A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SANGUINE AND PHLEGMATIC STUDENTS CONCERNING THEIR ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SANGUINE AND PHLEGMATIC STUDENTS CONCERNING THEIR ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL (A Comparative Study at the Second Year Student of SMP Wijayakusuma)

By: MUCHAMAD YUSUP 106014000403

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY JAKARTA 2013

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SANGUINE AND PHLEGMATIC STUDENTS CONCERNING THEIR ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL (A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of SMP Wijayakusuma)

By: MUCHAMAD YUSUP 106014000403

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY JAKARTA 2013 i

DEPARTEMEN AGAMA UNIVERSITAS ISLAM NEGERI (UIN) SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA FAKULTAS ILMU TARBIYAH DAN KEGURUAN Jl. Ir. H. Juanda No.95 Ciputat 15142 Jakarta

Telp: (62-21) 7443328, 7401925 Email: [email protected]

SURAT PERNYATAAN KARYA SENDIRI Saya yang bertanda tangan dibawah ini, Nama

: Muchamad Yusup

Tempat/Tanggal lahir : Jakarta, 04 Oktober 1985 NIM

: 106014000403

Program Studi

: Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Judul Skripsi

: A Comparative Analysis on Sanguine and Phlegmatic Students Concerning their English Speaking Skill (A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of SMP Wijayakusuma)

Dosen Pembimbing

: Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl. Ed.

Dengan ini menyatakan bahwa skripsi yang saya buat benar-benar hasil karya saya sendiri dan saya bertanggung jawab secara akademis atas apa yang saya tulis. Pernyataan ini dibuat sebagai salah satu syarat menempuh Ujian Munaqasah.

Jakarta, Juli 2013

ii

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SANGUINE AND PHLEGMATIC STUDENTS CONCERNING THEIR ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL (A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of SMP Wijayakusuma)

A “Skripsi” Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher’s Training in a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of S.Pd. (Bachelor of Art) in English Language Education

By: MUCHAMAD YUSUP 106014000403

Approved by the Advisor

Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl. Ed. NIP: 19440719 196510 2 001

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY JAKARTA 2013

iii

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In the name of Allah, Most Gracious Most Merciful Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the Worlds Great praise is only for Allah, God of all his creation in the universe, which His rububiyah is witnessed by all creatures without one is forgotten. His uluhiyah is pledged by every living creature. And we, human beings, are to express the very special testimony to our Prophet Muhammad Peace be upon Him that He, Allah’s apostle, is most adoration under Allah’s mercies which were given in a prestigious mandatory on a true religion and its tents. The writer sends words of regards to his beloved father, Sopari, and his beloved mother, Chotimah, and also his siblings Muhamad Purwadi, Mohamad Suprianto, Sri Nurchayati, Sri Agustini, and Siti Chodijah. They give many things as in learning a lot of aspects in life in order to be better with their abundant loves and cares including their helps during “skripsi” writing until the writer could finish the undergraduate study (S1) at Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training of Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta on the writer’s major in English Education. The writer deeply expresses thanks to his advisor, Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl. Ed., for his guidance in development during the “skripsi” writing. There are many constructive corrections, suggestions, and comments the writer has got from him. Mr. Sunardi is also the impressive, charismatic and nicest lecturer. All the perfection belongs to Allah and the writer can only make efforts. Moreover, the writer’s effort in doing “skripsi” may not be separated from the involvement and contributions of others, so that the writer is to say a lot of thanks and appreciations to: 1. All the honorable lecturers who have given their best to the students for more than four years until the examination day. All you give are really worthy remembering in our memory. 2. The chairman of English Education Department, Drs. Syauki, M.Pd. and his secretary, Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum. for their outstanding dedicacy. v

3. The dean of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training, Dra. Nurlela Rifa’i, MA, Ph.D and all his staffs who have already given attentions to their students for the sake of fulfilling teaching competence. 4. Riyanto the headmaster of SMP Wijayakusuma, for his permission to hold the research and to the teachers, especially to the English teachers and the counseling teacher who is so kind to share their information, ideas and experiences. 5. The staff of all libraries; the main library of Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, the Faculty Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training library, State University of Jakarta (UNJ) library, the Faculty of Psychology library of University of Indonesia (UI), the Indonesia Catholic University of Atmajaya library and PKBB Atmajaya to their services in providing the references of the ‘skripsi’. 6. Umi Kulsum, Muhajar, Jannah, Fernando, Afif for as many kindness to share ideas and time to accompany the writer in finishing this ‘skripsi’, and to all PBI B friends and English Department friends for their prayer, cheerfulness, and support. The words are not enough to say any appreciations for their help and contributions on this skripsi. May Allah SWT protect and give them happiness throughout their life. Finally, the writer realizes that the skripsi is far from being perfect. It is a pleasure for him to receive constructive critiques and suggestions from the readers.

Jakarta, Juli 2013

The Writer

vi

ABSTRACT MUCHAMAD YUSUP. “A Comparative Analysis on Sanguine and Phlegmatic Students Concerning their English Speaking Skill (A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of SMP Wijayakusuma)”. Strata 1 (S1). Department of English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’ Training ‘Syarif Hidayatullah’ State Islamic University Jakarta, 2013. Advisor: Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl. Ed. This study is aimed at knowing whether the sanguine students get better English speaking score than the phlegmatic students in speaking activity at the second year students of SMP Wijayakusuma. This research is started by collecting theory. After wards, giving personality test which is taken from a standardized test in Personality Plus written by Florence Littauer to the second grade students of SMP Wijayakusuma, and then he separates the sanguine students from the phlegmatic students. After that both personalities of students’ speaking skill are measured. The students’ speaking will be about one topic chosen, and after the writer discuses with Mrs. Ririn as a teacher in second grade students of Wijayakusuma School, we determine that the best topic is interview. Each of them should be expressed by their own words with their best. After the students’ speaking are recorded, they are scored by their own English teacher. When all scores finished, he designs frequency distribution and a comparative analysis with two independent samples. T-test calculation, then, is used to prove the significant data. And the last step to do is answering hypotheses of the research. The results of the study states that the students’ personality difference has no statiscally significant difference to the students’ English speaking competence. Both groups, the sanguine and the phlegmatic students may perform better English speaking skill through their own way of learning. Key terms

: A Comparative Analysis – Sanguine Students – Phlegmatic students – Speaking score

vii

ABSTRAK MUCHAMAD YUSUP. “Analisis Komparatif pada Siswa Sanguin dan Plegmatis Mengenai Keterampilan Berbahasa Inggris Mereka (Studi Komparatif pada Siswa Kelas Dua SMP Wijayakusuma)”. Strata 1 (S1). Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2013. Pembimbing : Drs. Sunardi Kartowisastro, Dipl. Ed. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah siswa sanguin mendapatkan nilai berbahasa Inggris lebih baik daripada siswa plegmatis dalam aktivitas berbicara pada siswa kelas 2 SMP Wijayakusuma. Penelitian ini dimulai dengan mengumpulkan teori pendukung, kemudian memberikan tes kepribadian yang diambil dari tes standar dalam Personality Plus yang ditulis oleh Florence Littauer pada siswa kelas 2 SMP Wijayakusuma, kemudian ia memisahkan siswa sanguin dari siswa plegmatis. Setelah itu kedua kepribadian siswa itu diukur keterampilan berbicaranya. Materi berbicara siswa akan dipilih satu topik, dan setelah penulis berdiskusi dengan Ibu Ririn selaku guru siswa kelas 2 SMP Sekolah Wijayakusuma, kami menentukan bahwa topik yang terbaik adalah wawancara. Masing-masing harus diungkapkan dengan katakata mereka sendiri dengan sebaik-baiknya. Setelah keterampilan berbicara siswa direkam, mereka dinilai langsung oleh guru bahasa Inggris mereka sendiri. Ketika semua nilai selesai, dia merancang distribusi frekuensi dan analisis komparatif dengan dua sampel independen. Sedangkan perhitungan T-test digunakan untuk membuktikan data yang signifikan. Dan langkah terakhir yang harus dilakukan adalah menjawab hipotesis penelitian. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa perbedaan kepribadian siswa secara statistik tidaklah mempunyai perbedaan yang signifikan terhadap kemampuan berbicara bahasa inggris mereka. Karenanya siswa sanguin ataupun siswa plegmatik dapat berbicara bahasa inggris lebih baik dengan cara belajar mereka sendiri. Kata kunci

: Analisis Komparatif – Siswa Sanguin – Siswa Plegmatis – Hasil Kompetensi Berbicara

viii

TABLE OF CONTENT TITLE ........................................................................................................... i SURAT PERNYATAAN KARYA SENDIRI ............................................. ii APPROVAL ................................................................................................. iii ENDORSEMENT ......................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................ v ABSTRACT .................................................................................................. vii TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................ ix LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................... xi LIST OF APPENDICES .............................................................................. xii CHAPTER I

: INTRODUCTION ........................................................ A. Background of the Study ........................................... B. Identification of the Problem ..................................... C. Limitation of the Problem .......................................... D. Formulation of the Problem ....................................... E. Objective of the Study.................................................. F. Significance of the Study ............................................

1 1 4 4 5 5 5

CHAPTER II

: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .............................. A. Personality ................................................................. 1. The Understanding of Personality ........................ 2. Psychology of Personality .................................... 3. The Sanguine Personality ..................................... a. The Strength of the Sanguine Students .............. b. The Weakness of the Sanguine Students ........... 4. The Phlegmatic Personality .................................. a. The Strength of the Phlegmatic Students ........... b. The Weakness of the Phlegmatic Students ........ B. Speaking .................................................................... 1. The Understanding of Speaking ........................... 2. The Functions of Speaking ................................... a. Talk as Interaction ............................................ b. Talk as Performance ......................................... 3. Types of Speaking Skill to Promote Skill ............. a. Discussion ........................................................ b. Information Gap/Problem Solving .................... c. Speech ..............................................................

6 6 6 8 10 11 12 14 15 16 18 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 24

ix

d. Drama and Roleplay ......................................... e. Conversation .................................................... 4. The Assessment Grading Scale of Speaking ......... C. Relevant Study .......................................................... D. Research Hypotheses ................................................. CHAPTER III

: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................... 32 A. B. C. D. E. F.

CHAPTER IV

CHAPTER V

25 25 26 30 31

The Location and Time of the Research ............................ The Method of the Research ............................................. The Population and Sample ............................................... The Technique of Collecting Data ..................................... The Technique of the Data Analysis .................................. The Hypotheses of the Research ........................................

32 32 33 34 37 39

: RESEARCH FINDINGS ............................................. A. The Data Description ................................................. B. The Data Analysis ..................................................... C. The Data Interpretation .............................................. 1. The Frequency of the Sanguine and the Phlegmatic Students .............................................. 2. The Better Ability in English Speaking Skill ......... 3. The Hypotheses Interpretation ...............................

40 40 45 50 50 51 51

: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ......................... 53 A. Conclusion ................................................................ 53 B. Suggestion ................................................................. 54

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................ 56 APPENDICES

x

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7

The Oral English Rating scale .......................................... The Four Personality Assessment ...................................... The Sample Result of Personality Test .............................. The Sanguine Student ....................................................... The Phlegmatic Student .................................................... The Classification of Score ............................................... Percentage Range of Sanguine Students ............................ Percentage Range of Phlegmatic Students ......................... The Frequency Distribution of Single Data ....................... The Calculation of the Sanguine Students and the Phlegmatic Students to their Speaking Score .....................

xi

28 34 36 40 41 43 44 44 45 46

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Appendix 6 Appendix 7

Student Personality Test A Sheet of Personality Assessment The Word Definition of Student Personality Test Scoring Criteria of Speaking, The Way of Scoring, and Questions of Interview The Result of Students’ Personality Test English Speaking Score T table for Variety of Value Distribution for Various Degree of freedom (df)

xii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study Most people assume that language is one of the cultures that cannot be separated from human life and there is no activity without using language. Language is a symbolic guide to culture.1 By language, people understand each other, and interest as part of a society. There are many languages used in this world, such as Indonesia, English, Arabic, French, Chinese, Japanese, and many others. One of languages used in this world is English language, and now English becomes an international language. English as a compulsory subject to learn in formal school in Indonesia was concentrated on the four skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Beside that, one of the four skills which play a significant role in mastering English is speaking. As a skill, speaking is the most used skill by people rather than the three other skills. According to Richards, “Learners consequently often evaluate their success in language learning as well as the effectiveness of their English course on the basis of how well they feel they have improved in 1

Rahayu Dwi Riyanti, dkk, Cross Cultural Understanding, (Universitas Terbuka, 2007),

p. 1.2.

1

2

their spoken proficiency.”2 From the statement, the writer would say that most language learners study English in order to develop proficiency in speaking. Besides, many language learners regard speaking ability as the measure of knowing a language. These learners define fluency as the ability to converse with others, much more than the ability to read, write, or comprehend oral language. They regard speaking as the most important skill they can acquire, and they assess their progress in terms of their accomplishments in spoken communication People have known about the branch of science since hundreds years ago which is named by psychology. One of the most popular discussions in the science of psychology is personality. If we look into the history of philosophy for a moment, we observe that personality has been often associated with what we call thinking or reasoning. According to Leibnitz, personality referred to “a substance gifted with understanding.”3 If we consider the reaction of various persons to the same experience, we will find that it is different in every one of them; it may be quick and lasting, or slow but lasting; or it may be quick but of short duration, or slow and of short duration. This personality or manner of reaction, or the different degrees of excitability, is what we call "temperament." According to Socrates, one of the most renowned of the Greek sages, there are four temperaments: the sanguine, the choleric, the melancholic, and the phlegmatic. The first two are also called extroverts which have active trait, and the last two are introverts which have passive trait. The active trait and the passive trait affect an individual willingness to speak, of course the extrovert students are more talkative than the introvert students which rather like to keep silent. As English teacher, we are required to understand students through their

2 Jack C. Richards, Developing Classroom Speaking Activities: From Theory to Practice, http://www.professorjackrichard.com/developing-classoom-speaking-activities.pdf, p.1. Successfully retrieved on April 23, 2012. 3 Robert W. Lundin, Personality, A Behavioral Analysis, (The macmillan Company, Collier-Macmillan Limited, London, 1969), p. 3.

