IMPROVING THE STUDENTS SPEAKING COMPETENCE USING SCREENCAST-O-MATIC

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

TITLE

IMPROVING THE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING COMPETENCE USING SCREENCAST-O-MATIC

A THESIS Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Magister Humaniora (M.Hum.) Degree in English Language Studies

by Paulina Besty Fortinasari Student Number: 156332011

THE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2017

i


A THESIS

IMPROYING

TIE

ST{IDENTS' SPEAKING COMPETENCT USING SCREENCAST.O.MATIC

Ilr.

J. Fismokg

Yoryekarta,3l luly

Advisor

ll

2011

'f

's 6rBuBqns

IT

!

,{11sre,r1ug

rolceJlg uru.rto.rg

'rrrnH'tr41

soguung'f 'rO'Z

,ftr1arceg

oqourqg-f:{fl.:

srequretrAl

r4ec;-\

uos,red4uq3 ri,;1gpP1|f

tr

ffi

*f

&

\' elquldecry

,(q pelueser6

JIIYI{I.O.ISVJNf fUJS

CNISN

ff,NfIf{I{IO3

CNDTYUdS .SINfCIOIS

fEI

CNIAOUdIItr

SISIHI Y



DEDICATION PAGE

Nobody said it was easy ~ Coldplay

God doesn’t require us to succeed, He requires us to try ~ Mother Teresa

If I fail, if I succeed, at least I’ll live as I believe ~ Whitney Houston

And, when you want something, the entire universe conspires in helping you to achieve it. ~ Paulo Coelho

iv


I dedicate this thesis to: To the ones who believe on the miracles of teaching

v

l

IA

'*p

ugsBrnuod &se8 Bur'Fr?d

UOZ

[p{57'q:rzryf,toa

saxe.lager.sdol(l $rotp1,16 so$Fl$es Jo 6sewrqd 'seepl ssesle ,r.poqeuros {oo} eqs JI rrowilecuec os.6ep Eurpnpur sscuentssuoc 1pS eW Epuulsr*prm rellra arll 'rell&t\ smorp erp Jo secuagueo pm 'sasrrqd 'suepr orll ,Jc 'pqeN esrrrrrsqlo ssa1un'socmluos 'msunld 'seapr IIB lBrB,trrrsc ol sr slql

,IIITYNIIIUO

frO IIt{Iff{fr,LYJ,S



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank Almighty God, Jesus Christ, for his blessing and love so that I can finish my thesis in English Language Studies. Because of His guidance and care, I can keep trying and keep my head held high in facing the barriers and challenges which hinder me to do my best. My deepest gratitude goes to my advisor, Dr. J. Bismoko, for his guidance, encouragement, and suggesstions for me to finish my thesis. I appreciate his time and knowledge in my thesis accomplishment. My deep gratitude also goes to all my lecturers in the English Language Studies of Sanata Dharma University for giving me priceless knowledge, skills and inspiration, especially F.X. Mukarto, Dr. B.B. Dwijatmoko, M.A., Dr. E. Sunarto, M. Hum., Widya Kiswara, M.Hum., Paulus Sarwoto, S.S., M.A., Ph. D., and all KBI lecturers. I also thank Mbak Marni for always guiding me in administrative matters. I would like to give my gratitude to Ms Wedo and Pak Simon., for the opportunities given to me to conduct research in Accounting C and Management A. My big thanks also I dedicate to the Dean of Economy Faculty and secretariat staffs for marvelous help and service. I am also grateful to the students in Accounting A and Management C for being my cooperative respondents. I would also like to convey my thanks to Pak Risang, Pak Gumawang Jati, Mbak Jesicca, Mas Calvin, dan Bu Badriah for giving me valuable input, ideas, references, and suggestions to complete my thesis. My special regards and overwhelming gratitude are presented to my beloved family: Bapak, Ibu, Anik and Erlangga for valuable support, loves and prayer for me. I also thank to my college friends in ELS escpecially Class B students and other friends. I also thank you for Riska, Gaby and Mb Ayuk to help me keep“healthy” in the craziness of finishing my thesis. I also would like to thank to Where-There-BeDragons (Mb Rita, Lindsay, Aaron) for the valuable chance and experience so I can learn language a lot and improve myself. Last but not least, I would also like to express my thankfulness to people whose names cannot be mentioned here. May God bless you abundantly.

Paulina Besty Fortinasari

viii

IIA

LI\Z

IFI

SZ

\ea?veteped

uuB>P,(Eol:rp lBnqlc 'e,(ureusqes u€Euep lenq e,(es p4 ueep.(tusd

uuqnuaq

'sqnued ru8eqes u,(es erueu rre>[un1u?cusur de14 Brrr€les 'e,(es epeds{ }lpfoJ rru{uoqrueu undneur e,(es pep utlr elurueru nped edrml srurepqp ueEu4usde>1 e,tuuuu>pselrlqndureur uup 'se1eqre1 sJBces lnlun urul srpou nels leruelul ualrnqulsrpueu 'e1up uulu>18ued >1n1ueq ruelep u,(uqeloEuour 'uru1 erpsur {n}ueq urelup uu>1qrrc8usur'uedun(ustu {n1un {BrI eur&qg ?}eu?S selrsJelrun uuap6ndre4 rre{ueqruew u,(es uurryrusp ueEuoq '(upe e11$ uulnpsdrp ?w$, pp uuosaq

p

upude>1

JIIYI^[.O.ISYJNf flU3S CNISN gJNf,IUdI IOJ ONDTYfldS .SINflONIS

gHI SNIAOUdIAII

:1npnfteq Euuf e.(us t{elu{I et:rz4uullegq B1errBS sullsrelrun ueelelsnd:ed epeda4 rruluequeur e,(us uenqeteEued nurl uuEuuqureEued FreC

lIOzEEggl: rreseuruod .Qseg eullned

?1IlsIs€rlBI I rouroN

3rrr3N

:

:urururlq c]suus sulrsJelrun el\srsuquu €^(us 'rur qur\uq rp tmEu4 epu€Ueq EueA

XIW4OWY NV,NITNTIilEDT XNNN HYIhITI

YTAVX I SVYIT gNd

NYNflil TISUTI{ NWT,YTNtr fld WgruiIT



TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE ............................................................................................................................. i APPROVAL PAGE ...................................................................................................... ii DEFENSE APPROVAL PAGE................................................................................... iii DEDICATION PAGE .................................................................................................. iv STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ............................................................................. vi LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ........................................... vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. ix LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................xiiii LIST OF PICTURES .................................................................................................. xv LIST OF FIGURE ...................................................................................................... xvi LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................... xvii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. xviii ABSTRAK ................................................................................................................... xix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1 A. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................... 1 B.

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION ....................................................................... 5

C.

PROBLEM LIMITATION ............................................................................... 7

D. PROBLEM FORMULATION .......................................................................... 8 E.

RESEARCH GOALS ........................................................................................ 9

F. RESEARCH BENEFITS ................................................................................. 11 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................... 13 A. THEORETICAL REVIEW ............................................................................. 13 1. Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) ..................................... 13 2. Screencast-O-Matic .................................................................................. 15 a. Screencast-O-Matic Application ........................................................... 16 b. The Use of SOM in ELT....................................................................... 28 ix


3. Speaking.................................................................................................... 30 a. The Nature of Speaking Skill ................................................................ 30 b. Types of Speaking ................................................................................ 31 c. Speaking Competence ........................................................................... 32 4. Teaching Speaking .................................................................................... 33 a. The Aims of Teching Speaking ............................................................ 33 b. The Problems in Teaching Speaking .................................................... 35 c. The Principles in Teaching Speaking.................................................... 37 5. Learning Speaking .................................................................................... 41 a. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) ......................................... 41 a. Integrating SOM in CLT Classroom ..................................................... 45 6. Feedback as One of Factors Affecting Speaking Competence ................. 46 a. The Definition of Feedback .................................................................. 46 b. The Types of Feedbacks ....................................................................... 48 c. Feedbacks on the Students' Speaking Competence .............................. 48 7. Young Adult Learners .............................................................................. 49 B.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................. 51

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................... 56 A. RESEARCH DESIGN .................................................................................... 56 B.

RESEARCH PROCEDURE ........................................................................... 60

C.

NATURE AND SOURCE OF DATA ............................................................ 66 1. Nature of Data ........................................................................................... 67 2. Sources of Data ......................................................................................... 67

D. INSTRUMENTS AND DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUES ..................... 69 1. Instruments................................................................................................ 70 a. Lesson Plans .......................................................................................... 70 b. Speaking Test Items .............................................................................. 72 c. Speaking Assessment Rubric ................................................................ 73 d. Questionnaire ........................................................................................ 73

x


e. Interview Guidelines ............................................................................. 75 2. Technique.................................................................................................. 76 a. Speaking Test ........................................................................................ 76 b. Questionnaire ........................................................................................ 77 c. Interview ............................................................................................... 77 3. Process ...................................................................................................... 78 E.

DATA ANALYSIS ......................................................................................... 79 1. Descriptive Statistics................................................................................. 79 2. Inferential Statistics .................................................................................. 82 a. Normality Test ...................................................................................... 82 b. Homogeneity Test ................................................................................. 82 c. Hypothesis testing ................................................................................. 82 3. Descriptive Qualitative ............................................................................. 84

F. RESEARCH VALIDITY (LEGITIMATION) ................................................ 85 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS RESULTS ...................................................................... 87 A. DATA SUMMARY ........................................................................................ 87 1. Preliminary Observtion ............................................................................. 87 2. Speaking Pre-test and Post-test ................................................................ 92 a. Pre-Test Results .................................................................................... 96 b. Post-Test Results................................................................................. 101 3. Questionnaire and Interview .................................................................. 108 a. Students’ Response from Questionnaire ............................................. 108 b. Students’ Response from Interview .................................................... 114 B.

ANALYSIS RESULTS ................................................................................. 122 1. The effect of SOM on the Speaking Competence .................................. 123 2. The Interaction Effect of SOM Across Feedback ................................... 124 3. The Students’ Responses on the Use of SOM ........................................ 131

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................ 132 A.

CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................ 132

xi


B.

IMPLICATIONS ........................................................................................ 135

C.

SUGGESTIONS ......................................................................................... 136

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................... 138 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................... 151

xii


LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1

Factorial Design Employed in This Research ……………………

59

Table 3.2

The Total Respondents of the Research ………………………….

69

Table 3.3

Reliability Statistics ……………………………………………..

75

Table 3.4

Criteria of Students’ Speaking Competence ……………………..

81

Table 4.1

Students’ Willingness to Prepare the Sources ……………………

88

Table 4.2

Students’ Computer Skills …..……………………………………

89

Table 4.3

Supporting Facilities …………………………………………… Reliability Test of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Experimental Class ……………………………………………………………… Reliability Test of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Control Class …… Reliability Test of Speaking Post-test Scores in Experimental Class ……………………………………………………………… Reliability Test of Speaking Post-test Scores in Control Class ….. Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Pre-test Score in Experimental Class ………………………………………………. Frequency Distribution of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Experimental Class ……………………………………………… Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Pre-test Score in Control Class ……………………………………………………………… Frequency Distribution of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Control Class ……………………………………………………………… Comparison between the Descriptive Statistics of the Speaking Pre-test in Experimental and Control Class ……………………… Normality Test of the Pre-Test Scores on Listening Comprehension in the Experimental and Control Group ……….. Homogeneity Test of the Speaking Pre-test in Experimental and Control Group …………………………………………………… Test of the Speaking Scores in Experimental and Control Class .. Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Post-test Score in Experimental Class ………………………………………………. Frequency Distribution of Speaking Post-test Scores in Experimental Class ………………………………………………. Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Post-test Score in Control Class ………………………………………………………………

91

Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7 Table 4.8 Table 4.9 Table 4.10 Table 4.11 Table 4.12 Table 4.13 Table 4.14 Table 4.15 Table 4.16 Table 4.17 Table 4.18

xiii

94 94 95 96 96 97 97 98 98 99 99 100 101 101 102


Table 4.19 Frequency Distribution of Speaking Post-test Scores in Control Class ……………………………………………………………… Table 4.20 Comparison between the Descriptive Statistics of the Speaking Post-test in Experimental and Control Class …………………….. Table 4.21 Normality Test of the Speaking Post-Test Scores in the Experimental and Control Group ……………………………….. Table 4.22 Homogeneity Test of the Speaking Pre-test in Experimental and Control Group. ………………………………………………….. Table 4.23 T-Test of the Speaking Post-test Scores in Experimental and Control Class …………………………………………………… Table 4.24 Normality Test …………………………………………………… Table 4.25 Homogeneity Test ………………………………………………

103

Table 4.26 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects (a Two-Way ANOVA) ……. Table 4.27 Reliability Statistics ………………………………………………

107

Table 4.28 Teaching and Learning …………………………………………... Table 4.29 Classroom Activities ……………………………………………..

109

Table 4.30 SOM Operationalization ………………………………………… Table 4.31 Positive Effect ……………………………………………………

112

Table 4.32 The Average of Questionnaire …………………………………… Table 4.33 The Samples of Students’ Responses from The Interview ……….

114

Table 4.34 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects (A Two-Way ANOVA)…….. Table 4.35 The Comparison of Students’ Speaking Competence Scores …..

124

Table 4.36 The Levene Test on the Feedback Variable ……………………... Table 4.37 Equality of Covariance Matrices …………………………………

128

Table 4.38 Multivariate Tests Output Box …………………………………...

130

xiv

103 104 104 105 106 106

109

110

113

114

128

129


LIST OF PICTURES

Picture 2.1 Official Website of Screencast-O-Matic …………………………….. 18 Picture 2.2 Step 1 and 2 for Installing SOM …………………………………….. 18 Picture 2.3 Step 3 and 4 for Installing SOM …………………………………….. 19 Picture 2.4 Step 5 for Installing SOM …………………………………………… 19 Picture 2.5 Adjusting the Captured Area ………………………………………... 20 Picture 2.6 Recording Size ………………………………………………………. 20 Picture 2.7 Adjusting Automatically …………………………………………….. 20 Picture 2.8 Screen Casting the PowerPoint Slides ………………………………. 20 Picture 2.9 Screen Casting the Video ……………………………………………

21

Picture 2.10 Recording Window in SOM ………………………………………... 21 Picture 2.11 Recording Button …………………………………………………..

22

Picture 2.12 Time Preparation in SOM ………………………………………….. 22 Picture 2.13 Pause Button ……………………………………………………….. 23 Picture 2.14 Menus in Pause Rectangle Box …………………………………….. 23 Picture 2.15 SOM Saving Window ……………………………………………… 24 Picture 2.16 Playback Line in Saving Window ………………………………….. 25 Picture 2.17 Saving Options …………………………………………………….. 25 Picture 2.18 Saving Options in detail …………………………………………….. 25 Picture 2.19 Publishing Options ………………………………………………….. 25 Picture 2.20 Process of Publishing ……………………………………………….. 26 Picture 2.21 Screen Casting Webcam …………………………………………… 27

xv


LIST OF FIGURE Figure 2.1

A cycle of CBA ………………………... …………………………..

Figure 2.2

The Conceptual Framework of the Study …………………………... 52

Figure 3.1

Mixed-method Procedure …………………………………………...

Figure 3.2

Speaking Test Items …...…………………………………………… 72

Figure 3.3

Final Score for Speaking Test ………………………………………. 74

Figure 3.4

The criteria formulation …………………………………………….. 80

Figure 4.1

The Profile Plots of Speaking Competence Mean Scores …………..

xvi

44

62

126


LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Pre-test Plan......................................................................................... 152 Appendix 2 Post-test Plan ...................................................................................... 156 Appendix 3 Assessment Rubrics............................................................................. 169 Appendix 4 Lesson Plan of Meeting 2 and 3 (EG) ................................................. 161 Appendix 5 Lesson Plan of Meeting 4 (EG) ........................................................... 170 Appendix 6 Lesson Plan of Meeting 5 (EG) ........................................................... 178 Appendix 7 Lesson Plan of Meeting 6 (EG) ........................................................... 184 Appendix 8 Lesson Plan of Meeting 7 (EG) ........................................................... 192 Appendix 9 Lesson Plan of Meeting 2 and 3 (CG) ................................................. 200 Appendix 10 Lesson Plan of Meeting 4 (CG)........................................................... 209 Appendix 11 Lesson Plan of Meeting 5 (CG)........................................................... 217 Appendix 12 Lesson Plan of Meeting 6 (CG)........................................................... 225 Appendix 13 Lesson Plan of Meeting 7 (CG)........................................................... 233 Appendix 14 Pre-test Scores for Experiment Group................................................. 241 Appendix 15 Pre-test Score for Control Group......................................................... 242 Appendix 16 Post-test Scores for Experiment Group ............................................... 243 Appendix 17 Post-test Score for Control Group ....................................................... 244 Appendix 18 Raw Data of Statistical Analysis ......................................................... 245 Appendix 19 Blue Print Questionnaire for Preliminary Observation ....................... 255 Appendix 20 Questionnaire for Preliminary Observation ........................................ 256 Appendix 21 Blue Print Questionnaire for Experimental Group .............................. 258 Appendix 22 Questionnaire for Experiment Group .................................................. 261 Appendix 23 Questionnaire Validation ..................................................................... 263 Appendix 24 Interview Guideline ............................................................................. 264 Appendix 25 Interview Transcripts ........................................................................... 265

xvii


ABSTRACT Fortinasari, P. B. (2017). Improving the Students’ Speaking Competence using Screencast-O-Matic. Yogyakarta: The Graduate Program in English Language Studies. The recent TEFL journals and seminars discuss the use of technology in EFL context. There are so many recommended new and useful computer software and applications. Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) is one of the newest applications that is recommended to be utilized in language teaching. This research is to test whether SOM gives positive effect to the English-speaking competence. To achieve the goal of the research, there are three research questions addressed in this study, namely 1) Is there a positive effect of the Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) technique on speaking competence of Accounting and Management students? 2) Is there any interaction between SOM technique and feedbacks received by the students?, and 3) How do the students respond to the use of SOM in learning speaking? This is a mixed-method research involving factorial experimental design supported by qualitative survey design. The participant of the study were 76 firstsemester-students of Accounting and Management Program Study in Sanata Dharma University who made up the experimental and control group. The data collection techniques were speaking tests (pre-test and post-test), questionnaire, and focus-group interview. The research data were the results of two sets of speaking tests, questionnaire, and the students’ responses towards improving speaking competence using SOM application. The results of the pre-test nd post-test scores were analyzed using a two-way ANOVA statistical technique while the data of the students’ responses (questionnaire and interview) were analyzed descriptively. The research findings show that there is a positive effect of implementing SOM on the students’ speaking competence. The analysis result indicates that there was a significant different between the two techniques (SOM and Non-SOM), indicated by (p=0.029<α=0.05). Meanwhile, the difference among the moderator variables (teacher’s feedback, teacher’s feedback plus peer feedback, and teacher’s feedback plus selfcorrective feedback) was not significant (p=0.269> α=0.05). However, regarding the joint effects, the analysis results shows that there was no interaction effect of techniques and the feedback givers on the students’ speaking competence, indicated by p=0.635> α=0.05, which meant that the students experienced SOM always performed better than those who didn’t experience SOM. Then, based on the qualitative analysis, SOM proposed a more effective and efficient learning for speaking class. SOM provides simple-and-easy-operated features that allow the students to record their voice as their practices before conducting real oral presentations. It provides a fun learning since it motivated the students to have autonomous learning, enhanced their confidence and improved cooperative learning because of its practicality, flexilibity and portability. Based on the research results, it shows that SOM can contribute positively to the learning process of speaking. Hence, it can be used as an alternative medium for the students to learn English speaking and improve their speaking competence. Keywords: Screencast-O-Matic, CALL research, speaking competence

xviii


ABSTRAK Fortinasari, P. B. (2017). Improving the Students’ Speaking Competence using Screencast-O-Matic. Yogyakarta: The Graduate Program in English Language Studies. Akhir-akhir ini, banyak jurnal dan seminar TEFL yang membicarakan tentang penggunaan teknologi di aktivitas pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Ada banyak software computer dan aplikasi yang bermanfaat untuk pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris. SOM adalah salah satu aplikasi terbaru yang direkomendasikan untuk digunakan di kelas Bahasa Inggris. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetes apakah penggunaan SOM memberikan efek positif pada kemampuan berbicara mahasiswa. Untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut, ada tiga rumusan masalah, yaitu (1) Apakah ada pengaruh positif mengenai penggunaan SOM pada kemampuan berbicara mahasiswa di program study Akuntansi dan Manajemen? (2) Apakah ada pengaruh interaksi antara penggunaan SOM dan komentar yang diterima oleh mahasiswa? dan (3) Seperti apakah persepsi mahasiswa tentang penggunaan SOM dalam kelas Bahasa Inggris? Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kombinasi yang melibatkan penelitian eksperimen faktorial dan survei kualitatif. Responden penelitian ini ada 76 mahasiswa semester 1 Fakultas Ekonomi Sanata Dharma yang terbagi dalam kelas ekperimen dan kontrol. Teknik pengumpulan data adalah ujian lisan (pre-tes dan pos-tes), kuisioner dan interview dalam kelompok. Dengan begitu, data penelitian adalah nilai ujian lisan (pretes dan pos-tes) dan respon mahasiswa mengenai penggunaan SOM melalui kuisioner dan interview. Hasil ujian lisan (pre-tes dan pos-tes) dianalisis dengan ANOVA dua jalur, sedangkan data tentang respon mahasiswa dianalisa secara deskriptif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ada pengaruh positif dari penggunaan SOM terhadap kemampuan berbicara mahasiswa. Hasil analisis mengindikasikan adanya perbedaan yang significant antara dua teknik (SOM dan Non-SOM) dengan perolehan p=0.029<α=0.05, meskipun diantara variable moderator (masukan guru, masukan guru plus teman, masukan guru dan masukan diri sendiri) tidak terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan (p=0.269> α=0.05). Akan tetapi, hasil analisis menemukan bahwa tidak ada pengaruh interaksi antara teknik dan masukan yang diterima oleh siswa. Dengan demikian, mahasiswa yang belajar menggunakan SOM selalu menunjukkan performa yang lebih baik daripada mahasiswa yang tidak menggunakan SOM. Sedangkan mengenai hasil analisis kualitatif, penggunaan SOM menciptakan pembelajaran yang lebih efektif dan efisien. SOM menyediakan fitur-fitur yang mudah dioperasikan dan menyediakan mahasiswa untuk merekam suara mereka sebagai bentuk latihan berbicara sebelum melakukan presentasi. SOM juga menyediakan situasi menyenangkan yang memotivasi mahasiswa untuk belajar berbicara mandiri, meningkatkan rasa percaya diri dan menciptakan pembelajaran yang kooperatif karena karakternya yang praktis, fleksibel dan portabel. Hasil penelitian di atas dapat disimpulkan bahwa SOM telah berkontribusi positif terhadap proses belajar speaking. Oleh karena itu, SOM bisa digunakan sebagai alternatif teknik untuk belajar English speaking dan meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Kata kunci: Screencast-O-Matic, CALL research, speaking competence.

xix


CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This study intends to investigate the effect of implementing Screencast-OMatic application on the students’ speaking competence. Therefore, this chapter presents the relevance and feasibility of the project which covers background of the study, problem identification, problem limitation and research questions. In addition, this chapter will also elaborate the goals and benefits of the research. A. BACKGROUND No one would deny that the most rapid development in recent years is the development and the spread of technology. Technology is regarded as an important thing in this modern era since it has contributed a lot in the improvement of human’s life. The recent TEFL journals and seminars discuss about the impact of using information and communication technologies (ICTs) in the general field of language teaching, especially in the enhancement of English teaching and learning process. Jati (2016) stated that the rapid evolution of technology has changed language pedagogy and language use, enabling new ways of learning, new forms of authorship, and new ways to teach beyond cognitive, classroom wall and curriculum. The development of technology has challenged the language teachers to improve and upgrade their teaching techniques. Furthermore, the demand of English competence is also rising recently. Having suffice English competence is regarded as important for the university

1


2 students to get better job, interact with foreign people, prepare academic future, and so forth. To be competent in English, it means that students should master the four English skills, namely listening, speaking, reading and writing. Speaking is regarded as essential skill for the undergraduate students since it will show that the students master English. When someone is speaking, they are performing their other skills such as their listening skill, vocabulary, understanding of English sentences, pronunciation, articulation and so forth. However, many students assume that speaking in English is difficult. Bailey (2003) as cited in Nunan (2004) mentions three reasons why students assume that speaking is difficult. First, it is because the students have limited English vocabulary and sufficient understanding of the structure. Second, the students do not have time to have practice. The only opportunities they speak English is in the English class. They do not have enough chances to practice speaking outside. Third, because of the first and second reason, the students are not confident to speak English and assume that speaking English is really hard. This notion is also supported by the facts found by the researcher. Based on the interview, the students in Accounting and Management Study Program Sanata Dharma University also admitted that the most difficult skills are listening and speaking. Whereas, according to Buku Panduan Program Studi Akuntansi dan Management, the students are expected to work in financial or marketing division in local or overseas companies. They are also expected to be able to compete in ASEAN Economy Community. Those positions require the workers or job seekers to be able


3 to understand the spoken language well in order to be able to communicate actively. On the other hand, the students also face another problem which is related to the opportunity to learn English speaking skill. The students do not have enough chance to speak English in the class since English class is allocated for 150 minutes. Therefore, it is essential to provide facilities for the students to do autonomous learning. As mentioned earlier, utilizing technology effectively and wisely will improve the learning achievement. There are many computer software and applications that help the teachers and students to achieve the goals of learning. Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) is one of the newest computer software which allow the users to record their voices while capturing the computer screen. Badriah (2016) states that SOM is “a digital recording of computer screen output, also known as a video screen capture, often containing audio narration”. Basically, SOM is the combination and the simplification of Windows Movie Maker and Audacity. Therefore, the final product of SOM is in the form of video. The user can cast everything such as desktop computer, slide presentation, videos, and so forth through the computer screen. This application is often utilized by the lecturers for flipped-classroom or businesses to present the products or services. There are a lot of utilized features that is very useful such adjustable screen, voice recordings, pause options, smart pointers, links to publish the videos and so forth. Liam (2016) adds that SOM is easy to operate and effective for the business industry to explain, promote or present their products and services in the form of video. In line


4 with that, Lamb (2015) states that, therefore, it is very possible to utilize SOM in language teaching since it is simple and does not require sophisticated instructions to perform. This computer software is suitable with the students who do not have enough opportunity to practice speaking inside or outside class. It is also likely for those who are not confident to speak. Since the speakers can put the cues about what they are going to speak. On the other hand, it allows the speakers to edit their recording. In short, it helps them practice speaking autonomously. However, there were still limited studies about the use of Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) in language learning, moreover, the studies in the local context which investigate the effect of the innovative media like SOM application on the students’ achievement in the real practice. Therefore, this study basically tries to discover the effect of SOM application on the students’ speaking competence. It is to test whether SOM application gives positive effect to the students’ speaking competence and how effective SOM application improve the students’ speaking competence. In discovering the effect, there are a lot of variables that may influence the speaking competence of the students. One of them is the feedback received by the students. Feedback is regarded as essential point in teaching speaking. Students who learn speaking really need feedbacks to know what kinds of mistakes they make or in which part they need to improve. Feedbacks can be received from the teachers, peers and even the students themselves. However, teachers have authority to choose the the best way to give feedbacks to the students (Harmer, 2006). It is suggested that


5 teachers correct the students’ mistakes positively and with encouragement (Baker & Westrup, 2003). Feedback in CALL classroom would be needed for the students as a guidance to do autonomous learning. Therefore, in this research, feedback is considered as variable moderator. It is necessary to investigate the interaction effect of SOM application across the feedback received by the students during speaking lesson. Interaction effect happens when the effect of an independent variable towards the dependent variable depends on the level of another independent variable. So, the effect of SOM towards speaking competence may differ depends on the level of feedbacks received by the students. In this research, the level of giving feedback is divided into three, namely teacher feedbacks, peer feedbacks and self-correction feedback. If there is an interaction effect between the use of SOM and the level of feedback received by the students, and the effect of SOM is positive, the teachers and the lecturers are suggested to use it. B. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION There are many problems in the teaching and learning speaking skills. The problems could arise from various aspects. The first problem which was found is that the students’ speaking competence in Accounting and Management Study Program is weak. They are in the beginner level. On the contrary, they need to have sufficient English speaking competence to get job, work in international field, prepare academic future, and so forth. If their speaking competence is weak, it will be difficult for the


6 students to compete in international context, whereas ASEAN Economy Community (AEC) requires them to be more skillful and competent. The second problem deals with the students’ perception that speaking in English is difficult. Bailey (2003) as cited by Nunan (2004) states that students perceive that speaking is difficult because they do not have idea about what and how to say. That condition is started by the lack of vocabulary and understanding English grammar. The students might be lack of input on vocabulary and get little exposure on English grammar. However, it could be a note for the teacher to create classroom activities that change the perception that learning speaking is not difficult. Then, still related to the previous problem, the third problem is that the students realize that their speaking skill is low. There are two possibilities when students think that their speaking skill is low. First, they will try to practice more and more to improve their skill and that is a positive effect. Second, the students give up on it and do not want to learn speaking anymore. To avoid the second possibility, it is essential for the teachers to have fun and encouraging teaching techiques which arise the students’ confidence. It is very important for the students to be confident so that they do not feel afraid of having mistakes during the practice. The fourth problem is related the opportunity to have speaking practice. Since English is as a Foreign Language in Indonesia, it is not easy to practice speaking English outside the class. Moreover, for the university students, their opportunity to learn English is insufficient. One of the things that should be done is maximizing the students’ opportunity to practice speaking and campaigning students’ autonomous


7 learning. Autonomous learning will help the students to do English speaking practice without the teachers. The last but not the least, the fifth problem is related to the technique used to teach speaking. Since the teaching teachnique is utilizing computer application, it is necessary to be investigated to know its effectivity and efficiency, advantages, drawbacks and threats. Therefore, the students can have lots of opportunities to practice speaking English by utilizing the application maximumly. C. PROBLEM LIMITATION In this research, the research would like to test whether SOM application gives positive effect on the students’ speaking competence in Accounting and Management Study Program. However, in this research, there are some limitations since there might be many problems in teaching and learning speaking skill. Regarding the feasibility of the research and the time constraint, the first limitation is on the research subject and the content taught. The research subjects are the students in Accounting and Management Students in Sanata Dharma University in the first semester. On the other hand, the researcher also limits the content taught. The content which is taught in this experiment is following MKU Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Therefore, this research will not disturb the flow of the English classes since the English classes for non-English majors are intended to guide students and build their speaking competence and last for 150 minutes (3 credits) each week.


8 The second limitation is on the language skill that will be explored. Although there are many skills in English, the researcher does not explore all of them. In this research, the researcher decides to focus on the speaking skill. It is chosen based on the urgency faced by the students in Accounting and Management Study Program. Those students are demanded to be able to speak fluently and accurately in the future jobs. The third limitation is on the speaking competence. Considering the students’ initial competence which is still low, it is impossible to improve all competencies to successfully speak in English. This research will focus only on students’ articulation, pronunciation and grammar. The fourth limitation is related to the media used in this experiment. As mentioned earlier, this research will find out the effect of using SOM application to the speaking competence of the students. Therefore, the medium focused in this research is only Screencast-O-Matic Free Version. The researcher also limits the version of the medium since the other versions of this medium are not affordable. The fifth limitation regards the factors affecting the speaking competence. Since there are many factors affecting the speaking competence of the students, the research limits the moderator variable. However, the factor affecting the speaking competence in this context is the feedback received by the students. D. PROBLEM FORMULATION This study is aimed to answer three research questions. They are:


9 1. Is there a positive effect of the Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) technique on speaking competence of Accounting and Management students? 2. Is there any interaction between SOM technique and feedbacks received by the students? 3. How do the students respond to the use of SOM in learning speaking? E. RESEARCH GOALS This research has three main goals. The first goal is to investigate whether there is a positive effect of implementing SOM on the students’ speaking competence. SOM is a recommended software which allows the user to cast anyting on the computer screen. SOM is suggested and innovated to be used as a teaching technique in speaking class. However, there were just few researches on the implementation of SOM in the English teaching and learning process. To fill this gap, discovering the effect of utilizing SOM is needed. It is essential to check how the media works in real practice. By doing experiment research, that is to find out the difference of the students’ achievement in the experimental and control group. The difference is analysed through a two-way ANOVA statistical procedure where the significance level of 0.05 is used to determine whether the difference is significant or not. Then, if the differenct is significant, it means that there is a positive effect on the students’ speaking competence. The second goal is to find out whether there is an interaction effect of implementing SOM on the speaking competence of Accounting and Management Students towards the feedbacks received by the students. As mentioned earlier,


10 interaction effect happens when the effect of an independent variable towards the dependent variable depends on the level of another independent variable. This goal of the research is related to the first goal which is to discover the effect of utilizing SOM as the performance media. However, speaking competence might not only be affected by the learning process because there are still many factors affecting speaking competence. In this research, the feedback received by the students is selected and considered as a strong factor that may influence the students’ speaking competence. Therefore, in addition to discovering the effect of technique (SOM and non-SOM), the researcher would also like to discover the joint effect of the technique (SOM and non-SOM) and the variety of feedback given to the students (teachers’ feedback, teachers’ feedback plus peer feedbacks, and teachers’ feedback and self-reflective feedback). If there is an interaction effect, it means that the effect of utilizing SOM may differ depends on the level of the feedback given by the teachers. On the other hand, if there is no interaction effect, it means that the effect of implementing SOM does not depend on the variety of feedbacks received by the students. The third goal is that the researcher would like to describe the students’ responses about learning speaking skill using SOM. It is necessary to describe the students’ responses since it will reflect the way they learn using SOM and the strengths as well as the weaknesses that has been found during implementation of SOM in learning speaking. Information about the effect of SOM will be more comprehensive if it is viewed not only from the learning achievement but also from the process. Therefore, the third goal is intended to give an additional insight about


11 the learning process of speaking skill by using SOM, including its benefit and limitation. F. RESEARCH BENEFITS This research is expected to give some benefits. Theoretically, this study is expected to facilitate the emergence of new technique of teaching speaking skill. It is also expected to give contribution to the improvement of English teaching media in Indonesia, especially in the form of computer software or application. Although there have been many researchers carrying out researchers about CALL, it is possible that there are still some works, especially related utilizing SOM, left to be done and some information need to be discovered. By discovering the effect of implementing SOM on the students speaking competence, its interaction effect with feedback given by the teachers and the students’ responses about the use of SOM, it is expected to give better prediction, control and explanation about the implementation of learning using computer software in the field of English Education. The findings of this study can be used to give insight for evaluating the effect of applying CALL/media for learning and to stimulate more studies on the use CALL/media in the English teaching learning process. Practically, the study is useful to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the teaching and learning process of speaking. It is expected that SOM can help teachers to utilize the school facilities such computer laboratory. Furthermore, this study is also expected to bring advantages for the students as SOM can give more opportunity


12 to the students to develop their speaking competence. SOM features that are simple, easy to operate, flexible, portable and practical encourage the students to practice speaking and do cooperative learning. Combined with the teachers’ guidance, utilizing SOM helps the students to become autonomous learners. It is also useful for the lecturers to facilitate the emergence of the new media. This research is expected to give better prediction, control and explain the implementation therefore it can give insight for evaluating the effect of technology like softwares or applications in the English Learning Process. In addition, this is also useful for other practitioners who are interested in the use of technology in the classroom. It is expected to give contribution in providing information and knowledge to develop or to implement other kinds of learning media in the classroom.


CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter includes a discussion of the related literature review. It presents theoretical research which consists of two main parts, namely theoretical review and theoretical framework. Theoretical review discusses some theories related to the study which are needed to conduct an experiment. This chapter consists of brief discussions of basic theories of The Nature of Screencast-O-Matic, The Nature of Speaking Skills, Teaching Speaking, Factors Affecting Speaking Competence, and Young-Adult Learners. The theories discussed will be used as the basis to establish the theoretical framework of this research and development. Theoretical framework discuses major relevant theories which help the researcher conduct an experiment. A. THEORETICAL REVIEW This part is giving the appropriate theories implemented in this research. It is aimed at giving foundation from related literature review and written sources to conduct this study. There are seven parts discussed in this part, namely ComputerAssisted Language Learning (CALL), Screencast-O-Matic, The Nature of Speaking, Teaching Speaking, Learning Speaking, Feedback as One Factor Affecting Speaking Competence. 1. Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) Sanaoui and Lapkin 1992, as cited in Greany (2002), found that technology encouraged the development of independent learning characteristics in high school

13


14 students. In addition, Warschauer (1996) as cited in Greany (2002) identified three common factors of student motivation provided by a technology-enhanced setting, namely communication, empowerment and learning. Communication means the students can communicate with others. Empowerment means the students felt empowered in the technology environment since they felt less isolated and were less afraid of contacting others. Learning means students believe that computer gives certain kinds of control over their learning by enabling them to learn faster and more independently, to write more creatively, and to speak more confidently. Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is any process in which a learner uses a computer and as a result, improves his/her language (Nunan, 2003, p. 248). Warschauer and Healey (1998, p. 59) as cited in Brown (2001, p. 145) state the benefits of CALL, namely (1) provide more opportunities to have flexible practices with feedbacks, (2) accommodate each individu, even in large class, to do the practices, (3) support pair or small-group work, (4) interesting and enjoyable, (5) various resources and learning style applied, (6) build computer literacy for real life. In recent, Bates (2015) proposes some principles to choose digital media used in the class. The principles are related to three things, namely students’ demography, access and classroom characteristics. Teacher should consider the demography of the students, especially on the level proficiency and characteristics. The first-year students might less independent and still need support and guidance. Teacher cannot expect them to be able to participate entirely through the use of technology.


15 However, Bates (2015) also notes technology may support for classroom activities, especially if it provides an approach to learning from face-to-face teaching and is gradually introduced, to prepare the students for more independent study later. Then, related to access, the teacher should recognize whether the students have access to use the media. It includes whether the students have personal computer/laptop, are able to install certain applications in their pc or laptop and have access to internet network. Since no matter how powerful in educational terms a particular medium or technology, if the students cannot access it in a convenient manner, they cannot learn from it (Bates, 2015). Then, regarding classroom characteristics, the media chosen should accommodate all the student differences. It means the media chosen can be utilized by all the students in the class across the various of learners’ characteristics and learning strategies. Brown (pp. 143-144) notes some CALL activities that can be explored such as collaborative project, peer-editing of composition, emailing, web page design, reinforcement of classroom material, games and simulations, computer adaptive testing and speech processing. 2. Screencast-O-Matic This part presents some theories related to Screencast-O-Matic. The theories discussed in this part consists of two sections. The former discusses the nature and characteristics of Screencast-O-Matic software application, while the latter discusses the use of SOM in English Language Teaching.


16 a. Screencast-O-Matic Application Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) is a new computer software launched in 2012. SOM is a digital recording of computer screen output. It is also known as a video screen capture containing audio narration. Reinch and Daccord (2015, p. 223) emphasize SOM is a program that allows the users to capture video, and audio on our computer screen into a media file and upload it for free. In other words, it allows the users to record all of the actions on their computer screen as well as audio commentary and save the recording for sharing or future playback. The application of this software is simple. After the software is installed and running, the user can adjust the size of the capture area. The users can include the entire screen, or only a portion of it. When the capture area is set, all users have to do is click the record button. From that point, anything done on the computer or spoken into the microphone is recorded. The recording can be stopped at any point and then resumed. After completing the recording, the users can save the recording to their saving folder in one of several popular file formats. The easiest of which to work with is mp4 format. In addition, the users are also provided with three choices to save the recording results. First, the users can save it in any folders in their computer. Second, they can directly upload their recording to youtube, while the third choice is saving and uploading to Screencast-O-Matic website. There are two versions of SOM, namely free-recorder version and prorecorder version. The differences are about the price and the features provided. Labelled as free-recorder version is because the users can easily download the master


17 software, install and utilize the software application without paying and doing registrations. Meanwhile, for utilizing pro-recorder version, the users need to pay $15 when installing and using the application. However, the features provided in prorecorder are more complete than the free-recorder version. Although the tools or features in free-recorder version are not many as in pro one, the minimum features have been provided to meet the users’ need. The features provided in the free version of SOM are listed below. 1) Suitable for Mac or Windows or PC The free-recorder version can be installed to Mac or Windows PC. To get the master software, the users can download freely in official website of SOM (https://screencast-o-matic.com). Picture 2 is the home of official website of SOM. Through this website, the users can download the master setup of free-recorder version by clicking start recording. Basically, the website also provides the users to use this application without installing in the personal computer. However, the users need to connect themselves with suffice data internet. When the application has been installed to their personal computer, they can use this software when the internet connection is off.


18

Picture 2.1 Official Website of Screencast-O-Matic

After obtaining the master setup, the users can start to install in the computer. Picture 2.2 and 2.3 are the steps for installing SOM for personal computer. The process of installing is quite easy and fast. Basically, the software system has been providing the users some options to choose. For the first run, the users need to connect the internet. If there will be new window which provides three options, namely Pro Recorder, Site License, and Free Recorder (see picture 2.5), it means the application is ready to use.

Picture 2.2 Step 1 and 2 for Installing SOM


19

Picture 2.3 Step 3 and 4 for Installing SOM

Picture 2.4 Step 5 for Installing SOM

2) Resizing the Captured Area The free-recorder version also provides the users to resize the captured area. By dragging the white-black border line, the users can adjust the captured area. We can take a look on Picture 2.5. On the left picture, the captured area is on the left side of the desktop, while on another picture, the captured area has been moved to the right side of the desktop and larger than previous one.


20

Picture 2.5 Adjusting the Captured Area As mentioned earlier, to resize the captured area, the users can change it manually by dragging the border line. However, it can be adjusted automatically by choosing the recording size which has been provided in the application. There are four options namely 480p, 720p, Active Window and Full screen (see picture 2.6). The example of adjusting recording size into the active window automatically is shown by picture 2.7.

Picture 2.6 Recording Size

Picture 2.7 Adjusting Automatically

3) Screen Casting Picture, PowerPoint Slides, Video Clips and Anything on the Computer Desktop. SOM can comprise anything from images, such as slides containing text or photographs, to full motion, like the movement of the mouse cursor, video clips and so forth. It can be enhanced with the inclusion of “call outs” (such as arrows or circles that emphasize certain parts of the screen image). Picture 2.7 is the examples of screen casting the PowerPoint slides to make digital story telling of Malin Kundang.


21 The size of captured area can be adjusted to be full screen setting. The SOM window will not interrupt the flow of the slides. Therefore, the speakers can tell the story naturally.

Picture 2.8 Screen Casting the PowerPoint Slides

Meanwhile, Picture 2.9 is the example of screen casting the video. We can adjust the border line to fit in the played video. As mentioned earlier, SOM window does not interrupt the flow of the video. However, the audio coming from the video can be either recorded or excluded. If the user wants to exclude the audio of the video, the video should be set in mute mode.

Picture 2.9 Screen Casting the Video


22 4) Recording the Voices while Capturing the Computer Screen for 15 Minutes One of the features in SOM is the users can add the audio during casting the computer screen. To be able to record clearly, it is recommended to use microphone or earphone. Picture 2.9 is the detail information to set the recording system.

Picture 2.10 Recording Window in SOM For free-recorder version, the users have 15-minute limit to the length of the recording. If the users want to experience no limitations to the length of their recordings, it is better to purchase the pro-recorder version. Pro-recorder version provides premium features in which one of them is unlimited recording.

Picture 2.11 Recording Button To start the recording, the users need to click REC (red button - see Picture 2.11). After clicking the red button, there will be counting-down numbers which are from three to one. Those number are as space for the users to prepare the recording.


23 In other words, the users of SOM are provided 3-second-preparation before casting and recording. After number 1, there is GO! which means that every single action on the computer screen and voices will be casted and recorded. This feature is very useful for the users to manage the recording. Picture 2.12 is a series of time shifting of the preparation before recording and casting using SOM.

Picture 2.12 Time Preparation in SOM 5) Pausing the Recording The free-recorder version of SOM also provides the users to pause the recording. When the recording and casting are started, the recording button will change into pause symbol (see Picture 2.13). In this case, the users are able to pause the recording and casting anytime. When it is paused, all the activities on the computer screen and voices are not casted and recorded.

Picture 2.13 Pause Button


24 Basically, the pause button in SOM is not only for pausing the recording and casting but also for stopping all the activities. When it is paused, the pause symbol will change into rectangle box which consists of several menus. To continue the recording, the users just need to click REC (red button). If the users want to listen what have been recorded, the users can click play button (

). If the users do not

feel satisfied with the results of the recording, the users can start over a new recording. To start a new recording, the users can click dustbin symbol (

). By

clicking this button, the previous recording will be deleted and the users can start a new recording. Picture 2.14 is the screenshot of menus in pause rectangle box.

Picture 2.14 Menus in Pause Rectangle Box 6) Saving the Recording Results After finishing the recording, the users should click the pause button and choose menu DONE on the pause rectangle box (see Picture 2.14). Therefore, the SOM window will change into what Picture 2.15 is presenting.


25

Picture 2.15 SOM Saving Window In SOM saving window, the users are provided playback line (see Picture 2.15). Through this line, the users can listen what have been recorded and casted. In further, the users can delete the unnecessary sounds. If the users do not satisfy, they can click REDO choice on the Options inset (see Picture 2.15). It means the users will delete the recording and start the new one.

Picture 2.16 Playback Line in Saving Window

Picture 2.17 Saving Options

Picture 2.18 Saving Options in detail


26 There are many ways to save the recording results of SOM. The users are able to save the results in the computer folders or any external disks and upload the results on Youtube Channel, SOM official website and certain recommended websites such as Vimeo, Google Drive, and Dropbox (see Picture 2.18). If the users want to upload the recording results to those websites, internet connection is very prominent. If the users want to save the recording in the computer folders or external disks, the new inset will change into what Picture 2.18 is portraying. In this case, the users can choose the types of the recording file, give the name of the recording, and choose the folder. For the types of the recording, there are three types, namely MP4, AVI and FLV.

Picture 2.19 Publishing Options After filling the filename and choosing the folder, the users can click PUBLISH (see Picture 2.19) to continue the process of saving the recording result. There is a small new window which shows the progress of publishing. In this step, the users need take some minutes. The speedy of the processing may the length of the recording. The longer recording may spend longer process. In the end of the process, there is a new window which shows some choices, namely play video, browse folder,


27 copy path and done. Play video means that directly the users can watch the video. Browse folder means that the users will be shown the folder in which the file is saved. If the users have nothing to do with the result, the users can click done. Picture 2.20 is depicting the process of publishing the recording result.

Picture 2.20 Process of Publishing 7) Utilizing Webcam The users can utilize webcam when they are making video presentation. As mentioned earlier that the captured area can be adjusted into the active window, SOM can cast and record the webcam window too. If the users want to cast not only the webcam window but also videos or PowerPoint slide, the users can choose both (see Picture 2.21). Therefore, on the right-down corner, there will be webcam inset like what Picture 2.21 is presenting.

Picture 2.21 Screen Casting Webcam


28 b. The Use of SOM in ELT In recent years, high school and university students spend most all of their personal and professional lives immersed in a digital society. Therefore, it is essential for the educators to be able to use and integrate both conventional and currect techniques (Lamb, 2016). SOM is an alternative yet powerful application that can be utilized. Ruffini (2012) argues that screencast apps, such as SOM, provide learners a student-centered and engaging learning experience in both distance and traditional language learning. Furthermore, it helps the teachers balance the traditional pedagogical methods with the effective use of technology in order to foster the language learning and deepen the students’ language knowledge and competence. SOM, as described previously, is one of computer programs that allows the users to create a digital video and audio recording of what occurs on the users’ computer screen. In language learning, Brock (2012) argues that the function of SOM is endless to practice making video presentation, lecturing and online class. Stannard (2012) as cited by Omer (2015) states that SOM allows the student sto make their own video with sufficient time to reflect, edit and reproduce them. It can be integrated across the language curriculum and into many learning activities, such as digital storytelling, narrated PowerPoint presentation, demonstrations, marketing presentation, persuasion presentation, and even only for practicing reading and pronunciation (Omer, 2015). In addition, Bates (2015) adds that SOM gives teachers enough time to access the students’ speaking performance since it provides permanen


29 records, which can be stored online or downloaded and replayed at the learners’ convenience or multiple platforms. There are some previous studies that utilize SOM in English Language Teaching. The first study of SOM is conducted by Larry Ferlazzo in 2013. Ferlazzo conducted an experiment study to the K-12 students in EFL Classroom in India for comprehending narrative/folktale story. In this study, the students were challenged to create folktale presentation using SOM. First, the students created a story board in PowerPoint and Frezi. After that, the students record the voices and cast the story board using SOM. The last activity is watching the folktale together in the class. Ferlazzo adds that it is good software for the students to enhance the students’ imagination and creativity. It is also powerful software that helps the students to aware on their pronunciation and structure during the recording. The second study was conducted by Indiriana and Ulfah from Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta in 2016. Indriana and Ulfah (2016) defines that SOM can be used as a media for the teacher to deliver comprehensive feedback to better students’ composition. They implemented SOM to help the students improve the students’ writing. In that study, SOM is used to share the teachers’ feedback on the students’ text. It was a classroom action research. The teachers utilized SOM as a recorded feedback by screencasting the students’ writing while giving comment on the mistakes. As a result, SOM was useful to increase the students’ awareness on the writing elements.


30 The third study about implementing SOM was conducted by Badriah in 2016. Badriah conducted a survey research on the use of SOM as performance medium in new anchor topic for Senior High School students in Bandung. As performance medium, the researcher did short tutorial to the students before allowing the students practiced using it. The students screencasted PowerPoint slides, video downloaded from youtube, or their own videos. SOM was regarded as attractive technique and learning medium to practice speaking English more. According to Badriah (2016), the students, especially those who were not confidence to speak in front of the public, were interested to the features, in which allows them to repeat the recording when they made mistakes. In addition, the use of SOM as learning medium improves the students’ collaboration. 3. Speaking This part presents some theories related to speaking skill. The theories discussed in this part are the nature of speaking skill, types of speaking and the speaking competence. The further discussion about every part will be shown below. a. The Nature of Speaking Skill According to Widdowson (1994) as cited by Somdee & Suppasetseree, (2015), speaking is the active productive skill and the use of oral production. It is the capability of someone to communicate orally with others; therefore, it requires the speakers to master communicative competence, grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation. Nunan (1999, p.49) shares that there are four characteristics of communicative competence. The first characteristic is knowledge of grammar and


31 vocabulary of the language. The second characteristic is the rules of speaking which consist of the knowledge to talk about different topics to different people in different situations. The third characteristic is the knowledge of how to use and respond to different functions of language like requests, apologies, thanks and invitation. The fourth characteristic is the knowledge of how to use the language appropriately. In brief, speaking is the process of transmitting ideas and information orally in a variety of situations. b. Types of Speaking Based on the functions, speaking can be categorize into two genres, namely transactional function and interactional function (Brown and Yule, as cited by Nunan, 1989, p. 27; Thornbury, 2005q, p. 13-14, as cited in Harmer, 2007, p. 343). The former means that speaking is primarly concerned with the transfer of information like conveying information and facilitating the exchange of goods and services. Meanwhile, the latter has primary concern on maintainin and sustaining social relationships. Harmer (2007) also shows another categorization of speaking. They are distincted into interactive and non-interactive. Interactive speaking is the conversation done by two or more people in which each person speaks. Each person will give and receive the information. The example of interaction speaking is the conversation that takes place between the seller and the customer in the market. On the other hand, non-interactive speaking is the conversation that involves two or more


32 people but there is only one person who is the most dominant. The example is leaving message on the phone. The last categorization that is shown by Harmer (2007) is planned and unplanned speaking. Planned speaking is the situation when the speaker is able to make his or her preparation or training for him or herself before the performance. The example of planned speaking is a lecture or wedding speech. Unplanned speaking is the speech that directly same as the reaction to someone’s speech. The example of unplanned speaking is bumping into someone on the street. c. Speaking Competence Hemerka (2009, p. 15) as cited in Astuti (2012) states that competence is used to describe the learner’s capacity to produce a language. When a learner can produce language (written and spoken), it means he/she has language competence. Manitoba (2009) as cited in Astuti (2012) defines language competence as a term which includes

the

linguitics

competence,

discourse

competence,

sociolinguistic

competence, and textual competence. On the other hand, Astuti (2012) defines language competence as the knowledge of language or the cognitive aspect in learning a language. Then, when a learner has language competence, he/she has the ability to use that language to produce meaningful production and language performance. Having language performance is noticed when the learners are able to produce correct utterance, meaningful spoken language, with well-performance language structure.


33 More spesifically, Brown indicates (2004, pp. 141-142) that one can be called have speaking competence if he/she is able to: (1) imitate a word or phrase or possibly a sentence (imitative), (2) produce short stretches of oral language design to demonstrate competence in a narrow band of grammatical, phrasal, lexical, or phonological relationship. Such as prosodic elements - intonation, stress, rhythm, juncture, intensive ability (intensive), (3) respond a very short conversation, standard greetings and small talk, simple requests and comments, and the like (responsive), (4) take the two forms of either transactional language which has the purpose of exchanging specific information, or interpersonal exchanges which have the purpose of maintaining social relationships (interactive), (5) maintain social relationships with the transmission of facts and information (interpersonal), and (6) develop (monologue) oral production including speeches, oral presentations, and story-telling, during which the opportunity for oral interaction from listener is either highly limited or ruled out together (extensive). 4. Teaching Speaking This part presents some theories related to teaching speaking. The theories discussed in this part are background of teaching speaking, the aims of teaching speaking, and the problems of teaching speaking. The further discussion about every part will be shown below. a. The Aims of Teaching Speaking Davies & Pearse (1998) as cited in Astuti (2012) argue that the major goal of all English language teaching should be to give learners the ability to use English


34 effectively, accurately in communication. Brown (2007) notes that “the benchmark successful teaching speaking is there are demonstrations of an ability to accomplish pragmatic goals through interactive discourse with their other speakers of the language” (p.322). It can be said that teaching speaking will be considered successful if the learners in speaking class can show their ability to speak and reveal their idea. Therefore, the students must learn and master the elements of speaking skill. In speaking classroom, students are expected to be able to speak in a range of different genres and situations (Harmer, 2007, p. 343). Therefore, after learning speaking, the students are able to survive in typical functional exchanges. Harmer (2007, p. 127) adds that it is very essential to teach speaking in the classroom. First, it is because classroom provides speaking activities which can be the rehearsal or opportunities-chances to practice the real-life speaking in the safety manner. As we know, some learners are not comfortable and afraid of speaking English directly to the native ones or publics. Speaking activities function the simulation to speak in real condition. Second, speaking tasks in which the students try to use any or all of the languages they know provide feedback for both the teacher and the students. Feedback on a series of tasks helps the students to sharpen their awareness on what they speak and their overall performance. Third, teaching speaking means giving more opportunities for the students to activate the elements they have stored in the brain until they have been accustomed to using it. In short, teaching speaking must help the students to have more speaking practices to be able to speak spontaneously and accurately in everyday life.


35 b. The Problems in Teaching Speaking Spoken language production is often considered one of the most difficult aspects of language learning (Brown & Yule, 1983). In reality, many language learners find it difficult to express themselves in spoken language in the target language. Each student has their own problems. Even, not all language learners after many years studying English can communicate fluently and accurately because they lack necessary knowledge. For Ur (1996), there are some speaking problems that teachers can come across in getting students to talk in the classroom. These are: inhibition, lack of topical knowledge, low or uneven participation and mother-tongue use. The first problem that the students often encounter is inhibition. When students try to say things in a foreign language in the classroom they are often inhibited. They are worried about making mistakes, fearful of criticism or losing face. They are shy of the attention that their speech attracts. Littlewood (2007) asserts that a foreign language classroom to can create inhibitions and anxiety easily. The second problem is learners often complain that they cannot think of anything to say and they have no motivation to express themselves. Rivers (1968) believes that the learners have nothing to express maybe because the teacher had chosen a topic which is not suitable for him or about which he knows very little. It is difficult for many students to respond when the teachers ask them to say something in a foreign language because they might have little ideas about what to say, which vocabulary to use, or how to use the grammar correctly (Baker & Westrup, 2003).


36 Third problem in speaking class is that participation is low or uneven. In a large group, each student will have very little talking time because only one participant can talk at a time so that the others can hear him/her. There is a tendency of some learners to dominate while others speak very little or not at all. The fourth one is when all or a number of learners share the same mother-tongue, they tend to use it because it is easier for them. Harmer (2006) suggests some reasons why students use mother- tongue in class. Firstly, when the students are asked to have a discussion about a topic that they are incapable of, if they want to say anything about the topic, they will use their own language. Another reason is that the use of mother- tongue is a natural thing to do. In addition, using the first language to explain something to another if there is no encouragement from the teachers. Finally, if teachers frequently use the students’ language, the students will feel comfortable to do it.

In line with Ur (1996), Gebhard (1996) as cited in Brown (2003) proposes three main problems usually faced by the students and teacher in the teaching and learning speaking (p.186). They are the students’ unwillingness to speak, the teachers’ error on giving feedback and the perception that native speaker can teach speaking better. 1) The Students’ Unwillingness to Speak It is the fact that the students in any classes, beginners or even some students who are in advanced level, do not want to speak because they are too shy, anxiety and not confident. Most of them are afraid of making mistakes. It is because they only have limited time to practice speaking English. They are not accustomed to speak


37 English. Therefore, to solve this problem, students have to be given many opportunities to practice speaking in the class. 2) The Teachers’ Error on Giving Feedback Feedback from teacher is very important for students. There are many ways of giving feedback. However, the most effective feedback is the most needed by the students. In giving feedback, teacher also has to be careful. Sometimes students do not pay attention on the feedback given to them. They still keep using the wrong language. Therefore, teacher must make sure that all students understand the feedback well so that the students will not do the same mistakes and can improve their speaking ability. 3) The Perception That Native Speaker Can Teach Speaking Better Many people consider that all native speakers can teach speaking in English. However, people should be careful. Gebhard (1996) notices that native speaker can be a model on how to use the language but sometimes they are not qualified as teachers. Not all native speakers are guaranteed to have good ability in teaching. They need to improve the ability on the variety of skills in classroom management. c. The Principles of Teaching Speaking Meanwhile, according to Ur (1999, pp. 1999, p. 120) as cited by Aleksandrazak (2011), a successful speaking activity can be noticed by these four conditions. First, the learners talk a lot. In speaking class, as much as possible of the period of time allotted to the activity is in the fact occupied by the learners’ talk. This may seem obvious because it is usually taken up with teachers’ talks. Second, the


38 participation of the students in the classroom discussion is even. Classroom discussion is not determined by a minority of talkactive participants. All the students get chance to speak and can distribute the contribution fairly. Third, motivation among the students is high. Learners are eager to speak because they are interested in the topic or the learning techniques, have something new to say about it or because they want to contribute to achieving a task objective. Fourth, language performed is of an acceptable level. Learners express themselves in utterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other, and of an acceptable level of language accuracy. There are many principles in teaching speaking. Those will be the foundation for the teacher to design the classroom techniques and activities. Bailey (2003), as cited from Nunan (2004) , proposes five principles of teaching speaking. They are: 1) Be aware of the differences between second language and foreign language learning contexts Bailey (2003) notes that the challenge of teaching speaking in foreign language learning context is that the students will not have many opportunities to use the target language outside the classroom. It is due to the target language is not the language used to communicate in their community. Since English is a foreign language in Indonesia, the students here also do not have many opportunities to use English to communicate. One of the opportunities in which they can speak in English is when they practice it in class. Therefore, teachers must be able to design the teaching and learning activities that enable the students to practice the language maximally.


39 2) Give students practice with both fluency and accuracy Students must be given the opportunities to use the language in order to develop their accuracy and fluency in learning the language. in order to help the students to be fluent in speaking, teachers should also give the students opportunities to speak. Here, teachers must provide various activities that can enable the students to use the language and practice it. Moreover, the only opportunity the students have to speak in English is just in the class during the English lesson. Therefore, the teachers should be able to allocate the time effectively so that the students can have more speaking practices in class. 3) Provide opportunities for students to talk by using group work or pair work, and limiting teacher talk In teaching speaking, teachers should minimize their domination to talk in the class. On the other hand, teachers have to give opportunities to the students to speak a lot. Bailey (2003) suggest that “pair work and group work activities can be used to increase the amount of time that learners get to speak in the target language during lessons” (p. 55). It means that the pair work and group work are very effective to make the students speak when they learn the language in class. Students will usually feel more comfortable to speak with their friends in groups rather than in whole class. It will help them to be more relaxed and free to speak so that they can practice speaking well. Therefore, teachers must provide many activities that enable the students to speak and practice the language with their friends.


40 4) Plan speaking tasks that involve negotiation for meaning The negotiating for meaning is the ability to understand and to be understood by the others in communication in the target language. Bailey (2003) adds that “by asking for clarification, repetition, or explanation during conversations, learners get the people they are speaking with to address them with language at a level they can learn and understand (p. 55). They are natural in the speaking context. It is why memorizing is not the appropriate way to learn speaking. It will just make the way the students speak seem unnatural. The students need to learn how to speak naturally by involving the use of the negotiating for meaning. 5) Design classroom activities that involve guidance and practice in both transactional and interactional speaking Bailey (2003) mention that the classroom activities for teaching speaking must cover transactional and interactional speaking activities, because those are te main purposes of speaking activities. Bailey (2003) also adds that “speaking activities inside the classroom need to embody both interactional and transactional purposes. Since language learners will have to speak the target language in both transactional and interactional setting” (p. 56). The teachers must create the teaching and learning activities that enable the students to use the language for both transactional and interactional purposes. To design speaking techniques, Nunan (2003) proposes 7 principles (pp. 275276). They are: (a) technique should cover the students’ need and accommodate the students to focus not only on the accuracy but also for the interaction, meaning and


41 fluency, (b) motivate the students to practice; (c) encourage the students to use authentic language in meaningful contexts; (d) provide appropriate feedback and correction; (e) link speaking and listening naturally; (f) support the students to initiate oral communication; and (g) improve the development strategies. 5. Learning Speaking This part presents some theories related to learning speaking. The theories discussed in this part are Communicative Language Teaching, Competency-based Approach, Project-based Approach, and Learning Speaking using Screencast-OMatic Technique. The further discussions about those theories are shown as follows. a. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) Recently, CLT refers to a set of generally agreed upon principles that can be applied in different ways, depending on the teaching context, the age of the learners, their level, their learning goals, and so forth (Richards, 2006, p. 24). There are ten core assumptions of current communicative language teaching. 1) Second language learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in interaction and meaningful communication. 2) Effective classroom learning tasks and exercises provide opportunities for students to negotiate meaning, expand their language resources, notice how language is used, and take part in meaningful intrapersonal exchange. 3) Meaningful communication results from students processing content that is relevant, purposeful, interesting, and engaging. 4) Communication is a holistic process that often calls upon the use of several language skills or modalities. 5) Language learning is facilitatd both by activities that involve inductive or discovert learning of underlying rules of languge use and organization, as well as by those involving language anlaysis and reflection. 6) Language learning is a gradual process that involves creative use of language and trial and error. Althoug errors are a normal product of learning the ultimate goal of learning is to be able to use the new language both accurately and fluently. 7) Learners develop their own routes to language learning, progress at different rates, and have different needs and motivations for language learning.


42 8) Successsful language learning involves the use of effective learning and communication strategies. 9) The roles of the teacher in the language classroom is that of a facilitator, who creates a classroom climate conducive to language learning and provides opportunites for students to use and practice the language and to reflect on language use and language learning. 10) The classroom is a community where learners learn through collaboration and sharing. (Richards, 2006, p. 25).

There are some typical classroom activities in current Communicative Language Teaching. First, CLT class seeks to develop students’ communicative competence through linking grammatical development to the ability to communicate. Hence grammar is not taught in isolation but often arises out of a communicative task, thus creating a need or specific items of grammar. Students might carry out a task and then reflect on some of the linguistic characteristics of their performance. Second, CLT class creates the need for communication, interaction, and negotiation of meaning through the use of activities such as problem solving, information sharing and role-play. Third, CLT class provides opportunities for both inductive as well as decductive leanring of grammar. Fourth, CLT class makes use of content that connects to students’ lives and interests. Fifth, CLT class allows the students to personalize learning by applying what they have learned to their own lives. Sixth, the classroom materials typically make use of authentic texts to create interest and to provide valid models of language. Regarding the principles of CLT, the learners’ need, the level of learners’ proficiency and the teaching condition, there are two approaches that can be used, namely Competency-Based Approach and Project-Based Learning.


43 1) Competency-Based Approach (CBA) Competence in general is regarded as the ability to do something well or effectively, correspondence with demands for a job. It is the ability to perform specific work functions. Schneck (1978) defines CBA is an outcome based instruction that is adaptive to the needs of the students, teachers and the community. In line with previous statement, Nkwetisama (2012) states CBA seeks to bridge the wall between school or the classroom and everyday life by seeking and giving information, interaction with people in the market, hospital, school offices through listening, reading, writing and speaking. Makulova (2015) adds CBA is an association of the interst of the employer’s, the graduate, the teachers and professionals in order to realize the professional activities in the best way. Recently, CBA has been the basis to design work-related and survivaloriented language teaching program for adults. It has become adopted in Indonesia, especially in the university level and vocational school. It seeks to teach the students the basic skills they need in order to prepare them for situations they commonly encounter in everyday life (Richards, 2006, p. 46). According to Weddel (2006) as cited in Nkwetisama (2012), there are four components which do not function in isolation. It starts with the need assessment, moves to the selection of the expected competencies, then to the target instruction from where it moves over to the evaluation of the rate of attainment of the competence, and then back to the assessment of the needs. The following figure is the cyclical of CBA component


44

Evaluation of the competency attainment

Need assessment

Deciding the target instruction

Selection of the competencies

Figure 2.1 A cycle of CBA Component Auerbach (1986) as cited in Richards (p. 46) identifies the features involved in the implementation of competency-based instruction in languge teaching. First, the goal is to enable the students to become autonomous individuals capable of coping with the demands of the world. Second, it focuses on life skills. Students are taught just those language skills required by the situations in which they will function. Third, it counts what the students can do as results of instruction. Fourth, the outcomes are made explicit. It is public knowledge, known and agreed upon by both learner and teacher. Fifth, it demonstrates mastery of performance objectives with continuous and ongoing assessment. 2) Project-Based Learning Project Based Learning is a teaching methods in which students gain knowledge and skills by working for an extended period of time to investigate and respond to an authentic, engaging and complex question, problem, or challenge.


45 Grant (2002, p.1) states PBL as an instructional method centered on the learner. This approach organizes learning around projects which are realized in the form of complex tasks. While making the project, studets can develop their problemsolving, decision-making, and investigation skills. They also have the opportunity to work autonomously over a given period of time to create realistics products in a variety of presentation form. The products are personally meaningful and become the represenatation of what they have learned (Thomas, 2000; Klein et al., 2009). The examples of PBL’s products are probably in the form of presentation, brochure or the result of an observation. The product might be completed by individual and group work. PBL approach arranges series of tasks into a project which result an end product.

b. Intergrating SOM in CLT Classroom In CLT classroom, language elements can be categorized into larger holistic components, namely function, topic, situation notion, grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation (Richards, 2005 as cited in Lewis, 2012). CLT classroom also give the teachers authority to explore the technniques used. The techniques used in CLT classroom can be print, visual or simulation. The point is every technique used aims to master specific competenciews and learner-participant center. In CLT classroom, SOM can be intergrated in several teaching and learning activities. As teaching medium, SOM can adapt authentic source by recording the authentic text which can be valid models for the students to study certain text.


46 Especially in speaking, it is not easy to get the examples of certain authentic models, therefore, teachers need to adapt and adopt the text by recording it using SOM and integrating it with other movie-maker applications so that it can be appropriately used for teaching and learning (Ferlazzo, 2013). SOM also can be used as performance medium since it provides recording features which can be used anytime and anywhere. It also provides saving feature so that the recording results can be played or re-listened any times the learners or the teachers need (Badriah, 2016). 6. Feedback as One of Factors Affecting Speaking Competence Feedback is regarded as one of important factors that affect the students’ speaking competence. The following parts will discuss about feedback as an essential factor which affect speaking competence. There are two parts, which are the definition of feedback, types of feedbacks and feedback during speaking activities. a. The Definition of Feedback Lewis (2002) emphasize giving feedback means telling students about the progress they are making as well as guiding them to areas for improvement. However, giving feedback is not always commenting. There is motivational side. Harney (2017) argues that feedback is a central to learning experience. Feedback is the key to build the students’ confidence and provide encouragement. There are five purposes of giving feedback to the students (Lewis, 2002). First, feedback provides information for teachers and students. For teacher, feedback is a way to describe their learners’ language, gives information about class progress and a form of evaluation on their own teaching. For students, feedback is an ongoing form


47 of assessment which is more focussed than marks or grades. Second, feedback provides students with advice about learning. Third, feedback provides students with language input. Teachers’ spoken or written feedbacks can be the students’ language input. Fourth, feedback is a form of motivation. Feedback can be more motivating than marks or grades. It can encourage students to study and to use language to the best of their ability by taking into account whatever the teacher knows about the learners’ attitudes. Fifth, feedback can lead students towards autonomy. One longterm purposes of feedback is to lead students to the point where they can find their own mistakes. Ali (2016) as cited in Harney (2017) states that effective feedback is a twoway process and a continuous dialogue between lecturers and learners. However, it is interesting to note that sometimes the students do not know what to do. It is often found when the learners are provided with valid and reliable feedback, improvement does not necessary follow. Sadler (1989) and Gibbs et al. (2004) as cited in Harney (2017) explain that condition might happen because the improvement also depends on the learners’ ability in integrating feedback positively into their learning. Therefore, it is a need to train the students how to use feedback. Lewis (2002) states several procedures in giving feedback, such as: 1) ignore it (temporarily or permanently); 2) correct the error of the fact but not the form (vice versa); 3) prompt the speaker to find the error; 4) ask someone else to find the error; 5) correct and explain the error.


48 b. The Types of Feedbacks According to Lewis (2002), there are many categorizations of feedbacks. Based on the person whom gives the feedback, feedback can be categorized into three, namely teacher feedbacks, peer feedback, and self-correction feedback. Teacher feedback means that the feedback is given by the teacher. Teacher has several strategies in giving the feedback, such as traditional “marking”, conferencing, collective feedback, comment orally one by one, feedback sheet, summarising feedback on the board and checklist. Meanwhile, peer feedback means the students give comment or motivation each other. In this case, the strategies used by the teacher are exchange papers, role-play, pair work in a moving circle, pass paper round, feedback questions, multiple feedback, read/listen/respond, compare writing, summarise and photocopy advice, and sentence on board. Sultana (2009) mentions that peer-correction can enhance the learner autonomy, cooperation, interaction and involvement. Peer-feedback also give more chance to the students to use the target language. The last type of this categorization is self-correction feedback. In this case, the students give feedback to themselves. Teacher might prepare student checklist to help the students focus on what should be corrected. c. Feedbacks on the Students’ Speaking Competence In giving the feedback during the speaking activities, the teacher should consider the stages of the lesson, the activities, the types of mistake made and the psychology of the students (Hammer, 1991). The example is like when the teachers


49 correct whenever there is a problem, the flow of the performance as well as the purpose of speaking activity will be destroyed. Then, if the students are corrected all the time, they may be demotivating and become afraid to speak. Therefore, it is suggested that teacher should know where to put the correction and correct the students’ mistake positively and with encouragement (Baker & Westrup, 2003). The feedback on the speaking competence may focus on the language elements and overall performance. 7. Young-Adult Learners Young-adult learners refer to individuals from ages eighteen to twenty-five, though with some flexibility on young leaners and adult learners (Davis, et. al., 2014). Young-adult leaners are in the transition steps as young children and adult learners. They required the teachers to take into account their learning needs and learning strategies. Teachers are required to use teaching methods and techniques that are best suited to their learning needs. Bastable and Dart (2007) says that there is a blended teaching paradigm between pedagogy (strategies for teaching children) and andragogy (strategies for teaching adults). When teaching the children, teacher must decide what to teach and how to teach since the students have a heavy reliance on the teachers. In contrast, adult learners are more likely self-directed and self-motivated learners. The students are able to decide what they must learn and how to motivate themselves to gain their knowledge and skills. Therefore, sometimes teachers invite them in decision making process.


