning process.
Observing is the time of collecting data to supervise to what extent the result of acting achieves the objective after being taught through approximative system of foreign language. The data of students’ achievement were taken in form of quantitative and the data was gotten from the result of speaking tests in answer scores.
This activity is evaluating about the change of students’ success in learning situation and teacher. This case, the data gained from the test and the result of observation which was interpreted and analyzed whether the action activity results in the progress, successfulness. The analysis is to know the weakness on the cycle I. the writer could make the clear and accurate conclusion. Then the result of reflection was used to determine the second cycle (cycle II) to get the improvement of the action.
The activities are:
a. Learn the results of reflection on the cycle I, which be inputted in the action more effective and efficient in cycle II.
b. In cycle II, the things that needed to be prepared in essentially the same as planning in cycle I, differing only in material or sub concepts that was studied and revised the improvement of learning results from reflection of cycle I.
Action was implemented in cycle II in essentially the same as cycle II, but differs in materials or sub concepts, implementation of action plans based on what has been designed or made.
The activities of observation were conducted from starting up to finish of action with such procedures in the cycle I.
Reflection on the cycle II was essentially the same as cycle I, the differences was material or sub concepts that was studied. Meanwhile, in the cycle II was an improvement of cycle I and cycle II. In according with the results of reflection in every previous cycle, if reflection exhaustiveness of qualified in the cycle II defined the implementation of the action is stopped, but if still not successful it will be proceed to the next cycle. (Wiriaadmadja 2008: 56).
B. Participant of the Study
There were some elements are involved in this participation of the study in the school of SMAN 1 Keruak are those who have responsible in concluding the research, they were:
Headmaster of SMA 1 Keruak helped the researcher to describe the information and condition of the students. In this case, he was helpful in processing of the research that was conducted by the researcher. Therefore, the researcher was easier in conducting the research.
In this case, the English teacher gave information about the students’ achievements in English especially in teaching speaking skill.
Researcher asked helping to the staffs of SMAN 1 Keruak to seek the documents of students’ data in previous semester to compare with present data.
Students of SMAN 1 Keruak were the main of the research because they gave the data that could conclude the result of the study whether it is effective or not. Without those students, the researcher could not be able to conduct the research completely.
The researcher did the research to implement the approximative systems of foreign language in teaching speaking skill for eleventh grade students of SMAN 1 Keruak in the school year 2009/2010.
C. Instrument of the Study
Based on the research methodology, the researcher needed to determine the research instrument to derive the data. The instrument that was designed can be used as a measurement to get a valid data. (Arikunto, 2002:122) states that the instrument is the tool that is used by the researcher to collect the data. Then, the instrument might be in form of some questions or exercises to measure knowledge, intelligent, achievement and attitude of someone or group of people. In choosing the instruments of data collection depends on the technique of data collection. Therefore, the researcher used two techniques in collecting the data. Firstly, the data of students’ achievement was taken from speaking test in implementing the appximative systems by giving some questions or exercises and the secondly, the data of teaching and learning process of approximative system was taken from observation checklist.
The classroom action research was conducted into two cycles. There were also tests in each cycle. Test is some questions or exercises and to measure skill, knowledge, intelligent and attitude of someone or group of people (Burhan Bungin, 1992: 179). Therefore, the researcher conducted tests in each cycle. So that way, the researcher took the score based on the oral production of students to measure the progress in form of group work. The components of the scoring criteria refer to Foreign Service Institute (FSI), they are: accent, grammar, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension. Those components will be evaluated by the criteria of the weighting table bellows:
Oller, (in Rohaniah, 2008: 29)
Oller, (in Rohaniyah, 2008: 31).
The above weighting table of the comprehensive description of the FSI procedure is conversed as follows:
Oller, 1979:323, Valette, 1977:160 (in Nurgiyantoro, 1995:286)
The researcher used the orally test in this study, the form of the oral test employed was verbal test based on the topics being taught in oral test or speaking, the respondents were asked to speak at least five minutes. The researcher graded the grammar scale receives the heaviest weighting, followed by vocabulary comprehension, fluency, accent, which receives the lowest weighting.
2. Observation Checklist
To get the data through observation, it was conducted by using checklist. Checklist is an observation device that consists of names of subject and factors that is researched. It was also defined as the list of data variables that will be collected (Sugiyono, 2006: 267). It was used to observe the implementation of approximative systems of foreign language. The researcher only checked Yes or No about the indicators of the study. The teacher and the students also fulfilled the format of evaluation.
D. Technique of Data Collection
After the instruments were determined, thus the next step is collecting the data. The data means the whole information that is directly collect from the subjects. The data is obtained by giving the students a questionnaire and tests in objective form. (Burhan Bungin, 2009: 123). Moreover, the data about implementation of approximative systems of foreign language was gathered by using the following steps:
1) Data test technique
The test was done by giving a test in the form of an oral presentation. In this case, the students were required to speak in front of the class by using retelling the story. It was based on the lesson plan of eleventh grade at semester one. There were some indicators that the writer observed during the process. Those were:
a. The students vocabulary
b. The grammatical errors on the sentences that students make
c. The students’ fluency
d. The students’ pronunciation during the oral presentation.