3

personality. And in this case, the discussion merely narrowed to the sanguine and the phlegmatic. The writer chooses the different classification of personality, one from extrovert and another from introvert. It is because the writer arranges to do comparative analysis in this study. The analysis is aimed to seek similarities and differences from the theory that is about the sanguine and the phlegmatic. After that, the performance in speaking of a group of students who belong to both personality types is compared by using their score. After the author consulted with his colleague who once has taught at SMP Wijayakusuma before, then followed by visiting and sharing his opinions with SMP Wijayakusuma English teacher about the speaking subject, it was clearly seen that both type of personality were found at school. During learning the sanguine and the phlegmatic students demonstrate different style and performance; they also participated differently in class. The students’ level which becomes the object of the study should be specific. Therefore the writer selects the students on the second year of SMP Wijayakusuma. The second grade students’ competency in English speaking skill based on suggestion from English teacher at that school is pretty good. That is because many are able to engage themselves in a good and fair communication in speaking session, and some of them can perform almost excellent English when they speak. Based on brief background about the students’ personality and the students’ learning of English speaking skill above, the writer wants to have the study for his “skripsi” under the title “A Comparative Analysis on Sanguine and Phlegmatic Students Concerning their English Speaking Skill” (A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of SMP Wijayakusuma).

4

B. Identification of the Problem Problem and challenge for teacher clearly appear because students with different personality are in one class. There is a group with active and talkative students and other group is the group of passive students who really love to keep silent when they are learning. The active students in speaking are named by sanguine personality then the passives belong to phlegmatic personality. The related problems that can be identified to the sanguine personality and the phlegmatic personality of students are such the example below: 1. The sanguine is extrovert person and the phlegmatic is the introvert person. They may create gap in learning, 2. The sanguine has mostly a strong leadership and the phlegmatic tends to be a follower, 3. The sanguine student is domineering speaker than the phlegmatic student, 4. The sanguine student likes speaking in less intensity and quantity than the phlegmatic student. However, several problems between the sanguine students and the phlegmatic students were identified. The problems occur in teacher and learner interactions. Now the writer just needs to specify them in order to be focus on the following point

C. Limitation of the Problem Due to the broadness of the topic discussion as the problems have been identified above, this study will be limit on the area how sanguine and phlegmatic type of personality is different and similar. Based on the theory, the sanguine students including their traits generally have a potency to be better in speaking ability than the phlegmatic students with their special traits. To test the theory, the students with the sanguine and the phlegmatic personality will be compared by their English speaking score which describe their competence in speaking.

5

D. Formulation of the Problem Based on the background and limitation of the problem that is about comparing the sanguine and the phlegmatic students to their English speaking score, the research question of this ‘skripsi’ can be formulated as  Do the sanguine students get better English speaking score than the phlegmatic students in English speaking activity? E. Objective of the Study In this comparative study, the writer wants to know whether the sanguine students get better English speaking score than the phlegmatic students in English speaking activity.

F. Significance of the Study The finding this study is expected to gain awareness of the teachers about the difference of student type in mastering materials especially in English speaking skill. In addition, knowing personality type varies the students’ way to encounter their learning activities. Therefore, teachers can adapt strategy and technique in order to teach each type of students’ personality to improve their English speaking skill.

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK In this chapter the writer tries to give clear description of theoretical framework which is consisting of personality, speaking, relevant study and research hypothesis. Personality consists of the understanding of personality, psychology of personality, the sanguine personality, and the phlegmatic personality. Speaking consist of the understanding of speaking, the functions of speaking, types of speaking skill to promote skill, and the assessment grading scale of speaking. A. Personality 1. The Understanding of Personality When you talk about someone’s personality, what do you really mean? Have you ever heard someone say, “She’s very aggressive” or “He’s so shy - such an introvert!” or “My mother is really sweet?” Or how about “He’s very dependent” or “She's got a terrific personality - a lot of sparkle!” the writer thinks you have heard exactly those words. In contrast to psychologists’ use of the term, when the average person uses the term, “personality” has a variety of meanings, each unique to the situation in which it appears.

6

7

Many different descriptions about personality are possible, but when most people use the term “personality”, sometimes they are using it for one of two purposes. In several examples, personality is labeling an obvious feature. Someone is sweet, or introverted, or shy, or aggressive. Each child is born with a unique personality. A great deal is learned through circumstances and other people, but most people believed it was inherent in us by the time we are born. Personality is made up the characteristic patterns of thoughts, feelings and behaviors that make a person unique. Personality arises from within the individual and remains fairly consistent throughout life. The meaning of the word “personality” may be somewhat vaguely associated with the idea of social attractiveness. To say that one has personality is generally considered to be a compliment, implying a high degree of acceptability by some group. The exact meaning of the word is seldom clear to those who use it, but if pressed to explain further what they mean by personality, they may describe it as charm, good manners, verbal facility, and physical attractiveness.1 Allport2 has made perhaps the most exhaustive survey of definitions of personality, some fifty in number, beginning with the etymology of the word “persona,” which originally denoted the theatrical mask worn in the Greek drama and later used by the Romans. In extending the concept of “persona,” it came to mean external appearance (not the true self).3 Allport attempted to combine the best elements of the previous definitions while avoiding their major shortcomings. First, he suggested that one might briefly define personality as “what a man really is”. However, he agreed that this is too abbreviated to be very helpful and

1

Robert W. Lundin, Personality, A Behavioral Analysis, (The macmillan Company, Collier-Macmillan Limited, London, 1969), p. 2. 2 G. W. Allport, Personality: a psychology interpretation, (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1937), p. 41. 3 Ibid., p. 27.

8

preceded to the better known definition: Personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environment.4 Whereas in Personality Psychology, Larsen defines personality as the set of psychological traits and mechanisms within the individual that are organized and relatively enduring and that influence his or her interactions with, and adaptations to, the intrapsychic, physical, and social environments.5 Good-organized traits make students’ personality shaped well from his adaptation and interaction, and after that he is ready to engage in school environment and society. From the definitions of different psychologist written above, the writer can conclude that personality is total-complex psychophysics (trait, behavior, taste, etc) of an individual influenced by several factors; innate capacity and environment which determine an individual action and reaction.

2. Psychology of Personality Psychology of personality is not a new case to be discussed in psychology. The branch of knowledge has been studied by the experts for a long period. This study doesn’t try to make a wide discussion in psychology, which has sub-discussions; general psychology, specialized psychology, and applied psychology. In specialized psychology, Nana Syaodih gives some examples such as psychology of development, male and female psychology, psychology of personality, abnormal psychology, differential psychology, and animal psychology.6

4

Calvin Springer Hall and Gardner Linzey, Theories of Personality. 3rd ed. (Toronto: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1987), p. 443. 5 Randy J. Larsen and David M. Buss, Personality Psychology, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005), p. 4. 6 Prof. Dr. Nana Syaodih Sukmadinata, landasan Psikologi Proses Pendidikan, (Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya, 2007), p. 87.

9

The psychology of personality which is our focus expects to show about the perspective in understanding human beings. It is based on their personality from variety of theories analyzed by psychoanalysts from the early beginning of study. When people open a discussion in a psychology of personality field, there is clear description of several theories. Sumadi Suryabrata gives categories that could be used to classify the theories. They are: a. Based on the personality component set as the framework or stepping stone in compiling theoretical formulations. The theories are as follow: 1) Constitutional theories, such as Italian-based theories, Frenchbased theories, Kretschmer, Sheldon, and so on. 2) Temperament theories, such as the theories of Kant, Meumann, Enselhans, Heymans, and Ewald. 3) Unconscious theories, as in the theories of Freud, Jung, Adler, and their followers. 4) Factors theories, like the Eyssenck’s theories, Cattell, and so on. 5) Cultural theories, such as in Spranger theory. b. Besides the category above, the basic of categorization that estimated to be very useful is the arrangement on the basis of approach. This segment is divided into two groups of theories. 1) Theories of typological approach, as in Plato, HippocratesGalenus, and Enselhans theories, and the modern Experts; Heymans and Ewald. 2) Theories of traits approach, such as the theories of Klages, Allport, Rogers, Freud, Jung, Murphy, etc.7 For more than a century, psychologists have attempted to identify and understand systematic, observable differences between individuals that seem stable over time. Among these individual differences, personality has received widespread attention. On this discussion, the writer only concentrates on temperament theory of typological approach as the main terms that are used concerning on Immanuel Kant ideas of personality which grouped into big four temperament-namely sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic, and melancholic.8 7 Drs. Sumadi Suryabrata, B.A., M.A., Ed.S, Ph.D, Psikologi Kepribadian (Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2007), p. 3-4. 8 Thomas Chamorro-Premuzic and Adrian Furnham, Personality and Intelectual Competence, (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publisher, 2005), p. 4.

10

The big four personality study was firstly begun by Hippocrates (460-377 BC)9, which then be developed by Galenus. The four personalities are used to define theories from recent psychologists.

3. The Sanguine Personality The cheerful sanguine is temperament which a warm, vibrant, lively and "fun". He can receive all the circumstances, and the impressions that seen can be easily affected his heart that quickly responded. His decisions are more determined by feeling than thinking. The Sanguine type requires a great deal of personal space and cannot tolerate restrictions of personal freedom. While usually not bossy, they cannot tolerate being bossed and always want to work on their own terms. They like the outdoors and physical activity. They often act before they think, not naturally thinkers. They are acquisitive, territorial, and action oriented. The sanguine is the creative, fun-loving, high-spirited sanguine’s natural tendency to look on the bright side, to enjoy people, and to seek out adventure sometimes results in a label of superficiality and frivolity, more joyful place because of the inspiration, enthusiasm, and fellowship he provides.10 The sanguine person is carefree and full of hope; attribute great importance to what ever he may be dealing with at the moment, but may have forgotten all about it the next. He means to keep his promises but fails to do so because he never considered deeply enough beforehand whether he would be able to keep them. He is good-natured enough to helps others but is a bad debtor and constantly asks for time to pay. He is very sociable, given to pranks, contented, does not take anything very seriously, and has many, many friends. He is not vicious but difficult to convert from his sins; he may repent but this contrition (which never becomes a felling of guilt) is soon forgotten. He is easily

9 Dr. Sarlito Wirawan Sarwono, Berkenalan dengan Aliran-aliran dan Tokoh-tokoh Psikologi (Jakarta: PT. Bulan Bintang, 2002), p. 20. 10 Art Bennet, LMFT and Laraine Bennet, The Temperament God Gave You, (Manchester, New Hampshire: Shopia Institute Press, 2005), p. 37.

11

fatigued and bored by work but is constantly engaged in mere games – these carry with them constant change, and persistence is not his forte.11 The following are several descriptions of strength and weakness of the sanguine personality: a. The Strength of the Sanguine Students The points below are from the book of ‘Personality Plus’ authored by Florence Littaure, they are traits which appear in variety of quantity. A trait is the representative of personality structure,12 as Springer defined. All the structures construct a personality. The traits may not find totally once in a while. Animated Playful Sociable Convincing Refreshing Spirited Promoter Spontaneous Optimistic Funny

Delightful Cheerful Inspiring Demonstrative Mixes-easily Talker Lively Cute Popular Bouncy13

Strengths of a Sanguine The Extrovert | The Talker | The Optimist The Sanguine's Emotions • Appealing personality • Talkative, Storyteller • Life of the Party • Good sense of humor • Memory for color • Physically holds on to listener • Emotional and demonstrative • Enthusiastic and expressive • Cheerful and bubbling over • Curious • Good on stage

56.

The Sanguine At Work • Volunteers for Jobs • Thinks up new activities • Looks great on the Surface • Creative and colorful • Has energy and enthusiasm • Starts in a flashy way • Inspires others to join • Charms others to work The Sanguine As A Friend • Makes friends easily

11

Hans Eysenck, Fact and Fiction in Psychology, (Baltimore: Penguins Book. 1965), p.

12

Hall and Linzey, op. cit., p. 442. Florence Littaure, Personality Plus, (Jakarta: Binarupa Aksara, 1996), p. 16-17.

13

12

• Wide-eyed and innocent • Lives in the present • Changeable disposition • Sincere at heart • Always being a child The Sanguine As A Parent • Makes Home Fun • Is liked by children's friends • Turns disaster into humor • Is the circus master

• Loves People • Thrives on compliments • Seems exciting • Envied by others • Doesn't hold grudges • Apologizes quickly • Prevents dull moments • Likes spontaneous activities

The strength of the sanguine is his ability to “live in the present moment”; he has a very optimistic, joyful attitude toward life. The sanguine is often adventuresome, enterprising, and creative - and is a source of inspiration to others.14 A person with a sanguine temperament is affectionate, loving, cheerful, optimistic, hopeful, and confident. The Sanguine has more natural inner-beauty qualities than the other temperaments. They can work on calmness and on controlling their tongue. They are emotional and demonstrative by nature. At work they provide a positive atmosphere and often volunteer to help out. Their creative and enthusiastic energy can inspire others. The sanguine child learns quickly, although he might have difficulty memorizing. Continually discovering some new interest, sanguine can find it difficult to attain great depth in one area of study. It is not that they do not have the intellectual capacity, but rather that their attention is so easily captured by something new. b. The Weakness of the Sanguine Students Traits below are the negative of the sanguine in some ways of the student type when he interacts in school environment. Florence Littaure mentioned the traits as follow:

14

Bennet. loc. cit.

13

Brassy Undisciplined Repetitious Forgetful Interrupts Unpredictable Haphazard Permissive Angered easily Naive

Wants credits Talkative Disorganized Inconsistent Messy Show-off Loud Scatter brained Restless Changeable15

Weaknesses of a Sanguine The Sanguine's Emotions • Compulsive talker • Exaggerates and elaborates • Dwells on trivia • Good sense of humor • Scares others off • Too happy for some • Has restless energy • Egotistical • Blusters and complains • Naive, gets taken in • Has loud voice and laugh • Controlled by circumstances • Gets angry easily • Seems phony to some • Never Grows Up The Sanguine As A Parent • Keeps home in a frenzy • Forgets children's appointments • Disorganized • Doesn't listen to the whole story

The Sanguine At Work • Would rather talk • Forgets obligations • Doesn't follow through • Confidence fades fast • Undisciplined • Priorities out of order • Decides by feelings • Easily distracted • Wastes time talking The Sanguine As A Friend • Hates to be alone • Needs to be center stage • Wants to be popular • Looks for credit • Dominates conversations • Interrupts and doesn't listen • Answers for others • Fickle and forgetful • Makes excuses • Repeats stories

Weaknesses of the sanguine temperament include the tendency toward superficiality, inconstancy, and sensuality because he places such a high value on relationships and pleasing others, he often tempted to forsake what he knows is right in order to fit in with the crowd.16

15 16

Littaure,op. cit., p. 17-18. Bennet, op. cit., p. 38.