50 Young-adult learners have blended characteristics and need adjusted strategies to meet their learning characteristics. Collins (2004) as cited in Bastable and Dart (2007) says that the young-adult learners are not yet fully independent learners and might not have sufficient life experience to fully process, interpret and decide what should be learned. However, the young-adult students feel that they cannot be directed. Teaching strategies must be directed at encouraging young adults to seek information that expands their knowledge base, helps them control their lives, and bolsters their self-esteem. Bastable and Dart (2007) also points out that learning strategies must meet their learning needs as they move from dependence on the teachers to more independent and critical learners. Therefore, it is essential for the teachers to create learning environment that supports the young-adult learners to have learning experience in the classroom which encourage them to be more independent and can build their critical thought, without assuming that young-adult learners are already capable of doing it without some guidance. Jekielek and Brown (2005) also add that the example of adjusting strategies is by giving young-adult learners to choose the final project topics. They may also choose with whom they do the project and do projects using computer and net. In line with Jekielek and Brown’s statement, Bastable and Dart also suggest to have group project and computer-assisted instruction. Group project is an attractive method for teaching and learning because it provides young adults with the opportunity to interact with others of similar age and situation. Computer-assisted instruction is also


51 interesting for young-adult learners because it helps them do the project much and finish the project faster. B. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK There are three research objectives that should be discovered in this study. The first objective of the study is to discover the effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence. As it is known, there are many problems related to speaking competence. This research tries to discover whether SOM can be effective media to solve the speaking problems facing by the students and to improve the students’ speaking competence. According to Hermenka (2009), there are three important points in speaking competence, namely producing correct utterances, having meaningful spoken language and performing language structure well. On the other hand, to have those points, there are problems that must be encountered in speaking, such as lexical choices, grammar, pronunciation, confidence, fluency and lack of practices (Brown & Yule, 1983; Gebhard, 1996; Ur, 1996; Littlewood, 2007). The following figure is the concept map of the research problems and logical sequence of the research. The speaking competence issue, the advantages of SOM and the factors affecting speaking relate to the research questions that must be answered.


52 Principles of Teaching Speaking The demand of AEC

SOM speaking learning technique

Effectiveness in Learning Speaking

Figure 2.2 The Conceptual Framework of the Study Having sufficed speaking competence is very essential for the students in Accounting and Management Students. They are demanded to be able to compete in the international level since Indonesia joins ASEAN Economic Community. In general, the speaking competence consists of three important points, namely be able to produce correct utterances, be able to have spoken language meaningfully and be able to perform language structure well. Specifically, the students in Economy Faculty are expected to have speaking competence in presenting the products or services fluently and accurately in English. However, the students are facing some problems which influence their speaking competence such as little exposure to English sounds and vocabulary, rarely having English speaking practice both in the class and outside the class, afraid of making mistakes and so forth. Since the students have limited time to practice speaking in the class, they should be facilitated to practice speaking outside the class. The role of media should


53 be able to solved this problem since the media is invented to facilitate the learning activity (Wulandari, 2013; Bates, 2015). SOM is one of recommended medium that is suggested to be applied in speaking classroom. SOM is computer software that allows the user to cast anything on the computer screen, add it with audio, and save it in the form of recorded video. In teaching speaking, SOM can be utilized to adapt spoken material which can be a valid model for the students to learn certain genre of text. It can be utilized as a supporting medium to practice speaking and a performance medium. Combining with feedbacks, SOM can be a learning technique which arouses the students to have collaborative learning with their peers and learn autonomously. However, this is can be realized by the meaningful of students’ classroom activities, assignement and task as the implementation and application of language competence they have as a result of learning language grammatical rule, structure and vocabulary. Based on the reasons above, it can be concluded that, theoretically, SOM is an effective medium that can facilitate speaking learning process and lead to the improvement of the students’ speaking competence. However, this conclusion is only tentative since it has not been examined empirically. Therefore, confirmation is necessary to discover the effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence. The hypothesis proposed is that there is a positive effect of SOM on the speaking competence of Accounting and Management students. This hypothesis can be expressed operationally with Ho = the post-test mean score of the control group is the same as the experimental group and H1 = the post-test mean sore of the experimental group is different from the control group’s. Meanwhile, the hypothesis can also be


54 expressed with the statistical equation H0: µ1= µ2 and H1: µ1≠µ2 with µ1 as the mean score of experimental group and µ2 as the mean score of control group. The second objective of this research is to discover the interaction effect of SOM on the speaking competence across the variety of feedbacks received by the students. This is an answer to the second research question. This research question is needed to strengthen and make the result of the first research question clearer. It is a question whether SOM can work effectively with the condition that the students are given various feedbacks during the speaking activities. Therefore, the second hypothesis that is proposed is: there is an interaction effect of SOM on the speaking competence of students in Accounting and Management Study Program across the feedbacks received. Operationally, it can be expressed that Ho=there is no interaction effect of the use of SOM and the variety of feedbacks. Meanwhile, H1 = there is an interaction effect of the use of SOM and the variety of feedbacks. It can be expressed by statistical equation Ho: µ1A= µ1B= µ1C= µ2A= µ2B=µ2C and H1: at least one mean is different with µ1A as the mean score of experimental group with teacher’s feedback, µ1B as the mean score of experimental group that received teacher’s feedback and peer feedback, µ1C as the mean score of experimental group that received teacher’s feedback and did self-corrective feedback, µ2A as the mean score of control group with teacher’s feedback only, µ2B as the mean score of control group that received teacher’s feedback and peer feedback, and µ2C as the mean score of control group that received teacher’s feedback and did self-corrective feedback.


55 The third objective of this research is to describe the students’ responses about the use of SOM in learning speaking. Based on the theoretical review, if students are given SOM as a medium for learning speaking, they will likely benefit from it and give positive responses to it. It is just like when they are given English learning through the medium of computer. Students can challenge themselves. They like to experience new way of learning rather than the traditional class which often makes them get bored easily. SOM techniques offer the students recorded practices. By having recorded practices, the students can record their practice before performing presentation. The students can record the voice wherever and whenever they want, as long as they are ready. This feature helps the students who have low confidence to speak in front of the class or public. Besides that, the results of recordings can be saved practically in the computer or uploaded in certain social media. Therefore, the students can listen to it again, make the evaluation and do the reflection to find out what kinds of speaking mistakes they make. In addition, the students have more language awaraness, are more accustomed to checking the language used, try to absorb and apply the input from the evaluation and reflection by not doing the same mistakes. Since the students can also get more opportunities to practices speaking, the use of SOM can help the students improve their speaking competence.


CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY In order to answer the research questions and to verify the empirical truth of this study, the appropriate method to conduct the research is applied. In this chapter, the researcher would like to present the methodology employed to conduct the research. The explanation of the detailed methodology in this research will be elaborated under several subtitles, which are Research Design, Research Procedure, Nature and Source of Data, Instruments and Data Gathering Technique, Data Analysis Technique and Research Validity. A. RESEARCH DESIGN This research was conducted in order to discover the causal relationship of SOM towards the speaking competence. Besides that, it also studied the causal relationship of another variable that was the variety of feedbacks received by the students. It also tried to describe the implementation SOM in teaching-learning speaking. This research is a mixed-method design. A mixed method design or approach is to intertwine both qualitative and quantitative methods in a single study (Litchman, 2013, p. 104). It is line with Cohen (2015), a mixed methods research design is a procedure for collecting, analyzing, and “mixing” both quantitative and qualitative methods in a single study or a series of studies to understand a research problem. It is

56


57 to provide a better understanding of the research problem and questions that either method by itself. However, Cohen also emphasizes that mixed methods research is not simply collecting and analyzing two distinct “strands” of research – qualitative and quantitative. It consists of merging (combining), connecting (having one database explain the other), building (having one database build something new used in the other), and embedding (placing one database within another larger database). There are some reasons of using mixed-methods designs. First, there are two types of data which are needed to give better understanding on the research questions. They are quantitative and qualitative data. Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 42) as cited in Cohen (2015) states it is such a very powerful mix when one combines quantitative and qualitative data. Second, in this research, one type of research is not enough to address the research problems. The researcher wants to provide alternative perspectives in study. Cohen (2015, p. 537) adds an experiment study which yields useful information about outcomes can be developed into a more in-depth understanding of how the experimental intervention actually worked by adding some collection of qualitative data. Therefore, in short, the benefit of using the mixedmethod design is to give more informative result of the study about things being investigated. This study belonged to explanatory research mixed method design. In explanatory research design, the quantitative data are collected and analyzed. Major emphasis is on the quantitative data. The qualitative data are collected to follow up or refine results from quantitative data (Lodico, et al., 2006, p. 286). In other words,


58 this study employs an experimental study with factorial design and supported by qualitative survey research design. The essential feature of experimental research is that investigator deliberately control and manipulate the conditions which determine the events in which they are interested, introduce an intervention and measure the difference that it makes. (Cohen, 2011, p. 312). In addition, an experimental study involves setting up precisely controlled conditions to which the individuals or groups being studies must react (Baker, 1999, p.20). This experiment study belonged to factorial design. Vogt as cited in Creswell, 2012, p. 311 says factorial design "represent a modification of the between-group design in which the research studies two or more categorical, independent variables, each examined at two or more levels." In short, Hatch and Farhady (1982, p. 151) stated that factorial design is used when the researcher has more than one independent variable in the design. The purpose of factorial design is to study the independent and simultaneous effects of two or more independent treatment variables on outcome (Creswell, 2012, p. 311; Gall, Gall and Borg, 2007, p. 418). In this research, there were a dependent variable and two independent variables. The dependent variable was the students’ speaking competence while the independent ones were the teaching technique and the feedbacks variety received by the students. The former independent variable had two levels, namely SOM and Non-SOM technique. The latter had three levels, which are teacher’s feedbacks, teacher’s feedback plus peer feedback, and teacher’s feedback plus self-corrective feedback.


59 Through the factorial design, there were two kinds of effects discovered in this study. They were main effect and interaction effect. The former was the effect of each independent variable on the dependent variable. Therefore, there were two kinds of main effects. They were the effect of SOM and Non-SOM technique on the students’ speaking competence and three varieties of giving feedbacks on the students’ speaking competence. The latter was the influence on one independent variable which depends on (co-varies with) the other independent variable in an experiment. Therefore, the factorial design employed in this research involves 2x3 designs. The following table illustrates the factorial design in this study. Table 3.1 Factorial Design Employed in This Research

SOM Technique Non-SOM

Strategies in Giving Feedback Teacher Feedback Teacher Feedback Teacher Feedback + Peer Feedback + Self-correction Speaking Speaking Speaking competence with competence with competence with SOM, teacher’s SOM and SOM, teacher’s feedbacks, and teacher’s feedback and peer self-correction feedbacks feedbacks feedback Speaking Speaking Speaking competence with competence with competence with Non-SOM, Non-SOM, Non-SOM and teacher’s teacher’s teacher’s feedbacks, and feedback and peer feedbacks self-correction feedbacks feedback

This factorial study was supported by qualitative survey research design. Qualitative survey research design belongs to a type of survey research design. Survey research has various functions such as to describe trends, to determine


60 individual opinions, or to identify important beliefs and attitude of individuals (Creswell, 2012, p. 376). Cohen, Manion and Morisson (2007, p. 205) states that survey design is used to gather data at a particular point in time with the intention of describing the nature of existing conditions, or identifying standards, against with existing conditions can be compared, or determining the relationship that exists between specific events. In this study, qualitative survey research was also used because it aimed to describe data on variable of interest that was on the use of SOM in learning speaking to improve students’ speaking competence. B. RESEARCH PROCEDURE In general, the researcher adapted the procedures of mixed method research proposed by Creswell (2012, p. 555). There were some steps followed for this design. The first step was determining whether a mixed-method design was feasible to the context. Feasible means that the research was possible to be conducted successfully within the time constraint and available resources. The mixed-method design was feasible to be conducted since there was sufficient time and also supporting resources such as the valid instruments for data collection, the respondents/participants, and the researcher who played important role to implement the design based on the procedure. The second step was establishing the rationale for conducting a mixed-method study. In this step, the researcher prepared the research questions that were needed to


61 be answered. There were three research questions. The first question was related to the main effect of SOM technique on the students’ speaking competence. The second question was intended to explore the interaction effect between the independent variables, which were SOM technique and the strategies of giving feedback. The third question was for discovering the students’ perspective toward learning speaking using SOM technique. The first and second questions employed quantitative technique, while the third question applied qualitative survey design. The next step was identifying the data collection technique. In this research, the data collection techniques were speaking test, questionnaire and interview. After identifying the data, instruments were prepared. The instruments were lesson plans, speaking tests items, questionnaire, interview and fieldnotes. The instruments were validated and tested by peers and lecturer. After that, treatments were implemented. Since, this was a CALL research, before implement the treatment, the availability of the media was measured. Preparation of the resources was initiated by getting information for the students whether they owned laptop and agreed to install SOM application. When the resources had been proved quantitative research was conducted. SOM technique was implemented in experimental class while Non-SOM technique was implemented in control class. This was continued by obtaining qualitative data through questionnaire and interview. After that, quantitative and qualitative data were collected, the data was analyzed. For the last step, the results were reported. The following scheme is the detail procedures of conducting this research.


62

Establishing the rationale and research questions

Conducting literature review and building conceptual framework

Doing class observations

Doing pretest to the experimental and control group

Doing pilot study

Creating, validating, and testing the instruments

Giving the treatment to the experimental and control group

Doing post-test to the experimental and control group

Analysing the quantitative data

Triangulating data

Analysing the qualitative data

Distributing the questionnaire and doing interview

Reporting the analysis result

Figure 3.1 Mixed-method Procedure Figure 3.1 shows the specific procedures in conducting this research. The procedure was started by determining the rationale of the study and establishing the research questions. After that, the literature review was conducted and conceptual framework was set up. In the conceptual framework, the hypotheses were formulated.


63 To verify the hypothesis and obtain the students’ perception toward the use of SOM in practicing speaking, treatment was implemented and data collection process was conducted. Before implementing the treatment, the researcher observed the classes which would be experimental and control group. This was done to know the real situation of population and to identify the availability of the sources and possible constraint. Through the discussion with the lecturers, two classes weere suggested for this study. The selection was based on the main lecturers’ opinions and the results of preliminary questionnaire. The main lecturers’ opinions were considered since the main lecturers had experienced with the students. Based on the main lecturer’s suggestions, the selected classes were those which had approximately the same competence in English. In addition, based on the results of preliminary questionnaire, around 95% of the students were willing to bring laptop and install the applications. Therefore, Accounting C was decided as experimental group and Management A was the control group. After the subject of the research was ready, the instruments were created. The instruments were lesson plans, speaking test, speaking assessment rubric, and questionnaire and interview guidelines. In this step, the instruments were also validated conceptually and empirically. Conceptually means when the blue print was made while empirically means when the pilot test was conducted. Therefore, conceptual validation was conducted by making the blueprint and doing consultation to the lecturers. For the lesson plans and speaking test items, it was also reviewed by


64 the main English lecturers who classes participated in this research, the head of Language Testing LBUSD and the writer of MKU Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. After conceptual validation, the empirical validation was done. For empirical validation, pilot tests for certain instruments such as questionnaire and interview guidelines were done to the college students randomly. Besides creating and validating the instruments like lesson plans, speaking test, interview guidelines, questionnaire and observation sheet, the researchers also conducted the experiment preparation. In this preparation, the researchers guided the students to download and install the application, prepared the experimental materials and conducted SOM tutorial. To install the application and conduct SOM tutorial, it took 2 weeks. There were 3 topics which were explored in this research, namely Folktale, Global Warming and Food and Health. The topics were chosen based on MKU Bahasa Inggris Sanata Dharma University. The instructional materials were checked by the main English Lecturers whose classes participate in this research, the chief of English Testing LBUSD and the writer of MKU Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. After the instruments and the material were ready, the pre-test was administered. The pre-test was conducted in two days during the mid-term test. The scores were obtained and analyzed. For the initial analysis, the researcher checked the normality and homogeneity of each group. Since the results of normality test and homogeneity test were normally distributed and homogeneous, the research could be continued and the treatment could be implemented. Two weeks later, the treatments were


65 implemented. In experiment, the independent variable was manipulated. The independent variable which was manipulated was the learning technique (SOM and Non-SOM). The feedback received by the students was also the independent variable but it would not be manipulated. After conducting the pre-test, the researcher started the treatment. There were six meetings in which each meeting lasted 120-150 minutes. The experiment group experienced the SOM technique while the control group experienced any other speaking techniques. The general activity in experimental group and control group were the students in both classes practice speaking a lot. One of the principles in teaching speaking was giving the students more opportunities to practice speaking in English. The difference between the treatment given in the experimental group and control group were on the technique of speaking practice. In experimental class, the students practiced speaking using SOM technique. The students would utilize the SOM application to have recorded speaking practices. On the other hand, the students in control group would also have speaking practices like having role-play, oral presentation, discussion and etc. Each of group had follow-up activities after each meeting. Follow-up activities were as homework and led for independent learning activities. Besides follow-up activities, the feedback was also given as one of fundamental things in teaching and learning language and the moderator variable in this research. Before giving the feedback, each group was divided into three sub-groups. The first


66 sub-group consisted the students who received the teacher’s feedbacks. The second sub-group was the students who experienced the teacher’s feedbacks and peer feedbacks. Meanwhile, the third one was the students who got the teacher’s feedbacks and did self-correction feedback. Those groups were permanent until the end of the treatment. After the treatments were done, post-test was conducted. The scores of posttests were obtained and analyzed. At the same time, the researcher distributed the questionnaire. After obtaining the post-test scores, the researcher conducted statistical analysis to find out the main effect and interaction effect. The statistical analysis used in this research was a two-way ANOVA through statistical program SPSS 23. Meanwhile, the data from questionnaire were checked statistically and analyzed descriptively. After that, some students were interviewed related to the use of SOM in improving their speaking competence. It was also as a follow-up confirmation to their response in the questionnaire. After obtaining the data from interview, it was corroborated and analyzed. At last, the results of quantitative and qualitative analysis were reported. C. NATURE AND SOURCE OF DATA This part shows the description of the data obtained to answer the research questions. There are two points to be discussed namely, Nature of Data and Sources of Data. The former describes the kinds of data, whereas the latter describes the origin of the data obtained.


67 1. Nature of Data There were four types of data in this research, namely measurement data, perception data, observation data and secondary data (document). Measurement data was any data that can be measured. In this research, the measured data was the the speaking test in the pre-test and post-test. It was in the form of interval data. Perception data was the data obtained through questionnaires, interview and the verbal data since it was related to the students’ response or perception towards the use of SOM. The type of questionnaire was the close-ended questionnaire with 4-point Likert scale revealed the data in the forms of interval data which then converted into nominal (categorical) data in order to make it able to be operated using statistical analysis of two-way ANOVA. Observation data was the result of class observation which is gathered through observation sheet. The secondary data was the students’ recordings. 2. Sources of Data The population of the research was the students of Accounting and Management Study Program in Sanata Dharma University in the first semester academic year 2016/2017. Regarding the ethics of conducting research project, a permission letter was obtained from the academic staff in Economy Faculty. After that, the Dean of Economy Faculty contacted the English Lecturers and recommended the researchers some classes to be the object of the research.


68 Since this was a mixed-methods research, the researcher applied NestedConcurrent Sampling Design. Johnson and Christensen (2002, p. 239) explains that Nested-Concurrent Sampling design means when the qualitative and quantitative data are collected at approximately the same time with qualitative sample being a subset of the quantitative sample. In this research, the researcher collected the quantitative data first. However, in the same period, the researcher also collected the qualitative data. All the respondents became the sample in experimental research, but only selected respondents who were in qualitative research. To select the respondents of the experiment research, the researcher applied simple random sampling method. Johnson and Christensen (2012, p. 237) states that in simple random sampling, the researcher selected any individual as the participants since everybody has an equal probability of being selected from the population. There were some steps for selecting the respondents for qualitative study. First, the English Lecturers in Economy Faculty gave the researchers the list of the classes that could be respondent of the research. The criteria made by the lecturer were those classes remained cooperative, well-motivated and the same ability. Then, the researcher distributed preliminary questionnaire to find out whether the students did not mind to bring laptop and install the application. Since this research required PC or laptop, it was essential to know the students’ willingness to bring laptop to the class. The result of the questionnaire showed that 95% of the target respondents did not mind to bring the laptop to the English class. They also did not mind to find stronger internet connection when the campus’ internet connection was not sufficient


69 since for the first installation, the application needed strong internet connection. The following table shows the distribution of the students belonging experimental group or control group. Table 3.2 The Total Respondents of the Research

Group

Class

Numbers

Experimental Control

Accounting C Management A

38 38

Tabel 3.2 shows the respondents of the research. Accounting Class C and Management A were accounted for experimental group and control group. Basically, the total students in Accounting class was 40 and the Management class was 39. However, two students in Accounting class C and one student in Management C dropped out before the first treatment was implemented. Therefore, the existence of those repondents in this research was omitted. Then, regarding the ethic of the research, the students’ identity was labeled by number 1, 2, 3, and so forth. Meanwhile, the sampling for qualitative research is critical-case sampling. Johnson and Christensen state critical-case sampling is selecting what are believed to be particularly important cases (p. 237). It can refer to “cases that can be used to make a preciously justified point particularly well or are known to be particularly important are selected for in-depth study” (p. 237). The important case of this research was the effect of learning SOM on the students’ competence. In other words, it was essential to scrutinize how SOM affects the students’ competence, the advantages and the drawbacks of the use of SOM in learning speaking. Therefore, the


70 samples were selected to the ones who were obvious improvement, little improvement, and no improvement at all. D. INSTRUMENTS AND DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUES Creswell (p. 139) suggests that there are five steps in the process of data collection, namely, determining the participants of the study, obtaining permissions needed from several individuals and organizations, considering what types of information to collect from several sources available to the quantitative research, locating and selecting instruments to use that will net useful data for the study and administering the data collection process to collect the data. Since the participants of the study had been determined, the permissions from the faculty and lecturers had been confirms and the information related to this research had been clarified, it was essential to determine and create research instruments that is used to net the data. This section will discuss the types of instruments and the techniques used to gather the data. 1. Instruments There were five kinds of instruments, namely the lesson plans, speaking test items, speaking assessment guidelines, questionnaires, an interview guideline and observation sheet. The detail of each instrument will be discussed below. a. Lesson Plans Graves (2000) defines a lesson plan as a map or checklist that guides the teachers in knowing what they teachers need to do next. It consists of sequences of


71 activities that remind the teachers of the goals and objectives of the lessons for the students. In line with Graves, Jensen (2006) as cited in Celce-Murcia (2011, p. 405) adds that lesson plan is an extremely useful tool that serves as a combination guide, recource, and historical document reflecting the teaching philosophy, student population, textbooks and the goals of teaching. Therefore, it can be said that lesson plan is not only for mapping but also as a record of what have been done in the class. In this experiment research, lesson plans were included as “experiment package” which should be prepared by the researcher. It functioned as the researcher’s guidance to implement SOM and the feedback strategies. Brown (2007, p. 164) suggests six elements that should be put in the lesson plans. They are goal, objectives, material and equipment, procedures, assessment and extra-class work. However, it does not dictate what and how. It is a guidance that should be flexible depends on the situation of the class. Based on MKU Bahasa Inggris textbook, there are six topics, namely Creativity, Freedom, Folktale, Job Occupation, Global Warming, and Food and Health. However, regarding the feasibility of the research, there were only three topics explored, namely Folktale, Global Warming and Food and Health. In arranging the lesson plan, the researcher discussed the content with main lecturers and the head of language testing in Sanata Dharma University. It was also consulted to the writer of MKU Bahasa Inggris textbook since the goal, objectives, and the material were incorporated with MKU Bahasa Inggris textbook. Therefore, the use of SOM and the goal of learning English were integrated each other.


72 b. Speaking Test Items Johnson and Christensen (p. 197) states “test is commonly used in quantitative research to measure attitudes, personality, self-perceptions, aptitude, and performance of research participants.” In line with Johnson and Christensen, Ary, Jacobs, Razavien (2002, p. 216) state test is a set of stimuli presented to an individual in order to elicit responses on the basis of which a numerical score can be assigned. The format of the test was almost the same as speaking test in IELTS. There were some clues for the students to speak 1-2 minutes. The topics were taken from MKU Bahasa Inggris Handout. Based on MKU Bahasa Inggris, there are six topics, namely Creativity, Freedom, Folktale, Job Occupation, Global Warming, and Food and Health. However, the topics for pre-test and post-test were different. For pre-test, the topics were Creativity, Freedom and Job Occupation. They were the topics that the students have explored before conducting the treatment (before mid-semester test). Meanwhile, the other three topics were the topics explored by the students during the treatment. Thus, the topics for post-test were Folktale, Global Warming and Food and Health. The following figure is the example of speaking test items. Pre-test 15

Pre-test 15 Unhealthy habits that are bad for your health

Describe the meaning of freedom. You should say: - What freedom is - The example of freedom and explain why we need freedom in life

-

You should mention: - What being healthy means - What some activities that should be avoided are and explain why those activities should be avoided (briefly)

Figure 3.2 Speaking Test Items


73 The content of the test was based on the syllabus and the indicators were based on the speaking competence proposed by Brown (2004). There were 24 items for pre-test and 18 items for the post-test. The speaking test items were consulted to and checked by the head of Language Testing LBUSD and the writer of MKU Bahasa Inggris. c. Speaking Assessment Rubric To assess the speaking, the teacher needed speaking rubric. According to Brown (2004), there are five important points namely task, pronunciation, grammar, fluency and vocabulary. The speaking assessment rubric can be seen in Appendix 3. This rubric is adapted from certain speaking assessment scales such as IELTS and Brown (2004). The rubric was used by the researcher and collaborator to assess the students’ speaking test. Therefore, to get the final score, the formula was made. Since the maximum total score is 25, to get maximum final score (100), the total score will be multipled with 4. The following figure is the formula to get the final score of students’ speaking competence. Total score x 4 = final score Figure 3.3 Final Score for Speaking Tests

d. Questionnaires Questionnaire is a self-report data collection instrument that should be filled out by the participant. Questionnaire is a widely used and useful instrument for


74 collecting survey information, providing structured, often numerical data, being able to be administered without the presence of the researcher and often being comparatively straightforward to analyze (Wilson and McLean, 1994, as cited in Creswell, 2012, p. 377). There were two questionnaires in this study. The first questionnaire was the questionnaire used for preliminary observation while the second was the questionnaire distributed after the treatment was done. The first questionnaire was used to measure the availability of the source needed to conduct this research. The second one was employed to dig out the students’ responses on the use of SOM as medium of learning speaking. The types of first and second questionnaire were four-option Likert scale. It rated from one until four. Its anchor for rating one until four were strongly disagree, disagree, agree and strongly agree respectively. In the first questionnaire, there were 11 questions, while in the second questionnaire; there are 38 items which mainly find out the students’ responses on the use of SOM in improving their speaking competence. To validate both questionnaires, contruct validity was done. The blueprint was made and checked by the experts. Meanwhile, to find out the consistency of each statement in the second questionnaire, a pilot data for the second questionnaire was conducted. The questionnaire was distributed to and fulfilled by 10 college students. After that, it was checked using Cronbach Alpha Coefficient. According to Pallant (2011), the requirement for judging that the questionnaire is acceptably consistent, the


75 Cronbach’s Alpha value must be above 0.70. The following table is the reliability of the questionnaire. Table 3.4 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items .798

N of Items .798

10

Based on the reliability statistics, it was found that the Cronbach’s Alpha value is 0.798. Since it was bigger than the level judgment, the questionnaire was considered acceptable and appropriate to be used for gathering the data. e. Interview Guidelines According to Creswell (2011), interview is a very effective way to discover other’s opinions about the situation. In this research, a semi-structured group interview was applied. A semi-structured interview is an interview in which the interview can expand the questions he/she has prepared in order to get detailed information. The researcher can use semi-structured interview to clarify the students’ answer in the questionnaires which are given to them (Elliot, 1991). There were 9 questions which can be expanded depends on the students’ responses. There were four groups interviewed after the treatment was done. Each of group consisted of 5-6 students. Although interview is a flexible tool for data collection enabling multi-sensory channels to be used; verbal, non-verbal, spoken and


76 heard, there are some principles to conduct interview. The order of the interview may be controlled whilst still giving space for spontaneity, and the interviewer can press not only for complete answers but for responses about complex and deep issues. On the other hand, the researcher using interviews has to be aware that they are expensive in time, they are open to interviewer bias, they may be inconvenient for respondents, issues of interviewee fatigue may hamper the interview, and anonymity may be difficult. The interview guideline was made to help the students reveal their responses. The guideline mostly contained the general questions since the interview would be the follow-up of the questionnaire. 2. Technique Data gathering technique is the method for physically obtaining data to be analyzed in a research study. To gather the data, the researcher used three techniques, namely a speaking test, questionnaires, and interview. The following sections will discuss those techniques specifically. a. Speaking Test Johnson and Christensen (2002) suggest that in experiment, the researcher might design a test procedure to measure very specific constructs that are operationalized in unique ways. The speaking test conducted in the research was intended to get the data of the students’ speaking competence which then was represented into score of speaking competence. The test was conducted in two times. First, it was used to obtain the score of pre-test. The second was for the post-test


77 (after treatments were implemented). In assessing the students’ speaking, the main lecturer became the collaborator. Therefore, the scores from collaborator and the researcher werevalidated through reliability test. To do reliability test, statistical technique Pearson-Product Moment was applied through statistical program SPSS 23. b. Questionnaire There were two types of questionnaires. The first questionnaire was distributed in the early of the research. It was intended to measure the availability of the sources. Since this was a CALL research, the availability of laptop and application must be measured. The second type of questionnaire was distributed after conducting the posttest. The researcher used questionnaire to know the students’ responses in using SOM to improve their speaking competence. The questionnaire was distributed at the end of the teaching-learning process of experimental study. c. Interview It was a semi-structured group interview. The form was in the focus-group discussions. There were four groups in which one group consists of 5-6 students. Therefore, the total interviewees were 21 students. The result of interview was for gaining the data about the effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence and confirmed the results of questionnaire. It was done after the treatment was implemented and the data of questionnaire were obtained.


78 3. Process To conduct the study, the data were collected through some stages. The first stage was distributing the questionnaires to measure the availability of the source. The second stage was gathering the data for the experimental research. The data for experimental research was the speaking pre-test and post-test scores from experimental and control class. In experimental research, the treatment was done after conducting the speaking pre-test scores, while the speaking post-test was conducted after the treatment had implemented. The data from pre-test and post-test were computed in SPSS Program. It aimed to find the mean difference of speaking competence score between experiment and control group after given the treatment. Therefore, main effect and interaction effect could be scrutinized. The third stage was gathering the data for qualitative survey research. The data were collected through questionnaire followed by interview. The respondents filled questionnaire were 38 students in Experimental group, while the total respondents for four semi-structured group interview were 21 students in Experimental group. E. DATA ANALYSIS The data obtained in this research need to be analyzed in order to answer the research questions. The data, as mentioned previously, consist of quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative data are analyzed using descriptive and inferential


79 statistics, while the qualitative data are analyzed descriptively. The details of the data analysis are as follows. 1.

Descriptive Statistics Before conducting a hypothesis testing using inferential statistics, describing

and summarizing the data were conducted first using descriptive statistics. The data that were gathered from the students in the forms of test score and speaking performance score were processed in the SPSS 23 application to obtain some information about the mean, median, mode, standard deviation, maximum and minimum score. Furthermore, frequency distribution table was also presented to illustrate the condition of the students’ speaking competence before and after the treatment. The table showed the categorization of the students’ speaking competence which was divided into 5 categories: very low, low, fair, good, and very good. The categorization is based on the formula by Sudijono (2009) which take into account the ideal mean (Mi) and ideal standard deviation (SDi) of the data as follows. Ideal Mean (Mi)

= 1/2 (maximum score+minimum score)

Ideal Standard Deviation (SDi)

= 1/5 (maximum score-minimum score)

The ideal mean (Mi) can be obtained by adding the highest score and the lowest score, and then divided by two. Meanwhile, the ideal standard deviation (SDi) can be obtained by subtracting the highest score from the lowest score, and then divided by five. After that, the criteria can be formulated. The formulation is also


80 adopted from Sudijono’s quantitative data conversion as shown in the following figure. Very Good Mi + 1,5 SDi Good Mi + 0,5 SDi Fair Mi – 0,5 SDi Weak Mi - 1,5 SDi Very Weak Figure 3.4 The criteria formulation (Sudijono, 2009, p. 175)

The speaking competence test was in the form of extensive speaking test. There was a clue for the students to speak 1-2 minutes about the topic purposed. From the scores obtained in the pretest and post-test, the calculation was conducted to determine the criteria of score categorization using the formula above. After the calculation, it was found that the ideal mean (Mi) is 57.88 and the ideal standard deviation (SDi) is 13.1. Thus, the criteria can be seen in the following table


81 Table 3.5 Criteria of Students’ Speaking Competence

Formula

Interval

Criteria

Mi + 1.5 SDi = 58.46 + 1.5x13.27) = 78.4 Mi + 0.5 SDi = 58.46 + 0.5x13.27) = 65.1 Mi - 0.5 SDi = 58.46 0.5x13.27) = 51.8 Mi - 1.5 SDi = 58.46 1.5x13.27) = 38.5

100 – 78.4

Very Good

78.3 – 65.1

Good

65.0 – 51.8

Fair

51.7 – 38.5

Low

38.4 - 0

Very Low

After the criteria obtained, the scores could be categorized based on those criteria. With the maximum score of 100, the students who scored higher than 78.4 were considered very good in speaking competence. Then, the students who obtained score of 65.1 to 78.3 were considered good in speaking competence. Fair criteria include the score from 51.8 to 65, while the students categorized into low are they whose scores are between 38.5 to 51.7. Meanwhile, the students who got score under 38.4 are categorized into very low students. These criteria were used to describe the students’ achievement of speaking competence in each class both in the pretest and post-test. 2.

Inferential Statistics The inferential statistics is used to test the research hypotheses. Before this

statistical analysis applied, the pre-analysis tests were conducted. The pre-analysis tests consist of normality and homogeneity test.


82 a.

Normality test The normality test was used to find out whether the data obtained from the

research variable has a normal distribution of scores. The test of nomality are used in the research is Kolmogorov-Smirnov through statistical program SPPS 23. If the p value is higher than 0.05, it can be stated that the scores have a normal distribution. b.

Homogeneity test The test was done to analyze whether the distribution of the scores of the

condition of the groups were homogeneous and to reveal whether there was a significant difference of the sample. This research applied the Levene Test (F-test) to find the homogeneity. c.

Hypothesis testing The hypothesis testing was used to answer the first and second question. The

first question was whether SOM has a positive effect on the students’ speaking competence. The second question was whether an interaction effect exists in relation to the effect of SOM on speaking competence across the feedbacks received by the students in Accounting and Management Study Program. To test these hypotheses, statistical techniques two-way ANOVA was applied. This technique was also in line with the design of the research that was factorial design. A two-way ANOVA is used to investigate the relationship between one dependent variable and two or more independent variables each of which may have several levels (Hatch and Farhady, 1982, p. 151).