2) The observation technique
The writer used the observation technique to gather data and information regarding the activities done into two cycles. In the first, the writer observed the teachers’ action during the teaching and learning process and also observed the students’ initial ability. In the second cycle, the writer observed the teaching and learning process that was designed based on the lesson plan in the teaching scenario and concluded the result. Then, the writer tended to observe any progress or development made by students after implementing the approximative systems of foreign language.
In evaluating the students’ result of speaking skill, the researcher referred to the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) criteria. The following were:
1. Before giving the test, the researcher prepared a classroom management.
2. Prepared the instrument (question in form of retelling the story and format of observation checklist).
3. The researcher implemented approximative systems of foreign language.
4. The researcher elaborated the rules and steps of approximative systems of foreign language.
5. When the approximative systems of foreign language were being implemented, the researcher controlled and evaluated students’ speaking skill
6. The researcher recapitulated the scores based on the result.
E. Technique of Data Analysis
In this point the researcher discussed about the technique of data description and data analysis.
1. Data Description
Technique of data description was used in this research is descriptive statistics. It was used to determine the data into high, average and low categories. For the purpose, the writer used the pattern:
Mi + 1 SDi to Mi + 3 Sdi = High
Mi – 1 SDi to < Mi + 1 SDi = Average
Mi – 3 SDi to < Mi – 1 SDi = Low
(L.R. Gay, 1986: 394)
2. Data Analysis
To analyze the data, it is related with the characteristics of the data itself. Therefore the data which was collected as follows:
a. Students Achievement. In this case, the researcher analyzed of the data by using descriptive statistics to know the mean and standard deviation, are analyzed by using this formula:
Where: M = Mean Score
∑ X = the Total of students Score
N = the Number of Students
Then, the researcher determined the indication of successful of the achievement students’ speaking skill in comprehending the materials. It could be implemented by counting the total of average scores that were evaluated as the students’ classical completeness while students’ individual completeness were analyzed through Minimum Completeness Criteria (MCC)/KKM (PERMENDIKNAS, 2007) says that learning completeness criteria can be used as a successful criterion. In this case, KKM of English language deals with speaking skill is 60. Therefore the individual completeness is regarded success if the students get score ≥ 60 (the scores are between 0-100) and the classical completeness is regarded success if the percentage is ≥ 75% of the whole students get score ≥ 60 (the scores are between 0-100).
The following is the formula used to know the indication of successful of classical completeness:
KB : The successful of learning
Ni : The Number of students who obtain mark ≥ 60
N : The whole number of students
Wardani, (in Fathurrahman, 2009: 46)
b. Action process
There some processes were applied by the researcher as follows:
1. On going analysis
This, the researcher analyzed the process of action, observation, and reflection of each cycle by observing of the implementation of approximative systems. The researcher analyzed the data without waiting all cycles over. But the researcher analyzed the data directly when he got them from the participant of the research problem.
2. Overall analysis
In this part, the researcher analyzed the data completely in all cycles. He waited the complete data from the participant of the research then all data were collected. In other word, he began analyzing the complete data of all cycles accurately and precisely.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2002): Procedures Pendleton Suatu Pendekatan Praktek.
Edisi Revisi Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.
Arikunto, Suharsini. 1998. Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik Edisi Revisi V, Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta.
Brown, H. Douglas. 1994. Teaching by Principle an Interactive an Approach to Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
Bungin, M. Burhan. 2009. Metodologi Peneleitian Kuantitativf. Surabaya.
(Corder, 1978, p.71: http: // w.w.w. teaching styles online.com).
Fathurrahman. 2009. Developing Students’ Creativity in Speaking Skill Through Slang Language to the Eleventh Grade of SMAN 3 Selong in the School Year 2009/2010. STKIP Hamzanwadi Selong: Unpublished.
Gay, L.R. 1992. Educational Research Competences for Analysis and Application. New York Oxford Singapore Sydney.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-as-a foreign-or-second-language” Catagories: English - Language education / Education by subject / Language acquisation / English as a Foreign Language.
Nurgiyantoro, Burhan. 1995. Penilaian dalam Pengajaran Bahasa dan Sastra. Yogyakarta: BPFE-Yogyakarta.
Richard, C. Jack. 1971. Error Analysis Perspectives on Second Language Acqusition: Description and Analysis, language science.
Rohaniah, 2008. The Effeect of Communicative Approach Toward Students’ Speaking Ability, For Beginning Level of The First Year Students of MTs. NW Korleko in the School Year 2007-2008. Thesis S-1 STKIP Hamzanwadi at Selong. Unpublished.
PERMENDIKNAS No.22/2007. Pola pemetaan implementasi KTSP, tentang standard isi.
Selinker, Larry. 1972. Language transfer, general linguistics.
Sugoyono. 2006. Statistika untuk penelitian. Jawa Barat.
Nopriyana, Siti Maulida. 2009/2010. The Implementation of Pragmatic Approach in Increasing Students’ Speaking Ability for the Eighth Grade of SMPN 4 Selong in the School Year 2009/2010. Thesis s-1 STKIP Hamzanwadi at Selong. Unpublished.
Wiriaatmadja, Rochiati, metode penelitian tindakan kelas. Bandung.
Zamzam, Ahmad. 2005/2006. Teaching English as Foreign Language ( TFEL ). ( Diktat ). Unplished.