14

Sanguine are frequently not disciplined, and this is, of course, very difficult for the third personality type called melancholy to understand. Sanguine wear their "heart on their sleeve", but they very easily “forgive and forget”.17 They are emotional and demonstrative by nature, but can tend towards arrogance and self-indulgence. At work they can be day dreamers and battle to complete work, juggling many tasks at once. They tend to lose focus on the task when the novelty wears off. From all description about the sanguine personality, we can look at the examples of the famous sanguine actors such as Tukul Arwana, Indra Bekti, Paris Hilton, etc. By knowing these famous people, it makes our understanding easier to draw and remind the personality of the sanguine in our mind. 4. The Phlegmatic Personality The Phlegmatic is the peaceful person who wants to stay out of trouble, keep life on an even plane and get along with everybody. Phlegmatic like to rest and show steadiness. Phlegmatic also a very calm and relaxed so that he never seemed bothered, how ever the circumstance of his surroundings. He's hard to angry and rarely to vent his temper. The phlegmatic is Peaceful Person, Born-follower, Likes harmony and rest, Loves to relax, Wants to calm people down, Gets along with everyone, Needs peace and sense of worth, Has little self-motivation, Gets depressed over conflict, Controls by procrastination.18 Phlegmatic are reserved, prudent, sensible, reflective, respectful, and dependable. They are not easily insulted or provoked to anger, nor are they given to exuberance or exaggeration in speech. They are loyal and committed, tolerant and supportive. They possess a hidden will of iron that is often overlooked, because they are such agreeable people. They have a knack for diffusing tense situations. Phlegmatic make superb 17 Dr. Faith C Abraham, Personality Identifier: the four temperaments, Retrieved at http://www.faithabraham.com/Personality%20Identifier.pdf on May 10, 2012, p. 5. 18 Florence Littauere, Marriage (after every wedding comes a marriage), Retrieved at http://www.wedplan.com/Worksheets/marriage_personality.pdf on May 18, 2012, p. 2.

15

diplomats and military strategists. They also make excellent firefighters, police officers, and military officers; they excel in professions where being calm under pressure is key.19 The following are the explanation to the fundamental phlegmatic traits that should be considered in understanding the phlegmatic personality. a. The Strength of the Phlegmatic Students Adaptable Peaceful Submissive Controlled Reserved Satisfied Patient Shy Obliging Friendly

Diplomatic Consistent Inoffensive Dry humor Mediator Tolerant Listener Contented Pleasant Balanced20

The 20 traits above are still based on Florence Littauer. Through points, the phlegmatic personality can be observed simply. The following are some strengths of phlegmatic personality: Strengths of a Phlegmatic The Introvert | The Watcher | The Pessimist The Phlegmatic's Emotions • Low-key personality • Easygoing and relaxed • Calm, cool and collected • Patient well balanced • Consistent life • Quiet but witty • Sympathetic and kind • Keeps emotions hidden • Happily reconciled to life • All-purpose person

19 20

Bennet op. cit., p. 40. Littaure, loc. cit.

The Phlegmatic At Work • Competent and steady • Peaceful and agreeable • Has administrative ability • Mediates problems • Avoids conflicts • Good under pressure • Finds the easy way ThePhlegmatic As A Friend • Easy to get along with • Pleasant and enjoyable

16

The Phlegmatic As A Parent • Makes a good parent • Takes time for the children • Is not in a hurry • Can take the good with the bad • Doesn't get upset easily

• Inoffensive • Good listener • Dry sense of humor • Enjoys watching people • Has many friends •Has compassion and concern

They are known for their easy-going nature. They possess a great deal of common sense and mental balance. They are excellent listeners and have great empathy for others. They are supportive friends, patient with difficult people and situations, and considerate at all times. On the job, phlegmatic are dependable, punctual, and orderly; they can bring harmony to almost any group. Everyone loves the low-key nature of the inoffensive phlegmatic, and though they are not loud like the Sanguine, they do have a witty sense of humor. They often lean while standing and sit in comfortable recliner chairs if at all possible.21 Conrad Hock said in his book called ‘The Four Temperament’ that there are many bright sides of the phlegmatic temperaments, those are:22 1. The phlegmatic works slowly, but perseveringly, if his work does not require much thinking. 2. He is not easily exasperated either by offenses, or by failures or sufferings. He remains composed, thoughtful, deliberate, and has a cold, sober, and practical judgment. 3. He has no intense passions and does not demand much of life. b. The Weakness of the Phlegmatic Students Numerous traits below are the simple descriptions to know about the weaknesses of the phlegmatic personality. Florence Littaure mentioned that traits are: 21 22

p. 22-23.

Abraham, op. cit., p. 10. Conrad hock, The Four Temperaments, (Wisconsin: Catholic Apostolate Press, 1934),

17

Blank Unenthusiastic Reticent Fearful Indecisive Uninvolved Hesitant Plain Aimless Nonchalant

Worrier Timid Doubtful Indifferent Mumbles Slow Lazy Sluggish Reluctant Compromising23

Weaknesses of a Phlegmatic The Phlegmatic's Emotions • Unenthusiastic • Fearful and worried • Indecisive • Avoids responsibility • Quiet will of iron • Selfish • To shy and reticent • Too compromising • Self-righteous The Phlegmatic As A Parent • Lax on discipline • Doesn't organize home • Takes life to easy

The Phlegmatic At Work • Not goal oriented • Lacks self motivation • Hard to get moving • Resents being pushed • Lazy and careless • Discourages others • Would rather watch ThePhlegmatic As A Friend • Dampens enthusiasm • Stays uninvolved • Is not exciting • Indifferent to plans • Judges others • Sarcastic and teasing • Resists change

Several kinds of description about the phlegmatic main weakness traits is written through points, they are:24 1. He is very much inclined to ease, to eating and drinking; is lazy and neglects his duties. 2. He has no ambition, and does not aspire to lofty things, not even in his piety.

23 24

Littaure, loc. cit. Hock, loc. cit.

18

The phlegmatic is a super introvert. It is difficult to rouse them to action. At times they can be selfish and stubborn. On the job, they do not seek out the power or the limelight,25 because of their reserved natures, phlegmatic are sometimes accused of being unassertive, or of lacking enthusiasm and spontaneity. The phlegmatic is known for avoiding things: conflict among people. The phlegmatic might defer to peer pressure in order to keep the peace or to avoid conflict.26 B. Speaking 1. The Understanding of Speaking Speaking is significant to an individual’s living processes and experiences as are the ability of seeing and walking. Speaking is also the most natural way to communicate. Without speaking, people must remain in almost total isolation from any kind of society. For most people, the ability to speak a language is the same with knowing a language since the speech is the most basic means of human communication. Actually, what is the meaning of speaking? In the process of writing this paper, the writer has tried to find out the meaning of speaking as one of skills in English language. He has finally found several resources that explain speaking as follows. According to Noah Webster, speaking has a variety of meanings: a) To tell, to say, to make known or as by speaking, to declare; to announce b) To proclaim; to celebrate c) To use or be able to use (a given language) in speaking d) To address27

25

Abraham, loc. cit. Bennet, op. cit., p. 41. 27 Noah Webster, Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, 2nd Edition, (New York: William Collins Publishers, 1980), p.1980. 26

19

In addition, Oxford Dictionary states that "speaking is to make use of language in an ordinary, not singing, to state view, wishes etc or an act of spokesman”.28 Meanwhile, Henry G. Tarigan defines that, “…speaking is a skill of conveying words or sounds of articulation to express or to deliver ideas, opinions, or feelings”.29 Don Bryne states that, “oral communication (or speaking) is a two way process between speaker and listener and involves the productive skill of speaking and the receptive skill of understanding”.30 Based on the previous four definitions, it can be synthesized that speaking is the process of sharing with another person, or with other persons, one’s knowledge, interests, attitudes, opinions or ideas. Delivery of ideas, opinions, or feelings is some important aspects of the process of speaking which a speaker’s idea become real to him and his listeners. 2. The Functions of Speaking Several language experts have attempted to categorize the functions of speaking in human interaction. According to Brown and Yule, as quoted by Jack C. Richards, “The functions of speaking are classified into three; they are talk as interaction, talk as transaction and talk as performance. Each of these speech activities is quite distinct in term of form and function and requires different teaching approaches”.31 Below are the explanations of the functions of speaking:

28

AS Hornby, Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, Sixth Edition, 1987), p.827. 29 Henry G. Tarigan, Berbicara Sebagai Suatu Ketrampilan Berbahasa, (Bandung: Angkasa, 1981), p. 15. 30 Donn Byrne, Teaching Oral English, (New York: Longman, 1998), p. 8. 31 Jack C. Richards, Developing Classroom Speaking Activities; From Theory to Practice,Http://www.professorjackrichard.com/developing-classoom-speaking-activities.pdf, p.2, It was retrieved on May 18, 2012.

20

a. Talk as Interaction Being able to interact in a language is essential. In fact, much of our daily communication remains interactional. This refers to what we normally mean by “conversation”. The primary intention in talk as interaction is to maintain social relationship. Meanwhile, talk as interaction has several main features as follows:        

Has a primarily social function Reflects role relationships Reflects speaker’s identity May be formal or casual Uses conversational conventions Reflects degrees of politeness Employs many generic words Uses conversational register Some of the skills (involved in using talk as interaction) are:

       

Opening and closing conversation Choosing topics Making small-talk Recounting personal incidents and experiences Turn-taking Using adjacency pairs Interrupting Reacting to others32 Mastering the art of talk as interaction is difficult and may not be a

priority for all learners. In talk as interaction, the ability to speak in natural way is required in order to create a good communication. For reason, some students sometimes avoid this kind of situation because they often lose for words and find difficulty in presenting a good image of themselves. This can be a disadvantage for some learners where the ability to use talk as interaction can be important.

32

Ibid., p.2-3.

21

b. Talk as Performance This refers to public talk or public speaking, that is, talk which transmits information before an audience such as morning talks, public announcements, and speeches. Talk as performance tends to be in the form of monolog rather than dialog. Often follows a recognizable format and is closer to written language than conversational language. Similarly it is often evaluated according to its effectiveness or impact on the listener, something which is unlikely to happen with talk as interaction or transaction. Examples of talk as performance are giving a class report about a school trip, conducting a class debate, making a sales presentation, and giving a lecture. The main features of talk as performance are:     

There is a focus on both message and audience It reflects organization and sequencing Form and accuracy is important Language is more like written language It is often monologic Some of the skills involved in using talk as performance are:

      

Using an appropriate format Presenting information in an appropriate sequence Maintaining audience engagement Using correct pronunciation and grammar Creating an effect on the audience Using appropriate vocabulary Using appropriate opening and closing33 It is clearly seen from the features and skill involved in using talk

as performance that initially talk as performance needs to be prepared in much the same way as written text. Therefore, this kind of talk requires a different teaching strategy. This involves providing examples or models of speeches or oral presentation. Therefore, question such as the following are needed in order to guide this process:

33

Ibid., p. 6.

22

   

What is the speaker purpose? Who is the audience? What kind of information does the audience expect Is any special language used?

3. Types of Speaking Skill to Promote Skill People course in the way of mastering English speaking skill worthily need to promote their acquaintance of several affective ways. To help students develop communicative efficiency in speaking, there are some activities are used in the classroom to promote the development of speaking skills in our learners. The discussions below centers on the major types of speaking activities that can be implemented as follows: a. Discussion Discussion is probably the most commonly used in the speaking skills classroom activity.34 It is a common fact that discussion really useful activity for the teacher in order to activate and involve student in classroom teaching. Typically, student are introduced to a topic via reading, listening passage, or a video tape and are then asked to get into pairs or groups discuss a related topic in order to come up with a solution, a response, or the like. Normally, people need time to assemble their thought before any discussion and that is something needs to consider. So, Teacher must take care in planning and setting up a discussion activity. According to Marianne Celce-Murcia, there are several steps that should be done by the teacher before starting the discussion activity: first, planned (versus random) grouping or pairing of students may be necessary to ensure a successful discussion outcome. Second, students need to be reminded that each person should have a specific responsibility in the discussion, whether it is kept on time, take note or report results. And finally, students need to be clear

34

Marianne Celce-Murcia, Teaching English As A Second or Foreign Language, (Boston: Heinly and Heinle, a Division of Thomson Learning,Inc.2001), p.106.

23

about what they are to discuss, why they are discussing it, and what outcome is expected.35 When a material focuses on producing and recognizing signals for turn-taking in a group discussion, the teacher needs assessment to his students’ progress. The assessment tool might be a checklist to be a complete by the teacher or students in the course of the students’ participation in the discussion.36 Finally, criteria should be clearly defined and understandable to both the teacher and the learners. In order to manage a good discussion activity, the writer concludes that the steps above are really important to do because most teachers hope that they will be able to organize discussion session in their classroom, particularly if the exchanges of opinions provoke spontaneous fluent language use. b. Information Gap/Problem Solving One type of speaking activity involves the so-called “information gap” where two speakers have different parts of information making up a whole. Because they have different information, there is a “gap” between them.37 In this activity, students are supposed to be working in pairs. One student will have the information that other partner does not have and the partners will share their information. Information gap activities serve many purposes such as solving a problem or collecting information. Also, each partner plays an important role because the task cannot be completed if the partners do not provide the information the others need. An example of an information gap principle is using the ‘jigsaw’ material. Jo McDonough and Christopher Shaw said that: In a jigsaw activity, each partner has one or a few pieces of the "puzzle" and the partners must cooperate to fit all the pieces into a whole picture. The puzzle piece may take one of several forms. It may be one panel from a comic strip or one photo from a set that 35

Ibid., p.107. Florez, MaryAnn Cunningham, Improving Adult English Language Learners’ Speaking Skill, http://www.ericdigests.org/2000-3/adult.htm, It was retrieved on June 10, 2012. 37 Celce-Murcia, loc. cit. 36

24

tells a story. It may be one sentence from a written narrative. It may be a tape recording of a conversation, in which case no two partners hear exactly the same conversation.38 From the statement above, the writer can say that information gap and jigsaw activity are effective because everybody has the opportunity to talk extensively in the target language and they can exchange information each others because of the gap between them. c. Speech Another common activity in the oral skills class is the prepared speech. Topics for speeches will vary depending on the level of the students and the focus of the class, but in any case, students should be given some leeway in determining the content of their talks.39 In order words, the teacher can provide the structure for the speech-its theoretical genre and its time restrictions. For example asking students to “tell us about an unforgettable experience you had”. Allow them to talk about something that is personally meaningful while at the same time encourages narration and description. Speeches can be frightening for the speaker and after while boring for the listeners, so it is a good idea to assign the listeners some responsibilities during the speeches. It is an excellent time to require peer evaluation of classmate’s speech. Steve Allen has a suggestion to the sequence of speech as follow. When choosing the content, people should organize the remark to these sequence; the opening, the middle, and the third part (the closing), after that they need to compose the speech by generating ideas, researching a topic, writing the speech, editing the speech, and finally typing the speech.40

38 Jo McDonough and Christopher Shaw, Material and methods in ELT; a Teacher’s Guide, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1993), p.165. 39 Celce-Murcia, loc. cit. 40 Steve Allen, How to Make a Speech (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986), p. 16-31.