83 Through using ANOVA, the effect of each technique used to improve the students’ speaking competence was analyzed. In addition, it analyzed the effect of other independent variable or the combination of independent variables on the students’ speaking competence. This kind analysis is usually called factor analysis or in another literature, for example in Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh (2002, p. 202), it is also called multifactor analysis. They state that multifactor analysis enables the researchers to analyze the combined effects of two or more independent variables in relation to a dependent variable. In this research, after being analyzed, the quantitative data were presented in some tables and graphs containing numbers. The table showed the result of the statistical analysis ANOVA which answered the research questions about the effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence and the interaction effect existing in the study. 3.

Descriptive Qualitative To answer the second research question, the researcher used qualitative data

analysis. According to Ary, Jacobs and Sorensen (2010, p. 481-482), qualitative data analysis consists of three steps in general. They are for familiarizing and organizing the data, coding and reducing the data, and interpreting and representing the data. The first step is familiarizing and organizing the data. The researcher analyzed the data gathered from questionnaire. There were 38 questions and it was divided into four parts. When the average of each questionnaire had been determined, it was essential


84 to find the average of each part and the final average. The final average was used to determine the responses of the students. When the average indicated that the students agre or strongly agree, it was concluded that there was positive response on the use of SOM for learning speaking. After analyzing the data from the questionnaire, the data from interview were started to be analyzed. The researcher tried to become familiar with the data through reading or listening to the data she/he had obtained during the data collection process. In this case, the researcher listened to the audio recording of the interview and then transcribed the interview in order to be ready for analysis. Once the transcription had been made, the researcher read and reread it. After reading for several times, then it was necessary for the researcher to organize the data based on the people, topic, or time period of the research. The second step was coding and reducing. Coding and reducing is the core of the qualitative analysis and includes the identification of categories and theme and their refinement (Ary, Jacobs, and Sorensen, 2010, p. 483). In the process of coding, the researcher developed the concept from the raw data. It was done by reading and rereading all of the data and finding the behavior patterns, thinking events that appeared regularly and looked important. The researcher, in this step, any also cut some irrelevant data which appeared to be less important in the research. The third step was interpreting and representing. According to Ary, Jacobs, and Sorensen (2010, p. 409), interpreting and involves reflecting about the words and acts of the study’s participants and abstracting important understandings from them.


85 The interpretation was based on the researcher’s understanding and knowledge, but it was supported by the data. Meanwhile, representing was related to how the data were presented. In this research, the researcher presented the interview data in the forms of descriptive detail related to the participant’s opinion, comments, and suggestion about the use of SOM in the teaching and learning process of speaking. This descriptive qualitative data were essentially used to support or explain more about the quantitative finding (Miles and Huberman, 1994, p. 10). F. RESEARCH VALIDITY (LEGITIMATION) The most threatening task in experiment is to hold constant or eliminate all extraneous variables that might affect the outcome measured by the posttest (Borg, Gall & Gall). There are two important validities that should be done, namely internal and external validity. The internal validity is the extent to which extraneous variables have been controlled by the researcher so that any observed effect can be attributed solely to the treatment variable (Cohen, p. 183). It seeks to demonstrate that the explanation of a particular event, issue or set of data which a piece of research provides can actually be sustained by the data. In addition, Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2006b, p. 234) define internal validity as the truth value, applicability, consistency, neutrality, dependability, and/or credibility of interpretations and conclusions within the underlying setting or group.


86 In this research, the internal validity was done by making the lesson plans which validated by the experts. By having lesson plans as “experiment package”, the researcher could control and minimize the extraneous variables which might affect the results of experiment. In addition, the researcher also constructed blue print and pre-figured themes when arranging questionnaires and interview guidelines. Those instruments were also validated by the experts and through pilot study in some college students. External validity is the extent to which the findings of an experiment can be applied to individuals and settings beyond those that were studied. The findings of an educational experiment may be externally valid for one setting, less externally valid for a different setting, and not externally valid at all for some other setting (Cohen, 186). This research was valid for students in other program studies in Sanata Dharma because the researcher followed the guidelines from MKU Bahasa Inggris Sanata Dharma University.


CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS RESULTS This section presents the data summary and analysis results. There are three objectives addressed in this study, namely (1) to find out whether there is a positive effect of the Screencast-O-Matic (SOM) technique on speaking competence of Accounting and Management students, (2) to find out whether there is an interaction between SOM technique and feedbacks received by the students, and (3) to find out the students’ responses to the use of SOM in learning speaking. As mentioned in previous chapters, the first and second research questions can be answered by the statistical analysis from speking pre-test and post-test scores, meanwhile the last research question can be answered by analyzing the results of questionnaire and interview. However, the preliminary observation will be elaborated earlier. A. DATA SUMMARY This section explores the data used to answer the research questions. First, the data were summarized from preliminary observation. After that, the data taken from speaking pre-test and post-test, questionnaire and interview are also presented. 1. Preliminary Observation Regarding the principals of CALL research, the researcher did preliminary observation by distributing preliminary questionnaire. The questionnaire had aim to dig out the information about the availability of the resources and helped the

87


88 researcher to decide the class which became the experimental class. There were 11 questions which mainly asked about whether the students have computer or laptop, how their laptop’s condition was, their willingness to bring laptop every English class and install SOM application. The questionnaire was distributed to 79 respondents in Economy Faculty. They consisted of 40 Accounting students and 39 Management students; however two students in Accounting class and a student in Management class dropped out from the classes and did not return the questionnaire. Therefore, the final of total respondents were 76 students. The analysis of this preliminary questionnaire is presented in three parts, namely students’ willingness to prepare the sources, students’ computer skills, and supporting facilities the students had. Table 4.1 Students’ Willingness to Prepare the Sources No

Questions

1

Do you have laptop/PC?

2

Does your laptop/PC work well?

3 8

Is it okay to bring laptop to English class? Is it okay if you install SOM in your laptop/PC?

Possibly Answers Yes No Very Good Good (Standard Operating) Not too good Broken Yes No Yes No

Acccounting Class N % 38 100 0 0 1 2.6 37 97.4 0 0 0 0 38 100 0 0 38 100 0 0

Management Class N % 38 100 0 0 2 5.3 30 78.9 6 15.8 0 0 32 84.2 6 15.8 35 92.1 3 7.9

Table 4.1 shows the results of the first part of preliminary questionnaire distributed in both classes. The first part was related to the availability of the sources and the student’s willingness to prepare the sources. It was essential to know whether


89 the students had laptop and how the condition of their laptops were because if they did not have laptop and their laptops were not in the good or standard condition, this CALL research could not be continued. Good or standard computers means the computers which did not have troubles when the users were operating standard applications (Ms Office, Mozilla, Video Player) and could be added with certain applications well. In table 4.1, it can be seen that all the respondents have laptop or personal computer. Most of the computers or laptops were in good condition. In Accounting Class, all of the students had computers in good or standard condition. In Management Class, the majority owned standard-funtioned computer and there were only 6 students whose computers cannot be functioned maximally. Then, it was noted that all Accounting students did not mind to bring laptop to English Class, while in Management Class, 6 out of 38 students minded to bring laptop to English Class. All of the students in Accounting Class were also willing to install SOM application in their laptops, while it was found 3 students in Management class who were not willing to install SOM application.


90 Table 4.2 Students’ Computer Skills No

4

5

6

7

Questions

Are you familiar in operating Ms PowerPoint? Are you familiar in operating Mozilla, Google Chrome, Opera and other similar applications?

Are you familiar in operating Windows Movie Maker and other similar applications? Have you used SOM application?

Familiar Familiar Enough Not familiar Familiar Familiar Enough Not familiar

Acccounting Class N % 38 100 0 0 0 0 38 100 0 0 0 0

Managemen t Class N % 38 100 0 0 0 0 38 100 0 0 0 0

Familiar Familiar Enough Not familiar

17 16 5

44.7 42.1 13.2

5 15 18

13.2 39.5 47.4

Yes, already Not yet

0 38

0 100

0 38

0 100

Possibly Answers

The second part of questionnaire digs out the students’ general computer skills. This infomation was represented by questions number 4, 5, 6 and 7. Having adequate computer skills, being able to exploit video-editing applications and recognizing how-to-use SOM may support them to learn speaking using SOM. Adequate computer skills required were such as operating Ms Power Point skillfully, operating Mozilla and other similar applications skillfully. Those skills were so essential because it would help the students to create attractive recordings. Based on Table 4.2, it was found that all respondents from both classes were familiar in operating Ms. PowerPoint. In other words, it can be concluded that the students would not have any problems in operating Ms Power Point and browser engines. The skills in operating video-editing applications was not really needed, but it would be a point plus for the students who were familiar in using it. Table 4.2


91 explains that the students in Accounting Class were quite familiar with some videoediting applications. There were only 5 students who were not familiar in using it. Meanwhile, almost half of the students in Management Class were not accustomed in operating those applications. The last fact of students’ computer skills obtained through this questionnaire was 100% of the students from both classes did not know SOM and have not used it yet previously. Therefore, it can be concluded that a tutotial workshop was needed to explore how to utilize SOM in general. This preliminary questionnaire also found out the students’ perceptions on campus facilities. Since WIFI is needed for first installation, the campus WIFI might support the the students’ activities. Table 4.3 reveals that over half respondents utilize campus WIFI. There were only 4 students who rarely used campus WIFI. According to the students, campus has provided sufficient internet connection for them. It means that campus WIFI can be accessed almost all the parts in the campus. In addition, the majority of the students perceived that campus WIFI was quite fast. Over one-third of the respondents revealed that it was fast and less than 10% said that it was not fast. However, it can be summarized that campus WIFI can be utilized and may support the CALL classroom. The following table is the detailed information about part 3 which mainly discussed about the students’ perceptions on campus facilities.


92 Table 4.3 Supporting Facilities No

Questions

9

How often do you use campus WIFI?

10

Is WIFI provided by campus sufficient?

11

Is Wifi provided by campus fast?

Possibly Answers Often Sometimes Rarely Never Sufficient Sufficient Enough Not Sufficient Fast Quite Fast Not Fast

Acccounting Class N % 10 26.3 28 73.7 0 0 0 0 22 57.6 16 42.1

Managemen t Class N % 14 36.9 20 52.6 4 10.5 0 0 24 63.2 14 36.8

0 14 23 1

0 15 20 3

0 36.9 60.5 2.6

0 39.5 52.6 7.9

After analyzing the questionnaire and having consultation with the lecturers, it was decided that Accounting Class was the experimental group and Management Class was the control group. The experimental group was the group experiencing SOM techniques while control group did not experience Non-SOM Technique. The biggest reason was because of the availability of the sources. All of the students in Accounting Class were willing to bring the laptops to the English and install the application of SOM. After deciding the experimental and control group, SOM tutorial was conducted in experimental group in two meetings before the treatments were started. 2. Speaking Pre-Test and Post-Test In experimental design, the quantitative data is essential. Quantitative data in this research were obtained from the speaking test. Speaking tests were administered two times, which were before the treatment and after the treatment. These data were


93 processed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics is used to describe the data in order to be understood better while inferential statistics was conducted to test the hypothesis. There were two kinds of speaking test scores submitted by the researcher and research collaborators. The collaborator assessors were the main lecturers. They gave the speaking scores by listening to the recordings of each student. Therefore, before the speaking test scores were analyzed descriptively, it must be validated to measure the reliability of the scores. The scores submitted by the researcher must be correlated with the scores submitted by the collaborators. To find the correlation, a PearsonProduct Moment (PPM) statistical technique from SPSS Program was applied. The relationship between speaking pre-test and post-test scores in experimental class and control class measured by the researcher and collaborators was investigated using Pearson Product-Moment correlational coefficient. Pallant (2011, p. 128) explains that Pearson correlation coefficient (r) can only take on values from -1 to +1. The sign out the front indicates whether there is a positive correlation or a negative correlation. The size of the absolute value (ignoring the sign) provides an indication of the strength of the relationship. According to Cohen (1988, pp. 7981) as cited in Pallant (2011, p. 134), r=.10 to .29 is regarded small, r=.30 to .49 is medium and r=.50 to 1.0 is determined as large or strong.


94 Table 4.4 Reliability Test of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Experimental Class R_Pre_EXP C_Pre_EXP Researcher_Pretest_EXP Pearson Correlation 1 .929** (R_Pre_EXP) Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 ** Collaborator_Pretest_EXP Pearson Correlation .929 1 (C_Pre_EXP) Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.4 shows that preliminary analysis using PPM on the speaking pre-test scores in experimental group. Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. There was a strong, positive correlation between the two variables, r=0.929, n=38, p<0.0005, with high scores obtained by the researcher with lower scores submitted by the collaborator. Table 4.5 Reliability Test of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Control Class R_Pre_CTRL C_Pre_CTRL R_Pre_CTRL Pearson Correlation 1 .950** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 ** C_Pre_CTRL Pearson Correlation .950 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

A strong, positive correlation between the speaking pre-test scores obtained by the researcher and collaborator was also found in Control Class. It was seen that the r value is 0.95 and p is smaller than 0.0005. Therefore, those scores can be used for further analysis.


95 The students’ speaking post-test were also measured by two assessors. They were the researcher and a collaborator. Before, it was used in further statistical analysis, it was validated through PPM as well. The results of PPM analysis on the students’ speaking post-test in experimental and control groups can be seen in Table 4.6 and Table 4.7. Table 4.6 Reliability Test of the Speaking Post-test Scores in Experimental Class R_Post_EXP C_Post_EXP R_Post_EXP Pearson Correlation 1 .930** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 ** C_Post_EXP Pearson Correlation .930 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.7 Reliability of the Speaking Post-test Scores in Control Class R_Post_CTRL C_Post_CTRL R_Post_CTRL Pearson Correlation 1 .921** Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 ** C_Post_CTRL Pearson Correlation .921 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 38 38 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.6 and Table 4.7 shows the preliminary analysis using PPM to see the correlation between the students’ speaking post-test scores given by researcher and collaborator. This analysis was done in both classes. Based on the results displayed in Table 4.6 and 4.7, there was no violation to the assumptions of normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. The same as previous results, it was also found that there was a


96 strong, positive correlation between the two variables, r=921, n=38, p<0.0005. In other words, it can be said that the scores given by the researcher were not much different with the ones given by the collaborator. After the speaking pre-test and post-test scores in experimental and control class had been validated, the scores were started to be analyzed. As mentioned earlier in the beginning of this chapter, the scores which were the main data to answer research question 1 were input to SPSS program to be analyzed. a. The Pre-test Result The data obtained from the pre-test given to experimental class (Appendix 20) shows that the minuum score is 32 and maximum score is 90. Moreover, the mean value is 54.89, the mode is 58, the median is 56, and the standard deviation is 13.86. The results of the data analysis presented in the table of descriptive analysis as shown below. Table 4.8 Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Pre-test Score in Experimental Class

N 38

Minimum Maximum 32.00

90.00

Mean

Mode

Median

54.89

58

56

Std. Deviation 13.86

In addition to the table above, the pre-test data from the experimental class are presented in the score criteria to describe the students’ speaking competence before the research is conducted. There are five categories to classify the scores such as very good, good, fair, poor and very poor.


97 Table 4.9 Frequency Distribution of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Experimental Class

No. 1 2 3 4 5

Score

Category

100 – 78.4 78.3 – 65.1 65.0 – 51.8 51.7 – 38.6 38.5 - 0 Total

Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Absolute 2 5 16 8 7 38

Frequency Relative (%) Cumulative (%) 5.2 5.2 13.2 18.4 42.1 60.5 21.0 81.5 18.5 100 100

Table 4.9 shows that nearly half of the students in Experimental Class were in fair category which means their speaking pre-test scores were around 51.8 to 65. The students who got predicate “poor” and “very poor” were 8 and 7 respectively. Thus, there were only 2 and 5 students whose speaking Pret-test scores were in category very good and good. In experimental research, the pre-test was also given to control class. The data from the control class (Appendix 20) show that the minimum score is 32 and the maximum score is 80. Moreover, the mean value is 55.21, the mode is 50, the media is 57, and the standard deviation is 12.78. The results of the descriptive analysis are presented in the following table. Table 4.10 Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Pre-test Score in Control Class

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Mode

Median

38

32.00

80.00

55.21

50

57


Then, in reference to the pre-test score of control class, the categorization of the students’ speaking competence is presented in Table 4.11. Approximately half of the students in control class were in fair condition. Their speaking scores were in 51.8


98 to 65. Thirteen out of 38 were accounted for poor and very poor condition (less than 51.8), while there were only 7 students in control class whose scores were more than 65. The detail of the distributions is presented as follows. Table 4.11 Frequency Distribution of Speaking Pre-test Scores in Control Class

No. 1 2 3 4 5

Score 100 – 78.4 78.3 – 65.1 65.0 – 51.8 51.7 – 38.6 38.5 - 0 Total

Frequency

Category Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Absolute 1 6 18 7 6 38

Cumulative (%)

Relative (%)

2.6 15.8 47.3 18.5 15.8 100

2.6 18.4 65.7 84.2 100

The comparison between the descriptive statistics of the speaking pre-test in experimental and control class can be seen in Table 4.12. It can be seen that both classes had the same minimum score, which was 32. The maximum score of experimental class was higher than that of control class. However, the mean value in control group is higher than the one in experimental group. There was a slight difference between the mean in control and experimental group since control group’s mean is 55.21 while experimental group was accounted for 54.89. Table 4.12 Comparison between the Descriptive Statistics of the Speaking Pre-test in Experimental and Control Class

Class

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Experimental Control

38 38

32.00 32.00

90.00 80.00

54.89 55.21

Mode Median 58 50

56 57

Std. Deviation 13.86 12.78

After obtaining the descriptive statistics, t-test was employed for further calculation. A t-test is usually used to compare two means. In this case, the subjects


99 are separated; therefore an independent-samples t-test is used. Before conducting the calculation, the normality and homogeneity is also tested. The result of the normality test of the pre-test data from experimental and control class is as follows. Table 4.13 Normality Tests of the Pre-Test Scores on Listening Comprehension in the Experimental and Control Group

Exp_Pretest Ctrl_Pretest

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic Df Sig. .094 38 .200* .105 38 .200*

The requirement for judging that the data is in normal distribution is if the value of p or sig. is greater than α=0.05. From the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the significance value shows that the data in experimental and control class are in normal distribution (0.2 >0.05 and 0.2>0.05). After it is judged that the data was in normal distribution, a homogeneity test was conducted. Homogeneity test has aims to find out that the pre-test data from experimental and control group were homogenous. The result of the homogeneity test is presented in the table below. Table 4.14 Homogeneity Test of the Speaking Pre-test in Experimental and Control Group Levene's Test for Equality of Variances F Score

Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed

Sig. .222

.639

The requirement for judging that the two classes are homogeneous is if the value of p or sig. is greater than α=0.05. From the Levene’s test, the significance


100 value shows that the samples variances of the two classes are homogenous (0.63>0.05). Then, after knowing that the data are normal and homogeneous, a t-test is conducted to test whether there is a significant difference of the pre-test scores in both classes before the treatment was applied. SPSS 23 computer program was used to analyse the hypothesis and the data. In hypothesis testing, H1 is accepted if the value in Sig. (2-tailed) < 0.05. In other words, if H1 is accepted and H0 is rejected, it means there is a significant difference in the mean scores on the speaking competence variable of experimental and control class. The result of t-test is presented in the following table. Table 4.15 T-Test of the Speaking Scores in Experimental and Control Class Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

F

Data


.222

Sig. .639

t-test for Equality of Means

t

df

Sig. (2tailed)

Mean Differe nce

Std. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower

Upper

-.103

74

.918

-.316

3.060

-6.412

5.781

-.103

73.5 11

.918

-.316

3.060

-6.413

5.781

Table 4.15 shows that the data is equal variance assumed since the significance value of Levene’s test for equality of variance is bigger than 0.05 (0.639>0.05). Then, referred to the column labelled Sig. (2-tailed) in equal variances assumed row, it can be seen that significance value is 0.918. When significance value is more than 0.05, it means that Ho is accepted and H1 is rejected. Based on the hypothesis, it can be concluded that there was no significant difference between the


101 speaking pre-test score in experimental class and control class. In other words, the classes had almost similar ability in speaking competence and they were proper to be used for the respondents in experimental research. b. The Post-test Result The data obtained from the speaking post-test given to experimental class (Appendix 20) shows that the minumum score was 40 and maximum score was 90. Moreover, the mean value was 65, the mode was 64, the median was 66, and the standard deviation was 12.01. The results of the data analysis presented in the table of descriptive analysis are shown below. Table 4.16 Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Post-test Score in Experimental Class

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Mode

Median

38

40.00

90.00

65

64

66


In addition to the table above, the post-test data from the experimental class are presented in the score criteria to describe the students’ speaking competence after the research is conducted. There are five categories to classify the scores such as very good, good, fair, poor and very poor. Table 4.17 Frequency Distribution of Speaking Post-test Scores in Experimental Class

No. 1 2 3 4 5

Score 100 – 78.4 78.3 – 65.1 65.0 – 51.8 51.7 – 38.6 38.5 – 0 Total

Category Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Absolute 6 14 12 6 0 38

Frequency Relative (%) 15.8 36.8 31.6 15.8 0 100

Cumulative (%) 15.8 52.6 84.2 100.0 100


102

Regarding table 4.17, more than one-third of the students were labelled in good ccategory. Their scores were ranging from 65.1 to 78.3. Another one-third of the students got fair category which scores were around 51.8 to 65. Surprisingly, the number of students who accounted for very good and poor category were the same. There were six students whose scores were in 78.4 to 100 and six students who suffered in 38.6 to 51.7. It is also interesting to note that there was no student who got score less than 38.5 or categorized very poor. The speaking post-test was also given to control class. The data from the control class (Appendix 20) show that the minimum score was 34 and the maximum score was 84. In addition, the mean value was 58.73, the mode was 54, the media was 57, and the standard deviation was 12.28. The result of the descriptive analysis of the speaking post-test scores is presented in the following table. Table 4.18 Descriptive Analysis of the Speaking Post-test Score in Control Class

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Mode

Median

38

34.00

84.00

58.73

54.00

57.00


To see the distribution of speaking post-test scores in control class, frequency distribution is analyzed. Regarding Table 4.19, over half of the students in control class were accounted for fair category. Their speaking post-test scores were ranging from 51.8 to 65. Five students were in good category (65.1 to 78.3) while the other categories such as very good, poor and very poor got 3 students for each. The detail


103 information about the frequency distribution of speaking post-test scores is presented as follows. Table 4.19 Frequency Distribution of Speaking Post-test Scores in Control Class

Frequency No.

Score

Category

100 – 78.4 78.3 – 65.1 65.0 – 51.8 51.7 – 38.6 38.5 - 0 Total

1 2 3 4 5

Absolute

Relative (%)

3 5 24 3 3 38

7.9 13.2 63.2 7.9 7.9 100

Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Cumulative (%)

7.9 21.1 84.2 92.1 100.0

After obtaining the descriptive statistics of speaking post-test in both classes, the descriptive statistics of these scores were compared. The following table shows the comparison between the descriptive statistics of the speaking post-test in experimental and control class. Table 4.20 Comparison between the Descriptive Statistics of the Speaking Post-test in Experimental and Control Class

Class Experimental Control

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Mode

Median

38 38

40.00 34.00

90.00 84.00

65 58.73

64 54.00

66 57.00

Std. Deviation 12.01 12.28

Refered to Table 4.20, the experimental group has higher mean score than that of the control class. The mean value of experimental group is 65 while the mean value of control group is 58.73. However, a further statistical analysis needed to be conducted to know whether the mean is significantly different. This was done by using independent-sample t-test. Before calculating the data, the pre-analysis of


104 normality and homogeneity was done. The following table is the results of normality test of experimental and control group. Table 4.21 Normality Test of the Speaking Post-Test Scores in the Experimental and Control Group

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic Df Sig. Exp_Posttest .125 38 .142 Ctrl_Posttest .134 38 .083

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. .959 38 .175 .945 38 .062

The requirement for judging that the data is in normal distribution is if the value of p or sig. is greater than α=0.05. From the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the significance value shows that the data in experimental and control class were in normal distribution (0.142 >0.05 and 0.83>0.05). After doing normality test, homogeneity test was then conducted. The result of the homogeneity test is presented in the table below. Table 4.22 Homogeneity Test of the Speaking Pre-test in Experimental and Control Group

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

Score


F

Sig.

.001

.976

The requirement for judging that the two classes are homogeneous is if the value of p or sig. is greater than α=0.05. From the Levene’s test, the significance value shows that the samples variances of the two classes are homogenous (0.98>0.05).


105 After knowing that the speaking post-test scores were normally distributed and homogeneous, a t-test was conducted. A t-test is needed to see whether there is a significant difference of the speaking post-test scores in experimental and control group. In hypothesis testing, H1 is accepted and Ho is rejected if the the value p<0.05. To find out the significant difference (p), it can refer to the column labeled Sig. (2-tailed), which appears under the section labelled t-test for Equality of Means. If the value in the Sig. (2-tailed) column is equal or less than 0.05, there is a significant difference in the mean scores on the students’ speaking competence in experimental and control group. If the value is above 0.05, there is no significant difference between the two groups. In other words, when p>0.05, H1 is rejected and Ho is accepted. Table 4.23 T-Test of the Speaking Post-test Scores in Experimental and Control Class t-test for Equality of Means

t

df


Sig. (2tailed)

Mean Difference


Lower

Upper

Equal variances assumed

2.246

74

.028

6.263

2.788

.708

11.819

Equal variances not assumed

2.246

73.963

.028

6.263

2.788

.708

11.819

Score

Based on the table 4.23, the value in Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.028. This value is below 0.05. Therefore, based on the hypothesis testing, when p<0.05, H1 is accepted and Ho is rejected. When H1 is accepted, it means that there is significant difference between the speaking post-test scores of experimental and control classes.


106 Besides conducting T-test, a two-way ANOVA was also applied to see the main effect. Some prerequisites tests needed to be done such as normalilty and homogeneity test. The data which were used in this case was only the data taken after the treatment because it was considered as the recent data that reflected the condition after the treatment. The following table is the result of the normality test. Table 4.24 Normality Test

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic df Sig. Exp_Posttest .125 38 .142 Ctrl_Posttest .134 38 .083 a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Shapiro-Wilk Statistic df Sig. .959 38 .175 .945 38 .062

Referred to the table 4.24, it can be seen that the significant value of both classes are more than 0.05. The significance value of the experimental classes was 0.14 and the significance value of the control class was 0.83. It means the data from both classes were in normal distribution. Then, to decide whether the samples are homogenous or not, a homogeneity test was conducted. The following table presents the result of the homogeneity of of the posttest score. Table 4.25 Homogeneity Test Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variancesa

Dependent Variable: F 1.607

Score df1 5

df2 70

Sig. .169


107 Table 4.25 presents that the data are homogeneous. It can also be concluded that the data gathered have not violated the homogeneity of variances assumption since the significance value was 0.169, that is more than 0.05 (if the p>0.05, the data are homogeneous). After knowing that the data were normal and homogeneous, the statistical analysis two-way ANOVA was conducted to know the main effect of the variables. Before testing the hypothesis, the level of significance should be determined first. In this research, the level of significance determined was 0.05. The results of the analysis of two-way ANOVA are presented as follows. Table 4.26 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects (a Two-Way ANOVA) Dependent Score Variable: Partial Type III Sum Eta Source of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Squared Corrected 1295.974a 5 259.195 1.748 .135 .111 Model Intercept 289854.706 1 289854.706 1954.947 .000 .965 Technique 734.583 1 734.583 4.954 .029 .066 Feedback 397.238 2 198.619 1.340 .269 .037 Technique 135.360 2 67.680 .456 .635 .013 * Feedback Error 10378.711 70 148.267 Total 302580.000 76 Corrected 11674.684 75 Total a. R Squared = .111 (Adjusted R Squared = .048)

Table 4.26 reveals the main effect of SOM and Non-SOM techniques on the students’ speaking competence. The main effect can be checked in the column marked Sig., in row technique. The hypothesis is when significant value (p) is smaller than the coefficient alpha (α=0.05), there is a significant difference between both


108 techniques. Based on that table, it is seen that significant value (p) is 0.029, which is smaller than α=0.05. Therefore, Ho is rejected and there is significant difference on the students’ speaking competence across the techniques (SOM and Non-SOM) applied. When Ho is rejected and H1 is accepted, therefore, it could be concluded that there is a positive effect of implementing SOM technique on the students speaking competence. 3. Questionnaire and Interview To answer the third research question, qualitative data was needed. To obtain the qualitative data, questionnaire and interview was conducted. The questionnaire was distributed and interviews were conducted to find out the students’ opinions about the use of SOM in improving speaking competence. The following paragraphs show the description of the students’ responses gathered through questionnaire and interview. a. Students’ Responses from Questionnaire A questionnaire consisting 38 questions was distributed to the students in Experimental group. There were 38 students who fulfilled the questionnaire. However, before the questionnaire was analyzed, the reliability of the scales was checked. The most commonly used indicators of internal consistency of each statement in the questionnaire is Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. According to Pallant (2011, p. 100), a very good internal consistency reliability is shown by the value .089.


109 However, the value .70 is also acceptable. The following table shows the results of realiability test using Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient. Table 4.27 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha .861

Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .861

N of Items 38

Based on the table 4.27, the Cronbach’s Alpha value is 0.861. This value is very acceptable and indicates has good internal consistency. Therefore, a further analysis about the students’ responses on the use of SOM as medium of learning speaking gathered from the questionnaire can be continued. The questionnaire was analyzed descriptively. To read the results of the questionnaire easily, the descriptive analysis will be divided into four big parts, namely general evaluation of teaching and learning using SOM, the classroom activities using SOM, the features of SOM and the positive effects on the speaking competence after learning using SOM.

As explained in Chapter 3, there are

indicators to determine and define the average namely, 1.00 – 1.49 = strongly disagree, 1.50 – 2.49 = disagree, 2.50 – 3.49 = agree, and 3.50-4.00 = strongly agree. Table 4.28 describes the first part. There are eight statements in the first part, which digs out the students’ perception on the teaching and learning that they have followed. This includes the evaluations on the preparation of the teaching. Based on the results, the tutorials given before the treatments were easy to follow and helpful. There were only 3 students who did not agree with these statements. Besides the tutorials, the majority of the students also agreed that the instructions given by their


110 lecturers were clear and easy to understand. Besides given clear and easy-understood instructions, the students also perceive that vocabulary exposures during learning speaking using SOM were enough. Almost 80% of the students agreed that the lecturer had given them sufficient vocabulary to learn speaking using SOM. The table also shows that the total average is 3.28, which indicates that the students agree on the teaching and learning speaking using SOM. Table 4.28 Teaching and Learning No

Statements

Average

Label

6

Tutorials of using SOM conducted by my lecturer were easy to follow. Tutorials of using SOM conducted by my lecturer were so helpful. The instructions given by my lecturer were clear. The instructions given by my lecturer were easy to understand. My lecturer helped me when I had problem with SOM application in my computer. My lecturer gave sufficient vocabulary before learning English speaking using SOM. The topics provided for SOM recording were relevant to the study program I choose. The topic provided for SOM recording was interesting. Average

3.32

Agree

3.32 3.37 3.29

Agree Agree Agree

3.29

Agree

3.13

Agree

3.24

Agree

3.29 3.28

Agree Agree

7 8 9 10 11 35 36

The second analysis digs out the classroom activities using SOM. Based on the table 4.29, it is seen that there was no student who disagree on the statement number 1, 2, and 33. It means that all the students enjoyed speaking class, agreed that learning English speaking using SOM was fun and enjoyed working with their classmate on the SOM project. However, not all students liked doing SOM recording and learning English speaking using SOM. It is noted that three students did not like learning speaking using SOM and two students did not like doing SOM project. This


111 analysis is followed by the facts that eight out of 38 students could not follow SOM activities and over ten students did not think that SOM activities were various. The overall average shown in Table 4.29 is 3.39, that means that the students agree on classroom activities which integrated SOM and teaching and learning speaking techniques. Table 4.29 Classroom Activities No

Statements

Average

Label

1 2 3 12 13 33

I enjoyed speaking class. Learning English speaking using SOM was fun. I could follow SOM activities in the class. There are various SOM activities in the class. I liked learning English speaking using SOM I enjoyed working with my classmate in doing SOM project. I liked doing SOM recording. Practicing English speaking using SOM was more interesting than doing monolog in front of the class. Practicing English speaking using SOM was more interesting than doing presentation in front of the class. Average

3.55 3.39 3.08 2.92 3.26

Strongly Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree

3.84

Strongly Agree

3.39

Agree

3.63

Strongly Agree

3.39

Agree

3.39

Agree

34 30 31

The next part is about SOM operationalization. It includes statements number 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20. All the students agreed that SOM was easy to install, easy to download and easy to operate. It can be seen on the statement number 15, 16 and 17. The majority of the students also perceived that SOM recording can be done everywhere and everytime, and only small numbers who admit that doing SOM is not easy. It was found that strongly agree average was found on number 15,16, and 17, which represent that SOM is easy to install, easy to download and easy to operate. Therefore, it is not suprising that the students show that they agreed on the


112 operationalization of SOM (average = 3.50). The detail information of the students’ responses on SOM operationalization can be observed in Table 4.4.30. Table 4.30 SOM Operationalization No

Statements

Average

Label

Strongly agree

15 16

SOM application is easy to install in my computer. SOM application is easy to download.

3.58 3.71

17

SOM application is easy to operate.

3.74

Strongly agree

18

I could do SOM recording everywhere I want.

3.29

Agree

19

Doing recording using SOM is easy.

3.42

Agree

20

SOM application can be utilized to record anything on the computer screen. Average

3.29

Agree

3.50

Strongly agree

Strongly agree

The last part presented is related to the positive effects of SOM. Based on the Table 4.30, the majority of the students perceived that the features of SOM helped them prepare their English oral presentation. It can be seen on the statement number 22 and 23. Almost 100% of the students also agreed that by practicing English speaking using SOM helped the students recognize and analyze their speaking mistakes. They could analyze their mistakes on pronunciation and grammar. All the students agreed that SOM helped them understand the input/comment given to them, which encouraged them to speak more confidently, especially on the final tests (see statement number 28, 29, and 32). Table 4.31 also shows that collaborative learning was preferred among the students. It is seen from scales on the statement 4 and 37, which none of the students did not agree on the statements provided. Besides that, learning using SOM help them


113 create speaking practicing habit, which leads them to learn English speaking independently. The frequencies and pecentages on the positive effect of learning using SOM can be seen as follows. Table 4.31 Positive Effects No

Statements

22

The features in SOM helped me learn oral presentation. SOM application helped me prepare presentation English. Practicing English speaking using SOM helped me recognize the mistakes. Practicing English speaking using SOM helped me analyze the mistakes. Practicing English speaking using SOM helped me analyze mistakes in pronunciation. Practicing English speaking using SOM helped me analyze the mistakes in English grammar. Practicing English speaking using SOM helped me understand the input/comments given by lecturers and peers. Practicing English Speaking helped me speak more confidently in the final test. Practicing English speaking using SOM helped me improve your confidence in speaking. Learning English speaking using SOM required me to cooperate with my peers. Learning English speaking using SOM required me to learn independently. Learning using SOM encouraged me to practice speaking in English. SOM application helped me to learn English speaking with my peers. SOM application encouraged me to learn independently.

23 24 25 26 27 28

29 32 4 5 14 37 38

TOTAL

Average

Label

3.26

Agree

3.37

Agree

3.53

Strongly agree

3.37

Agree

3.47

Agree

3.42

Agree

3.53

Strongly agree

3.74

Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree

3.42

Agree

3.61 3.71 3.71

3.97 3.97

3.58

Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree

Based on the descriptive analysis above, it can be concluded that the students give positive responses on the use of SOM in the speaking and learning activities. It


114 can be summarized from the final average of each statement. The final average from first part to the fourth part is 3.44. The detail measurement can be seen below. Table 4.32 Final Average of Questionnaire

Analysis Parts Teaching and Learning Classroom Activities SOM Operationalization Posititve Effects FINAL AVERAGE

Average 3.28 3.39

3.50

3.58 3.44 (Agree)

b. Students’ responses from Interview After obtaining the data from questionnaire, the focus-group interviews were conducted. There were four groups in which one group consisted of five students. The students were chosen randomly. The focus-group interview is to confirm what the students reveal in the questionnaire. The samples of the results of interview have been provided in Table 4.33. The following paragraphs are the analysis of the results of interview. There are four parts, namely the classroom activities using SOM, the features of SOM, the positive effects of learning using SOM and the drawbacks of using SOM as learning medium. The following table explores the student’s responses during the focus group discussions.