25

d. Drama and Role Play Drama is an excellent way to get the students using the language. It essentially involves using the imagination to make oneself into another character or the classroom into a different place. According to Scrivener, drama can be an activity for beginner for exciting listening and speaking work and it can also be utilized as a tool to provide practice in grammatical, lexical, functional, or phonological areas.41 The next way of getting students to speak in different social contexts and to assume varied social role is role-play activities in the classroom. Materials are generally aimed at the more proficient EFL learner, although this is not always the case, as they can be set up in a highly structured way with a lot of teacher control. At the other end of the spectrum, however, a considerable amount of choice may be exercised by allowing the students more freedom in what they will say. e. Conversation One of the recent trends in oral skills pedagogy is the emphasis on having students analyze and evaluate the language that they or others produce. In other word, it is not adequate to have students produce lots of language; they must become more aware of many features of language in order to become competent speakers and interlocutors in English. One speaking activity which is particularly suited to this kind of analysis is conversation, the most fundamental form of oral communication. One way to approach this activity is to assign students to find a native speaker (or near-native speaker) they know and arrange to taperecord a 20-30 minutes interaction with this person. Of course, not all of the discourse that results from this encounter will be truly “natural conversation-the native may fall into the role of “interviewer and ask all questions while the non-native merely responds; therefore the instructor 41

Jim Scrivener, Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English language Teachers. The Teacher Development Series, (Oxford, Heinemann ELT, 1994), p. 69.

26

may want to encourage the learner beforehand to come up with a few questions to ask native speaker. In any case, the resulting interaction will provide a spontaneous sample from (and for) the learner to analyze. In a variation of the conversation, learners are required to tape-record an interview with native speaker on a topic of their choices and then repot the result to the class. 4. The Assessment Grading Scale of Speaking As most people say that testing speaking is the most complex to assess with precision. Many of teachers often feel uncomfortable when handling speaking test since it is often difficult to be objective and consistent when testing a large number of students. But it doesn’t mean that speaking test can’t be measured in correct way. The writer has found several resources that explain about the way to assess speaking test and its technique. Hughes, as quoted by Endang Fauziati, listed three general formats for testing speaking ability that are interview, interaction with peers and responses to tape recording.42 Interaction with peers is the technique that will be used by writer to assess speaking ability. In the interaction with peers, two or more students may be asked to discuss a topic. The problem with this format is that the performance of one student may be affected by that of others. One student might dominate the conversation. Therefore, Heaton said that it is important to make pair students with similar level of language proficiency. Meanwhile, determining the rating scale used is the next step to do in assessing speaking skill. The writer found various books that presented the sample of an oral English rating scale. J.B. Heaton in his book, Writing English Language Test, examined rating scale of six-point range. In addition, Ingram and Elaine Wylie, in their article “Assessing Speaking Proficiency in the International English Language Testing System examined rating 42

Endang Fauziati, Testing Speaking Skill, A paper of the49th International TEFLIN Conference, English: A Prerequisite for Global Communication, (Denpasar: English Department, Faculty of Letters, University Of Udayana), p.4.

27

scale of nine-point range. Besides, Harris in his book Testing English as a Second Language examined rating scales of five-point range. In this paper, the writer quoted the one used by Harris as it is the most applicable to our speaking class rating system, since we would have 1-10 or 10-100 range of point as stated in the guidelines of scoring speaking skill in 2004 curriculum. According to Harris, speaking is a complex skill requiring the simultaneous use of different ability which often develops at different rates. Five components are generally recognized in analyses of speech process that are pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency (the ease and speed of the flow of the speech) and comprehension (an understanding of what both the tester and the testee are talking about or the ability to respond to speech as well as to initiate it).43 Harris presented the sample of an oral English rating scale that used 1-5 points. Below is the frame of Harris’s oral English rating scale: No

Criteria

1.

Pronunciation

2.

Grammar

43

Rating Comments Score 5 Has few traces of foreign accent 4 Always intelligible, thought one is conscious of a definite accent 3 Pronunciation problem necessities concentrated listening and occasionally lead to misunderstanding 2 Very hard to understand because of pronunciation problem, most frequently be asked to repeat 1 Pronunciation problem to serve as to make speech virtually unintelligible 5 Make few (if any) noticeable errors of grammar and word order 4 Occasionally makes grammatical and or word orders errors that do not, however obscure meaning 3 Make frequent errors of grammar and word order, which occasionally obscure meaning 2 Grammar and word order errors make

David P. Harris, Testing English as A Second Language, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1969).

28

1

3.

Vocabulary

5 4 3 2 1

4.

Fluency

5 4 3 2 1

5.

Comprehension

5 4

3 2

1

comprehension difficult, must often rephrases sentence and or rest rich himself to basic pattern Errors in grammar and word order, so, severe as to make speech virtually unintelligible Use of vocabulary and idioms is virtually that of native speaker Sometimes uses inappropriate terms and must rephrases ideas because of lexical and equities Frequently uses the wrong words conversation somewhat limited because of inadequate vocabulary Misuse of words and very limited vocabulary makes comprehension quite difficult Vocabulary limitation so extreme as to make conversation virtually impossible Speech as fluent and efforts less as that of native speaker Speed of speech seems to be slightly affected by language problem Speed and fluency are rather strongly affected by language problem Usually hesitant, often farced into silence by language limitation Speech is so halting and fragmentary as to make conversation virtually impossible Appears to understand everything without difficulty Understand nearly everything at normal speed although occasionally repetition may be necessary Understand most of what is said at slower than normal speed without repetition Has great difficulty following what is said can comprehend only “social conversation” spoken slowly and with frequent repetition Can not be said to understand even simple conversational English Table 2.1

29

The oral ability test divided into five elements; pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. Each element’s characteristics are then defined into five short behavioral statements as stated in the frames above. This helps to make the test reliable, since it avoids subjectivity because it provides clear, precise and mutually exclusive behavioral statements for each point of the scale. The writer will objectively see the characteristics of each student’s speaking ability whether they achieve 1,2,3,4 or 5 score. Then, it can easily calculate the score. The amount of maximum scores gained is 25. It is gained from the five elements of speaking as stated above. This amount of score can be described as follows: Pronunciation

:5

Grammar

:5

Vocabulary

:5

Fluency

:5

Comprehension

:5 25

Since our speaking class rating system is used the range of point 110 or 1-100, then, to make it easier to calculate, the score is converted into 100 point scale by multiplying it with 4. The rating system used here is based on the rounding off system. It is also in line with the statement from Hazell. Hazell, as cited in Endang Fauziati article, stated that teachers could modify the range point scale based on their need. So, it is clearly seen that the writer modify the range score because the need of the scoring system as stated in the previous page. According to the rounding off system, writer concludes that 100 point is the highest score gained by a student and 20 point is the lowest score gained by a student.

30

C. Relevant study There were researchers had been done by researchers about speaking. Firstly, Nurmilah by the title “The effectiveness of using information gap in developing students’ speaking skill”. She used the experimental research. The writer did the research one class. Before did the activity, she gave pre-test to find out the students’ basic competence. Then, she taught speaking by using information gap technique. Finally, she gave post-test to know whether there was significant influence of implementation of information gap technique in teaching speaking achievement through the growth of the students’ pre-test score. Based on the data analysis above, the result showed that the coefficient is 11.82. It meant that there was a significance increase in teaching speaking through information gap. From the result of calculation, it was obtained the value of the t-observation (t0) is 11.82. The writer used the degree of significance of 5% the value of degree of significance is 2.04. If the to compared with each value of the degrees of significance, the result is 2.04 < 11.82. The writer summarized that improving the students’ speaking by using information gap technique had positive influence for the second grade of SMP Negeri 153 Jakarta. Second, Nana Nurjanah by the title “The Relationship between Students’ Interest in Speaking and their Speaking Score” the method used is correlational study, she takes only one class as the subject. She gave each of the students a questionnaire related to the students’ interest in speaking to be collaborating with their speaking score. The result of the analysis in the research showed that there is positive correlation between students’ interest in speaking and their speaking score. Interest gives positive influence in teachinglearning speaking skill. Students who have higher interest in speaking get a better score than the lower one. Third, Nina Zuhairiah in her research "Developing Students’ English Speaking Ability by Using Contextual Teaching Learning" the research used Classroom Action Research (CAR) as the method of research. The CAR was

31

done based on Kurt Lewins’ design. The writer did two cycles inevery which each cycle consists of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting and each cycle there are two meeting. The data were gathered through qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative data were gained by analyzing the interview an observation result. Then, quantitative data were obtained from students’ speaking score of pretest and post test. The result of this research shows that using contextual teaching learning in teaching speaking at VIII grade of MTs. Al-Ikhwaniyah can motivate the students to speak English and improve their speaking ability. The students’ responses showed that they were interested to learn English speaking because they thought that the activities were interesting. Moreover, the mean score pretest was 60.94. Then, the mean score of posttest cycle 1 was 71.50 and the mean score of posttest cycle 2 was 72.25. In addition, there were 3 students (8.3 %) who passed KKM in the pretest. Meanwhile, in the cycle 1, there were 16 students (44.4%) who passed KKM and it gained which was in the posttest cycle 2 there were 27 students (75%) who passed KKM, so the criteria of success was achieved. Related to the result of observation and interview, the researcher concluded that teaching speaking by using contextual teaching learning at VIII grade of MTs Al-Ikhwaniyah can develope students’ speaking ability and the students were motivated in the teaching-learning process. D. Research Hypothesis A research hypothesis is the result of literature review or rational process of research that has had a theoretical truth.44 The Hypothesis is that the sanguine students get better English speaking score than the phlegmatic students in speaking English activity.

44

Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi, Fakultas Ilmu tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah-Jakarta 2011, p.48

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter of research methodology consists of the location and time of the research, the method of the research, the population and sample, the technique of collecting data, the technique of the data analysis, and the hypotheses of the research. A. The Location and Time of the Research Location of the research was in SMP Wijayakusuma of which building is located on Penjaringan. This was the school where the researcher did his friends school. The research was done successfully starts on 23th of May 2013 until 28th of May 2013. B. The Method of the Research The approach of the research is a quantitative research which implements the testing of theory, quantitative research generates statistics through the use of large-scale survey research, using instruments such as questionnaires and structured interviews.

32

33

The technique of analyzing data is the use of comparative analysis. The research may be about two similar things that have crucial differences.1 The things may not correlate each other. Comparative analysis ideals for someone who needs to hold a research in getting the problem belonged to two or more independent variables. Husein Umar stated the research to the group of empirical studies where the researcher cannot control the independent variable because the problem happened, or characteristics cannot be manipulated.2 Comparative analysis technique is one of quantitative analysis technique or one of statistical technique that can be used to test hypothesis concerns about whether or not there is a difference between or among variable tested. If the difference is found, researcher will need to ensure whether it is significant or only by chance.3 It makes the data and the result could be more objective. According to limitation of the study in the previous chapters, firstly, the writer compares the sanguine students and the phlegmatic students to their way of learning speaking. The comparison describes the similarities and the differences of both students’ personalities. The next is the comparative analysis to the speaking score of the sanguine and the phlegmatic students. This analysis is to answer the research question. C. The Population and Sample The writer chooses the population of all students from the second graders of SMP Wijayakusuma. The writer applies 100% students to be tested because all the students actually can be the participant without any more selection, neither choosing through gender nor percentage of the sum total population. 1

Kery Walk, How to Write a Comparative Analysis, Retrieved at http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CompAnalysis.html on June 19, 2012. 2 Drs. Husein Umar, S.E., M.M., MBA, Metode Penelitian untuk Skripsi dan Tesis Bisnis, (Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2005), p. 28. 3 Drs. Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Satistik Pendidikan, (Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 1995), p. 261.

34

To get accurate data about the students' responsiveness to this research, the writer noted the total students of the VIII classes are 70 students. The students are divided into two classes, with the detail description of a number of students as follow: VIII A

: 36 students.

VIII B

: 34 students.

D. The Technique of Collecting data The technique of collecting data is the use of personality test which identifies students’ personality through examining personality based on list of traits. It is suitable to classify personalities for the reason that the test is taken from standardized assessment written by Florence Littauer. The test is arranged based on the 40 question numbers from all four personalities; sanguine, choleric, melancholic, and phlegmatic. They can be observed apparently on the table below.

Table 3.1 THE PERSONALITY TEST OF FLORENCE LITTAUER THE FOUR PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT STRENGHTS 1.

--- Adventurous

--- Adaptable

--- Animated

--- Analytical

2.

--- Persistent

--- Playful

--- Persuasive

--- Peaceful

3.

--- Submissive

--- Self-sacrificing

--- Sociable

--- Strong-willed

4.

--- Considerate

--- Controlled

--- Competitive

--- Convincing

5.

--- Refreshing

--- Respectful

--- Reserved

--- Resourceful

6.

--- Satisfied

--- Sensitive

--- Self-reliant

--- Spirited

7.

--- Planner

--- Patient

--- Positive

--- Promoter

8.

--- Sure

--- Spontaneous

--- Scheduled

--- Shy

9.

--- Orderly

--- Obliging

--- Outspoken

--- Optimistic

10.

--- Friendly

--- Faithful

--- Funny

--- Forceful

11.

--- Daring

--- Delightful

--- Diplomatic

--- Detailed

12.

--- Cheerful

--- Consistent

--- Cultured

--- Confident

35

13.

--- Idealistic

--- Independent

--- Inoffensive

--- Inspiring

14.

--- Demonstrative

--- Decisive

--- Dry humor

--- Deep

15.

--- Mixes easily

--- Mover

--- Musical

--- Mediator

16.

--- Thoughtful

--- Tenacious

--- Talker

--- Tolerant

17.

--- Listener

--- Loyal

--- Leader

--- Lively

18.

--- Contented

--- Chief

--- Chart maker

--- Cute

19.

--- Perfectionist

--- Pleasant

--- Productive

--- Popular

20.

--- Bouncy

--- Bold

--- Behaved

--- Balanced

WEAKNESSES 21.

--- Blank

--- Bashful

--- Brassy

--- Bossy

22.

--- Undisciplined

--- Unsympathetic

--- Unenthusiastic

--- Unforgiving

23.

--- Reticent

--- Resentful

--- Resistant

--- Repetitious

24.

--- Fussy

--- Fearful

--- Forgetful

--- Frank

25.

--- Impatient

--- Insecure

--- Indecisive

--- Interrupts

26.

--- Unpopular

--- Uninvolved

--- Unpredictable

--- Unaffectionate

27.

--- Headstrong

--- Haphazard

--- Hard to please

--- Hesitant

28.

--- Plain

--- Pessimistic

--- Proud

--- Permissive

29.

--- Angered easily

--- Aimless

--- Argumentative

--- Alienated

30.

--- Naïve

--- Negative attitude

--- Nervy

--- Nonchalant

31.

--- Worrier

--- Withdrawn

--- Workaholic

--- Wants credit

32.

--- Too Sensitive

--- Tactless

--- Timid

--- Talkative

33.

--- Doubtful

--- Disorganized

--- Domineering

--- Depressed

34.

---Inconsistent

--- Introvert

--- Intolerant

--- Indifferent

35.

--- Messy

--- Moody

--- Mumbles

--- Manipulative

36.

--- Slow

--- Stubborn

--- Show-off

--- Skeptical

37.

--- Loner

--- Lord over others

--- Lazy

--- Loud

38.

--- Sluggish

--- Suspicious

--- Short-tempered

--- Scatterbrained

39.

--- Revengeful

--- Restless

--- Reluctant

--- Rash

40.

--- Compromising

--- Critical

--- Crafty

--- Changeable

The questionnaire has 40 question numbers. Every number of items consists of traits from the four personalities. The word definition of the test can be seen in appendix 3. To do the test the writer asked the students to put a check list (√) to the best choice from the four trait options on entirely item numbers. The answer represents their trait that fit to them best. Then the check list test

36

papers that have been done by the students are matched to the indicators table above. For examples: Number 1 (C) Adventurous. (P) Adaptable.  (S) Animated. (M) Analytical Number 2 (M) Persistent. (S) Playful. (C) Persuasive.  (P) Peaceful. Each symbol means C S M P

: is for Choleric : is for Sanguine : is for Melancholic : is for Phlegmatic By seeing the check list, the student answers "animated" for item

number 1. It means the item number 1 will be counted as sanguine. For the item number 2 the student answer is "peaceful". It must be counted as phlegmatic. The same way is applied to the next numbers until the last one. After matching all the item numbers of the test, we can see the portion of each personality. The four personalities have portions in different quantity of check lists such as shown in the following: No

Name

S

C

M

P

1.

Student 1

17

9

7

7

2.

Student 2

17

8

6

9

3.

Student 3

9

7

8

16

4.

Student 4

7

4

9

20

Table 3.2

37

The way of personality judgment is by seeing the highest result that appears on the total questions. On the table above student 1 has 17 and student 2 has 17 at the sanguine column and student 3 has 16 and student 4 has 20 at the phlegmatic column. They can be said as the dominants which mean student 1 and student 2 are the sanguine students. Student 3 and student 4 are the phlegmatic students. Those are the students’ personality. There for, the students have their own personality, the researcher then separated the students who belong to the sanguine and phlegmatic personality, and then the students of the two personalities were calculated with a certain statistical method. E. The Technique of the Data Analysis The students of VIII classes were given the personality test. After doing the scoring of the questionnaire, and the judgment for the students' personality, the researcher only takes the students from the sanguine and the phlegmatic personality. For the speaking activity that the students performed, they will scored by their own English teacher. Soon after all the scoring steps finished, the writer started using statistic calculation. The two groups; the sanguine and the phlegmatic students and each score of English speaking clearly distributed as the single data distribution into two tables. After this step the data came to the calculation pattern called Standard Deviation (SD) and degree of freedom, to seek more stable format of data, after that T-test finding to answer the t table

and t observation as the steps described below:

38

1.

The Standard Deviation combination with the degree of freedom

  x2  1 2 S 

 x 

   x 2   2 n1     n1  n 2  2 2

1

 x 

2

2

n2

   

db  n1  n 2  2 2.

The T-test calculation In this research, T-test calculation which is used is the separated variants pattern. Take a look at the pattern below:

x1  x 2

t

S2 S2  n1 n2

First, the calculation start from the lower pattern that is as follow:

S x x 1

2

S2 S2   n1 n2

And then after the first pattern of T-test calculation is solved, there is the final pattern

tobservation 

x1  x2 Sx x 1

2

39

F. The Hypotheses of the Research Below is the hypothesis of the research that must describe how the study should be answered. There is about the sanguine and the phlegmatic students to their English speaking skill. Ho = There is no difference in English speaking ability between the sanguine and the phlegmatic students. Ha = There is difference in English speaking ability between the sanguine and the phlegmatic students.

40

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS This research finding chapter consists of the data description, the data analysis, the data interpretation. A. The Data Description The following two tables are the students who have been categorized to the sanguine and the phlegmatic personality. They are the students who become the research object and the following are their English speaking scores (see Appendix 6) which was obtained from their performance.

Table 4.1 THE SANGUINE STUDENTS THE SECOND GRADE OF SMP WIJAYAKUSUMA No

Name

Speaking Score

1

Student 1

60

2

Student 2

65

3

Student 3

60

4

Student 4

60

40

41

5

Student 5

70

6

Student 6

75

7

Student 7

70

8

Student 8

65

9

Student 9

70

10

Student 10

78

11

Student 11

80

12

Student 12

70 68.58

Average

Table 4.2 THE PHLEGMATIC STUDENTS THE SECOND GRADE OF SMP WIJAYAKUSUMA No

Name

Speaking Score

1

Student 13

70

2

Student 14

70

3

Student 15

65

4

Student 16

60

5

Student 17

60

6

Student 18

75

7

Student 19

75

8

Student 20

65

9

Student 21

60

10

Student 22

60

11

Student 23

60

12

Student 24

60

Average

65.00

42

The 24 students are the sanguine students and the phlegmatic students. From the total number of students at second grade, the researcher has tested 70 students from the second grade population (see appendix 5). The other 46 students belong to the other personalities and their combination. They are neither the sanguine students nor the phlegmatic students. The way to find the average of the sanguine and phlegmatic students’ score is by the following calculation. The average in statistics is known by mean (M). The pattern of Mean is

Mx1 

fX N

Description: fX

: the total of students’ score

N

: a number of students

This pattern is to find Mean from single data which the scores are more than one frequency; whether they are for some data or whole of them. The following is the calculation for x1 or the sanguine students.

Mx1 

fX

N 823 Mx1  12 Mx1  68.58

43

The writer has got the first Mean, and then he stepped forward to the second Mean. It is for the phlegmatic students. The calculation is as follows:

Mx 2 

fX

N 780 Mx 2  12 Mx 2  65.00 The writer has already got both Mean for the two groups of students. The average shows that the sanguine students’ average is higher than the phlegmatic students’. The next calculation will describe the significance difference of the sanguine and the phlegmatic students. Suharsimi in her book writes the classification of scores as follow1: Table 4.3 The Classification of Scores by S. Arikunto Score

Grade

Remark

80 – 100

Excellent

A

66 – 79

Good

B

56 – 65

Fair

C

40 – 55

Poor

D

30 – 39

Fail

E

Based on the classification of scores above, it can be divided into the high, middle, and low scores: The high scores: 80 – 100 The middle scores: 56 – 79 The low scores: 30 – 55

1

251

Suharsimi Arikunto, Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, (Jakarta: Bumi aksara, 2003), p.

44

Furthermore, the writer will determine the percentage of the score by using formula below: P = F x 100% N P = Percentage F = frequency N = Number of Students Table 4.4 Percentage Range of Sanguine Students No

CS

F

P

1

The high score

1

8.33%

2

The middle score

11

91.66%

3

The low score

0

0%

12

100%

Total Table 4.5

Percentage Range of Phlegmatic Students No

CS

F

P

1

The high score

0

0%

2

The middle score

12

100%

3

The low score

0

0%

12

100%

Total CS = Classification of Scores F = Frequency P = Percentage

45

B. The Data Analysis To begin the data analysis steps, the writer uses the frequency distribution to describe how the frequency from the two variables; the sanguine and the phlegmatic group is divided into frequency which is spread systematically, and then the frequency is added to be the total of frequency. Table 4.6 THE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF SINGLE DATA

No

The Sanguine Students (x1)

The Phlegmatic Students (x2)

x1

F

x2

F

1

80

1

75

2

2

78

1

70

2

3

75

1

65

2

4

70

4

60

6

5

65

2

6

60

3 12

12

In the table 4.6, everyone can see that the data is called single data distribution because they are such ungrouped data with no interval among them. And the data are orderly typed by the range of the highest score from the lowest score from both personalities of the students

46

Table 4.7 THE CALCULATION OF THE SANGUINE AND THE PHLEGMATIC STUDENTS TO THEIR SPEAKING SCORE

No

The Sanguine Students

The Phlegmatic Students

x1

F

x12

fx1

fx12

x2

f

x22

fx2

fx22

1

80

1

6400

80

6400

75

2

5625

150

22500

2

78

1

6084

78

6084

70

2

4900

140

19600

3

75

1

5625

75

5625

65

2

4225

130

16900

4

70

4

4900

280

78400

60

6

3600

360

129600

5

65

2

4225

130

16900

6

60

3

3600

180

32400

823

145809

780

188600

12

12

47

After the writer distributed the data through the tables above, henceforth he started the calculation of Standard Deviation finding (SD) which is combined to the degree of freedom finding (df). The following calculation is the pattern combination.

2 2      x 2  x1     x 2  x2   2 n   1 n1   2    S2   n1  n2  2

The statistic pattern starts explaining about S2 which means this calculation is for Standard Deviation calculation or SD for short. It combines the two sides of the sanguine group and the phlegmatic group. In the first parentheses can be called by the first Standard Deviation, the SD goes to the sanguine group and then the second parentheses with plus order belongs to the second Standard Deviation of the phlegmatic group. The Standard Deviation (SD) is to standardize the mean which is weak at first, then after using the Standard Deviation it has more stable for its value of belief or reliability.1 For the below pattern of the complete pattern above is the degree of freedom, which mixed into one. Simply you can see this pattern,

df = (n1+n2) - 2 It is from the original pattern df = n1 - 1 and df = n2 - 1

1

Drs. Anas Sudijono, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan, (Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 1995), p. 143.

48

For now the writer would use the first complete pattern that is mentioned above, he begins calculating the data of table 4.6 by the use of that pattern in order to get the established final result. 2 2      x 2   x1     x 2   x2    2  1 n1   n2      2 S  n1  n2  2

 (823) 2   (780) 2     188,600  145,809  12 12     S2  12  12  2

S2 

(145,809  56,444.08)  (188,600  50,700) 22 S2 = 10330.22

The result of S2 is successfully done to assist the next calculation in filling in the main calculation in T-test formulation. Right after this is called by the separated variants pattern which is chosen because of two considerations. They are: 1.

The two means referred to two samples which have the same quantity.

2.

The variants of the data are not homogeny.2 The two points of considerations bring the writer to choose the next

calculation. The pattern is named the separated variants. The modified pattern is continued to the calculation of the separated variants, the separated variant pattern is

2

Prof. Dr. Sugiyono, Statistika untuk Penelitian, (Bandung: CV Alfabeta, 2008), p. 138.

49

x1  x 2

t

S2 S2  n1 n2

First half step is by doing sum of the dual Standard Deviation per n1 and the dual Standard Deviation per n2 in quadrate. The sum is the lower pattern of the separated variants.

S x x 

s2 s2  n1 n 2

S x x 

10,330 .22 10,330 .22  12 12

1

1

2

2

S x  x  860.85  860.85 1

2

S x  x  1721 .7 1

2

S x  x  41.49 1

2

The first T-test formulation has perfectly finished by calculating of the right side of the pattern. The result is the answer for S x1 x2 Next is the way to calculate the upper pattern from separated variants as the lower pattern has already been got. It becomes the furnishing of the next step to complete the separated variants pattern.

50

 fx  f  fx   f

1

x1  x2

2



823  68 . 58 12



780  65 . 00 12

Soon after the two calculations of the separated variants were treated, now the writer went to the final pattern to answer the t table, is the t observation or to greater than the t table or tt.

x1  x 2 S x x

tO 

1

2

68 .58  65 .00 41 .49 3.58 tO  41 .49 t O  0 .086 tO 

From the value of t observation(to) above is 0.086 with the t table = 2.07 (see Appendix 7) for  = 5% of significance level and t significance

table

= 2.82 for the level of

 = 1%.

A. The Data Interpretation To interpret the data, the writer may have a look to the analysis of data spreading at the previous pages. The interpretation is divided into three parts: 1.

The Frequency of the Sanguine and the Phlegmatic Students Based on the table 4.6, the sanguine and the phlegmatic students are only in small enough quantity. It was 17.14% for each the sanguine personality and the phlegmatic personality of the students or 34.29% in average for the two personalities in one level of study.

51

If we want to observe in other schools or other classes, the same case will not be far different from other grades in another school. It is because we can rarely find this type of students who are more active and have leadership ability with the skill of speaking. We will find the phlegmatic students about the same quantity in classes as the sanguine students’ quantity. In fact, the phlegmatic is likely the characteristic of the students who has not really active in speaking activity. 2.

The Better Ability in English Speaking Skill The sanguine students are assumed to have a good ability and better ability in speaking. In this research, their score of speaking is 68.58 in average. The phlegmatic student is well-known as the stolid person; he is estimated to be a person who has less ability in speaking than the sanguine. However, the average of the phlegmatic students is 65.00. The data tells that the score of the sanguine students in English speaking activity is higher than the phlegmatic students. The sanguine students in the second grade of SMP Wijayakusuma proved that the presumption on the theory is true even though they sometimes could be untrue along with the theory ever once in a while.

3.