115 Table 4.33 The Samples of Students’ Responses from The Interview Interview Points

Themes

Motivating

The students’ responses towards the classroom activities using SOM

Attractive

Less tense

Challenging More speaking practice

The students’ responses towards the features of SOM

Recorded Practices Clear recording Integrated with other apps

Portability & Flexibility Easy to operate

The positive effect of SOM

More confidence

Language awareness

Reflective learning

Collaborated learning

Independent learning The drawbacks of using SOM

More time allocated

Sample of Students’ Interview Because I haven’t mastered English well and I want to master it, I like learning using SOM. It is more interesting than having presentation in front of the class since I don’t have confidence enough. By using SOM, I feel that having good speaking skills is not impossible unless we are tired to practice. (C3) I think learning using SOM is interesting. I don’t know that we can cast anything like video. I just know screenshot in my smartphone. (D3) I like the activities which are using SOM. These activities were challenging and attractive for me.(M3) In my opinion, this application is usual, but I like the activities because this is better than having presentation in front of the class when we are not ready yet (A10) I do agree miss. I felt that I was challenged to operate the computer well, explored the ideas fast, organized slide presentation well and recorded the presentation with correct form of language. Besides that, I was also challenged to combine SOM and other applications to create a better recording (N2) The same as others.. I like this class because I have more English speaking practice. (H1) Well, one of its advantages is that we will have recorded practices for our presentation. So, we can listen again our practices. We can analyse by ourselves or ask others, like teacher or friends to give comment on our recorded practice. (I9) I also can record my practices with clear and good audio output. (E4) Basically, the features are quite interesting, but it would be more interesting if we can combine with other features. (C4) I think practicing using SOM is flexible. We can record our voice everywhere and any time. We do not always practice speaking in the class or in the English lesson. We can practice speaking without lecturers as well. (I9) The features are interesting, simple and easy to operate. (L4) I feel that I am more confidence right now. Recently, I am trying to answer the questions using English. Moreover, when I am using SOM, I will have recorded practices which I can replay wherever and whenever I want and was added by the feedbacks from my teacher and friends (B5) I don’t know whether I have more confindence right now. But thing that I realize, practicing with SOM and combine it with feedbacks help me know my mistakes and know where should be corrected and improved. Therefore, I did not mistakes on the next speaking practices. (A5) Having recorded practices using SOM is quite helpful miss. for me. By having recorded practices, we can listen our voices and if we feel that the sound is weird, we look at the dictionary, asked the lecturer or other friends or browsing in the internet more (A6) By having recorded practices using SOM, I can analyse the kinds of mistakes I made, and then tried not to make the same mistakes on the next speaking. (G6) I like the activities in this class.. the project required me to work with my classmate. I learn how to coordinate, how to divide the tasks and how to help each others. For example, I am not saying thought, think, and so on, they help me to correctly say those words. (N8) I do agree with others…basically we can record our practices by ourselves. If we want to get the comment, we can ask our friends or use the comment sheet you give me last time. (J7) Actually learning using SOM is helpful. We can have recorded practices and if it is combined with reflection sheet, it is very good. But sometimes, it requires me to prepare quite long. (H7) We need to pay to get the Pro version miss… (O9)


116 1) The Classroom Activities Using SOM Learning speaking using SOM is described attractive by the students. The students enjoyed making a video presentation using SOM. They are interested in casting anything on the screen computer. They regarded that learning speaking using SOM is attractive because it is different from the usual speaking activity. They usually were asked to perform and present in front of the class, but by using SOM, they do not need to stand in front of the class. They can record their own voice while casting slide powerpoint to support their recording. “I like learning using SOM. It is quite attractive. I can learn how to present something by recording it..”(A3) “I like SOM. I do not need perform in the class directly..I can record my voice and add some pictures or video by casting on it” (E3)

SOM also motivated the students to learn English. By learning speaking using SOM, the students were encouraged to practice speaking as many as possible until they got the best result. They perceived that it was different from a classic speaking activity like standing up in front of the class and doing speech. This way, apparently, encouraged the students who were low English skills and not confident, to keep practicing speaking English. “Because I haven’t mastered English well and I want to master it, I like learning using SOM. It is more interesting than having presentation in front of the class since I don’t have confidence enough. By using SOM, I feel that having good speaking skills is not impossible unless we are tired to practice.” (C3)

Learning speaking by SOM is also regarded challenging. Although they were not asked to speak in front of the audience, they realized that their recording might be


117 watched by many people. They were challenged to use the language correctly and minimize the mistakes. In addition, the majority of the students were generation Z, whose lives are influenced very much by technology. Some students admit that they were challenged to operate the computer more skilfully while brainstorming, organizing PowerPoint slides, recording, and integrating SOM with other applications for better results. “I do agree miss. I felt that I was challenged to operate the computer well, explored the ideas fast, organized slide presentation well and recorded the presentation with correct form of language. Besides that, I was also challenged to combine SOM and other applications to create a better recording”. (N2) “I like SOM activities. It is really challenging but attractive.” (M3)

Because learning speaking using SOM is attractive and motivating, the students admitted that recording activities are more preferable than direct speech activities. Especially for those students who were having low vocabulary building, grammartical understanding, and pronunciation, they preferred practicing speaking using SOM. Moreover, they can repeat the recording when they made mistakes. The students admitted recording decreased the tense and at last, encouraged them to learn speaking practices more and more. “In my opinion, this application is usual, but I like the activities because this is better than having presentation in front of the class when we are not ready yet” (A10) “The same as the others ... I like this class because I have more English speaking practice. I have more opportunities to practice speaking in English.” (H1)


118 2) The Features of SOM SOM is recommended for the students to practice English speaking. The first feature proposed by SOM is making recorded practices. By having recorded practices, the students could replay what they have said and listen to it. By replaying the recording, the students might find mistakes and things that must be improved. It also allows the students to ask some feedbacks from teachers or friends out of English lesson. “Well, one of its advantages is that we will have recorded practices for our presentation. So, we can listen again our practices. We can analyse by ourselves or ask others, like teacher or friends to give comment on our recorded practice.” (I9) “We can practice the presentation by recording it using SOM. So, while working on the slide presentation, we can give audio explanation. Having recorded practices is so helpful to increase my confidence.” (L5)

Related to the featured had by SOM, students mentioned that SOM provided clear and good resolution audio and video output. It is very important because the students will learn how to promote goods and services and make persuasive videos using SOM. Besides that, SOM is also noted as easy-operated application. “I also can record my practices with clear and good audio output.” (E4) “The features are interesting, simple and easy to operate.” (L4)

When the students learn speaking using SOM, they can integrate its features with other movie-editing applications. Many students combined the results of SOM recording with transition effect on the Windows Movie Maker and Adobe Video, so that their SOM recording looks more sophisticated.


119 “Basically, the features are quite interesting, but it would be more interesting if we can combine with other applications…hmm like Windows Movie Maker..” (C4)

Then, SOM is characterized as portable and flexible. SOM application can be downloaded and installed easily. The students admit that they did not have problem during the installation process. Its flexibility is known because it can be used anywhere and anytime. The students just needed to bring laptop installed SOM application. “I think practicing using SOM is flexible. We can record our voice everywhere and any time. We do not always practice speaking in the class or in the English lesson. We can practice speaking without lecturers as well”. (I9) “In my opinion, its feature is simple. It can be a simulation for presentation and we can record the simulation wherever and whenever I want. I just need to bring laptop” (G9)

3) The Positive Effect of Learning Speaking Using SOM Students perceived that there were some positive effects on their speaking competence after learning speaking using SOM. The first positive effect was some students felt more confident after having treatments using SOM. The students admitted that recently they were not afraid of answering lecturer’s questions using English. Some students also realized that sometimes they were not afraid anymore because they have had speaking practices. In addition, the students confessed that their speaking performance for final exam was better than the the one on the midsemester test. The students’ confidence to speak were increased because they have quite lots of speaking practices using SOM. Moreover, during the practices, the


120 students also got comments or input from the lecturers and peers and did selfreflection feedback. “I feel that I am more confident right now. Recently, I am trying to answer the questions using English. “[B5) “I think, when I am using SOM, I have recorded practices which I can replay wherever and whenever I want and was added by the feedbacks from my teacher and friends” (B5) “I feel that recently and sometimes I am a bit fearless to speak in English … since I have more practices” (D5) “I am a bit confident miss… I realized when I performed during the final exam” (E5)

Not only the confidence, the students also improved on the language awareness. Since the students have more speaking practices, the students used more English language. Moreover, they also got speaking feedbacks and did some reflection. The students were aware on the language they spoke. Before the recording, they organized what they needed to talk about. After getting the feedbacks and doing self-reflection, they know what should be improved. They were trying to speak with correct grammar and pronunciation. “I don’t know whether I have more confindence right now. But thing that I realize, practicing with SOM and combining it with feedbacks help me know my mistakes… and know where should be corrected and improved. Therefore, I tried not to make the same mistakes on the next speaking practices”. (A5) “Learning speaking with SOM is so helpful. I can listen my voice again..and sometimes.. When I hear something weird.. like sentence structure and pronunciation…” It is so helpful miss..although I still felt afraid to speak spontaneously. But, when I practiced speaking using SOM, I recorded my speaking, listened to it, found the mistakes, and tried to correct it, and we do it for several times, I can remember the vocab, grammar or pronunciation more. (B6)


121 The improvement on the students’ language awareness was caused by the new learning technique. By having recorded practices, the students can listen to their voices and increased their sense on the use of language. When they found that the language was less appropriate or uncommonly used, they opened the dictionary, checked to google search engine, confirmed to the lecturers or asked other friends. The feedbacks received by the students also encouraged them to reflect on what they have said and what they should improve in the next recording. Having recorded practices using SOM is quite helpful miss. for me. By having recorded practices, we can listen our voices and if we feel that the sound is weird, we look at the dictionary, asked the lecturer or other friends or browsing in the internet more (A6) By having recorded practices using SOM, I can analyse the kinds of mistakes I made, and then tried not to make the same mistakes on the next speaking. (G6) Although the effect is not direct, I felt that learning using SOM can help me reduce the speaking problems. especially I know my usual mistakes and practice and practice until it is correct. (K6)

The positive effects on learning using SOM, the students realized that they could do collaborated learning. They could learn speaking in English outside the classroom. The students could record their presentation and they could ask other friends to give feedback. The collaboration could also be done during the preparation. It would be very useful because the load of studying was not too heavy. Not only collaborated learning, the students also acknowledged that they could learn speaking more independently. Since the students have been introduced on several kinds of feedbacks, the students could do self-reflective feedback. They could practice the speaking themselves and reflected on their own practices.


122 “I like the activities in this class.. the project required me to work with my classmate. I learn how to coordinate, how to divide the tasks and how to help each others. For example, I am not saying thought, think, and so on, they help me to correctly say those words.” (N8) “I do agree with others…basically we can record our practices by ourselves. If we want to get the comment, we can ask our friends or use the comment sheet you give me last time”. (J7) “For me, one of the positive side of SOM is.. it encourage me to learn speaking by myself. Previously, to learn English, we were so depending on the teacher’s existence. Now, we know how to reflect on our practices, because it is recorded. (A9)

4) The Drawbacks of Using SOM None of the learning medium is perfect. There would be drawbacks that may restrict the students to use it. During the interview, there were two inputs related to the drawbacks of learning speaking using SOM. The first input coming from aa student was noted that although SOM is quite helpful, but he did not like the preparation since sometimes it took longer time. It would be better if it was not done for the whole semester. The second input was related to the version used. Some students gave input that to get the Pro version, they needed to pay more. “Actually learning using SOM is helpful. We can have recorded practices and if it is combined with reflection sheet, it is very good. But sometimes, it requires me to prepare quite long”. (H7) “We need to pay to get the Pro version miss…” (O9)

B. ANALYSIS RESULTS This section is as the follow-up of the data summary. From the data summary, it is underlined that there was positive effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence, there was no interaction effect of SOM across the feedback received by the students, and the students responded positively to the use of SOM in learning


123 speaking. The following paragraphs explore the answers of three research questions in detail. 1. The Effect of SOM on the Speaking Competence The quantitative analysis revealed the answers to the first research questions. Based on the descriptive and inferential analysis, it is noted that there is a positive effect of implementing SOM on the students’ speaking competence. In this study, the positive effect of technique on speaking competence is obvious. The descriptive statistics (Table 4.26) shows that the students who employed SOM as the media to practice speaking performed better on their speaking competence than that of the students who were on the regular class. The two-way ANOVA result (Table 4.26) shows that there is a significant difference on the speaking competence attributable to the technique used (SOM and Non-SOM Technique). Therefore, it can be concluded that SOM as a computer-assisted learning language technique can affect on the students’ speaking competence. This finding supports a research conducted by Ferlazzo (2013), which shows that SOM techniques increased the students’ language awareness during speaking. The students spoke more accurately with organized ideas, more accurate grammar, more inteligible pronunciation and better vocabulary. In addition, this finding is also in line with Badriah (2016) who observed the use of SOM application among the SHS students in Bandung. According to Badriah, the students who practiced SOM more often had higher confidence during the public speaking and more engaged in English speaking activities.


124 2. The Interaction Effect of SOM across the Feedback Received by the Students As mentioned in Chapter 3, interaction effect happens when the effect of an independent variable towards the dependent variable depends on the level of another independent variable. Therefore, the effect of SOM towards speaking competence may differ depends on the level of feedbacks received by the students. To find out the interaction effect, a hypothesis testing was conducted. The first testing employed was inferential statistics two-way ANOVA. Basically, the results of a two-way ANOVA were three things, namely, the main effects of the first independent variables (SOM and Non-SOM techniques) to the students’ speaking competence, the main effect of the second independent variables (feedbacks received by the students) to the students’ speaking competence and the effect of techniques towards the students’ speaking compentence which depends on the levels of feedbacks. However, the main effect of the first independent variable (SOM and Non-SOM techniques has been discussed in the previous section which answers the research question number 1. The following table is the results from a two-way ANOVA statistical test.


125 Table 4.34 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects (A Two-Way ANOVA) Dependent Variable:

Score

Type III Sum Source of Squares df Mean Square F Corrected 1295.974a 5 259.195 1.748 Model Intercept 289854.706 1 289854.706 1954.947 Technique 1 734.583 734.583 4.954 Feedback 397.238 2 198.619 1.340 Technique 135.360 2 67.680 .456 * Feedback Error 10378.711 70 148.267 Total 302580.000 76 Corrected 11674.684 75 Total a. R Squared = .111 (Adjusted R Squared = .048)

Sig.

Partial Eta Squared

.135

.111

.000 .029 .269

.965 .066 .037

.635

.013

Table 4.34 reveals the main effect of the second independent variables (feedback received by the students) to the students’ speaking competence and the interaction effect of techniques and feedbacks towards the students’ speaking competence. The main effect and interaction effect can be checked in the column marked Sig, in row feedback and technique*feedback. The result revealed is that there is no significant difference on the students’ speaking competence based on the levels of the feedback received by the students. As mentioned earlier, in this research the students have been classified into the students who got teacher’s feedback only, the students who experienced teacher’s feedback and peer feedback, and the students who got teacher’s feedback and did self corrective feedback. Based on this statistical two-way ANOVA, the p value for


126 feedback is higher than the level of significance (0.269<0.05), which means feedback did not differ in terms of the students’ speaking competence. Then, another result drawn from a two-way ANOVA is that there is no interaction effect of techniques on the students’ speaking competence on the levels of feedback received by the students. It indicated that Ho is not rejected since the p value is bigger the level of significance (p=0.635>α=0.05). The following figure visualizes the impact of technique and feedback on the students’ speaking competence.

Figure 4.1 The Profile Plots of Speaking Competence Mean Scores

Regarding the profile plots above, it can be seen that there is significant effect only on the technique applied (SOM and Non-SOM). The students in experimental


127 group were accounted for higher mean scores than the students in control group. Then, although there was no significant effect on the feedback received to the students’ speaking competence, it was interesting to note that the students who got teachers’ feedbacks only suffered the lowest mean scores. In addition, the students who got teacher’s feedbacks and did corrective feedback experienced highest mean scores. Then, since that condition happened in both classes, it makes the three lines parallel, which indicates that there is no interaction effect. Students who experienced SOM always performed better than those taught using Non-SOM and the students who got teachers’ feedbacks and did self-corrective feedback had the highest mean scores. After knowing the main effect and interaction effect, it is better to know the effect size. Effect size is a set of statistics that indicates the relative magnitude of the differences between means, or the amount of the total variance in the dependent variable that predictable from knowledge of the levels of the independent variable. Effect size was found when a further statistical analysis was conducted. Therefore, a mixed between-within ANOVA was employed. The following table present a more detail comparison of students’ speaking competence in certain levels of technique and feedback as the first steps of doing mixed between-within ANOVA statistical analysis from SPSS Program.


128 Table 4.35 The Comparison of Students’ Speaking Competence Scores Technique Mean Std. Deviation N Feedback1 EXP 60.8333 14.40854 12 CTRL 55.8333 15.78165 12 Total 58.3333 14.99758 24 Feedback2 EXP 64.0000 11.02064 12 CTRL 56.5000 8.14081 12 Total 60.2500 10.22040 24 Feedback3 EXP 69.5000 10.34408 12 CTRL 61.0000 10.00000 12 Total 65.2500 10.85577 24 Note: Feedback 1 = teacher’s feedback only; Feedback 2 = teacher’s feedback + peer feedback; Feedback 3 = teacher’s feedback + self-corrective feedback

When the speaking competence scores were compared, it was seen that the students experiencing SOM technique and getting the third type of feedback (teacher’s feedback and self-corrective feedback) were accounted for the highest mean score. Meanwhile, the students who experienced any other speaking technique (Non-SOM) and got the teacher’s feedback only suffered for the lowest mean scores. This further statistical technique also provided the results of Levene’s test to see that the scores in each feedback group was homogeneous. Through table 4.27 which show the results of Levene’s Test, it can be seen that the Sig. value in each feedback is bigger than coefficient alpha (p=0.934, 0.502, 0. 826 > α=0.05). By having bigger significant point, it was safe to continue the next process. Table 4.36 The Levene Test on the Feedback Variable F Feedback1 Feedback2 Feedback3

df1 .007 .466 .049

df2 1 1 1

Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups. a. Design: Intercept + Technique Within Subjects Design: Feedback

22 22 22

Sig. .934 .502 .826


129 After checking the homogeneity of the data, it was also essential to check the sig. value in the Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices to see whether there is a violation on the assumption. Pallant (2011) notes if the sig. value is less than 0.01, it means there will be a violation. Table 4.36 shows that the significant value was bigger than the 0.01 (0.209>0.01) which means there would be no violation for further assumption. Table 4.37 Equality of Covariance Matrices Box's M F df1 df2 Sig.

9.909 1.405 6 3506.717 .209

After that, to see impact of two different interventions (SOM and Non-SOM technique) on the students’ speaking competence, across three feedbacks, it can be seen on sig. value in Wilks’ Lambda in the Multivariate Test output box. Interaction happened when significant value is smaller than coefficient alpha 0.05. In this research,

it

was

found

that

the

sig.

level

for

Wilks’

Lambda

(row

technique*feedback) was 0.92. It was bigger than the coefficient alpha 0.05. Thus, it can be concluded that there is no interaction effect of techniques applied across the moderator variable (feedback received by the students). This result is the same as the result obtained from a two-way ANOVA. To know the effect size, the partial eta squared, given in the Multivariate Test output box, must be checked. Using the commonly used guidelines proposed by Cohen (1988, pp. 284-7) as cited in Pallant (2011, p. 281) that .01=small effect,


130 .06=moderate effect, .10=large effect, this result suggests a large effect size (0.196, see the feedback row). In other words, it can be concluded that basically there is an effect of feedbacks on the students speaking competence. However, if the effect size of combination technique and feedback is very small, since the partial eta squared value is 0.008. The detailed information about effect size can be seen in Table 4.38. Table 4.38 Multivariate Tests Output Box Effect Feedback

Value .196 .804 .244 .244 .008 .992 .008 .008

Pillai's Trace Wilks' Lambda Hotelling's Trace Roy's Largest Root Feedback Pillai's Trace * Wilks' Lambda Technique Hotelling's Trace Roy's Largest Root a. Design: Intercept + Technique Within Subjects Design: Feedback b. Exact statistic

F 2.565b 2.565b 2.565b 2.565b .084b .084b .084b .084b

Hypothesis df 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000

Error df 21.000 21.000 21.000 21.000 21.000 21.000 21.000 21.000

Sig. .101 .101 .101 .101 .920 .920 .920 .920

Partial Eta Squared .196 .196 .196 .196 .008 .008 .008 .008

Based on the statistical findings related to the interaction effect, it was found that the influence on the students’ speaking competence made by SOM and NonSOM techniques did not depend on the feedback givers. It can also be said that the factors (learning technique and feedback giver) did not work together to influence speaking competence. That SOM is better that Non-SOM did not depend on the ones gave the feedbacks. Furthermore, these statistical results can be a reference for the students that learning speaking using SOM can be done collaboratively and independently, as long as the students know the principles of giving and interpreting the feedbacks. Since


131 based on the statistical findings, the students experienced teacher’ feedbacks only suffered for the lowest mean score. Meanwhile, the students who got teacher’s feedback plus peer feedback and teacher’s feedback plus doing self-correction feedback experienced higher mean scores. This means that the students basically can learn speaking or do speaking practices with their peers or autonomously. However, the second findings may lead to the discussion about the limitation of this research. The students’ speaking competence is affected by various factors, and the factor taken in this study is limited to the feedbacks received by the students. The non-existence of the interaction effect in this study might be caused by other factors, such as the students’ vocabulary mastery, students’ interest, background knowledge, learning style and so forth. c. The Students’ Responses on the Use of SOM Based on the students’ responses through questionnaire and interview, it can be summarized that SOM benefited the students to maximize their speaking practices. It provided a better learning speaking condition in which the students had more opportunities to practice speaking in comfortable way. There are several advantages that were revealed by the students through questionnaire and focus-group interview. First, SOM is a helpful and motivating teaching-lerning technique for the students. It is helpful because it allows the students to have recorded speaking practices. It means that the students can record their speaking practices in the position


132 they feel comfortable. They can record their speaking practices inside or outside the class. Next, this is a helpful and motivating technique for those who have low English skills and confidence. By having recorded practices, they do not need to stand in front of the class to learn public speaking. SOM motivates the students who are afraid of making mistakes during the speaking to keep trying and practicing. After that, SOM is also perceived attractive. Since SOM allows the users to cast anything on the computer screen, the students can make interesting recorded practices, for example by casting PowerPoint slides, video, pictures and animation. Therefore, later on the audience can listen to the recording while watching the results of screencasting. This is more interesting than any recording applications which usually focus on the audio only. In addition to the fact that SOM can cast anything on the computer screen while record the voice of the user, free-version SOM do not provide effect for slide/video transition. To give this kind of effect, the students must integrate SOM with other video-editing tools. Practicing presentation using SOM may challenge the students to be more skillful in utilizing technology. Furthermore, learning speaking using SOM encourages the students to have reflective learning, collaborative learning and independent learning which are very beneficial for them. In conclusion, the students show positive responses related to the use of SOM in learning speaking. The students revealed that SOM is a helpful medium for learning speaking since it provides recorded practices which can be accessed easily. It


133 also provides fun and attractive features that can motivate them to keep practicing speaking and do presentation simulation. Its portability and flexibility also support it as a fun technique as the students can do recorded practices wherever and whenever they want. At last, SOM speaking learning technique provides challenging activities for the students to produce interesting video recording.


CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS This chapter consists of three parts. The first part is the research results. It will show the conclusions of the research analysis. The second part is the implication. It discusses how the research implies to teaching and learning English language. The last part is suggestions. It proposes suggestions for teachers and future reseachers. A. CONCLUSIONS This study mainly aims to discover the effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence. It is also intended to discover the interaction effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence across the feedback received by the students. In addition, it is also to discover the students’ perception related learning speaking using SOM. The following paragraph are the discussion of research result. As mentioned in Chapter IV that there is an effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence. The descriptive statistics shows tht the mean score of the experimental group, experiencing SOM technique, is higher than that of the control group, taught using any other speaking technique). Based on the two-way ANOVA, it is concluded that there is significant difference (p=0.03<α=0.05). The result indicates that the null hypothesis is rejected. It means that the means score of the experimental group and control group are significantly different. It also means that there is an effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence.

134


135 Secondly, this study revealed that there was no interaction effect of SOM on the students’ speaking competence across the feedback received by the students. The result of two-way ANOVA indicates no significant interaction (technique and feedback received) effect for students’ speaking competence. Since the p value is 0.659, it is bigger than the coefficient alpha (0.05). This results indicates that the null hypothesis is accepted. By having conclusion that there is no interaction effect of SOM across the feedback received by the students, it means that SOM and the variety of feedbacks do not cooperate in affecting the students’ speaking competence. In other words, in affecting the students’ speaking competence, SOM does not depend on the subject giving the feedback. However, there are some possibilities for other factors which may go together with the SOM speaking learning technique. It might be the students’ vocabulary mastery, background knowledge, learning style and so forth. Third, regarding the students’ responses towards the use of SOM as medium of learning speaking, it is noted that there are some positive responses. The students regard that SOM is hepful, motivating, attractive and challenging. The

students

revealed that SOM is a helpful medium for learning speaking since it provides recorded practices which can be accessed easily. It also provides fun and attractive features that can motivate them to keep practicing speaking and do presentation simulation. Its portability and flexibility also support it as a fun technique as the students can do recorded practices wherever and whenever they want. At last, SOM speaking learning technique provides challenging activities for the students to produce interesting video recording.


136 B. IMPLICATIONS In learning speaking, supportive conditions are necessary in order that students can practice speaking more effectively. As we know that the students have problems on the speaking competence. They have problems on the exploring the ideas, using correct grammatical sentence structure, pronouncing the words, and choosing the most appropriate words. One of factors that caused those problems was the limitation for the students to practice speaking. The students did not have maximum opportunities to practice speaking in English both inside and outside the class. SOM offered the students recorded speaking practices. Guided by the teachers and supported by SOM’s characteristics, which are flexible and portable, the students could record their speaking practices using SOM wherever and whenever they could. The students did not need to come to the class to record the voices. Moreover, when they need to get feedbacks from the teachers or peers, they can send it the video files via email, chatting applications, or uploading in social media such as Youtube or Facebook. By doing this technique, the students can maximize their opportunities to practice speaking English. Since there is no interaction between the use of SOM and the feedback givers, it means that SOM are suggested to be used by the students to practice speaking skills. Since the students can ask feedback to their peers and do slef-reflection by listening to the recordings, the use of SOM can help the teachers promote


137 collaborative and independent learning speaking. SOM can still be utilized by the students when the teachers are not around them. The last implication is that the use of SOM can improve the students’ computer skills. Having good computer skills must be very beneficial for

the

students so that they can compete globally. C. SUGGESTIONS Based on the research results and the implication of applying SOM in speaking class, I would like to propose some suggestions which are expected to the teachers, media developers, parents and university stakeholders, and other researchers. For the teachers, it is expected that teachers open their mind to use technology in the classroom. Since the advanced of technology grows fast nowadays, it is very essential for the teachers to refresh their learning technique by integrating technology in the learning and teaching activities. In addition, technology can help the teacher to have more effective and efficient classroom activities. The fact that SOM are regarded as motivating and challenging must motivate the teachers to make innovation or utilize the technological devices. The students are interested in challenging yet meaningful activities. Some technological devices can be exploited to create challenging and meaningful activities. For the learning media developers and mobile or computer applications developers, it is expected that develop and publish more language learning media and application. It is hoped that media and application developers can cooperate with the


138 teachers therefore the content and the context of the materials are more suitable with the learners’ need. The third suggestion are intended to parents and university stakeholders to facilitate the students personal computer or computer laboratorium in each faculty. By having computer laboratorium, language teacher may have more opportunities to expand their CALL classroom activities which are very useful for the students to expand their language knowledge. Then, the last suggestions are proposed to the other researchers. Since this study was covered by some limitations including time, fund and knowledge, there are still many areas of the study which has not been covered yet. Therefore, for other researchers, it is possible to conduct a more comprehensive study. It can be a similar type of study which has the pupose to discover the effectiveness of other media but with noticing to different moderator variables or with larger samples of the study.


BIBLIOGRAPHY Ahmad Asakereh, M. D. (2015). Student Satisfaction with EFL Speaking Classes: Relating Speaking Self-efficacy and Skills Achievement. Issues in Educational Research, 25(6), 345-363. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier25/asakereh.pdf on December 1, 2016 Akhyak, Indramawan, A. (2013, December). Improving the Students' English Speaking Competence through Storytelling (Study in Pangeran Diponegoro Islamic College (STAI) of Nganjuk East Java, Indonesia). International Journal of Language and Literature, 1, 18-24. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/23079170 on August 30, 2016 Aleksandrazak, M. (2011). Problems and Challenges in Teaching and Learning Speaking at Advanced Level. Glottodidactica: Adam Mickiewicz University Press Poznań 37(2011) Retrieved from http://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/gl/article/view/324 on February 8, 2017 Ali, A.D., 2016. Effectiveness of Using Screencast Feedback on EFL Students’ Writing and Perception. English Language Teaching, 9(8), p.106. Retrieved http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/60976 on August 30, 2016 Al-Tamimi, N. O. (2014, December). Public Speaking Instruction: Abridge to Improve English Speaking Competence and Reducing Communication Apprehension. International Journal of Linguistics and Communication, 2, 45-68. Retrieved from ERIC Journal doi:10.15640/ijlc.v2n4a4 on September 14, 2016 Anggraeni, W. 2012. The Characteristics of Teacher's Feedback in the Speaking Activities of the Grade Nine Students of SMP N 2 Depok: A THESIS. Yogyakarta State University. Retrieved from http://eprints.uny.ac.id/25678/ on September 14, 2016 Assessment Toolkit: Giving Assessment Feedback. UNSW Australia. Retrieved from https://teaching.unsw.edu.au/assessment-feedback.pdf on December 1, 2016 Arnold, S., Guthrie, & K. Thille, C. (2013). Effective Use of New Learning Media and Technology. Forum for the Future of Higher Education pp. 61-70. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ff1209s.pdf on March 31, 2017. Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Razavieh, A. (1985). Introduction to research in education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Wiston.

139


140 Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education (6th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Wiston. Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th edition). Belmont, CA: Wardsworth Cengage Learning. Astuti, D. K. (2013). The Gap between English Competence & Performance (Performance: The Learners` Speaking Ability). Foreign Language Learning and Teaching Conference Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.litu.tu.ac.th/journal/FLLTCP/Proceeding/660.pdf660-670 on October 4, 2016 Aryes, J. (2014). Lesson Planning: Outcomes and Responsibilities in Planning. WestPoint, NY: Centre for Teaching Excellence United States Military Academy. Retrieved from http://www.usma.edu/cfe/Literature/Ayres_14.pdf on September 14, 2016 Bachman, L. F., & Cohen, A. D. (1998). Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bachman, L.F., & Palmer, A.S. (1996). Language testing in practice: designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Badriah. (2016). The impact of using Screencast-O-Matic in Teaching News Item Text. Proceedings of the 11th Bandung International Conference on Language and Education (Information and Communication Technology in Language Studies. Bandung: The Language Center of Bandung Institute of Technology ISBN 978-602-7861-61-9 Bagaric, V., & Djigunovic, J. M. (2007). Defining Communicative Competence. Metodika.8(1) pp. 94-103. Retrieved from http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=42651&lan g=en on March 31, 2017 Bailey, K. M. (2003). Speaking. In Nunan, D. (2004). Practical english language teaching. New York: Mc Graw-Hill Companies. Baker, J., & Westrup, H. (2003). Essential speaking skills: a handbook for english language teachers. London: Continuum. Baker, T. L. (1999). Doing sosial research (3rd edition). Singapore: The McGrawHill Companies, Inc. Baleghizadeh, S., & Shahri, M. N. N. (2012). EFL Teachers' Conceptions of Speaking Competence in English. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. Taylor & Francis Online 20(6) February 2014. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2014.885702 on March 31, 2017


141 Bastable, S. B., & Dart, M. A. (2007). Chapter 5: Developmental stages of the learner. – x(x). Retrieved from http://www.jblearning.com/samples/0763751375/46436_CH05_000_000.p df on 13 July 2017 Bates,

T. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: an online module https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter1-8-2-the-sectionsmodel/sectionsmodel

Becker, H. J. (1994). How our best computer-using teachers differ from other teachers: implications forrealizing the potential of computers in schools? Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(3),291-321. Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/volume-1/issue-2-00/seminalarticles/article1-htm-25/ on September 14, 2016 Brock, M. P. (2012). Best practices for teaching with emerging technologies. New York: Routledge. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). NewYork: Longman. Brown, H. D. (2003). Language assessment: principles and classroom practice. New York: Longman Pearson Education, Inc. Brown, H. D. (2004). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). NewYork: Longman. Brown, J.S. (2005). Learning, working & playing in the digital age. Retrieved from http://www.serendip.brynmawr.edu/seelybrown/seelybrown.html. Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Calvin, Y. (2016). Implementing SOM in writing class: A WORKSHOP. (iTELL). Technology Enhanced Language Learning: Teaching and Researching. Salatiga: Association for Indonesia's Technology Enhanced Language Learning Practitioner 3-4 November 2016 Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (Eds.), Language and Communication, 2-27. London: Longman.


142 Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Teaching english as a foreign language. London: Heinle & Heinle Publisher. Celce-Murcia (2011). Teaching english as a foreign language. London: Heinle & Heinle Publisher. Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer application in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chen, H. Y. (2007). The relationship between EFL learners’ self-efficacy beliefs and English performance: A PhD THESIS, Florida State University. http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/3846/ Retrieved from March 31, 2017 Cresswell, J. W. (2003). Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston : Pearson Education, Inc. . Cresswell, J. W. (2011). Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, evaluating, quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Creswell, J. W. (2015). Riset pendidikan: perencanaan, pelaksanaan, dan evaluasi riset kualitatif dan kuantitatif. (H. P. Soetjipto, Trans.) Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Cohen, L. M. (2011). Research methods in education. London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. Cohen, L. M. (2011). Research methods in education. London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morisson, K. (2007). Research methods in education. London: Routledge. Cohen, L. J., & Levy, T. (2017). Teaching English for Academic Purposes through the Use of Digital Tool (Ruppin Academic Centre, Israel). IGI Global: Disseminator of Knowledge. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/teaching-english-foracademic-purposes-through-the-use-of-digital-tools/164801 Davies, P., & Pearse, E. (1998). Success in english teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press


143 Davis, C. A. & Olson, Joann S. (2014). Meeting the transitional needs of young adult learners (new directions for adult and continuing education, number 143): an online source. -:Wiley. Dunkel, P. (1991). Computer-assisted language learning and testing: research issues and practice. Pennsylvania: Newbury House. Dwi Wahyuni, D. I. (2014. Linguistic Competence and Speaking Performance of English Education Study Program Students of Sriwijaya University. Journal of English Literacy Education 1(2) 83-94. Retrieved from http://download.portalgaruda.org/article.php?article=471952&val=9698&t itle=LINGUISTIC%20COMPETENCE%20AND%20SPEAKING%20PE RFORMANCE%20OF%20ENGLISH%20EDUCATION%20STUDY%2 0PROGRAM%20STUDENTS%20OF%20SRIWIJAYA%20UNIVERSIT Y on December 1, 2016 Elliot, J. 1991. Action research for education charge. Buckingham: Open University Press. Etkisi, G., et. al. (2016). Effect of Combined Peer-Teacher Feedback on Second Language Writing Development. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. H. U. Journal of Education 31(4), 657-675 Retrieved from doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2016015701 on September 14, 2016 Faizi, R., Afia, A. E., & Chibeb, R. (----). Students' Perceptions on Social Media Use in Language Learning. International Conference: ICT for Language Learnin 6th edition. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/817f/98aa4719969711a57079a2a9ee922f 743b49.pdf on March 31, 2017 Ferlazzo, L. (2013). English Language Learners Using Screencast-o-matic for folktale presentation. http://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org/2013/11/06/englishlanguage-learners-using-screentastic-for-folktale-presentations/ Ferlazzo, L. (2013). English Language Learners Using Screencast-o-matic for folktale presentation. Retrieved from www.academia.edu/66945609/ English_language_learners_using_screencast_o_matic_for_folktale_prese ntation on August 30, 2016 Ferreira, A., Moore, J. D., & Mellish, C. 2007. A study of feedback strategies in foreign language classrooms and tutorials with implications for intellligent computer-assisted language learning systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 17, 389-422. Retrieved from https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/4137 on September 14, 2016 Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1932). How to design and evaluate research in education. NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.