The Hypotheses Interpretation The hypotheses of the research is Ho = There is no difference in English speaking ability between the sanguine and the phlegmatic students. Ha = There is difference in English speaking ability between the sanguine and the phlegmatic students. 2.82 >

0.086 < 2.07

52

That means, The Null Hypotheses (Ho) is accepted The Alternative Hypotheses (Ha) is rejected The hypotheses tested by T-test of comparative analysis from independent sample express that there is no difference in English speaking ability between the sanguine and the phlegmatic students. From that statement we can say 

In high score, the sanguine students get 8.33% and the phlegmatic students get 0%



In middle score, the sanguine students get 91.66% and the phlegmatic students get 100%



In low score, the sanguine students get 0% and the phlegmatic students get 0%

53

CHAPTER V CONCLUSSION AND SUGGESTION This chapter presents the conclusions and some suggestions based on the previous finding research at SMP Wijayakusuma. A. Conclusion This research seems not completely break the theory on the concept of personality that the sanguine is better than the phlegmatic in speaking. The sanguine tends to speak vocally. He likes to be a good speaker through his talker soul. In contrary the phlegmatic does not really like to speak and he likes to be a good listener. The data interpret that the sanguine students get higher average English speaking score and the phlegmatic students have lower average score. The sanguine students do not always possess higher competency of English speaking skill which is because of his natural willingness to speak than the phlegmatic students. Sometimes the introvert student may overlap the extrovert students. Through sequence of calculation at the previous chapter the hypotheses of the research shows that the Null Hypotheses (Ho) which states “there is no difference in English speaking ability between the sanguine and the phlegmatic

53

54

students” is accepted. It means that the students’ personality has no statically significant difference to the students’ English speaking score. The possibility of error in this research may be highlighted from the decision taking while the students are doing the personality test and there is also the possibility of inappropriateness on giving score which is influenced by the students, they might not show their best ability in English speaking performance at that time. B. Suggestion Students are the people who need guidance in learning. They must be maintained by smart teacher who understand them intellectually and psychologically. In order to give some opinions to this study based on the finding, it can be recommended that: 1. When the sanguine students learn English speaking skill, they need to learn seriously from grammar because the sanguine students sometimes do not pay attention to the language pattern. Never let them underestimate the importance of learning grammar because, on the other hand, it will sharpen their accuracy in speaking. 2. The sanguine students have so much confidence in saying something in English. They need to maintain it well but with no over confidence and arrogance. It is occasionally make them fail. 3. The phlegmatic students will study pattern more than the sanguine, they like to study concept of the subject. They could perform better structure. 4. The phlegmatic students must have better confidence in improving their English speaking skill. Confidence is the subject matter of the phlegmatic students who tend the improving in teaching learning process.

55

For teachers, what they need are: 1. Guide the Sanguine students to consider about patterns when they are speaking. A good speaking is also seen from the structure of the language. 2. To advise the students not to be over confidence in facing English speaking activity. They need to be calm down and to be low profile when they set in the good performance. 3. Giving more spirit to the phlegmatic to be consistent in doing study of patterns of English before they learn to speak, but without take much time. 4. To support the students to explore their ability in speaking. They have more ability but they still need practice to be confident. Teacher may create situation in order not to be too serious and stressful.

56

BIBLIOGRAPHIES Allen, Steve, How to Make a Speech, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986. Allport, G. W., Personality: a psychology interpretation, New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1937. Arikunto, Suharsimi, Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, Jakarta: Bumi aksara, 2003. Bennet, Art LMFT and Bennet, Laraine, The Temperament God Gave You, Manchester, New Hampshire: Shopia Institute Press, 2005. Byrne Donn, Teaching Oral English, New York: Longman, 1998. Celce-Murcia, Marianne, Teaching English As A Second or Foreign Language, Boston: Heinly and Heinle, a Division of Thomson Learning, Inc.2001. Eysenck, Hans, Fact and Fiction in Psychology, Baltimore: Penguins Book. 1965. Fauziati, Endang, Testing Speaking Skill, A paper of the49th International TEFLIN Conference, English: A Prerequisite for Global Communication, Denpasar: English Department, Faculty of Letters, Universityof Udayana. Hall, Calvin Springer and Linzey, Gardner, Theories of Personality. 3rd ed., Toronto: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1987. Harris, David P, Testing English as A Second Language, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1969. Hock, Rev. Conrad, The Four Temperaments, Wisconsin: Catholic Apostolate Press Milwaukee, 1934. Larsen, Randy J. and Buss, David M., Personality Psychology, 2nd ed., New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005. Littaure, Florence, Personality Plus, Jakarta: Binarupa Aksara, 1996. Lundin, Robert W, Personality, A Behavioral Analysis, London: The macmillan Company, Collier-Macmillan Limited, 1969. McDonough, Jo and Shaw, Christopher, Material and methods in ELT; a Teacher’s Guide, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1993. 56

57

Premuzic, Thomas Chamorro and Furnham, Adrian, Personality and Intelectual Competence, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publisher, 2005. Riyanti, Rahayu Dwi, dkk, Cross Cultural Understanding, Universitas Terbuka, 2007. Sarwono, Sarlito Wirawan, Berkenalan dengan Aliran-aliran dan Tokoh-tokoh Psikologi, Jakarta: PT. Bulan Bintang, 2002. Scrivener, Jim, Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English language Teachers. The Teacher Development Series, Oxford: Heinemann ELT, 1994. Sukmadinata, Nana Syaodih, landasan Psikologi Proses Pendidikan, Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya, 2007. Suryabrata, Sumadi, Psikologi Kepribadian, Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2007. Sudijono, Drs. Anas, Pengantar Satistik Pendidikan, Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 1995. Sugiyono, Statistika untuk Penelitian, Bandung: CV. Alfabeta, 2008. Tarigan, Henry G, Berbicara Sebagai Suatu Ketrampilan Berbahasa, Bandung: Angkasa, 1981. Umar, S.E., M.M., MBA, Drs. Husein, Metode Penelitian untuk Skripsi dan Tesis Bisnis, Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2005. Abraham, Faith C, Personality Identifier: the four temperaments, from http://www.faithabraham.com/Personality%20Identifier.pdf, retrieved May 10, 2012. Florez, Cunningham MaryAnn, Improving Adult English Language Learners’ Speaking Skill, from http://www.ericdigests.org/2000-3/adult.htm, retrieved June 10, 2012. Littauere, Florence, Marriage (after every wedding comes a marriage), from http://www.wedplan.com/Worksheets/marriage_personality.pdf, retrieved May 18, 2012. Richards Jack C, Developing Classroom Speaking Activities; From Theory to Practice, from http://www.professorjackrichard.com/developingclassoom-speaking-activities.pdf, retrieved May 18, 2012.

58

Walk,

Kery, How to Write a Comparative Analysis, from http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CompAnalysis.html, retrived June 19, 2012.

Appendix 1 TES KEPRIBADIAN SISWA Di bawah ini ada 40 nomor isian yang masing-masing terdiri dari 4 pilihan. Berilah tanda √ di muka satu pilihan dari setiap nomor yang paling sering cocok dengan kamu. Pastikan pada setiap nomor diberi satu tanda. Kalau kamu tidak yakin kata mana yang paling cocok, tanyakan kepada sahabatmu, atau pikirkan apa jawaban kamu ketika kamu masih kanak-kanak. Demi keringkasan kata ini masih dipertahankan dalam bahasa inggris, namun telah diberikan definisi atau penjelasan bagi kata itu. STRENGHTS 1.

--- Adventurous

--- Adaptable

--- Animated

--- Analytical

2.

--- Persistent

--- Playful

--- Persuasive

--- Peaceful

3.

--- Submissive

--- Self-sacrificing

--- Sociable

--- Strong-willed

4.

--- Considerate

--- Controlled

--- Competitive

--- Convincing

5.

--- Refreshing

--- Respectful

--- Reserved

--- Resourceful

6.

--- Satisfied

--- Sensitive

--- Self-reliant

--- Spirited

7.

--- Planner

--- Patient

--- Positive

--- Promoter

8.

--- Sure

--- Spontaneous

--- Scheduled

--- Shy

9.

--- Orderly

--- Obliging

--- Outspoken

--- Optimistic

10.

--- Friendly

--- Faithful

--- Funny

--- Forceful

11.

--- Daring

--- Delightful

--- Diplomatic

--- Detailed

12.

--- Cheerful

--- Consistent

--- Cultured

--- Confident

13.

--- Idealistic

--- Independent

--- Inoffensive

--- Inspiring

14.

--- Demonstrative

--- Decisive

--- Dry humor

--- Deep

15.

--- Mixes easily

--- Mover

--- Musical

--- Mediator

16.

--- Thoughtful

--- Tenacious

--- Talker

--- Tolerant

17.

--- Listener

--- Loyal

--- Leader

--- Lively

18.

--- Contented

--- Chief

--- Chart maker

--- Cute

19.

--- Perfectionist

--- Pleasant

--- Productive

--- Popular

20.

--- Bouncy

--- Bold

--- Behaved

--- Balanced

WEAKNESSES 21.

--- Blank

--- Bashful

--- Brassy

--- Bossy

22.

--- Undisciplined

--- Unsympathetic

--- Unenthusiastic

--- Unforgiving

23.

--- Reticent

--- Resentful

--- Resistant

--- Repetitious

24.

--- Fussy

--- Fearful

--- Forgetful

--- Frank

25.

--- Impatient

--- Insecure

--- Indecisive

--- Interrupts

26.

--- Unpopular

--- Uninvolved

--- Unpredictable

--- Unaffectionate

27.

--- Headstrong

--- Haphazard

--- Hard to please

--- Hesitant

28.

--- Plain

--- Pessimistic

--- Proud

--- Permissive

29.

--- Angered easily

--- Aimless

--- Argumentative

--- Alienated

30.

--- Naïve

---Negative attitude

--- Nervy

--- Nonchalant

31.

--- Worrier

--- Withdrawn

--- Workaholic

--- Wants credit

32.

--- Too Sensitive

--- Tactless

--- Timid

--- Talkative

33.

--- Doubtful

--- Disorganized

--- Domineering

--- Depressed

34.

---Inconsistent

--- Introvert

--- Intolerant

--- Indifferent

35.

--- Messy

--- Moody

--- Mumbles

--- Manipulative

36.

--- Slow

--- Stubborn

--- Show-off

--- Skeptical

37.

--- Loner

--- Lord over others

--- Lazy

--- Loud

38.

--- Sluggish

--- Suspicious

--- Short-tempered

--- Scatterbrained

39.

--- Revengeful

--- Restless

--- Reluctant

--- Rash

40.

--- Compromising

--- Critical

--- Crafty

--- Changeable

Appendix 2 LEMBAR PENILAIAN KEPRIBADIAN KEKUATAN NO

SANGUINIS POPULER

KOLERIS KUAT

MELANKOLIS SEMPURNA

PHLEGMATIS DAMAI

1

…..

Animated

…..

Adventurous

…..

Analitycal

…..

Adaptable

2

…..

Playful

…..

Persuasive

…..

Persistent

…..

Peaceful

3

…..

Sociable

…..

Strong-willed

…..

Selfsacrificing

…..

Submissive

4

…..

Convincing

…..

Competitive

…..

Considerate

…..

Controlled

5

…..

Refreshing

…..

Resourceful

…..

Respectful

…..

Reserved

6

…..

Spirited

…..

Self-reliant

…..

Sensitive

…..

Satisfied

7

…..

Promoter

…..

Positive

…..

Planner

…..

Patient

8

…..

Spontaneous

…..

Sure

…..

Scheduled

…..

Shy

9

…..

Optimistic

…..

Outspoken

…..

Orderly

…..

Obliging

10

…..

Funny

…..

Forceful

…..

Faithful

…..

Friendly

11

…..

Delightful

…..

Daring

…..

Detailed

…..

Diplomatic

12

…..

Cheerful

…..

Confident

…..

Cultured

…..

Consistent

13

…..

Inspiring

…..

Independent

…..

Idealistic

…..

Inoffensive

14

…..

Demonstrative

…..

Decisive

…..

Deep

…..

Dry humor

15

…..

Mixes-easily

…..

Mover

…..

Musical

…..

Mediator

16

…..

Talker

…..

Tenacious

…..

Thoughtful

…..

Tolerant

17

…..

Lively

…..

Leader

…..

Loyal

…..

Listener

18

…..

Cute

…..

Chief

…..

Chartmaker

…..

Contented

19

…..

Popular

…..

Productive

…..

Perfectionist

…..

Pleasant

20

…..

Bouncy

…..

Bold

…..

Behaved

…..

Balanced

KELEMAHAN NO

SANGUINIS POPULER

KOLERIS KUAT

MELANKOLIS SEMPURNA

PHLEGMATIS DAMAI

1

…..

Brassy

…..

Bossy

…..

Bashful

…..

Blank

2

…..

Undisciplined

…..

Unsympathetic

…..

Unforgiving

…..

Unenthusiastic

3

…..

Repetitious

…..

Resistant

…..

Resentful

…..

Reticent

4

…..

Forgetful

…..

Frank

…..

Fussy

…..

Fearful

5

…..

Interrupts

…..

Impatient

…..

Insecure

…..

Indecent

6

…..

Unpredictable

…..

Unaffectionate

…..

Unpopular

…..

Uninvolved

7

…..

Haphazard

…..

Headstrong

…..

Hard to please

…..

Hesitant

8

…..

Permissive

…..

Proud

…..

Pessimistic

…..

Plain

9

…..

Angeredeasily

…..

Argumentative

…..

Alienated

…..

Aimless

10

…..

Naïve

…..

Nervy

…..

Negativeattitude

…..

Nonchalant

11

…..

Wants-credit

…..

Workaholic

…..

Withdrawn

…..

Worrier

12

…..

Talkative

…..

Tactless

…..

Too sensitive

…..

Timid

13

…..

Disorganized

…..

Domineering

…..

Depressed

…..

Doubtful

14

…..

Inconsistent

…..

Intolerant

…..

Introvert

…..

Indifferent

15

…..

Messy

…..

Manipulative

…..

Moody

…..

Mumbles

16

…..

Show-off

…..

Stubborn

…..

Skeptical

…..

Slow

17

…..

Loud

…..

Lord over others

…..

Loner

…..

Lazy

18

…..

Scatterbrained

…..

Shorttempered

…..

Suspicious

…..

Sluggish

19

…..

Restless

…..

Rash

…..

Revengeful

…..

Reluctant

20

…..

Change-able

…..

Crafty

…..

Critical

…..

Compromising

Appendix 3 DEFINISI KATA TES KEPRIBADIAN SISWA KEKUATAN NO

KATA

DEFINISI

1

Adventurous

Orang yang mau melakukan sesuatu hal yang baru dan berani dengan tekad untuk menguasainya.

Adaptable

Mudah menyesuaikan diri dan senang dalam setiap situasi

Animated

Penuh kehidupan, sering menggunakan isyarat tangan, lengan dan wajah secara hidup

Analitycal

Suka menyelidiki bagian-bagian hubungan yang logis dan semestinya

Persistent

Melakukan sesuatu sampai selesai sebelum memulai lainnya

Playful

Penuh kesenangan dan selera humor yang baik

Persuasive

Meyakinkan orang dengan logika dan fakta, bukannya pesona atau kekuasaan

Peaceful

Tampak tidak terganggu dan tenang serta menghindari setiap bentuk kekacauan

Submissive

Dengan mudah menerima pandangan atau keinginan orang lain tanpa banyak perlu mengemukakan pendapatnya sendiri

Self-sacrificing

Bersedia mengorbankan dirinya demi atau untuk memenuhi kebutuhan orang lain

Sociable

Orang yang memandang bersama orang lain sebagai kesempatan untuk bersikap manis dan menghibur, bukannya sebagai tantangan atau kesempatan bisnis

Strong-willed

Orang yang yakin akan caranya sendiri

Considerate

Menghargai keperluan dan perasaan orang lain

Controlled

Mempunyai perasaan emosional tetapi jarang memperlihatkannya

Competitive

Mengubah setiap situasi, kejadian, atau permainan menjadi kontes dan selalu bermain untuk menang

Convincing

Bisa merebut hati anda melalui pesona kepribadiannya

Refreshing

Memperbaharui dan membantu atau membuat orang lain merasa senang

Respectful

Memperlakukan orang lain dengan rasa segan, kehormatan dan penghargaan

Reserved

Menahan diri dalam menunjukkan emosi atau antusiasme

Resourceful

Bisa mertindak cepat dan efektif boleh dikata dalam semua situasi

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Satisfied

Orang yang mudah menerima keadaan atau situasi apa saja

Sensitive

Secara intensif memperhatikan orang lain dan apa yang terjadi

Self-reliant

Orang mandiri yang bisa sepenuhnya mengandalkan kemampuan, penilaian dan sumber dayanya sendiri

Spirited

Penuh kehidupan dan gairah

Planner

Memilih untuk mempersiapkan aturan-aturan yang terinci sebelumnya dalam menyelesaikan proyek atau target dan lebih menyukai keterlibatan dengan tahap-tahap perencanaan dan produk jadi, bukannya melaksanakan tugas

Patient

Tidak terpengaruh oleh penundaan, tetap tenang dan toleran

Positive

Mengetahui segala-galanya akan beres kalau dia yang memimpin

Promoter

Mendorong atau memaksa orang lain mengikuti, bergabung atau menanam investasi melalui pesona kepribadiannya

Sure

Yakin, jarang ragu-ragu atau goyah

Spontaneous

Memilih agar semua kehidupan merupakan kegiatan yang impulsif, tidak dipikirkan lebih dahulu, dan tidak dihambat oleh rencana

Scheduled

Membuat dan menghayati menurut rencana sehari-hari, tidak menyukai rencananya terganggu

Shy

Pendiam, tidak mudah terseret ke dalam percakapan

Orderly

Orang yang mengatur segala-galanya secara metodis dan sistematis

Obliging

Bisa menerima apa saja, orang yang cepat melakukannya dengan cara lain

Outspoken

Bicara terang-terangan dan tanpa menahan diri

Optimistic

Orang yang periang dan meyakinkan dirinya dan orang lain bahwa segala-galanya akan beres

Friendly

Orang yang menanggapi dan bukan orang yang punya inisiatif, jarang memulai percakapan

Faithful

Secara konsisten bisa diandalkan, teguh, setia dan mengabdi, kadang-kadang tanpa alasan

Funny

Punya rasa humor yang cemerlang dan bisa membuat cerita apa saja menjadi peristiwa yang menyenangkan

Forceful

Kepribadian yang mendominasi dan menyebabkan orang lain raguragu untuk melawannya

Daring

Bersedia mengambil resiko, tak kenal takut, berani

Delightful

Orang yang menyenangkan sebagai teman

Diplomatic

Berurusan dengan orang lain secara penuh siasat, perasa dan sabar

Detailed

Melakukan segala-galanya secara berurutan dengan ingatan yang

jernih tentang segala hal yang terjadi 12

13

14

15

16

Cheerful

Secara konsisten memiliki semangat tinggi dan mempromosikan kebahagiaan pada orang lain

Consistent

Tetap memiliki keseimbangan secara emosional, menanggapi sebagaimana yang diharapkan orang lain

Cultured

Orang yang perhatiannya melibatkan tujuan intelektual dan artistik, seperti teater, simfoni, balet

Confident

Percaya diri dan yakin akan kemampuan dan suksesnya sendiri

Idealistic

Memvisualisasikan hal-hal dalam bentuk yang sempurna, dan perlu memenuhi standar itu sendiri

Independent

Memenuhi diri sendiri, mandiri, penuh kepercayaan diri dan rupanya tidak begitu memerlukan bantuan

Inoffensive

Orang yang tidak pernah mengatakan atau menyebabkan apapun yang tidak menyenangkan atau menimbulkan rasa keberatan

Inspiring

Mendorong orang lain untuk bekerja, bergabung atau terlibat dan membuat seluruhnya menyenangkan

Demonstrative

Terang-terangan menyatakan emosi, terutama rasa sayang dan tidak ragu-ragu menyentuh orang lain ketika bicara kepada mereka

Decisive

Orang yang mempunyai kemampuan membuat penilaian yang cepat dan tuntas

Dry humor

Memperlihatkan kepandaian bicara yang menggigit, biasanya kalimat satu baris yang sifatnya sarkastis

Deep

Intensif dan introspektif tanpa rasa senang kepada percakapan dan pengejaran yang pulasan

Mediator

Secara konsisten mencari peranan merukunkan pertikaian supaya bisa menghindari konflik

Musical

Ikut serta atau punya apresiasi mendalam untuk musik, punya komitmen terhadap musik sebagai bentuk seni, bukannya kesenangan pertunjukan

Mover

Terdorong oleh keperluan untuk produktif, pemimpin yang diikuti orang lain, merasa sulit duduk diam-diam

Mixes easily

Menyukai pesta dan tidak bisa menunggu untuk bertemu dengan setiap orang dalam ruangan, tidak pernah menganggap orang lain asing

Thoughtful

Orang yang tanggap dan mengingat kesempatan istimewa dan cepat memberikan isyarat yang baik

Tenacious

Memegang teguh, dengan keras kepala, dan tidak mau melepaskan sampai tujuan tercapai

Talker

Terus menerus bicara, biasanya menceritakan kisah lucu dan menghibur setiap orang di sekelilingnya, merasa perlu mengisi kesunyian supaya membuat orang lain merasa senang

17

18

19

20

Tolerant

Mudah menerima pemikiran dan cara-cara orang lain tanpa perlu tidak menyetujui atau mengubahnya

Listener

Selalu bersedia mendengar apa yang anda katakana

Loyal

Setia kepada seseorang, gagasan atau pekerjaan, kadang-kadang melampaui alas an

Leader

Pemberi pengarahan karena pembawaan, yang terdorong untuk memimpin dan sering merasa sulit mempercayai bahwa orang lain bisa melakukan pekerjaan dengan sama baiknya

Lively

Penuh kehidupan, kuat, penuh semangat

Contented

Mudah puas dengan apa yang dimilikinya, jarang iri hati

Chief

Memegang kepemimpinan dan mengharapkan orang lain mengikutinya

Chartmaker

Mengatur kehidupan, tugas dan pemecahan masalah dengan membuat daftar, formulir atau grafik

Cute

Tak ternilai harganya, dicintai, pusat perhatian

Perfectionist

Menempatkan standar tinggi pada dirinya, dan sering pada orang lain, menginginkan segala-galanya pada urutan yang semestinya sepanjang waktu

Pleasant

Mudah bergaul, bersifat terbuka, mudah diajak bicara

Productive

Harus terus-menerus bekerja atau mencapai sesuatu, sering merasa sulit beristirahat

Popular

Orang yang menghidupkan pesta dan dengan demikian sangat diinginkan sebagai tamu pesta

Bouncy

Kepribadian yang hidup, berlebihan, penuh tenaga

Bold

Tidak kenal takut, berani, terus terang, tidak takut akan resiko

Behaved

Secara konsisten ingin membawa dirinya di dalam batas-batas apa yang dirasakan semestinya

Balanced

Kepribadian yang stabil dan mengambil tengah-tengah, tidak menjadi sasaran ketinggian atau kerendahan yang tajam

KELEMAHAN NO

KATA

DEFINISI

21

Blank

Orang yang memperlihatkan sedikit ekspresi wajah atau emosi

Bashful

Menghindari perhatian, akibat rasa malu

Brassy

Orang yang suka pamer, memperlihatkan apa yang gemerlapan dan kuat, terlalu bersuara

Bossy

Suka memerintah, mendominasi, kadang-kadang mengesalkan dalam hubungan antara orang dewasa

Undiciplined

Orang yang kurang keteraturannya mempengaruhi hampir semua bidang kehidupannya

Unsympathetic

Merasa sulit mengenali masalah atau sakit hati atau perasaan orang lain

Unenthusiastic

Cenderung tidak bergairah, sering merasa bahwa bagaimanapun sesuatu tidak akan berhasil

Unforgiving

Orang yang sulit memaafkan dan melupakan sakit hati atau ketidakadilan yang dilakukan kepada mereka, biasa menyimpan dendam

Reticent

Tidak bersedia atau menolak ikut terlibat, terutama kalau rumit

Resentful

Sering memendam rasa tidak senang sebagai akibat merasa tersinggung oleh sesuatu yang sebenarnya atau sesuatu yang dibayangkan

Resistant

Berjuang, melawan atau ragu-ragu menerima cara lain yang bukan caranya sendiri

Repetitious

Menceritakan lagi kisah atau insiden untuk menghibur anda tanpa menyadari dia sudah menceritakannya beberapa kali sebelumnya, terus menerus memerlukan sesuatu untuk dikatakan

Fussy

Bersikeras tentang persoalan atau perincian sepele, minta perhatian besar kepada perincian yang tidak penting

Fearful

Sering mengalami perasaan sangat khawatir, sedih atau gelisah

Forgetful

Punya ikatan kurang kuat yang biasanya berkaitan dengan kurang disiplin dan tidak mau repot-repot mencatat secara mental hal-hal yang tidak menyenangkan

Frank

Langsung, blak-blakan, tidak sungkan-sungkan mengatakan kepada anda tepat apa yang dipikirkannya

Impatient

Orang yang merasa sulit bertahan untuk menghadapi kekesalan atau menunggu orang lain

Insecure

Orang yang merasa sedih atau kurang keppercayaan

Indecisive

Orang yang merasa sulit membuat keputusan apa saja

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

Interrupts

Orang yang lebih banyak berbicara daripada mendengarkan, yang mulai bicara bahkan tanpa menyadari bahwa orang lain sudah bicara

Unpopular

Orang yang intensitas dan tuntutannya akan kesempurnaan bisa membuat orang lain menjauhinya

Uninvolved

Tidak punya keinginan untuk mendengarkan atau tertarik pada perkumpulan, kelompok, aktivitas atau kehidupan orang lain

Unpredictable

Bisa bergairah sesaat dan sedih pada saat berikutnya, atau bersedia membantu tetapi kemudian menghilang atau berjanji akan datang tetapi kemudian lupa untuk muncul

Unaffectionate

Merasa sulit secara lisan atau fisik memperlihatkan kasih sayang dengan terbuka

Headstrong

Bersikeras memaksakan caranya sendiri

Haphazard

Tidak punya cara yang konsisten untuk melakukan banyak hal

Hard to please

Orang yang menetapkan standarnya terlalu tinggi sehingga orang lain sulit untuk memuaskannya

Hesitant

Lambat dalam bergerak dan sulit ikut terlibat

Plain

Kepribadian tengah-tengah tanpa tinggi rendah dan tidak memperlihatkan banyak emosi, kalau ada

Pessimistic

Sementara mengharapkan yang terbaik, orang ini biasanya melihat sisi buruk sutu situasi lebih dulu

Proud

Orang yang punya harga diri tinggi dan menganggap dirinya selalu benar serta orang terbaik untuk pekerjaan

Permissive

Memperbolehkan orang lain (termasuk anak-anak) melakukan apa saja sesukanya untuk menghindari dirinya tidak disukai

Angered easily

Orang yang perangainya seperti anak-anak yang mengutarakan diri dengan ngambek dan berbuat berlebihan serta melupakannya hampir seketika

Aimless

Bukan orang yang menetapkan tujuan dan tidak ingin menjadi orang seperti itu

Argumentative

Mengobarkan perdebatan karena biasanya dia benar, tidak peduli bagaimana situasinya

Alienated

Mudah merasa terasing dari orang lain, serng karena rasa tidak aman atau takut jangan-jangan orang lain tidak benar-benar senang bersamanya

Naïve

Perspektif yang sederhana dan kekanak-kanakan, kurang bijaksana atau pengertian tentang tingkat kehidupan yang lebih mendalam

Negative attitude

Orang yang sikapnya jarang positif dan sering hhanya bisa melihat sisi buruk atau gelap dari setiap situasi

Nervy

Penuh keyakinan, semangat dan keberanian, sering dalam pengertian negative

Nonchalant

Mudah bergaul, tidak peduli, masa bodoh

31

32

33

34

35

Worrier

Secara konsisten merasa tidak tetap, terganggu atau resah

Withdrawn

Orang yang menarik diri dan memerlukan banyak waktu untuk sendirian atau mengasingkan diri

Workaholic

Orang yang menetapkan tujuan secara agresif serta harus terus menerus produktif dan merasa bersalah kalau beristirahat, tidak terdorong oleh keperluan untuk sempurna atau tuntas tetapi kebutuhan untuk pencapaian dan imbalan

Wants credit

Merasa senang mendapat penghargaan atau persetujuan orang lain. Sebagai penghibur orang ini menyukai tepuk tangan, tertawa dan/atau penerimaan penonton

Too sensitive

Terlalu introspektif dan mudah tersinggung kalau disalahpahami

Tactless

Kadang-kadang menyatakan dirinya dengan cara yang agak menyinggung perasaan dan kurang pertimbangan