144 Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education. NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1989). Educational research: an introduction. New York:Longman. Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (2007). Educational Research: an introduction. New York: Longman. Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (2007). Task for independent language learning. Illlinois: Pantagraph Printing. Gebhard, J. G. (1996). Teaching english as a foreign or second language. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press. Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004-5). Conditions underwhich assessment supports student learning.Learning & Teaching in Higher Education, 1, pp.1-31. Retrieved https://sydney.edu.au/educationportfolio/ei/assessmentresources/pdf/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson.pdf on March 31, 2017 Graves, K. (2000). Designing language course: a guide for teachers. London: Heinle&Heinle Publishers. Greany, J. S. (2002). Students Perceptions on Language Learning in a Technological Environment: Implications for the New Millennium. Language Learning & Technology 6(1). pp. 165-180. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/pdf/steppgreany.pdf on September 14, 2016 Grant, M. M. (2002). Getting a grip on projecct-based learning: theory, cases, and recommendations. Meridian. Retrieved from https://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/win2002/514/project-based.pdf on March 31, 2017. Gu, S., Reynolds, & Eric D. (2013). Imagining Extensive Speaking for Korean EFL Modern English Education, xx(x). Retrieved from http://sites.miis.edu/sarahgo/files/2015/10/MESSOpaperExtensiveSpeakin ginEFL.pdf on September 16, 2016 Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of english language teaching (the 3th edition). Longman: London and New York Harmer, J. (1996). The practice of english language teaching. New York: Longman. Harmer, J. (2006). How to teach english. London: Longman. Harney, S. 2017. Visual Audio Screencasts to Enrich Feedback and Learner Engagement.In: Technology-Enabled Feedback Approaches for First-


145 Year: Y1 Feedback Case Studies in Practice: Y1Feedback. Retrieved from https://www.y1feedback.ie on December 1, 2016 Hastoyo, S. S. (2010). Improving Students' Speaking Competence Through Small Group Discussion: A THESIS. Teacher Training and Education Faculty Sebelas Maret University, English Department. Surakarta. Retrieved https://eprints.uns.ac.id/6421/ on December 4, 2016 Hatch, E. M., & Farhady, H. (1982). Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. NY: Newbury House. Hemerka, V. (2009). Low Speaking Performance in Learners of English. Masaryk University Brno, Department of English Language and Literature. Retrieved from https://is.muni.cz/th/186265/pedf_b/Low_Speaking_Performance_BC_Th esis.pdf on September 14, 2016 Huang, C. P. (2012). Exploring Factors Affecting the Use of Oral Communication Strategies. 龍華科技大學學報第三十期 12. Retrieved from http://www.lhu.edu.tw/m/oaa/synthetic/publish/publish/30/8.%E9%BB%8 3%E7%A7%8B%E8%90%8DExploring%20Factors%20Affecting%20the%20Use%20of%20Oral%20C ommunication%20Strategies.pdf on December 1, 2016\ Indriana, D., & Ulfah, R. (2016). The Implementation of Screencast-O-Matic to Help Improve Students’ Writing. TESOL Indonesia: An International Conference Proceedings x(x) August 2016. Intel Teach Program. xxxx. Instructional Strategies: Teacher and Peer Feedback. Designing Effective Project. Intel Corporation. Retrieved from https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/program/education/us/en/docum ents/project-design/strategies/instructionalstrategies-feedback.pdf on March 31, 2017 Ishii, Y. 2011. A survey of Learners' Preferences about Teacher's Feedback on Writing. Proceedings of the 16th Conference of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from http://paaljapan.org/conference2011/ProcNewest2011/pdf/graduate/G14.pdf on September 16, 2016 Jati, G. (2016). E-teacher development: Can teachers contribute in digital era?. Proceedings of the 11th Bandung International Conference on Language and Education (Information and Communication Technology in Language Studies. Bandung: The Language Center of Bandung Institute of Technology ISBN 978-602-7861-61-9 Jekielek, S., & Brown, B. (2005). The transition to adulthood: characteristics of young adults ages 18 to 24 in America. New York: Annie E. Casey


146 Foundation Retrieved from http://ilscertification.com/resources/transitiontoadulthood.pdf on 13 July 2017 Jensen, L. (1990). Planning lesson. Teaching English as a Foreign Language. London: Heinle & Heinle Publilsher (pp. 403-409). Jensen, L. (2001). Lesson Planning Guidelines. In Celce-Murcia, M. (2011). Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012). Educational Research (4th edition): Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Approaches. California: SAGE Publications. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: from method to postmethod. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding Language Teaching. From Method to Postmethod. ESL and Applied Linguistic Series. Retrieved from http://flteducation.wikispaces.com/file/view/kumaraPosmethod.pdf on January 1, 2011 Klein, J. I., et. al. (2009). Project-based learning: inspiring middle school students to engage in deep and active learning. New York: NYC Department of Education. Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/documents/teachandlearn/project_basedFinal.pdf on August 30, 2016. Lewis, M. (2002). Giving feedback in language classes. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Center. Lamb, M. (2012). Explaining successful language learning in difficult circumstances. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/3110563/Explaining_successful_language_lear ning_in_difficult_circumstances Lamb, M. (2015). The motivational dimension of language teaching. Language Teaching, 50(3). pp. 301-346. Retrieved from White Rose Research Online http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/105502/7/Lamb%20Finals.pdf on July 16, 2016. Levy,

M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning; conceptualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

context

and

Liam, A. (2016). Information and Communication Technology in Language Studies. Proceedings of the 11th Bandung International Conference on Language and Education (Information and Communication Technology in


147 Language Studies. Bandung: The Language Center of Bandung Institute of Technology ISBN 978-602-7861-61-9 Lightbown, P. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.) Focus on Form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 177–196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Litchman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: a user's guide (3rd edition). California: SAGE Publications, Inc. Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research: from theory to practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Makulova, A. T., et. al. (2015). Theory and practice of competency-based approach in education. International Education Studies 8(8) pp. 183-192, July 28, 2015. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1070819.pdf on March 31, 2017. Melendez, R. A. M., Zavala, G. g. q., & Mendez, R. F. 2014. Teaching Speaking Strategies to Beginners. European Scientific Journal 1 (February 2014) Retrieved from http://www.eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/viewFile/2864/2692 on September 1, 2016 Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd edition). California: SAGE Publication, Inc. Newby, T. J., et. al. (2000). Educational technology for teaching and learning. New York: Pearson. Nkwetisama, C. M. (2012). The competency based approach to english language education and the walls between the classroom and the society in cameroon: pulling down the walls. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 2(3) pp. 516-523, March 2012. Retrieved from http://www.academypublication.com/issues/past/tpls/vol02/03/12.pdf on March 31, 2017. Nunan, D. (1989). Understanding language classrooms: a guide for teacherinitiated action. New York: Prentice Hall. Nunan, D. (1991). Language Teaching methodology : a textbook for teachers. New York: Prentice Hall.


148 Nunan, D. (1995). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers Nunan, D. (2003). Practical english language teaching. New York: Mc Graw-Hill Companies. Omer,

B. (2016). matic/watch/cD6lFJzjJ/

Screencast-O-Matic.

https://screencast-o-

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House Publishers. Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to date analysis using the spss program. NSW: Allen & Unwin. Patsula, P. J. (1992). The Usableword Monitor. Sookmyung Woman's Universitas Seoul. www.patsulamedia.com/usefo.usableword/report20020201mediaselection-criteria.html Puji, H. (2012). Panduan praktis spss 20. Yogyakarta: Andi Rana, A. M. K., Perveen, U. (2013). Motivating Students through Self-Correction. Educational Research International 2(2) October 2013. Retrieved from http://www.erint.savap.org.pk/PDF/Vol.2(2)/ERInt.2013(2.2-23).pdf on September 1,4, 2016 Reinch, J., Daccord, T. (2005). Best ideas for teaching with technology: a practical guide for teacher, by teachers. ERIC Books. Published on February 18 Riadi, E. (2015). Statistika penelitian (analisis manual dan ibm spss). Yogyakarta: Andi. Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved http://faculty.mu.edu.sa/public/uploads/1347871288.356924906420-JackC-Richards-Communicative-Language-Teaching-Today.pdf on March 17, 2016 Richard, J. C. (2006). Developing Classroom Speaking Activities: From Theories to Practice. Journal Watch 28(2) December 2006. NCELTR Resourse Center. Retrieved from http://www.ameprc.mq.edu.au/docs/journal_watch/jw107.pdf on January 5, 2011 Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. 2002. Methodology in language teaching: an anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


149 Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (1992). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2015). Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press Rivers, W. (1968). Teaching foreign language skills. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ruffini, M. (2012). Screencasting to Engage Learning: AN ONLINE SOURCE. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2012/11/screencasting-toengage-learning Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment andthe design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18(2), pp.119-144. Retrieved http://pdf.truni.sk/eucebnice/iktv/data/media/iktvv/Symposium_LTML_Royce%20Sadler_BF ormative_Assessment_and_the_design_of_instructional_systems.pdf on on December 1, 2016 Sadler, D.R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment In Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 5(1), pp.77-84. Retrieved http://dropoutrates.teachade.com/resources/support/5035b24fecda6.pdf on on December 1, 2016 Sanaoui, R., & Lapkin, S. (1992). A case study of an FSL senior secondary course integrating computer networking. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 43(3), 524-552. ERIC Journal. Retrieved on September 14, 2016 Santoso, S. (2015). Menguasai spss 22: From basic to expert skills. Jakarta: Gramedia. Santoso, S. (2016). Panduan lengkap spss versi 23. Jakarta: Gramedia. Savage, L. (1993). Literacy through a competency-based educational approach. In J. A. Crandall and J. K. Peyton (eds.), Approaches to adult ESL literacy instruction. Washington DC: Center of Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems. Schneck, E. A. (1978). A Guide to Identifying High School Graduation Competencies. ---:--Siregar, S. (2013). Metode penelitian kuantitatif. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group. Somdee, M., & Suppasetseree, S. 2012. Developing English Speaking Skills of Thai Undergraduate Students by Digital Storytelling through Websites. Foreign Language Learning Teaching Conference Proceedings. Retrieved


150 from http://www.litu.tu.ac.th/journal/FLLTCP/Proceeding/166.pdf September 14, 2016

on

Sudijono, A. (2009). Pengantar evaluasi pendidikan. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada. Sugiyono. (2010). Metode penelitian kuantitatif kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta Sultana, A. (2009). Peer Correction in ESL Classrooms. BRAC University Journal 6(1). pp. 11-19. Retrieved from http://www.finchpark.com/courses/tkt/Unit_31/peer.pdf on September 14, 2016 TEAL Centre Staff. 2010. Effective Lesson Planning. Teaching Excellence in Adutl Literacy. Retrieved from https://lincs.ed.gov/sites/default/files/8_TEAL_Lesson_Planning.pdf on September 14, 2016 Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. On Project-based Learning, March 2000. Retrieved from www.bobpearlman.org/BestPractices/PBL_Research.pdf on September 14, 2016. Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Tuan, N. H. (2015). Factors Affecting Students' Speaking Performance at Le Thanh Hien High School. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3, pp. 8-23. Vietnam. Retrieved from http://www.multidisciplinaryjournals.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/03/FACTORS-AFFECTINGSTUDENTS%E2%80%99-SPEAKING.pdf on August 30, 2016, Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ur, P. (1999). A course in language teaching: practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vesna Bagarić, J. M. (2007). Defining communicative competence. Metodika, 8, 94-103. Retrieved December 1, 2016 Wahyuni, D, Ihsan, D., Hayati, R. (XXXX). Linguistic competence and speaking performance of english education study program students of sriwijaya university. Retrieved http://download.portalgaruda.org/article.php?article=471952&val=9698pd f./ on March 31, 2017


151 Ware, J. L., Loucky, J. P. (2016). Flipped instruction methods and digital technologies in language learning classroom. Boston: IGI-Global Warschauer, M. (1996). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing and communication. In M.Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawai'isymposium (Technical Report # 12; pp. 29-46). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based language teaching: concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Weddel, K.S. (2006). Competency Based Education and Content Standards. Northern Colorado: Northern Colorado Literacy Resource Center. Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H.G. (1994). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wulandari, H. (2013). Learning the art of dance by implementing the som-assisted free expression approach. Man in India 96(!2) 4851-4860. Retrieved from http://serialsjournals.com/serialjournalmanager/pdf/1499759380.pdf on March 31, 2017.


151

APPENDICES

151


152 Appendix 1

Pre-test Plan Meeting 1 1. The pre-test is conducted on 19 October 2016 during the mid-term test. In this pre-test, the researcher records the students’ monologue. The students speak around 1-2 minutes related to situation prepared. The researcher prepares the situations related to the topics that the students have acquired. 2. The mechanisms of speaking pre-test are: a. Speaking pre-test will be conducted in different room from the real mid-term test. The students should go to the researcher’s room immediately after they have finished their mid-term test with their lecturer. b. The students will have speaking pre-test one by one. c. The topics in the speaking pre-test are the same as what they have in mid-term test with their lecturer. If the students are talking about topic A, therefore, in the pre-test, they will also talk about topic A. However, the form of the instruction will be different. d. The instruction will be shown to the students and they will be given 1 minute to prepare what they are going to talk. In this case, the students may take note. Small note will be prepared for them. To save the time, the students are reminded to write the keywords only. e. The students are encouraged to speak around 1-2 minutes and during the speaking, their voices will be recorded. f. The students have the chance to repeat the recording once. g. The result of the speaking pre-test will not influence the mid-term score. 3. Situations for speaking pre-test are: 1

Describe the meaning of creativity. 2 You should say: - What creativity is - One of creative people you know is and explain why you think he or she is a creative person.

3

Describe the meaning of creativity You should say: - What creativity is - Whether you are creative/not creative person and explain why you are creative/not creative person

4

Share how you categorize creative people You should say: - What creativity is - The examples of creative people are and why they are categorized into creative people. Talk about someone who is creative You should say: - Who he/she is - How you know him/her and explain why he/she is categorized into creative person


153

5

Describe the most creative person you know

6

You should say: - Who he/she is - What he/she has created and explain whether his/her creativity influence others positively 7

9

Mention some creative activities that might support you to be creative person You should say: - What the activity/ies is/are - Where you can do the activities and explain how those activities can improve your creativity. Please share a creative thing that you have seen and inspired you

Please share a creative event that you have attended

8

You should say: - What the event was - When and where the event was held in ….. and explain who were involved in that event.

You should say: - What the thing was - Who made the thing - When and where you saw the thing and explain how it inspires you 10 Share why creativity is important for university students

Share why creativity is important for you You should say: - What creativity is - Why creativity is important and explain how you improve your creativity

11 Describe a creative thing/object that you have made You should say: - What creative thing you have made was…. - It was made of …. then explain how to make that thing. 13 Share why parents/teachers need to fulfil children’s creativity You should say: - What creativity is - Why children should have creativity and explain why parents/teachers

You should say: - What creativity is - Why creativity is important for university students because and explain how university students improve their creativity 12 Mention some creative activities that might support you to be creative person You should say: - What the activity/ies is/are - Where you can do the activities and explain how those activities can improve your creativity 14 Imagine and share if someone does not have creativity You should say: - What creativity is - Why creativity is important and explain how if someone does not have creativity


154 need to fulfil children’s creativity 15 Describe the meaning of freedom. You should say: - What freedom is - The example of freedom and explain why we need freedom in life 17 Share how freedom can help you achieve the dream You should say: - What your dream is - The freedom you have and explain how freedom can help you achieve the dream. 19 Share how you describe freedom. You should say: - The meaning of freedom - The examples of freedom and explain how if we do not have freedom. 21 Share the freedom that we haven’t got right now. You should say: - The examples of freedom that we haven’t got right now and explain whether we need to fight for those freedom

16 Describe the meaning of having freedom You should say: - Having freedom means - The example of freedom you have and explain why having freedom is important 18 Share how much freedom you have You should say: - The examples of freedom you have - The activity that you cannot do and explain why you cannot do that/those activity/activities 20 Share why you need to fight your freedom. You should say: - The meaning of freedom - The examples of freedom that you don’t have right now and explain how you fight for your freedom. 22 Compare the freedom that you had when you were child and the freedom that you have right now You should say: - The examples of freedom that you had when you are child - The examples of freedom that you have right now and explain whether it is enough or not

23 Describe the job that you dream about You should say: - What the name of the job is - The responsibility you

24 Present the examples of skills qualifications needed in certain company You should say: - What the name of the job is


155 probably have and explain why you want to have that job

- What the skills and qualifications needed are and explain why that job needs those skills or qualifications.


156

Appendix 2 Post-Test Plan 7-8 December 2016 Time Allocation: 150 menit 1. The post-test will be conducted on 7 December 2016 during the final test. In this posttest, the researcher records the students’ monologue. The students speak around 1-2 minutes related to situation prepared. The researcher prepares the situations related to the topics that the students have acquired. 2. The mechanisms of speaking post-test are: a. Speaking post-test will be conducted in different room from the real final test. The students should go to the researcher’s room immediately after they have finished their final test with their lecturer. b. The students will have speaking final test one by one. c. The topics in the speaking post-test are the same as what they have in final test with their lecturer. If the students are talking about topic A, therefore, in the speaking posttest, they will also talk about topic A. However, the form of the instruction will be different. d. The instruction will be shown to the students and they will be given 1 minute to prepare what they are going to talk. In this case, the students may take note. Small note will be prepared for them. To save the time, the students are reminded to write the keywords only. e. The students are encouraged to speak around 1-2 minutes and during the speaking, their voices will be recorded. f. The students have the chance to repeat the recording once. g. The result of the speaking post-test will not influence the final test score. 3. Situations for speaking post-test are:

1

Share your favourite folktale.

2

Share one of life values in certain folktale You should say: - What the title of the folktale is - What the life value found in the folktale is and explain how life values can be found in that story

4

Share your favourite movie

You should say: - What the title of your favourite folktale is - When you heard the story for the first time and explain why you like that folktale very much. 3

Share your favourite novel You should say: - What the title of the novel is

You should say: - What the title of the movie


157 -

5

How you got the novel (buy, borrow?) and explain why you like the novel very much Share your favourite novel

-

6

You should say: - What the title of the novel is - Who the author of the novel is and explain the moral values in the novel 7

Describe the term warming” and its causes

“global

You should say: - What global warming is - What the causes of global warming are

8

Who the characters in the movie are and explain why you like the movie very much Share your favourite Indonesian folktale You should say: - What the title of the folktale - Who the characters in the folktale and explain the moral values in the folktale Explain the causes and effects of global warming. You should mention: - What the causes of global warming are - What the effects of global warming are

and mention some facts of the causes 9

Describe the meaning of 3R. You should say: - What 3R stands for - What the examples of actions for 3R are and give the example of actions to do that R

and mention some facts of the effects 10 Tell small and simple actions that you can do to reduce the global warming. You should mention: - What global warming is - What the small and simple actions to reduce global warming are And explain one of the actions that you have done

and tell one of the examples in detail. 11 Share the activities that cause 12 Describe the meaning of greenhouse global warming effect You should say: - What global warming is - What the causes of global warming are and explain the real activities that cause globa warming in your

You should say: - Greenhouse effect is - The condition of greenhouse effect and tell what you should do for greenhouse effect


158 surrounding 13 Explain food avoided

that

should

be 14 Describe fast food.

You should mention: - What some food that should be avoided are - Where we usually find that food

You should say: - What fast food is - What the examples of fast food are and why we are not recommended to eat fast food.

and explain why that food should be avoided 15 Unhealthy habits that are bad for 16 Describe organic food your health You should say: You should mention: - - What organic food is - - What being healthy means - What the examples of organic food - - What some activities that should be are avoided are and explain your opinion about and explain why those activities organic food. should be avoided (briefly) 17 Tell the advantages of organic 18 Tell the disadvantages of organic food food You should mention: - What your opinion about fast food is - What the advantages of organic food are

You should mention: - What your opinion about organic food is - What the disadvantages of organic food are

and tell/show the evidence of the its and tell/show the evidence of the its advantages disadvantages 19 Simple activities to keep fit 20 Explain healthy food around us You should mention: - Why we need to keep fit - What the activities to stay fit are and explain the examples of how to realize it.

You should mention: - What the meaning of healthy food - What kinds of healthy food And explain how to get healthy food easily


159 Appendix 3

Assessment Rubrics No

Aspect

Score

Note

1

Minimal attempt to complete the task and/or responses frequently inappropriate. Partial completion of the task yet needs help in handling any complication or difficulties. Partial completion of the task, responses mostly appropriate yet undeveloped. Completion of the task responses appropriately and adequately developed. Completion of the task perfectly, responds with elaboration. Frequent errors, little or no communication, speech is often unintelligible Some mispronunciations and a very heavy accent cause difficulty for listeners, require frequent repetition. Mispronunciations do not cause misunderstanding, using a range of pronunciation features but there are still some mistakes Errors in pronunciation are quite rare, using a range of pronunciation features correctly Using a wide range of pronunciation features, easy to understand throughout L1 accent has minimal effect on intelligibility Cannot produce basic sentence forms, frequent inadequate and/or inaccurate use of basic language structure, Make some constant errors when producing basic sentences except in memorized expressions, errors may lead to misunderstanding Producing basic sentences with correct form or reasonable accuracy, errors do not lead misunderstanding, use limited complex structure, Producing basic sentences correctly, using complex sentences with some flexibility, mistakes are still found but do not cause comprehension problems Control of grammar is good. Few errors, with occasional failure on the basic pattern. Speech is so halting with long pauses and/or incomplete thoughts, cannot link simple sentences. Speech is quite slow and/or with frequent pauses, few and no incomplete thoughts for short or routine sentences, having limited ability to link simple sentences. Speech is frequently hesitant; frequently using repetition and selfcorrection and/or slow speech to keep going and complete the idea for short and routine sentences Speech is occasionally hesitant, produce simple sentences fluently,

2

Task

1

3 4 5 1

Pronunciation

2

2 3 4 5 1 2

Grammar

3

3 4 5 1

Fluency

4

2

3 4


160 No

Aspect

Score

5 1 2

Vocabulary

5

3

4 5

Note reduce the pause when using more complex communication, use limited range of connectives and discourse markers Speech is almost fluent, effortless and smooth, hesitation is usually content-related and only rarely to search for language, use a range of connectives and discourse markers. Only produces isolated words, very simple daily vocabulary or memorized utterances Uses sufficient vocabulary to convey personal information or familiar topics, produces frequent errors in word choice when talking to less familiar topics. Able to speak the language with sufficient vocab to participate effectively in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social and professional topics Or Has wide enough vocabulary with limited vocabulary to discuss more various topics Uses a wide vocabulary resources to understand and participate in any conversation, uses less common and idiomatic vocabulary with occasional in accuracies Uses vocabulary with full flexibility and precision in all topics, uses idiomatic language naturally and accurately


161 Appendix 4

Lesson Plan of Meeting 2 and 3 Experimental Group Speaking Class Topic : Folktale 26 October 2016 Time Allocation: 120 minutes

A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. Analyze the structure of narrative text 2. Write a short narrative text with correct organization 3. Organize Powerpoint slides of a narrative story (Folktale/Folklore/Indonesia/NonIndonesia) 4. Record a short narrative story using SOM with sufficient language elements. D. 1. 2. 3.

Learning Method Approach : Communicative Language Teaching Method : Genre-based Approach, CBA, Project-based Learning Technique : SOM technique

E. Material 1. Function : Expressions related to time and sequence o Once upon a time, …. o Some years ago, ……. o hundreds year ago, ……. o After, …. o In 2014, o Then, …. o One day, o Suddenly, … 2. The structure of the text: Simple Past with To be and Verb 3. Narrative Text (Organization and language elements)


162 F. Teaching Media and Source 1. Media : Screencast-O-Matic Application, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout 2. Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi 3. Source : Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube englishwsheet.com G. Learning Activity Meeting 2 No. Learning Stages T’s activities Opening - T greets Ss and has 1 Activities friendly talks - T shows pictures of Indonesian folktale. - T Asks the students some questions such as do you have favorite folktale? Where does the story come from? How do you know about the story? How about the story in other countries? Are the foreign folktale similar to Building ours? 2 Knowledge of the Field

3

Modelling and deconstructing the text

Ss’ activities - Ss responds to T’s greeting and have friendly talks

- Ss responds to the T’s questions

- Ss divide themselves into two-four big groups - T shows video of folktale - Each group compete to compilation. Then, T asks guess the title and tell the the students to guess what story about. the title of the folktale. T - Score for guessing the title asks another student to correctly is 10 and telling tell the story briefly. To the story briefly (name of make it interesting, it can the characters, the setting be group competition. of the story, the moral value, etc) is 50. - T play a video of Jack and - Ss watch a Folktale (Jack the Bean Stalk. and the Bean Stalk) - T asks some - Ss responds to the T’s comprehensive questions questions

Time allocation

5’

2’

13’

5’ 3’


163 related to Jack and the Bean Stalk - Ss read the text and its analysis (orientation, complication and resolution) T and Ss discuss the text - T and Ss discuss the text organization and language organization and language elements elements - Ss watch and listen T play a video of Bawang carefully to a video of Merah and Bawang Putih Bawang Merah and Bawang Putih T asks comprehensive questions related to - Ss respond to T’s questions Bawang Merah Bawang Putih - Ss read and analyse the T distribute another structure organizate and handout of narrative text the language elements T and Ss discuss the text - T and Ss discuss the text organization and language organization and language elements elements T distribute handout of simple past test and - Ss do the exercises discuss briefly with the Ss T and Ss discuss about - T and Ss discuss about past past tense exercises tense exercises - Ss make a group of 2-3 T distributes handout to people make outline - Ss complete the outline of certain story - Ss review what they have T reviews what the learned (organization of students have learned narrative text and simple past tense) - Ss write a short narrative text - Ss arrange PowerPoint slide about the story

- T distributes the narrative handout (the text of Jack and the Bean Stalk) -

-

-

-

-

-

4

Joint construction of the text

5

Closing

6

Take home task

-

-

5’

5’

5’

2’

5’ 5’ 10’ 5’ 20’

5’

Meeting 3 No. Learning Stages 1

Opening

T’s activities - T greets Ss and has

Ss’ activities - Ss responds to T’s greeting

Time allocation 5’


164 Activities

2

3

4

5

Joint construction of the text Independent construction of the text Assessment

Closing

friendly talks - T reviews material in previous meeting - T checks the Ss’ outline and writing for some who do the take-home task

and have friendly talks - Ss responds the T’s questions - Ss arrange PowerPoint slide about narrative story - Ss write the transcripts for recording - Ss do the recording using SOM - Ss watch and listen to certain SOM recordings - Ss divide themselves to 3 big permanent group (group who receive feedback from the teacher only, group who receive feedback from the teacher and peers, and group who receive feedback from teacher and do selfassessment) - Ss submit the recordings

- T gives oral feedback to the recording

- T gives written feedback

H. Assessment 1. Technique : Performance Test 2. Form : SOM recording (Students will make simple powerpoint slide about certain topics in folktale then explain the slide and record it using SOM) 3. Instrument : teacher’s feedback form, peer-feedback form, self-assessment form, speaking assessment rubric No. Aspect 1 Task Completion 2 Pronunciation 3 Grammar 4 Fluency 5 Vocabulary Total score Final score

1

2

3

25 Total score x 4 = 100

Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

4

5

20’ 30’

6’ 24’

5’


165 Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

I. Learning Material Meeting 2 and 3 1. Ppt for guessing the title of the folktale (Cinderella, Jack and the Beanstalk, Rapunzel, Beauty and the Beast, etc) 2. Video for guessing the story about (Malin Kundang, Timun Emas, Roro Jonggrang, Bawang Merah Bawang Putih, The Legend of Crying stone, The Legend of Toba Lake) 3. Two video about narrative story (Jack and the Bean Stalk and Bawang Merah Bawang Putih) 4. Two narrative texts (Jack and the Bean Stalk and Bawang Merah Bawang Putih) 5. Ppt about “Tips to make interesting slide story using PowerPoint” J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Timun Emas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNhoaIPr7Io Roro Jongrang and Prambanan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cim_zV7tM4 The Legend of Crying Stone https://youtu.be/1en16LPkLSU Sangkuriang https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17P2hCv9Rjs Golden Snail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zJ2oHw2h00 Bawang merah and Bawang Putih https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPUKpzACcC8&t=290s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1qBX_ptIkM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uCby3qC6Us The legend of Danau Toba https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfPEuGjF2Sw Malin Kundang https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5usDXCCSUc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blo4wiFBqMk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dkhM7VLeo


166 K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Dosen memberi warna pada bintang dalam kriteria-kriteria di bawah ini. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca dan memahami masukanmasukan yang diberikan oleh dosen untuk latihan-latihan berikutnya. No 1

Kriteria

Konten rekaman/Presentasi/Monolog Sesuai dengan topik Organisasi teks (orientation – complication – resolution) Bagian orientasi Gambaran detail complication dan climax Bagian resolution

2

Pembawaan Volume suara Artikulasi Kelancaran berbicara Pengucapan Penggunaan kalimat dan grammar Pemilihan kata Kreativitas slide presentasi

3

Kurang memuaskan

Penilaian umum Persiapan untuk rekaman Pengelolaan waktu

Masukan/Komentar:

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


167

L. Lembar Masukan dari Teman Nama teman

: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Mahasiswa memberi warna pada bintang pada penyataan-penyataan di bawah ini. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca dan memahami masukanmasukan yang diberikan oleh teman mahasiswa lainnya untuk latihan-latihan berikutnya. No. Penyataaan Nilai 1.

Teman saya berbicara dengan jelas

2.

Saya suka rekaman teman saya

3.

Rekaman teman saya menarik

4.

Teman saya bicara tentang folktale dengan antusias

5.

Yang paling saya suka di rekaman teman saya adalah

6.

Mereka mempunyai keahlian di bagian

7.

Teman saya perlu rekamannya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:

memperbaiki

Orientation Complication Resolution Organisasi teks (orientation – complication – resolution) Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat Pengucapan


168 M. Refleksi untuk Diri Sendiri Nama Anda : 1. ……………………. Nama Partner Anda

: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Mahasiswa memberi warna pada bintang pada penyataan-penyataan di bawah ini untuk dirinya sendiri. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca, memahami dan mengisi nilai refleksi untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Keterangan: 1= sangat tidak setuju; 2 = tidak setuju; 3=setuju; 4=sangat setuju No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Refleksi

1

2

3

Kamu tahu cerita apa yang kamu rekam. Kamu mempersiapkan rekaman dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan rekamam dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan rekaman dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek hasil rekaman Anda Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu Kamu suka mengerjakan rekaman ini

14.

Kamu akan memberikan _____ smilling faces atas segala usahamu

15.

Kamu puas dengan hasil rekaman ini dengan teman Anda

16.

Berapa lama persiapan kamu untuk rekaman:

Kurang dari 2 jam Kurang dari 1 hari Sekitar 2-7 hari Lebih dari 7 hari

4


169 17.

Apa yang perlu kamu tingkatkan:

18

Sebutkan kosa kata baru yang Anda temui di topik ini:

19

Sebutkan kata-kata yang Anda ragu untuk mengucapkan:

Konten rekaman Penggunaan struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Pengucapan kata-kata dalam Bahasa Inggris Kemampuan dalam menggunakan komputer


170

Appendix 5 Lesson Plan of Meeting 4 Experimental Group 2 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 minutes Topic : Folktale A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. analyse the short and simple opinion text 2. complete short and simple opinion text 3. express their opinion related to certain issues (Folktale, Movie, TV drama) D. Material 1. Function : a. Expressions of giving opinion o In my opinion, ….. o I think, …. o According to the article I read, …… E. 1. 2. 3.


F. Teaching Media and Source 1. Media : Screencast-O-Matic Application, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout 2. Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi 3. Source :


171 Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.

G. Learning Activity

No.

1

3

Learning Stages Opening Activities


Time allocation

T’s activities

Ss’ activities

- T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T reviews previous materials - T shows pictures about Indonesian movies, Indonesian TV Drama, Western Movies, Western TV Drama, Korean Movies, Thailand Movies, Korean TV Serial,etc. - T asks the students some questions such as have you seen those movies?; which one is the most interesting?; when the movies are adopted from the novel, do you prefer watching the movie or reading the novel?; etc. - T asks the students to discuss with their peers about those movies/drama. - T guides the Ss to share their discussion

- Ss responds to T’s greeting and have friendly talks

5’

- Ss respond to the teachers’ question - Ss discuss the movies with their peers - Ss share their opinion

10’

- T plays SOM recording talking about the most fantastic movie in 2015.

- Ss watch and listen to the recording

3’

- T asks some comprehensive questions related to the recording

- Ss respond to the teacher’s recording

2’


172 - T distributes the handout of argumentative text - T plays SOM recording about Indonesian movies - T asks some comprehensive questions related to the recording

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure and language component of argumentative text

5’

- Ss watch and listen to the recording

3’

- Ss respond to the teacher’s recording

2’

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure and language component of argumentative text - Ss choose the topics provided. Ss may find - T distributes outline to other topics write short - Ss complete an outline to argumentative text. make short presentation about movies and folktale - Ss design PowerPoint slides to show their arguments using Microsoft PowerPoint or find videos. Ss record their argument using SOM - T gives feedbacks to the - Ss give and receive students feedbacks (based on the group they belong to) - Ss review what they have learned (language component in short - T reviews what the argumentative text) students have learned - Deciding English Final Project  additional time 10 minutes to discuss the topic - T distributes the handout of argumentative text

3

4

5


Independent construction of the text (30 minutes)

Closing

H. Assessment 1. Technique : Performance Test 2. Form : SOM recording (Students will make simple powerpoint slide about certain topics in folktale then explain the slide and record it using SOM)

5’

20’

45’

10’

10’


173 3. Instrument : teacher’s feedback form, peer-feedback form, self-assessment form, speaking assessment rubric

No. Aspect 1 Task Completion 2 Pronunciation 3 Grammar 4 Fluency 5 Vocabulary Total score Final score

1

2

3

4

5


Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

I. Learning Material Meeting 4 1. PPT about western movie, Indonesian movie, Korean Drama, Indonesian Sinetron 2. SOM recording about the best movies all the time 3. SOM recording about is watching movies a good way to improve our English skills? 4. Short argumentative text about is watching movies a good way to improve our English skills? 5. Short argumentative text about the best movies all the time 6. Outline to argumentative text and handout about argumentative text 7. Teacher’s feedback form, peer feedback form, self-corrective feedback form J. References Film vs Novel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3QsUx0x_4w Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Chamber of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF9qpIIh1pI

Azkaban


174 Sinetron Indonesia vs Drama Korea https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DtzMShnVM Perbedaan Drama Korea dan Sinetron Indonesia masa kini https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqJbj9TJjWA Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria

Konten rekaman/Presentasi/Monolog Sesuai dengan topik Organisasi teks Bagian pembukaan Thesis statement dan isi jelas Bagian kesimpulan

2


3

Kurang memuaskan

Penilaian umum Persiapan untuk rekaman

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


175 Pengelolaan waktu Masukan/Komentar:

L. Lembar Masukan dari Teman Nama teman

: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.


3.


4.

Teman saya bicara tentang movies and stories dengan antusias

5.