Timid

Mundur dari situasi sulit

Talkative

Pembicara yang menghibur dan memaksa diri yang merasa sulit mendengarkan

Doubtful

Mempunyai ciri khas selalu tidak tetap dan kurang keyakinan bahwa suatu hal akan berhasil

Disorganized

Kurang kemampuan untuk membuat kehidupan teratur

Domineering

Dengan memaksa mengambil kontrol atas situasi dan/atau orang lain, biasanya dengan mengatakan kepada orang lain apa yang harus mereka lakukan

Depressed

Orang yang hampir sepanjang waktu merasa tertekan

Inconsistent

Tidak menentu, serba berlawanan, dengan tindakan dan emosi yang tidak berdasarkan logika

Introvert

Orang yang pemikiran dan perhatiannya ditujukan ke dalam, hidup didalam dirinya sendiri

Intolerant

Tampaknya tidak bisa tahan atau menerima sikap, pandangan, atau cara orang lain

Indifferent

Orang yang merasa bahwa kebanyakan hal tidak penting dalam satu atau lain cara

Messy

Hidup dalam keadaan tidak teratur, tidak bisa menemukan banyak benda

Moody

Tidak mempunyai emosi yang tinggi, tetapi biasanya semangatnya merosot sekali, sering kalau merasa tidak dihargai

Mumbles

Bicara pelan kalau didesak, tidak mau repot-repot bicara dengan jelas

Manipulative

Mempengaruhi atau mengurus dengan cerdik atau penuh tipu muslihat demi keuntungan sendiri, dan dengan suatu cara akan bisa memaksakan kehendaknya

36

37

38

39

40

Slow

Tidak sering bertindak atau berpikir dengan cepat, sangat mengganggu

Stubborn

Bertekad memaksakan kehendaknya, tidak mudah dibujuk, keras kepala

Show-offs

Perlu menjadi pusat perhatian, ingin dilihat

Skeptical

Tidak mudah percaya, mempertanyakan motif di balik kata-kata

Loner

Memerlukan banyak waktu pribadi dan cenderung menghindari orang lain

Lord over

Tidak ragu-ragu mengatakan pada anda bahwa dia benar atau memegang kendali

Lazy

Menilai pekerjaan atau kegiatan dengan ukuran berapa banyak tenaga yang diperlukan

Loud

Orang yang tertawa atau suaranya bisa didengar di atas suara lainlainnya dalam ruangan

Sluggish

Lambat untuk memulai, perlu dorongan untuk termotivasi

Suspicious

Cenderung mencurigai atau tidak mempercayai gagasan atau orang lain

Short-tempered

Punya kemarahan yang menuntut berdasarkan ketidaksabaran dan sumbu yang pendek. Kemarahan dinyatakan ketika orang lain tidak bergerak cukup cepat atau tidak menyelesaikan apa yang diperintahkan kepada mereka

Scatterbrained

Tidak punya kekuatan untuk berkonsentrasi atau menaruh perhatian, pikirannya berubah-ubah

Revengeful

Secara sadar atau tidak menyimpan dendam dan menghukum orang yang melanggar, sering dengan diam-diam menahan persahabatan atau kasih saying

Restless

Menyukai kegiatan baru terus-menerus karena tidak merasa senang melakukan hal yang sama sepanjang waktu

Reluctant

Tidak bersedia atau melawan keharusan ikut terlibat

Rash

Bisa bertindak tergesa-gesa, tanpa memikirkan dengan tuntas, biasanya karena ketidaksabaran

Compromising

Sering mengendurkan pendiriannya, bahkan ketika dia benar, untuk menghindari konflik

Critical

Selalu mengevaluasi dan membuat penilaian, sering memikirkan atau menyatakan reaksi negative

Crafty

Cerdik, orang yang selalu bisa menemukan cara untuk mencapai tujuan yang diinginkan

Changeable

Rentang perhatian yang kekanak-kanakan dan pendek yang memerlukan banyak perubahan dan variasi supaya tidak merasa bosan

Appendix 4 SCORING CRITERIA OF SPEAKING Student : …………………………

Date : ………………………

Score : …………… No 1.

Criteria Pronunciation

Rating Score 5 4 3 2 1

2.

Grammar

5 4 3 2

1 3.

Vocabulary

5 4 3 2

Comments Has few traces of foreign accent Always intelligible, thought one is conscious of a definite accent Pronunciation problem necessities concentrated listening and occasionally lead to misunderstanding Very hard to understand because of pronunciation problem, most frequently be asked to repeat Pronunciation problem to serve as to make speech virtually unintelligible Make few (if any) noticeable errors of grammar and word order Occasionally makes grammatical and or word orders errors that do not, however obscure meaning Make frequent errors of grammar and word order, which occasionally obscure meaning Grammar and word order errors make comprehension difficult, must often rephrases sentence and or rest rich himself to basic pattern Errors in grammar and word order, so, severe as to make speech virtually unintelligible Use of vocabulary and idioms is virtually that of native speaker Sometimes uses inappropriate terms and must rephrases ideas because of lexical and equities Frequently uses the wrong words conversation somewhat limited because of inadequate vocabulary Misuse of words and very limited vocabulary makes comprehension quite difficult

1 4.

Fluency

5 4 3 2 1

5.

Comprehension

5 4 3 2 1

Vocabulary limitation so extreme as to make conversation virtually impossible Speech as fluent and efforts less as that of native speaker Speed of speech seems to be slightly affected by language problem Speed and fluency are rather strongly affected by language problem Usually hesitant, often farced into silence by language limitation Speech is so halting and fragmentary as to make conversation virtually impossible Appears to understand everything without difficulty Understand nearly everything at normal speed although occasionally repetition may be necessary Understand most of what is said at slower than normal speed without repetition Has great difficulty following what is said can comprehend only “social conversation” spoken slowly and with frequent repetition Can not be said to understand even simple conversational English

THE WAY OF SCORING This is the way to score the speaking competency through an interview. The criteria include 5 components; they are pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. 1. Pronunciation If students who is interviewed “has a few trances of foreign accent”, he or she will get score 5. 2. Grammar If during the interviewed the student has “Occasionally makes grammatical and or word orders errors that do not, however obscure meaning”, he or she will be scored 4. 3. Vocabulary The students will get score 5 if he or she “Use of vocabulary and idioms is virtually that of native speaker”. 4. Fluency The students may receive score 3 when he or she possesses “Speed and fluency are rather strongly affected by language problem” during interview. 5. Comprehension During the interview held by the researcher, the student processes “Understand nearly everything at normal speed although occasionally repetition may be necessary”, so he or she must get must get score 4 for comprehension component. In conclusion, we can sum up the result of the student’s performance above as 5 + 4 + 5 + 3 + 4 = 21 21 x 4 = 84 And the highest score of this performance must be 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 = 25 25 x 4 = 100

QUESTIONS OF INTERVIEW 1. Tell me about your self! 2. What do you think about this school? 3. What have you done to improve your English speaking score?

Note: Those questions sometime were developed with an English teacher concerned according students skills.

Appendix 5 SMP WIJAYAKUSUMA THE RESULT OF STUDENTS' PERSONALITY TEST VII A No Name 1 Achmad Nur Fauzi 2 Alfiatul Nazah

S

C

M

P

Domination

3

12

4

16

Phlegmatic

9

7

8

16

Phlegmatic

3

Ayu Pratiwi

12

6

10

12

Sanguine Phlegmatic

4

Clarita Agustine

13

8

11

8

Sanguine Phlegmatic

5

Deden Irawan

7

12 10

11

Complex

6

Della Adelia

10

9

11

10

Complex

7

Devia Anggita

12

9

8

11

Sanguine Phlegmatic

8

Dian Aprilian Hidayat

11

15

6

8

Choleric

9

Dicky Purnama

17

9

7

7

Sanguine

10

Diska Krisyanti

13

6

7

14

Phlegmatic sanguine

11

Elgi Indri Yani

8

10 10

12

Complex

12

Febby Pratama

16

10

7

7

Sanguine

13

Feri Irawan

11

12 10

7

Complex

14

Galang Bagus Aldianto

12

9

8

11

Sanguine Phlegmatic

15

Gusti Febriyansyah Adillah Tolan

6

11

7

16

Phlegmatic

16

Henry Febrian Ahmad

12

9

8

11

Sanguine Phlegmatic

17

Jerry Handika

7

14

6

13

Choleric Phlegmatic

18

Jessica Aprilia

8

10 16

6

Melancholic

19

Jihan Sabilla

9

6

16

9

Melancholic

20

Kevin

6

13

7

14

Phlegmatic Melancholic

21

Lutfi Buchori

10

9

5

16

Plegmatic

22

Mega Agustina

7

12 13

8

Choleric Melancholic

23

Meriana Dwi Ariska

10

9

11

10

Complex

24

Muhamad Iqbal

5

13

9

13

Choleric Phlegmatic

25

Muhammad Agan Saputra

12

11

5

12

Complex

26

Muhammad Nur Husain Y

16

4

6

14

Sanguine

27

Nurul Arofah

16

9

4

11

Sanguine

28

Okki Dermawan

29

Pamilia Jurna Ningsih

4 7

8 4

11 13

17 16

Phlegmatic Phlegmatic

30

Putri Sulung

8

12 16

4

Melancholic

31

Riski Fauja Lestari

16

13

7

4

Sanguine

32

Rival Roynaldi

8

8

12

12

Melancholic Phlegmatic

33

Samuel

6

10

7

17

Phlegmatic

34

Savira Meilita.A

17

8

7

8

Sanguine

35

Soni Candra Wijaya

6

18

7

9

Choleric

36

Risa Ifan Tastia Arzeti

9

7

15

9

Melancholic

VIII B No

S

C

M

P

Domination

1

Alfin Nurlaila

Name

10

9

10

11

Complex

2

Ari Indra Jaya

5

15

6

14

Choleric Phlegmatic

3

Christyamara Ayu Yeprilianda

11

10

9

10

Complex

4

Dani Setyawan

7

15

9

9

Choleric

5

Djessy Arista Putri R

10

12

9

9

Sanguine Choleric

6

Feny Alviani

17

7

8

8

Sanguine

7

Inggit Achmad Ichsani

8

8

12

12

Melancholic Phlegmatic

8

Kaisar Fatah Ibrahim

16

11

5

8

Sanguine

9

Leftysya Devi Ameylin

13

16

5

6

Choleric

10

Linda Andriani

13

7

5

15

Phlegmatic

11

Marsella Triyana

11

12

7

10

Complex

12

Maulana Yusuf

11

12

5

12

Complex

13

Nanda Nur Anisa

14

Nurul Fauziah

14 12

6 8

7 7

13 13

Sanguine Phlegmatic Sanguine Phlegmatic

15

Rahmat Kurniawan

16

12

3

9

Sanguine

16

Resa Yovani

10

10

11

9

Complex

17

Rian Ismawanto

15

4

11

10

18

Richard

11

9

5

15

Sanguine Phlegmatic

19

Ruswanto

7

4

9

20

Phlegmatic

20

Sheila Yazid Siti Rubiyanti

7 16

8 5

12 8

13 11

Melancholic Phlegmatic

21 22

Sri Meta Karyani

9

8

5

18

Phlegmatic

23

Suci Andini

13

8

5

13

Sanguine Phlegmatic

24

Syarif Hidayat

9

13

8

10

Choleric

25

Tika Apriyanti

17

8

6

9

Sanguine

26

Vanessa Hanny

16

7

7

10

Sanguine

27

Veronika Putri Ela Reforma

11

10

8

11

Complex

28

Vina Erika

11

8

9

12

Sanguine Phlegmatic

29

Wandy

6

14

7

13

Choleric Phlegmatic

30

Yatri Susanti

10

12

7

11

Complex

31

Yayan Susilo

32

Yudha Pratama

13 10

10 12

6 9

11 9

Complex Sanguine Choleric

33

Yusuf Mordekhai

17

8

8

7

Sanguine

34

Gilang Prakasa

10

11

9

10

Complex

Sanguine

Appendix 6 The Second Grade Students of SMP WIJAYAKUSUMA English Speaking Score No

Name

Pron

Gram

Vocab

Fluency

Compre

Total

1

Student 1

3

3

3

3

3

60

2

Student 2

3

3.25

3

4

3

65

3

Student 3

3

3

3

3

3

60

4

Student 4

3

3

3

3

3

60

5

Student 5

3.50

3.50

3.50

3.50

3.50

70

6

Student 6

3.25

4

4

4

3.50

75

7

Student 7

3

3.50

3.50

3.50

4

70

8

Student 8

3

4

3

3

3.25

65

9

Student 9

3.50

4

3

3

4

70

10

Student 10

4

4

3.50

4

4

78

11

Student 11

4

4

3.50

4.50

4

80

12

Student 12

4

3.50

3.50

3

3.50

70

13

Student 13

4

3.50

4

3

3

70

14

Student 14

4

3

4

3

3.50

70

15

Student 15

3

4

3.25

3

3

65

16

Student 16

3

3

3

3

3

60

17

Student 17

3

3

3

3

3

60

18

Student 18

3

4

4

4

3.75

75

19

Student 19

3.25

4

4

4

3.50

75

20

Student 20

3

4

3

3.25

3

65

21

Student 21

3

3

3

3

3

60

22

Student 22

3

3

3

3

3

60

23

Student 23

3

3

3

3

3

60

24

Student 24

3

3

3

3

3

60

Appendix 7 T Table for Variety of Value Distribution for Various Degree of Freedom (df) df 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 35 40 45 50 60 70

T’ Critics Value for Significance Level 5% 12.71 4.30 3.18 2.78 2.57 2.45 2.36 2.31 2.26 2.23 2.20 2.18 2.16 2.14 2.13 2.12 2.11 2.10 2.09 2.09 2.08 2.07 2.07 2.06 2.06 2.06 2.05 2.05 2.04 2.04 2.03 2.02 2.02 2.01 2.00 2.00

1% 63.66 9.92 5.84 4.60 4.03 3.71 3.50 3.36 3.25 3.17 3.11 3.06 3.01 2.98 2.95 2.92 2.90 2.88 2.86 2.84 2.83 2.82 2.81 2.80 2.79 2.78 2.77 2.76 2.76 2.75 2.72 2.71 2.69 2.68 2.65 2.65

80 90 100 125 150 200 300 400 500 1000

1.99 1.99 1.98 1.98 1.98 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.96 1.96

2.64 2.63 2.63 2.26 2.61 2.60 2.59 2.59 2.59 2.58