Yang paling saya sukai dari rekaman teman saya

6.


Organisasi teks (opening – body - conclusion) Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks (opening – body - conclusion) Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas)


176 7.

Teman saya perlu memperbaiki rekamannya di bagian ….

Organisasi teks Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat Pengucapan

Masukan/Komentar:

M. Refleksi untuk Diri Sendiri Nama Anda : 1. ……………………. Nama Partner Anda

: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Mahasiswa memberi warna pada bintang pada penyataan-penyataan di bawah ini untuk dirinya sendiri. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca, memahami dan mengisi nilai refleksi untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Keterangan: 1= sangat tidak setuju; 2 = tidak setuju; 3=setuju; 4=sangat setuju No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Refleksi Kamu tahu isi opini yang kamu rekam. Kamu mempersiapkan rekaman dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan rekamam dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan rekaman dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek hasil rekaman Anda

1

2

3

4


177 12. 13.

Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu Kamu suka mengerjakan rekaman ini

14.


15.


16.


17.


18


19


Kurang dari 2 jam Kurang dari 1 hari Sekitar 2-7 hari Lebih dari 7 hari Konten rekaman Penggunaan struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Pengucapan kata-kata dalam Bahasa Inggris Kemampuan dalam menggunakan komputer


178

Appendix 6 Lesson Plan of Meeting 5 Experimental Group 9 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 minutes Topic: Global Warming

A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. identify the cause and effect of global warming through observation 2. analyse the cause and effect text about global warming 3. produce short cause and effect text 4. record the explanation about the cause and effect text of global warming D. Material 1. Conjuction:  as a result  because  since  therefore  consequently E. 1. 2. 3.

   

for this reason therefore so due to


F. Teaching Media and Source 1. Media : Screencast-O-Matic Application, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout 2. Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi


178 3. Source : Man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfGMYdalClU Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. G. Learning Activity Meeting 5 No. Learning Stages

1

Opening Activities

T’s activities

2

Time allocation

- T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T reviews previous materials


5’

- T shows video “MAN” that reflects on the effects of global warming. - T discuss the vocabulary related to global warming with Ss

- Ss discuss the videos and the find the vocabulary related to global warming - Ss write down the vocabulary on the white board - Ss discuss the vocabulary with T

10’

- Ss watch and listen to the videos

3’

- Ss respond to the teacher’s questions

2’

- T plays SOM video talking about the cause and effect off global warming. . - T asks some comprehensive questions related to the viddeos Modelling and deconstructing the text

Ss’ activities

- T distributes the handout of cause and effect text - T plays SOM video about the cause and effect of global warming - T asks some comprehensive questions related to the video - T distributes the handout

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of cause and effect text - Ss watch and listen to the video

3’

- Ss respond to the teacher’s video

2’

- Ss read the text

5’


179 of cause and efffect text

3

4


- T distributes outline to write short cause and effect text.

Independent construction of the text (30 minutes) - T gives feedbacks to the students

5

Closing

- T reviews what the students have learned

- Ss analyse the structure and language component of argumentative text - Ss compare the first and second cause and effect text - Ss choose the topics provided. Ss may find other topics - Ss complete an outline to make short expalantion of the cause and effect of global warming - Ss design PowerPoint slides or use the videos provided by the teacher to record the explanation of the cause and effect of global warming. - Ss give and receive feedbacks (based on the group they belong to) - Ss review what they have learned - Ss show the progress of final project

20’

45’

10’

10’


1

2


3

4

5


180

I. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

Learning Material Meeting 5 Video “MAN” (Kuswandono, ) SOM video: cause and effect of global warming 1 SOM video: cause and effect of global warming 2 Cause and effect text 1 Cause and effect text 2 Handout for making outline Teachers’ feedback form, peer feedback form and self-assessment form

J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Dosen memberi warna pada bintang dalam kriteria-kriteria di bawah ini. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca dan memahami masukan-masukan yang diberikan oleh dosen untuk latihan-latihan berikutnya. No 1

Kriteria


2

Kurang memuaskan

Pembawaan

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


181 Volume suara Artikulasi Kelancaran berbicara Pengucapan Penggunaan kalimat dan grammar Pemilihan kata Kreativitas slide presentasi 3


Masukan/Komentar:


182 L. Lembar Masukan dari Teman Nama teman

: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Mahasiswa memberi warna pada bintang pada penyataan-penyataan di bawah ini. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca dan memahami masukan-masukan yang diberikan oleh teman mahasiswa lainnya untuk latihan-latihan berikutnya. No. Penyataaan Nilai 1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


Masukan/Komentar:

Organisasi teks (opening – body - conclusion) Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks (opening – body - conclusion) Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks Konten rekaman Struktur kalimat Pengucapan


183


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi

1

2

3

Kamu tahu isi opini yang kamu rekam. Kamu mempersiapkan rekaman dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan rekamam dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan rekaman dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek hasil rekaman Anda Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu Kamu suka mengerjakan rekaman ini

14.


15.


16.


Kurang dari 2 jam Kurang dari 1 hari Sekitar 2-7 hari

4


184

17.


18


19


Lebih dari 7 hari Konten rekaman Penggunaan struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Pengucapan kata-kata dalam Bahasa Inggris Kemampuan dalam menggunakan komputer


185

Appendix 7 Lesson Plan of Meeting 6 Experimental Group 16 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 menit Topic: Global Warming A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. identify the language element and organization of persuasive text 2. compare the organization text and language elements in persuasive text 3. complete persuasive presentation 4. organize persuasive presentation D. Material 1. Function : Expressions used in persuasive presentation:  Why don’t we …….?  Don’t you thik it would be better to ……..?  I’m sure we ought to …..  I think we should ……  We should ….  You don’t want it happens because your quality of life is important …… 2. The structure of the text: Relative Clause (using Relative Pronouns and Relative Adverb) E. 1. 2. 3.


F. Teaching Media and Source 1. Media : Screencast-O-Matic Application, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout


186 2. Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi 3. Source : Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. G. Learning Activity

No. Learning Stages

1

2

T’s activities

Time allocation



5’

- T plays video about 3R

- Ss watch the videos - Ss observe the things surround them and categorize it into the things that can be reused, reduced and recycled. - Ss present their discussion in front of the class

10’

- T plays SOM video about persuasive text in reusing secondhand thing.


3’

- T asks some comprehensive questions related to the videos


2’

- T distributes the handout of persuasive text

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of persuasive text

Opening Activities


Ss’ activities

- T plays SOM video about the persuasive text in recycling the things - T asks some comprehensive questions related to the video - T distributes the handout of persuasive text

- Ss watch and listen to the video

3’


2’

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of persuasive text - Ss compare the first and second persuasive text


187

3

4


- T distributes outline to write short cause and effect text.

Independent construction of the text (30 minutes) - T gives feedbacks to the students

5

Closing


- Ss choose the topics provided. Ss may find other topics - Ss complete an outline to make short persuasive text - Ss design PowerPoint slides or use the videos provided by the teacher to record their persuasive presentation related reducing global warming - Ss give and receive feedbacks (based on the group they belong to) - Ss review what they have learned - Ss show the progress of final project

20’

45’

10’

10’


1

2

3


Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

4

5


188 38.5 - 0

Very Poor

I. Learning Material Meeting 6 1. Video: 3R 2. SOM Video: persuasive text (1) 3. SOM Video: persuasive text (2) 4. Handout of persuasive text (1) 5. Handout of persuasive text (2) 6. Handout of making outline 7. Teachers’ feedback form, peer-feedback form, and self-correction feedback form J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria


2

Kurang memuaskan

Pembawaan Volume suara Artikulasi Kelancaran berbicara

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


189 Pengucapan Penggunaan kalimat dan grammar Pemilihan kata Kreativitas slide presentasi 3


Masukan/Komentar:



: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.

Teman saya perlu rekamannya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:

memperbaiki



191


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi Kamu tahu isi opini yang kamu rekam. Kamu mempersiapkan rekaman dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan rekamam dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan rekaman dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek hasil rekaman Anda Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu Kamu suka mengerjakan rekaman ini

14.


15.


1

2

3

4


192 16.


17.


18


19




193

Appendix 8 Lesson Plan of Meeting 7 Experimental Group 23 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 menit Topic: Food and Health A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. differentiate between healthy and unhealthy food and life 2. present the ideas of healthy food and life briefly 3. produce persuasive/short argumentative presentation about food and health D. Material 1. Function : Cohesive Devices in Spoken Language - After that - In the beginning - At first - Eventually - In the end - Later on 2. The structure of the text: Common conjunction E. 1. 2. 3.


F. 1. 2. 3.

Teaching Media and Source Media : Screencast-O-Matic Application, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi Source :


194 Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. G. Learning Activity Meeting 7 No. Learning Stages

T’s activities - T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T reviews previous materials

Ss’ activities - Ss responds to T’s greeting and have friendly talks –

1

Opening Activities

- T shows pictures about activities and food that may harm the human body - T asks the students to choose the activities and food that should be avoided and asks them to give short justification

–

–

– - T plays video about “Digestive System after Eatng Instant Noodle.(2:30) - T introduce the activity card - T shows Marcia’s short argumentative presentation 2


- T distributes the handout of an activity card and Marcia’s script - T introduce the second activity card - T shows Daniel’s short

–

Ss explore the food and activities that may harm the human body Ss discuss about the food and activities that may harm the human body with their peers Ss share their argument/justification about the food and activities that should be body in the class. Ss watch and listen to the video Ss share their opinion related to the fact between digestive system and instant noodle.

- Ss watch and listen to Marcia’s short argumentative presentation


8’

5

5’

- Ss read the activity card and the script - Ss discuss and analyse how 5 Marcia’s organize the argument - Ss watch and listen to Daniel’s short 5 argumentative presentation


195 argumentative presentation - T distributes the handout of an activity card and Daniel’s script

- Ss read the activity card and the script - Ss discuss and analyse how Daniel’s organize the argument - Ss compare Marcia’s presentation and Daniel’s 5 presentation

- T shows some tips to speak more fluently with activity card. 3

4

5

Joint construction of the text Independent construction of the text (30 minutes)

Closing

- T distribute some activity cards.

- T gives feedbacks to the students


3’ - Ss make outline about what 15’ to say for the activity card - Ss design PowerPoint slides or find the videos that present the arguments - Ss give and receive feedbacks (based on the group they belong to) - Ss review what they have learned - Ss show the progress of final project

50’ 10’

7’


1

2

3


Criteria

Score

4

5


196 Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

I. Learning Material Meeting 7 1. PPT: food and activities that may harm the human body 2. Video: Digestive system after eating instant noodle 3. SOM Video: Marcia’s presentation (1) 4. SOM Video: Daniel’s presentation (2) 5. Transcript of Marcia’s presentation (1) 6. Transcript of Daniel’s presentation (2) 7. Handout of making outline 8. Teachers’ feedback form, peer-feedback form, and self-correction feedback form J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria


2

Kurang memuaskan

Pembawaan

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


197 Volume suara Artikulasi Kelancaran berbicara Pengucapan Penggunaan kalimat dan grammar Pemilihan kata Kreativitas slide presentasi 3


Masukan/Komentar:



: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


Masukan/Komentar:



199


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi Kamu tahu isi opini yang kamu rekam. Kamu mempersiapkan rekaman dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan rekamam dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan rekaman dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan direkam dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek hasil rekaman Anda Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu Kamu suka mengerjakan rekaman ini

14.


15.


1

2

3

4


200 16.


17.


18


19




201

Appendix 9 Lesson Plan of Meeting 2 and 3 Control Group 26 October 2016 Time Allocation: 120 minutes Topic: Folktale A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. Analyze the structure of narrative text 2. Write a short narrative text with correct organization 3. Organize Powerpoint slides of a narrative story (Folktale/Folklore/Indonesia/Non-Indonesia) 4. Perform short roleplay D. 1. 2. 3.

Learning Method Approach : Communicative Language Teaching Method : Genre-based Approach, CBA, Project-based Learning Technique : Roleplay

E. Material 1. Function : Expressions related to time and sequence o Once upon a time, …. o o hundreds year ago, ……. o o In 2014, o o One day, o 2. The structure of the text: Simple Past with To be and Verb 3. Narrative Text (Organization and language elements)

Some years ago, ……. After, …. Then, …. Suddenly, …

F. Teaching Media and Source 1. Media : Video, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout 2. Equipment : Laptop, LCD


202 3. Source : Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube G. Learning Activity Meeting2

1

2

Opening Activities

Building Knowledge of the Field

Ss’ activities

- T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T shows pictures of Indonesian folktale. - T Asks the students some questions such as do you have favorite folktale? Where does the story come from? How do you know about the story? How about the story in other countries? Are the foreign folktale similar to ours?


5’

- Ss responds to the T’s questions

2’

-

3

Time allocation

T’s activities

No. Learning Stages

Modelling and deconstructing the text -

- Ss divide themselves into two-four big groups T shows video of folktale - Each group compete to compilation. Then, T asks guess the title and tell the the students to guess what story about. the title of the folktale. T - Score for guessing the title asks another student to correctly is 10 and telling tell the story briefly. To the story briefly (name of make it interesting, it can the characters, the setting be group competition. of the story, the moral value, etc) is 50. T play a video of Jack and - Ss watch a Folktale (Jack the Bean Stalk. and the Bean Stalk) T asks some comprehensive questions - Ss responds to the T’s related Jack and the Bean questions Stalk - Ss read the text and its T distributes the narrative analysis (orientation, handout (the text of Jack complication and and the Bean Stalk) resolution)

13’

5’ 3’

5’


203 - T and Ss discuss the text - T and Ss discuss the text organization and language organization and language elements elements - Ss watch and listen - T play a video of Bawang carefully to a video of Merah and Bawang Putih Bawang Merah and Bawang Putih - T asks comprehensive questions related to - Ss respond to T’s questions Bawang Merah Bawang Putih - Ss read and analyse the - T distribute another structure organizate and handout of narrative text the language elements - T and Ss discuss the text - T and Ss discuss the text organization and language organization and language elements elements - T distribute handout of simple past test and - Ss do the exercises discuss briefly with the Ss - T and Ss discuss about - T and Ss discuss about past past tense exercises tense exercises 4


5

Closing

6

Take home task

- T distributes handout to make outline - T reviews what the students have learned

- Ss complete the outline of certain story

5’

5’

2’

5’ 5’ 10’ 5’ 20’

- Ss review what they have learned (organization of 5’ narrative text and simple past tense) - Ss write a short narrative text - Ss arrange a short role-play (around 5-10 minutes)

Meeting 3 No. Learning Stages

1 2

3

Opening Activities Joint construction of the text Independent

T’s activities - T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T reviews material in previous meeting - T checks the Ss’ outline and writing for some who do the take-home task

Ss’ activities

Time allocation

- Ss responds to T’s greeting and have friendly talks 5’ - Ss responds the T’s questions - Ss arrange a short role-play 20’ with their friends in the group - Ss make three big 30’


204 construction of the text

4

H. 1. 2. 3.

Assessment

- T gives direct-oral feedback and written feedback

permanent group (group who receive feedback from the teacher only, group who receive feedback from the teacher and peers, and group who receive feedback from teacher and do selfassessment) - Ss do role-play performance (there are 6 groups, each consists of 68 students, each performs 5-7 minutes) - Ss give feedback from teacher, peers and do selfassessment

Assessment Technique : Spoken Test Form : Oral Performance Instrument : teacher’s feedback form, peer-feedback form, self-assessment form, speaking assessment rubrics


1

2

3


Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

4

5


205

I. Learning Material Meeting 2 and 3 1. Ppt for guessing the title of the folktale (Cinderella, Jack and the Beanstalk, Rapunzel, Beauty and the Beast, etc) 2. Video for guessing the story about (Malin Kundang, Timun Emas, Roro Jonggrang, Bawang Merah Bawang Putih, The Legend of Crying stone, The Legend of Toba Lake) 3. Two video about narrative story (Jack and the Bean Stalk and Bawang Merah Bawang Putih) 4. Two narrative texts (Jack and the Bean Stalk and Bawang Merah Bawang Putih) 5. Ppt about “Tips to make interesting slide story using PowerPoint” J. References Timun Emas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNhoaIPr7Io Roro Jongrang and Prambanan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cim_zV7tM4 The Legend of Crying Stone https://youtu.be/1en16LPkLSU Sangkuriang https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17P2hCv9Rjs Golden Snail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zJ2oHw2h00 Bawang merah and Bawang Putih https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPUKpzACcC8&t=290s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1qBX_ptIkM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uCby3qC6Us The legend of Danau Toba https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfPEuGjF2Sw Malin Kundang https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5usDXCCSUc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blo4wiFBqMk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dkhM7VLeo Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen Nama Mahasiswa

: 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria

Kurang memuaskan

Konten rekaman/Presentasi/Monolog/Roleplay Sesuai dengan topik

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


206 Organisasi teks (orientation – complication – resolution) Bagian orientasi Gambaran detail complication dan climax Bagian resolution 2


3

Penilaian umum Persiapan untuk roleplay Pengelolaan waktu

Masukan/Komentar:


207 L. Lembar Masukan dari Teman Nama grup Anggota

: ……………………. : …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

1. Mahasiswa memberi warna pada bintang pada penyataan-penyataan di bawah ini. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca dan memahami masukan-masukan yang diberikan oleh teman mahasiswa lainnya untuk latihan-latihan berikutnya. No. Comments Scores 1.

Anggota-anggota di grup ini bicara dengan jelas

2.

Saya suka role-play grup ini.

3.

Role-play grup ini menarik

4.

Grup ini menceritakan sebuah folktale dengan antusias

5.

Yang paling bagus di role-play grup ini adalah

6.


7.

Mereka perlu memperbaiki performance-nya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:

Orientation Complication Resolution Organisasi teks (orientation – complication – resolution) Performance Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks Performance Struktur kalimat Pengucapan


208 M. Refleksi untuk Diri Sendiri Nama Anda Nama Partner Anda

: 1. ……………………. : 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Mahasiswa memberi warna pada bintang pada penyataan-penyataan di bawah ini untuk dirinya sendiri. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca, memahami dan mengisi nilai refleksi untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Keterangan: 1= sangat tidak setuju; 2 = tidak setuju; 3=setuju; 4=sangat setuju No. 1. 2. 3.

Refleksi

12.

Kamu tahu cerita apa yang kamu pertunjukkan. Kamu mempersiapkan pertunjukan dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan pertunjukan dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan pertunjukan dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan dipertunjukkan dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan dipertunjukkan dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek naskah cerita Anda Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu

13.

Kamu suka mengerjakan tugas ini

14.


15.

Kamu puas dengan hasil pertunjukan ini dengan teman Anda

16.

Berapa lama persiapan kamu untuk pertunjukan:

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

1

2

3

Kurang dari 2 jam Kurang dari 1 hari Sekitar 2-7 hari Lebih dari 7 hari

4


209 17.


18


19


Ide cerita Penggunaan struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Pengucapan kata-kata dalam Bahasa Inggris Rasa percaya diri


210

Appendix 10 Lesson Plan of Meeting 4 Control Group 2 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 minutes Topic: Folktale A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. analyse the short and simple opinion text 2. complete short and simple opinion text 3. express their opinion related to certain issues (Folktale, Movie, TV drama) D. Material 2. Function : a. Expressions of giving opinion o In my opinion, ….. o I think, …. o According to the article I read, …… E. 1. 2. 3.

Learning Method Approach : Communicative Language Teaching Method : Genre-based Approach, CBA, Project-based Learning Technique : Short presentation

F. 1. 2. 3.

Teaching Media and Source Media :Video, PowerPoint Presentation, Handout Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi Source : Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.


211 G. Learning Activity No. Learning Stages

1

3

Opening Activities


T’s activities - T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T reviews previous materials - T shows pictures about Indonesian movies, Indonesian TV Drama, Western Movies, Western TV Drama, Korean Movies, Thailand Movies, Korean TV Serial,etc. - T asks the students some questions such as have you seen those movies?; which one is the most interesting?; when the movies are adopted from the novel, do you prefer watching the movie or reading the novel?; etc. - T asks the students to discuss with their peers about those movies/drama. - T guides the Ss to share their discussion

Ss’ activities

Time allocation


5’

- Ss respond to the T’s question - Ss discuss the movies with their peers - Ss share their opinion

10’

- T plays video about the most fantastic movie in 2015.


3’

- T asks some comprehensive questions related to the video

- Ss respond to the T’s questions

2’

- T distributes the handout of argumentative text - T plays video about Indonesian movies - T asks some comprehensive questions related to the video

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of argumentative text - Ss watch and listen to the 3’ video - Ss respond to the teacher’s video

2’


212

- T distributes the handout of argumentative text

3

4

5

H. 1. 2. 3.


- T distributes outline to write short argumentative text.



Closing


- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure and language component of argumentative text - Ss choose the topics provided. Ss may find other topics - Ss complete an outline to make short presentation about movies and folktale - Ss prepare their presentation. They may prepare pictures/ppt slides/videos or without any media - Ss perform short presentation. - Ss give and receive feedbacks (based on the group they belong to) Group 1: teachers’ feedback only Group 2: Teachers’ feedback and peer feedback Group 3: Teachers’ feedback and self assessment feedback - Ss review what they have learned (language component in short argumentative text) - Deciding English Final Project  additional time 10 minutes to discuss the topic

5’

20’

55’

10’

Assessment Technique : Performance Test Form : Short presentation Instrument : teacher’s feedback form, peer-feedback form, self-assessment form, speaking assessment rubric

No. Aspect 1 Task Completion 2 Pronunciation 3 Grammar

1

2

3

4

5


213 4 Fluency 5 Vocabulary Total score Final score


Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

I. Learning Material Meeting 3 1. PPT about western movie, Indonesian movie, Korean Drama, Indonesian Sinetron 2. Video about the best movies all the time 3. Video about is watching movies a good way to improve our English skills? 4. Short argumentative text about is watching movies a good way to improve our English skills? 5. Short argumentative text about the best movies all the time 6. Outline to argumentative text and handout about argumentative text 7. Teacher’s feedback form, peer feedback form, self-corrective feedback form J. References Film vs Novel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3QsUx0x_4w Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Chamber of Azkaban https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF9qpIIh1pI Sinetron Indonesia vs Drama Korea https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D-tzMShnVM Perbedaan Drama Korea dan Sinetron Indonesia masa kini https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqJbj9TJjWA Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen Nama Mahasiswa

: 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..

Instruksi: 1. Dosen memberi warna pada bintang dalam kriteria-kriteria di bawah ini. 2. Dengan pendampingan dosen, mahasiswa membaca dan memahami masukan-masukan yang diberikan oleh dosen untuk latihan-latihan berikutnya.


214 No 1

Kriteria


2


3

Kurang memuaskan

Penilaian umum Persiapan untuk presentasi Pengelolaan waktu

Masukan/Komentar:

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan



: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.

Saya suka presentasi teman saya

3.

Presentasi teman saya menarik

4.


5.

Yang paling saya sukai dari presentasi teman saya

6.

Teman saya mempunyai keahlian di bagian

7.

Teman saya perlu memperbaiki presentasinya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:

Organisasi teks (opening – body - conclusion) Ide presentasi Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks (opening – body - conclusion) Ide presentasi Struktur kalimat (baik dan sesuai grammar) Pengucapan (jelas) Organisasi teks Ide presenatasi Struktur kalimat Pengucapan


216


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi

1

2

3

Kamu tahu isi opini yang kamu presentasikan. Kamu mempersiapkan presentasi dengan baik Kamu mencari bahan preentasi dari buku-buku atau majalah Kamu mencari bahan presentasi dari internet Kamu diskusi dengan partner kamu Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan dipresentasikan dengan dosen Kamu dan partner kamu diskusi tentang topik yang akan dipresentasikan dengan grup lain Kamu dan partner kamu saling bekerjasama Kamu dan partner kamu saling berbagi tugas Kamu dan partner kamu mengecek pengucapan katakata sulit di kamus Bahasa Inggris Kamu dan partner kamu meminta seseorang (dosen atau teman) untuk mengecek hasil presentasi Anda Kamu tahu kesulitan kamu Kamu suka mengerjakan rekaman ini

14.


15.

Kamu puas dengan hasil presentasi ini dengan teman Anda

16.

Berapa lama persiapan kamu untuk presentasi:

Kurang dari 2 jam Kurang dari 1 hari Sekitar 2-7 hari

4


217

17.


18


19


Lebih dari 7 hari Konten rekaman Penggunaan struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Pengucapan kata-kata dalam Bahasa Inggris Rasa Percaya Diri


218

Appendix 11 Lesson Plan of Meeting 5 Control Group 9 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 minutes Topic: Global Warming A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. identify the cause and effect text of global warming through observation 2. analyse the cause and effect text about global warming 3. produce short cause and effect text 4. record the explanation about the cause and effect text of global warming D. Material 1. Conjuction:  as a result  because  since  therefore  consequently

   

for this reason therefore so due to

E. 1. 2. 3.

Learning Method Approach : Communicative Language Teaching Method : Genre-based Approach, CBA, Project-based Learning Technique : Short Monologue

F. 1. 2. 3.

Teaching Media and Source Media : PowerPoint Presentation, Handout Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi Source : Man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfGMYdalClU Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.


219

G. Learning Activity Meeting 5 No. Learning Stages

1

2

Opening Activities


T’s activities

Joint

Time allocation



5’

- T shows video “MAN” that reflects on the effects of global warming. - T discuss the vocabulary related to global warming with Ss

- Ss discuss the videos and the find the vocabulary related to global warming - Ss write down the vocabulary on the white board - Ss discuss the vocabulary with T

10’

- T plays a video talking about the cause and effect off global warming. .


3’

- T asks some comprehensive questions related to the viddeos


2’

- T distributes the handout of cause and effect text

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of cause and effect text

- T plays a video about the cause and effect of global warming - T asks some comprehensive questions related to the video - T distributes the handout of cause and efffect text

3

Ss’ activities

- T distributes outline to


3’


2’

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of argumentative text - Ss compare the first and second cause and effect text - Ss choose the topics 20’


220 construction of the text

4

5


Closing

write short cause and effect text.



provided. Ss may find other topics - Ss complete an outline to make short expalantion of the cause and effect of global warming - Ss do short monologue -

Ss give and receive feedbacks (based on the group they belong to)

10’

- Ss review what they have learned - Ss show the progress of final project

10’


1

2

45’

3


Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

4

5


221 I. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Learning Material Meeting 4 Video “MAN” (youtube) Video: cause and effect of global warming 1 Video: cause and effect of global warming 2 Handout of Cause and effect text 1 Handout of cause and effect text 2 Handout for making outline Teachers’ feedback form, peer feedback form and self-assessment form

J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria


2

Kurang memuaskan

Pembawaan Volume suara Artikulasi Kelancaran berbicara Pengucapan

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


222 Penggunaan kalimat dan grammar Pemilihan kata Kreativitas slide presentasi 3


Masukan/Komentar:



: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.

Teman saya perlu presentasinya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:

memperbaiki



224


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi

1

2

3


14.


15.


16.


Kurang dari 2 jam Kurang dari 1 hari

4


225

17.


18


19


Sekitar 2-7 hari Lebih dari 7 hari Konten rekaman Penggunaan struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Pengucapan kata-kata dalam Bahasa Inggris Rasa Percaya Diri


226

Appendix 12 Lesson Plan of Meeting 6 Control Group 16 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 menit Topic: Global Warming A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. identify the persuasive text 2. compare the organization text and language elements in persuasive text 3. complete persuasive presentation 4. organize persuasive presentation D. Material 1. Function : Expressions used in persuasive presentation:  Why don’t we …….?  Don’t you thik it would be better to ……..?  I’m sure we ought to …..  I think we should ……  We should ….  You don’t want it happens because your quality of life is important …… 2. The structure of the text: Relative Clause (using Relative Pronouns and Relative Adverb) E. 1. 2. 3.

Learning Method Approach : Communicative Language Teaching Method : Genre-based Approach, CBA, Project-based Learning Technique : Presentation


227

F. 1. 2. 3.

Teaching Media and Source Media : Video, Handout Equipment : Laptop, LCD, Wifi Source : Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.

G. Learning Activity

No. Learning Stages

1

2

T’s activities

Time allocation



5’

- T plays video about 3R

- Ss watch the videos - Ss observe the thhings surround them and categorize it into the things that can be reused, reduced and recycled. - Ss present their discussion in front of the class

10’

- T plays video about persuasive text in reusing secondhand thing.


3’

- T asks some comprehensive questions related to the videos


2’

- T distributes the handout of persuasive text

- Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure 5’ and language component of persuasive text

Opening Activities


Ss’ activities

- T plays video about the persuasive text in recycling the things - T asks some


3’

- Ss respond to the teacher’s

2’


228 comprehensive questions related to the video - T distributes the handout of persuasive text

3

4

5

H. 1. 2. 3.

Joint construction of the text Independent construction of the text (30 minutes)

Closing

- T distributes outline to write short persuasive text.



video - Ss read the text - Ss analyse the structure and language component of persuasive text - Ss compare the first and second persuasive text - Ss choose the topics provided. Ss may find other topics - Ss complete an outline to make short persuasive text - Ss do short presentation in the class related 3R - Ss give and receive feedbacks (based on the group they belong to) - Ss review what they have learned - Ss show the progress of final project

Assessment Technique : Performance Test Form : Oral Presentation Instrument : teacher’s feedback form, peer-feedback form, self-assessment form, speaking assessment rubric


1

2

3


Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

4

5

5’

20’

45’ 10’

10’


229 Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

I. Learning Material Meeting 6 1. Video: 3R 2. Video: persuasive text (1) 3. Video: persuasive text (2) 4. Handout of persuasive text (1) 5. Handout of persuasive text (2) 6. Handout of making outline 7. Teachers’ feedback form, peer-feedback form, and self-correction feedback form J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria


2

Kurang memuaskan

Pembawaan Volume suara

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


230 Artikulasi Kelancaran berbicara Pengucapan Penggunaan kalimat dan grammar Pemilihan kata Kreativitas slide presentasi 3


Masukan/Komentar:



: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.

Teman saya perlu presentasinya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:

memperbaiki



232


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi

1

2

3


14.


15.


16.



4


233

17.


18


19




234

Appendix 13 Lesson Plan of Meeting 7 Control Group 23 November 2016 Time Allocation: 120 menit Topic: Food and Health A. Course Description This course is a practical class designed to offer beginning to intermediate speakers a number of opportunities to organize and prepare short speaking presentation for public speaking. The students will learn about the delivery styles, the effectiveness of language and organization techiques. This class will be the supplement of English course in regular class in semester 1 for the students of non-English department in Sanata Dharma University. B. Basic Competence At the end of the course, the students are expected to demonstrate a short speaking speech to express their opinion or to report the observation on certain topics. C. Learning Objectives At the end of this activity, the students are able to: 1. differentiate between healthy and unhealthy food and life 2. present the ideas of healthy food and life briefly 3. produce persuasive/short argumentative presentation about food and health D. Material 1. Function : Cohesive Devices in Spoken Language - After that - In the beginning - At first - Eventually - In the end - Later on 2. The structure of the text: Common conjunction E. 1. 2. 3.

Learning Method Approach : Communicative Language Teaching Method : Genre-based Approach, CBA, Project-based Learning Technique : Oral short monologue

F. Teaching Media and Source 1. Media : PowerPoint Presentation, Handout, Video 2. Equipment : Laptop, LCD


235 3. Source : Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. G. Learning Activity Meeting 7 No. Learning Stages

T’s activities - T greets Ss and has friendly talks - T reviews previous materials

Ss’ activities - Ss responds to T’s greeting and have friendly talks –

1

Opening Activities

- T shows pictures about activities and food that may harm the human body - T asks the students to choose the activities and food that should be avoided and asks them to give short justification

–

–

–

2


Ss explore the food and activities that may harm the human body Ss discuss about the food and activities that may harm the human body with their peers Ss share their argument/justification about the food and activities that should be body in the class. Ss watch and listen to the video Ss share their opinion related to the fact between digestive system and instant noodle.

- T plays video about “Digestive System after Eatng Instant Noodle.

–

- T introduce the activity card - T play Marcia’s recording

- Ss listen to Marcia’s recording

- T distributes the handout of an activity card and Marcia’s script - T introduce the second activity card - T shows Daniel’s

- Ss read the activity card and the script - Ss discuss and analyse how Marcia organizes the argument - Ss watch and listen to Daniel’s recording - Ss read the activity card


10’

3’


236 recording - T distributes the handout of an activity card and Daniel’s script

and the script - Ss discuss and analyse how Daniel organizes the argument - Ss compare Marcia’s recording and Daniel’s recording

- T shows some tips to speak more fluently with activity card. 3

4

5

H. 1. 2. 3.


- T distribute some activity cards.


Closing


2’ - Ss make outline about what 15’ to say for the activity card - Ss do oral monologue with the teacher. The order is based on the three basic groups (Ss receiving the T’ feedback only, Ss receiving T’s feedback n peer 60’ feedback, and Ss receiving T’s feedback and doing self-correction feedback) Note : maybe not all the students do oral monologue. - Ss review what they have learned 10’ - Ss show the progress of final project

Assessment Technique : Performance Test Form : Speaking short monologue Instrument : teacher’s feedback form, peer-feedback form, self-assessment form, speaking assessment rubric

No. Aspect 1 Task Completion 2 Pronunciation 3 Grammar 4 Fluency 5 Vocabulary Total score

1

25

2

3

4

5


237 Final score

Total score x 4 = 100

Criteria

Score

Very Good

100 – 78.4

Good

78.3 – 65.1

Fair

65.0 – 51.8

Poor

51.7 – 38.6

Very Poor

38.5 - 0

I. Learning Material Meeting 7 1. Video: 3R 2. Video: persuasive text (1) 3. Video: persuasive text (2) 4. Handout of persuasive text (1) 5. Handout of persuasive text (2) 6. Handout of making outline 7. Teachers’ feedback form, peer-feedback form, and self-correction feedback form J. References Kuswandono, P., et. al. (2015). Bahasa Inggris: English for General Purposes (MKU Bahasa Inggris Handbook). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Youtube

K. Lembar Masukan dari Dosen : 1. ……………………. : 2. …………………….

Nama Mahasiswa

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Kriteria

Kurang memuaskan

Konten rekaman/Presentasi/Monolog Sesuai dengan topik Organisasi teks Bagian pembukaan

Cukup memuaskan

Memuaskan

Sangat memuaskan


238 Thesis statement dan isi jelas Bagian kesimpulan 2


3


Masukan/Komentar:



: 1. ……………………. 2. ……………………. 3. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..



2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.

Teman saya perlu memperbaiki presentasinya di bagian ….

Masukan/Komentar:



240


: 1. ……………………. 2. …………………….

Topik : ……………………….. Tanggal : ………………………..


Refleksi

1

2

3


14.


15.


16.



4


241

17.


18


19




242 Appendix 14

Pre-test Scores for Experiment Group St number

Task

85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 97 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 122 123 124 125 126

3.5 3.5 1.5 3 3.5 3.5 4.5 3 1.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 1.5 2 3.5 4 3 2 2 2 3 1.5 3.5 5 2.5 3 2.5 2 3 4.5 3.5 2.5 1.5 3 2.5 2 2.5 1.5

Pronunciation 2.5 3 2 2.5 3 3 3 2.5 2 4 4 3 2 1.5 2.5 4 3 2.5 2 3 2.5 2 3 5 2 2.5 3.5 3 3 4 3 3.5 2 3.5 3 3 3.5 2

Fluency

Grammar

Vocabulary

Total Score

Final Score

3.5 3.5 2 3 2 3 3 3 1.5 4 4.5 3 1.5 1.5 2.5 4 3.5 3 2 2 2.5 2 4 4.5 3 3.5 4 2.5 3 3.5 2.5 3 2.5 3.5 2.5 2 3 2

2.5 3 2.5 2.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 2 3.5 4 3 1.5 1.5 2.5 3 3.5 2.5 2 2 2 2 2.5 4 2.5 3 3 2 2.5 4 3 3 1.5 2.5 2 2 2.5 1.5

3 3 1.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.5 3 2 3 3.5 2.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 2 2 2 2.5 1.5 2.5 4 2.5 2.5 2.5 2 2 3 2.5 2.5 2 2.5 2 2 2.5 2

15 16 9.5 13.5 14.5 15 17.5 15 9 19 20.5 14 8 8.5 13.5 18 16.5 12 10 11 12.5 9 15.5 22.5 12.5 14.5 15.5 11.5 13.5 19 14.5 14.5 9.5 15 12 11 14 9

60.00 64.00 38.00 54.00 58.00 60.00 70.00 60.00 36.00 76.00 82.00 56.00 32.00 34.00 54.00 72.00 66.00 48.00 40.00 44.00 50.00 36.00 62.00 90.00 50.00 58.00 62.00 46.00 54.00 76.00 58.00 58.00 38.00 60.00 48.00 44.00 56.00 36.00


243 Appendix 15

Pre-test Scores for Control Group St number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38

Task

Pronunciation

Fluency

Grammar

Vocab ulary

2.5 2 1.5 1.5 4 2 2.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 2 4 3.5 3 2 1.5 3 2.5 3 3.5 1.5 4 3 3 3 3 2.5 2.5 3 1.5 2.5 3 2.5 3 3 3 3.5

2.5 3 2 2.5 3 2.5 2.5 4 3 3.5 2 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 3 3 2.5 3 1.5 3 2.5 3 2.5 3 3 2.5 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4

2.5 3 1.5 2 3 2 3 4 3 4 1.5 4.5 3 4 2.5 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 2 3.5 3 3.5 2.5 3 3 3 3 1.5 3 3 3 3 3 3.5 3.5

2.5 2.5 2 2 3 2 2.5 3.5 3 4 1.5 4 3.5 3.5 2.5 2 3 2 2.5 3 1.5 3.5 2.5 3 2 2.5 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4

2.5 2.5 1.5 2 3 2 2 3.5 2.5 3.5 1.5 3.5 3 3 2.5 1.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 1.5 3.5 2.5 3 2.5 2.5 3 3 2.5 1.5 3 3 3 3 3 3.5 3.5

Total Score 12.5 13 8.5 10 16 10.5 12.5 19.5 15 19.5 8.5 20 16.5 16.5 12 9 14 12.5 13 15.5 8 17.5 13.5 15.5 12.5 14 14.5 14 14.5 8.5 14.5 15 14.5 15 15 16 18.5

Final Score 50.00 52.00 34.00 40.00 64.00 42.00 50.00 78.00 60.00 78.00 34.00 80.00 66.00 66.00 48.00 36.00 56.00 50.00 52.00 62.00 32.00 70.00 54.00 62.00 50.00 56.00 58.00 56.00 58.00 34.00 58.00 60.00 58.00 60.00 60.00 64.00 74.00


244 Appendix 16

Post-test Scores for Experimental Group St number 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 97 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 122 123 124 125 126

Task

Pronunciation

Fluency

Grammar

Vocab ulary

4 4 3.5 4 4 4.5 4.5 4.5 3 4.5 4.5 4 2 2.5 3 4.5 3 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 4 4 5 4 4 4.5 3 3 4.5 3.5 3.5 2 3 3.5 4 3.5 3

3 3 2.5 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 3 2 2 2.5 4 3 2.5 3 3 3 3 3 5 3.5 3.5 4.5 3 3 4.5 3 3 2 3 3 3.5 3 2.5

3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 4 4.5 3 2 2 3 4 3.5 2 3 3.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 3.5 3.5 4 2.5 3 4 3 3 2.5 3 3 4 3.5 2.5

3.5 3.5 2.5 3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 4 3 2 2 3 3.5 3.5 2 3 3 3.5 3 3 4 3 3.5 3.5 2.5 3 4 3 3 2 2.5 3 3.5 3 2

3 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 4 4 3 2 2 3 4 3 2 3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3 4 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3 3.5 2 2.5 3.5 3.5 3 2

Total Score 17 17.5 14.5 17 17.5 18 18 18 12.5 20 21 16 10 10.5 14.5 20 16 10.5 15.5 16.5 16.5 17 17 22.5 17.5 18 20 14.5 15 20.5 15.5 16 10.5 14 16 18.5 16 12

Final Score 68.00 70.00 58.00 68.00 70.00 72.00 72.00 72.00 50.00 80.00 84.00 64.00 40.00 42.00 58.00 80.00 64.00 42.00 62.00 66.00 66.00 68.00 68.00 90.00 70.00 72.00 80.00 58.00 60.00 82.00 62.00 64.00 42.00 56.00 64.00 74.00 64.00 48.00

Feedback Group 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 1 1 3 3 1 2


245 Appendix 17

Post-test Scores for Control Group St number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38

Task

Pronunciation

Fluency

Grammar

Vocab ulary

2.5 4 2.5 3 5 2.5 3.5 5 3.5 4.5 2 3.5 3.5 3 3 1.5 3 4 3.5 3 1.5 4.5 3 2.5 3 4 4 2.5 4.5 3 4 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 4 3.5

2.5 3 2 2 3.5 2.5 2.5 4 2 3.5 2 4 2.5 3 2.5 1.5 3 2 2.5 3 2 3.5 3 2 2.5 3.5 2 2 3 2.5 2.5 2 3 2 3 2.5 4

2.5 3 1.5 2.5 4 2.5 3 4.5 3 4 1.5 4.5 3 3.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 2.5 2 4 3.5 3 3 4 2.5 3 3 2.5 3 3 3 3 2.5 3 3.5

3 2.5 2 2 4 2.5 2.5 3.5 3 4 1.5 4 2.5 3.5 2.5 2 3 2.5 2.5 3 1.5 3.5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2.5 3.5 3 2.5 3 3 3 4

2.5 3 1.5 2 4.5 2.5 2.5 4 2.5 4 1.5 3.5 3 3 2.5 2.5 3 2.5 2.5 3 1.5 4 3 3 2.5 3.5 3 3 3.5 3 3 2.5 3 2.5 3 3 3.5

Total Final Score Score 13 52.00 15.5 62.00 9.5 38.00 11.5 46.00 21 84.00 12.5 50.00 14 56.00 21 84.00 14 56.00 20 80.00 8.5 34.00 19.5 78.00 14.5 58.00 16 64.00 13 52.00 10 40.00 14.5 58.00 13.5 54.00 14 56.00 14.5 58.00 8.5 34.00 19.5 78.00 15.5 62.00 13.5 54.00 14 56.00 18 72.00 14.5 58.00 13.5 54.00 17 68.00 13.5 54.00 16 64.00 14 56.00 15 60.00 13.5 54.00 15 60.00 15.5 62.00 18.5 74.00

Feedback Group 1 2 2 3 1 3 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 1 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 2


246

Appendix 18

Raw Data of Statistical Analysis Decriptive Statistics of Speaking Tests Statistics Exp_Pretest N

Valid Missing

Exp_Posttest

Ctrl_Pretest

Ctrl_Posttest

38

38

38

38

0

0

0

0

Mean

54.8947

65.0000

55.2105

58.7368

Std. Error of Mean

2.24995

1.94921

2.07339

1.99348

Median

56.0000

66.0000

57.0000

57.0000

58.00a

64.00

50.00a

54.00a

13.86964

12.01576

12.78123

12.28861

Mode Std. Deviation Variance

192.367

144.378

163.360

151.010

Range

58.00

50.00

48.00

50.00

Minimum

32.00

40.00

32.00

34.00

Maximum

90.00

90.00

80.00

84.00

2086.00

2470.00

2098.00

2232.00

Sum a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown

Normality Test of Speaking Tests Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic Exp_Pretest

.094

Ctrl_Pretest

.105

df

Shapiro-Wilk Sig.

Statistic

df

Sig.

38

.200*

.968

38

.336

38

.200*

.957

38

.154

Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnova Statistic

df

Shapiro-Wilk Sig.

Statistic

df

Sig.

Exp_Posttest

.125

38

.142

.959

38

.175

Ctrl_Posttest

.134

38

.083

.945

38

.062

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction


247


248 T-test of Speaking Tests Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

Score


t-test for Equality of Means

df

Sig. (2tailed)

Mean Difference



F

Sig.

t

Lower

Upper

.222

.639

.103

74

.918

-.316

3.060

-6.412

5.781

.103

73.511

.918

-.316

3.060

-6.413

5.781

A two-way Anova Descriptive Statistics Dependent Variable: Technique EXP

Score Mean Teacher feedback only

Std. Deviation

N

61.0769

13.82306

13

64.0000

11.02064

12

69.8462

9.98204

13

Total

65.0000

12.01576

38

Teacher feedback only

57.6667

17.41125

12

58.5714

8.39152

14

60.0000

10.88786

12

Total

58.7368

12.28861

38


59.4400

15.41125

25

61.0769

9.88301

26

65.1200

11.37365

25

61.8684

12.47648

76

Teacher feedback + peer feedback Teacher feedback + self corrective feedback

CTRL

Teacher feedback + peer feedback Teacher feedback + self corrective feedback

Total

Teacher feedback + peer feedback Teacher feedback + self corrective feedback Total


249

Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variancesa Dependent Variable:

Score

F

df1

df2

Sig.

1.607 5 70 .169 Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups.

a. Design: Intercept + Technique + Feedback + Technique * Feedback

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable:

Score Type III Sum of Squares

Source Corrected Model Intercept

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Partial Eta Squared

1295.974a

5

259.195

1.748

.135

.111

289854.706

1

289854.706

1954.947

.000

.965

Technique

734.583

1

734.583

4.954

.029

.066

Feedback

397.238

2

198.619

1.340

.269

.037

135.360

2

67.680

.456

.635

.013

10378.711

70

148.267

302580.000

76

11674.684

75

Technique * Feedback Error Total Corrected Total

a. R Squared = .111 (Adjusted R Squared = .048)

Estimate Marginal Mean 1. Grand Mean Dependent Variable:

Mean 61.860

2. Technique

Score

Std. Error 1.399

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 59.070 64.651


250 Estimates Dependent Variable:

Score 95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower Bound Bound

Technique EXP

Mean 64.974

Std. Error 1.977

61.032

68.917

CTRL

58.746

1.981

54.796

62.696

Pairwise Comparisons Dependent Variable:

Score

Mean Difference (I-J)

(I) Technique EXP

CTRL

CTRL

EXP

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval for Differenceb Lower Upper Bound Bound

Sig.b

6.228*

2.798

.029

.648

11.809

-6.228*

2.798

.029

-11.809

-.648

Based on estimated marginal means *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. b. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Least Significant Difference (equivalent to no adjustments).

Univariate Tests Dependent Variable:

Score Sum of Squares

Contrast Error

df

Mean Square

734.583

1

734.583

10378.711

70

148.267

F 4.954

Partial Eta Squared

Sig. .029

.066

The F tests the effect of Technique. This test is based on the linearly independent pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means.

3. Feedback Estimates Dependent Variable:

Feedback Teacher feedback only Teacher feedback + peer feedback

Score

Mean

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval Upper Lower Bound Bound

59.372

2.437

54.511

64.233

61.286

2.395

56.509

66.063


251 Teacher feedback + self corrective feedback

64.923

2.437

60.062

69.784

Pairwise Comparisons Dependent Variable:

(I) Feedback Teacher feedback only

Score

Mean Difference (I-J)

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval for Differencea Lower Upper Bound Bound

Sig.a

Teacher feedback + peer feedback

-1.914

3.417

.577

-8.729

4.901

Teacher feedback + self corrective feedback

-5.551

3.447

.112

-12.426

1.323



1.914

3.417

.577

-4.901

8.729


-3.637

3.417

.291

-10.453

3.178



5.551

3.447

.112

-1.323

12.426


3.637

3.417

.291

-3.178

10.453

Based on estimated marginal means a. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Least Significant Difference (equivalent to no adjustments). Univariate Tests Dependent Variable:

Score Sum of Squares

Contrast Error

df

Mean Square

F

397.238

2

198.619

10378.711

70

148.267

1.340

Sig. .269

Partial Eta Squared .037

The F tests the effect of Feedback. This test is based on the linearly independent pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means. 4. Technique * Feedback Dependent Variable:

Technique EXP

Score

Mean

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval Lower Upper Bound Bound


61.077

3.377

54.341

67.812


64.000

3.515

56.989

71.011


252

CTRL

Teacher feedback + self corrective feedback Teacher feedback only

69.846

3.377

63.111

76.582

57.667

3.515

50.656

64.677


58.571

3.254

52.081

65.062


60.000

3.515

52.989

67.011

Mixed Between-Within ANOVA Within-Subjects Factors Measure: Feedback 1

Dependent Variable Feedback1

2

Feedback2

3

Feedback3 Between-Subjects Factors Value Label

Technique

N

1

EXP

12

2

CTRL

12 Descriptive Statistics

Technique Feedback1

Feedback2

Feedback3

Mean

Std. Deviation

N

EXP

60.8333

14.40854

12

CTRL

55.8333

15.78165

12

Total

58.3333

14.99758

24

EXP

64.0000

11.02064

12

CTRL

56.5000

8.14081

12

Total

60.2500

10.22040

24

EXP

69.5000

10.34408

12

CTRL

61.0000

10.00000

12

Total

65.2500

10.85577

24

Box's Test of Equality of Covariance Matricesa Box's M

9.909

F

1.405

df1

6

df2

3506.717


253 Sig.

.209 Multivariate Testsa

Effect Feedback

Feedback * Technique

Value Pillai's Trace

F

Hypothesis df

Error df

Partial Eta Squared

Sig.

.196

2.565b

2.000

21.000

.101

.196

Wilks' Lambda

.804

2.565b

2.000

21.000

.101

.196

Hotelling's Trace

.244

2.565b

2.000

21.000

.101

.196

Roy's Largest Root

.244

2.565b

2.000

21.000

.101

.196

Pillai's Trace

.008

.084b

2.000

21.000

.920

.008

Wilks' Lambda

.992

.084b

2.000

21.000

.920

.008

Hotelling's Trace

.008

.084b

2.000

21.000

.920

.008

.008

.084b

2.000

21.000

.920

.008

Roy's Largest Root a. Design: Intercept + Technique Within Subjects Design: Feedback b. Exact statistic

Mauchly's Test of Sphericitya Measure: Epsilonb Within Subjects Effect Feedback

Approx. ChiSquare

Mauchly's W .656

8.858

df

Sig.

2

.012

GreenhouseGeisser

Huynh-Feldt

.744

Lower-bound

.822

.500

Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix. a. Design: Intercept + Technique Within Subjects Design: Feedback b. May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects Measure:

Source Feedback

Type III Sum of Squares

Mean Square

df

F

Sig.

Partial Eta Square d

Sphericity Assumed

612.111

2

306.056

1.982

.150

.083

Greenhouse-Geisser

612.111

1.488

411.379

1.982

.163

.083

Huynh-Feldt

612.111

1.643

372.452

1.982

.159

.083

Lower-bound

612.111

1.000

612.111

1.982

.173

.083


254 Feedback * Technique

Error(Feedback)

Sphericity Assumed

39.000

2

19.500

.126

.882

.006

Greenhouse-Geisser

39.000

1.488

26.211

.126

.821

.006

Huynh-Feldt

39.000

1.643

23.730

.126

.843

.006

Lower-bound

39.000

1.000

39.000

.126

.726

.006

Sphericity Assumed

6794.222

44

154.414

Greenhouse-Geisser

6794.222

32.735

207.553

Huynh-Feldt

6794.222

36.156

187.913

Lower-bound

6794.222

22.000

308.828

Tests of Within-Subjects Contrasts Measure: Type III Sum of Squares

Source Feedback

Linear

Mean Square

df

F

Partial Eta Squared

Sig.

574.083

1

574.083

2.704

.114

.109

Quadratic

38.028

1

38.028

.394

.537

.018

Feedback * Technique

Linear

36.750

1

36.750

.173

.681

.008

2.250

1

2.250

.023

.880

.001

Error(Feedback)

Linear

4671.167

22

212.326

Quadratic

2123.056

22

96.503

Quadratic

Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variancesa F

df1

df2

Sig.

Feedback1

.007

1

22

.934

Feedback2

.466

1

22

.502

Feedback3

.049

1

22

.826

Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance of the dependent variable is equal across groups. a. Design: Intercept + Technique Within Subjects Design: Feedback Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Measure: Transformed Variable: Source Intercept Technique Error

Type III Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Partial Eta Squared

Sig.

270357.556

1

270357.556

2313.345

.000

.991

882.000

1

882.000

7.547

.012

.255

2571.111

22

116.869


255

Profile Plots


256 Appendix 19 Blue Print Questionnaire for Preliminary Observation Learning media availability refers to the readiness of the teachers, students and stakeholders of the faculty to set up the devices which support the classroom activities. (Bates, 2015)

Laptop/Computer availability Habitude in utilizing computer in campus area Volition to provide the laptop during the implementation Volition to install the application Familiarity in operating common computer software (Word, PowerPoint, Mozilla, etc.) Students’ access to internet connection

1, 2 3, 4, 5 6 11 7, 8, 9, 10,

12, 14

13,


257 Appendix 20 Questionnaire for Preliminary Observation KUISIONER 1 Kuisioner ini akan digunakan untuk penelitian berjudul “Screencast-O-Matic Application to Improve the Speaking Competence of Accounting and Management Students”. Isilah kuisioner di bawah ini dengan memberi tanda checklist (√) sesuai dengan yang anda alami. Sebelum membaca daftar pertanyaan dan mengisi kuisioner, bacalah petunjuk terlebih dahulu. Jawaban Anda tidak akan merugikan atau mempengaruhi nilai anda. Terimakasih untuk ketulusan dan kerjasama Anda. Petunjuk pengisian : Berapa umur Anda? □ 17

No

18

□ 19

Pertanyaan

1.

Apakah Anda mempunyai laptop?

2.

Apakah laptop anda bisa digunakan dengan baik?

3.

4.

□ 20

Jika Anda mempunyai laptop, apakah anda bersedia membawa laptop Anda ke kampus selama mata kuliah Bahasa Inggris? Apakah Anda familiar menggunakan PowerPoint atau program presentasi sejenisnya?

5.

Apakah Anda familiar menggunakan aplikasi Windows Movie Maker atau program edit film sejenisnya?

6.

Apakah Anda familiar menggunakan aplikasi Mozilla, Google Chrome atau aplikasi browser sejenisnya?

7.

Apakah Anda pernah mendengar tentang aplikasi Screencast-O-Matic?

Jawaban □ □ □ □

Ya Tidak Baik Sekali Cukup untuk aplikasi standar (Office, Browsing) □ Kurang baik □ Rusak □ Bersedia □ Tidak bersedia □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □

Familiar Cukup familiar Tidak familiar Familiar Cukup familiar Tidak familiar Familiar Cukup familiar Tidak familiar Sudah pernah Belum pernah


258

8.

Apakah Anda keberatan jika nanti harus menginstall Screencast-O-Matic di laptop Anda?

9.

Seberapa sering Anda menggunakan fasilitas wifi yang disediakan oleh kampus?

10.

Menurut Anda, bagaimana fasilitas wifi di kampus II Univ. Sanata Dharma?

11.

Menurut Anda, bagaimana kecepatan wifi di kampus II Univ. Sanata Dharma

□ Keberatan □ Tidak keberatan □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □

Selalu Sering Kadang-kadang Tidak Pernah Memadai Cukup memadai Tidak memadai Cepat Cukup cepat Tidak cepat


259 Appendix 21 Blue Print Questionnaire for Experiment Group Concept Sub-Concept Indicators Language The speaking class is engaging Learning process (Mueller, 1958; teaching and and fun Wesely, 2002; Nunan, 2003; learning The learning activities encourage Richardson, 1996 as cited in process in collaboration and learners’ Brown, 2006) CALL issue interaction refers to any Teaching strategies (Warschauer Various SOM techniques are process in and Healey, 1998 as cited in given which a learner Brown, 2004; Brown, 2004; SOM techniques provide more uses a Nunan, 2003; Richardson, 1996 as opportunities to practice speaking computer and cited in Brown, 2006) as a result Teacher – Students interaction improves Instructions given by the teachers his/her Teachers’ roles (Greanny, 2002; are easy to understand language Nunan, 2003) (Greany, 2002; Teacher can manage the class well Nunan, 2004; Brown, 2004).

SOM as language learning medium refers to the effect of utilizing SOM as the medium to carry out the activities in the class (Ferlazzo, 2013; Bates, 2015; Badriah, 2016; Carrier, Damerow & Bailey, 2017)

The access of SOM (Reinch & Daccord, 2015, p. 223, Calvin, 2016)

The effect of using SOM as learning media (Sanaoui & Lapkin, 1992; Warschauer, 1996; Greany, 2002; Ferlazzo, 2013; Badriah, 2016)

Items 1, 2, 3, 13 4,5 12 13 6,7,10,11 8, 9 12,13

Easy to install

15

Easy to download

16

Easy to operate

17,19

Flexibility

18

Useful and interesting features

20,21,22

More opportunity to practice speaking

35

Speaking skill is improved

30

More vocabulary

29

Aware of English pronunciation

26

Aware of English structure

27

More confident

33

Know where should be improved

24,25

Perform better for final project

22,23,30


260

Interest and relevance of SOM (Greany, 2002; Bates, 2015)

The advantages of using SOM as learning media (Warschauer and Healey, 1998 as cited in Brown, 2004; Jati, 2016; Calvin, 2016)

Encourage independent learning

39

Follow-up the feedback

28

Learning using SOM is more interesting Ss enjoy collaborative activities with their classmates

31, 32 34, 38

Ss enjoy recording activities

35

The topics provided were relevant

36

The topics provided are interesting

37

Flexible practices

18

The availability of the sources Autonomous learning

5, 3


261 Appendix 22 Questionnaire for Experiment Group KUISIONER Kuisioner ini akan digunakan untuk penelitian berjudul “Screencast-O-Matic Application to Improve the Speaking Competence of Accounting and Management Students”. Isilah kuisioner di bawah ini dengan memberi tanda checklist (√) sesuai dengan yang anda alami. Sebelum membaca daftar pertanyaan dan mengisi kuisioner, bacalah petunjuk terlebih dahulu. Jawaban Anda tidak akan merugikan atau mempengaruhi nilai anda. Terimakasih untuk ketulusan dan kerjasamanya. Petunjuk pengisian: Contoh pengisian kuisioner Part A Skala No

Pernyataan 1

1

2

4 √

Anda suka kelas speaking.

Skala 1 2 3 4

3

Sangat tidak setuju/sangat mudah/tidak pernah sama sekali Tidak setuju/mudah/jarang Setuju/sulit/sering Sangat setuju/sangat sulit/sangat sering Evaluasi Penggunaan Aplikasi SOM

No 1 2 3 4

5

6 7

Pernyataan Anda suka kelas speaking. Belajar Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM menyenangkan. Anda dapat mengikuti kelas speaking berbasis SOM ini dengan baik Belajar berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan SOM menuntut saya untuk bekerja sama dengan temanteman. Belajar berbicara Bahasa Inggris dengan menggunakan SOM menuntut saya untuk belajar mandiri. Tutorial penggunaan SOM dari dosen jelas dan mudah diikuti. Tutorial penggunaan SOM dari dosen sangat membantu.

1

Skala 2 3

4


262 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25

26

27

28

Instruksi yang diberikan oleh dosen jelas. Instruksi yang diberikan oleh dosen mudah dimengerti. Dosen membantu saya ketika ada masalah dengan program SOM di komputer saya. Dosen memberikan kosakata yang cukup sebelum saya berlatih berbicara menggunakan SOM Aktivitas-aktivitas di kelas menggunakan SOM bervariasi Saya suka belajar berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan SOM Belajar menggunakan SOM membuat saya banyak berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris. Aplikasi SOM mudah diinstal di laptop Anda. Aplikasi SOM mudah didownload. Aplikasi SOM mudah dioperasikan. Anda dapat merekam suara Anda dengan SOM dimana saja. Merekam menggunakan aplikasi SOM mudah. Aplikasi SOM bisa digunakan untuk merekam apa saja yang ada di layar komputer. Aplikasi SOM bisa merekam suara baik dari luar komputer atau dalam komputer. Fitur-fitur yang ada di aplikasi SOM membantu anda untuk belajar oral presentasi. Aplikasi SOM membantu Anda mempersiapkan presentasi Bahasa Inggris dengan mudah. Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM membantu Anda menemukan kesalahan-kesalahan ketika berbicara. Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM membantu Anda menganalisa kesalahan-kesalahan ketika berbicara. Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM membantu anda menganalisa kesalahan-kesalahan pengucapan dalam Bahasa Inggris. Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM membantu anda menganalisa kesalahan-kesalahan pada struktur kalimat Bahasa Inggris Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM membantu Anda memahami


263

29

30

31

32 33 34 35 36 37 38

masukan/komentar yang diberikan dosen atau teman. Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM membantu Anda berbicara lebih baik ketika final project Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM lebih menarik daripada monolog di depan kelas Berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan aplikasi SOM lebih menarik daripada presentasi di depan kelas Aplikasi SOM membantu Anda meningkatan rasa percaya diri. Anda senang bisa bekerja sama dengan teman-teman dalam latihan berbicara menggunakan SOM Anda senang melakukan rekaman menggunakan SOM Topik yang disediakan untuk rekaman SOM relevan dengan program studi yang saya pilih Topik yang disediakan untuk rekaman SOM menarik. Aplikasi SOM membuat Anda belajar speaking dengan teman. Aplikasi SOM membuat Anda belajar mandiri.


264 Appendix 23 Questionnaire Validation 1. Are the statements/questions in the questionnaire clear? …………………………………………………………………........ 2. Are the statements/questions in the questionnaire easy to understand? …………………………………………………………………........ 3. Has the researcher provided suitable title for the questionnaire? …………………………………………………………………........ 4. Do the lead-in paragraphs contain the information about the questionnaire going to be filled by the respondents? …………………………………………………………………........ 5. Do the lead-in paragraphs guide the respondent to fill the questionnaire? …………………………………………………………………........ 6. Are the examples sections useful? …………………………………………………………………........ 7. Is the instruction clear? …………………………………………………………………........ 8. Are the multiple-response questions effective? …………………………………………………………………........

Any comment about the questionnaire:


265 Appendix 24 Interview Guideline 1. Do you like speaking class? 2. What is your opinion about learning speaking that you have experienced for several meetings? 3. What is your opinion about SOM as media for learning speaking? 4. Do you like the features of SOM? 5. Does it help you solve your speaking problems? 6. Does it motivate you to learn speaking? 7. Does it provide you enough practice? 8. Could you tell me about your experience in learning using SOM? 9. What do you think the advantages or disadvantages of using SOM? 10. Do you think that feedbacks influenced your improvement of speaking competence?


266 Appendix 25

Interview Transcript Group 1 R Hello semuanya, terimakasih sudah datang. Sekarang, saya mau interview kalian tentang kelas speaking kita. Saya akan bertanya kepada salah satu dari kalian, lalu yang lain silakan menambahkan. Berbeda pendapat tidak masalah. Yang penting itu menurut pengalaman kalian masing-masing. Sudah siap? R Jika sudah siap, mari kita mulai. R Apakah kalian senang dengan kelas speaking ini? A1 Ya senang miss, kan lumayan bisa belajar Bahasa Inggris gratis.. B1 Senang miss.. bisa buat nambah skill saya C1 Sama dengan yang lain. Saya senang D1 Senang miss… saya bisa practice Bahasa Inggris lebih banyak E1 Senang miss.. cuma tugasnya jadi tambah banyak hehee R B2 C2

D2 E2 A2

R C3

Apa perasaan kamu ketika sudah belajar speaking beberapa pertemuan? Hmmm..ya senang aja sih miss.. semakin ngerti aja kalau saya harus banyak latihan Ya menurut saya juga. Awalnya saya menganggap Bahasa Inggris itu sulit banget n ga penting.. tp lama-lama saya merasa kalau ini penting dan bisa dipelajari. Sama miss.. saya juga lumayan suka Sama miss.. senang dan bersyukur bisa dapat tambahan semester ini Sama dengan yang lain miss.. kurang lama aja sih dan kemarin terlihat kami harus kerja keras karena waktunya pendek ya miss..

A3 B3

Menurut kalian, apakah belajar bicara dengan SOM itu menarik? Karena saya belum menguasai Bahasa Inggris..belajar pakai SOM menarik sih miss.. apalagi jika dibandingkan dengan presentasi langsung di depan kelas. Saya bisa coba berkali-kali.. kalau langsung kan ga bisa diulang miss..jadi saya ngrasa kalau bisa ngomong bahasa inggris cas cis cu situ beneran bisa..asala mau latihan dan latihan Menarik miss.. saya kira screenshot saja, ternyata ada yang bisa jalan juga kayak film Sama miss dengan C dan D. Hanya saja kalau bisa akses ke yang Pro, mgkn keren ya miss… Ya miss.. belajar pakai SOM menarik..saya bisa latihan presentasi… Menarik juga miss… dan sama dengan yang lain…

R D4

Jadi kalian suka fitur-fitur yang ada pada SOM? Ya.. fitur-fitur SOM yang free ini lumayan membantu miss

D3 E3


267 E4 A4 B4 C4

R E5 A5 B5 C5 D5

R

A6

B6

C6 D6 E6

R B7

Ya saya juga.. setidaknya bisa merekam dengan suara yang jelas dan bagus Fitur-fitur SOM yang versi gratis ini lumayan miss..bisa buat belajar presentasi dan tahu mana yang harus ditingkatkan Fitur-fiturnya ada yang bagus ada yang kurang miss.. seperti kalau nambahin suara dari luar ga bisa.. harus pakai aplikasi lain kayak movie maker Ya lumayan menarik miss fitur-fiturnya.. tapi memang lebih menarik kalau bisa digabungkan dengan aplikasi lain.. Apakah berlatih menggunakan SOM membantu kalian untuk lebih percaya diri dalam berbicara Bahasa Inggris? Ya.. lebih pe-de sedikit miss.. keliatan banget waktu ujian akhir Kalau pe-de belum terlalu miss.. tapi jadi tahu dimana aja kesalahanku.. jadi bisa di-improve pas latihan-latihan berikutnya Ya saya merasa lebih pe-de sih miss.. karena direkam, terus bisa didengerin lagi..terus bisa minta masukan apa komentar dari dosen apa temen … Kalau pede iya miss.. meski awal2nya malu juga…karena aneh juga rasanya dengar suara sendiri…hheee Ya saya lebih berani miss untuk bicara Bahasa Inggris.. meski masih banyak salah… tp kalau latihan-latihan gitu, ya lebih baik lagi miss Sebenarnya ada banyak masalah ketika berbicara Bahasa Inggris yang sangat menghambat kita untuk lancar be seperti tidak tahu pakai kata-kata apa, karena vocab masih terbatas, tidak pede, takut grammar kalian salah, tidak tahu menyusun kalimat Bahasa Inggris, tidak punya ide, takut salah dan sebagainya. Nah, apakah berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan SOM membantu kamu mengatasi masalah-masalah di kemampuan berbicara kamu? Tadi apa aja ya miss… hmmm.. lumayan membantu sih ya… karena dengan rekaman..kita denger suara kita, terus kok aneh apa kurang yakin atau dapat masukan kalau itu salah, jadi saya dan partner saya tanya ke dosen atau googling atau liat kamus gitu.. jadi ya membantu banget miss buat saya Sangat membantu miss.. saya belum pede miss kalau langsung bicara spontan gitu.. kalau pake SOM ini kan kita rekam, ada waktu untuk mempersiapkan..ada waktu untuk belajar..ada waktu untuk cari kata-kata yang pas.. dan karena berulang-ulang.. jadi lebih ingat Saya setuju sih miss.. SOM bantu kita.. apa ya merefleksikan.. berbicara kita… Saya sama dengan yang lain… SOM banyak bantu saya untuk tahu salahnya di… apa ya.. pengucapan.. terus…pas gak ya kata-katanya Meskipun ga langsung, saya juga merasa aplikasi ini bantu kita mengatasi masalah2 speaking.. karena kita tahu salah kita dimana n kita bisa benerin kesalahan itu miss. Apakah kalian termotivasi untuk belajar speaking secara mandiri? Saya iya. Sepertinya dengan aplikasi SOM ini, terus lembar-lembar refleksi


268

C7

D7 E7 A7

R C8 D8 E8 A8 B8 R D9

E9 A9 B9

C9

R E10

kemarin, saya bisa belajar sendiri… Cuma itu ya miss.. persiapannya jadi lebih panjang Saya juga sih miss.. tapi saya merasa sekarang masih perlu dosen atau kayak miss gini buat kasih masukan apa komentar… dah bener belum… mana yang perlu ditambahi dikurangi gitu Kalau saya pengennnya juga gitu miss.. bisa belajar mandiri…tidak tergantung dosen.. mungkin bisa kerja sama dengan teman Ya itu miss.. bisa kerja sama dengan teman… Saya setuju dengan yang lain.. memang dengan adanya aplikasi ini membantu kita untuk bisa belajar sendiri dan dengan teman ya miss.. Ya… jadi apakah kalian senang bisa bekerja sama dengan teman kalian? Senang miss..saling bantu… saling ngasih masukan Senang kok miss.. karena saya sulit dapat ide kadang-kadang Senang dong miss… jadi tidak terlalu berat n ngrasa sendirian Senang miss.. hmmm karena… sama dengan yang lain… ga sendirian, saling bantu, saling ngasih masukan Senang miss.. Cuma ya itu kalau sama-sama ga bisa ya kami kepentok miss Menurut kalian, apa kelebihan dari berlatih menggunakan SOM? Kelebihannya … dengan SOM kita tu bisa latihan presentasi sambal direkam… jadi bisa didengerin ulang... terus bisa minta tolong orang lain untuk ngasih masukan dan hasil presentasinya lancar.. Kelebihan SOM itu bisa merekam apa saja yang ada di layar komputer dan itu bisa dijadikan buat presentasi… bisa buat latihan kayak tadi Ya.. kelebihan SOM itu… kita bisa latihan untuk belajar mandiri miss.. kan kita bisa cek kalimat apa kata-kata kita udah bener apa belum setelah rekaman Kelebihan SOM itu… ya itu td miss… bisa buat latihan sebelum presentasi… terlebih buat seperti saya yang…. agak malu-malu gitu miss.. apa ya belum pede kalau harus ngomong langsung dan banyak depan orang… Kalau menurut saya…. kelebihan simple aja sihh miss…bisa untuk latihan presentasi itu tadi

Sedangkan kekurangannya apa? Hmm….Kalu kekurangannya…Kekurangan SOM itu kalau pengen yang ada tamabahan efek-efek gitu harus beli SOM yang Pro.. jadi harus digabungkan kerjanya dengan aplikasi lain A10 Kalau menurut saya… aplikasi SOM itu standard aja miss fiturnya…. ya sama kayak aplikasi rekaman lain… cuma aplikasi ini bisa.. rekaman apa aja yang ada di layar komputer… kayak presentasi gitu….. B10 Sama ya miss… dengan yang lain…kekurangannya ya itu tadi… C10 Mungkin kekurangannya… kita tetep harus minta orang lain .. kayak miss atau miss Wedo atau temen buat koreksi kita miss


269 D10 Hmmm.. apa ya miss.. mungkin itu tadi ya miss.. sama dengan yang lain…. R

Baik…. interview kita sudah selesai… terimakasih atas partisipasi kalian. Sukses selalu kuliah kalian

Group 2 R Hello semuanya, terimakasih sudah datang. Sekarang, saya mau interview kalian tentang kelas speaking kita. Saya akan bertanya kepada salah satu dari kalian, lalu yang lain silakan menambahkan. Berbeda pendapat tidak masalah. Yang penting itu menurut pengalaman kalian masing-masing. Sudah siap? R Jika sudah siap, mari kita mulai. R Apakah kalian senang dengan kelas speaking ini? F1 Senang dong miss… saya banyak belajar gimana bicara Bahasa Inggris yang lancar gitu G1 Senang miss… banyak belajar yang jelas.. ga cuma speaking tapi juga kayak kata-kata di Bahasa Inggris… terus gimana nyusun kalimat H1 Sama dengan yang lain… yang pasti kelasnya banyak praktek I1 Senang dong miss.. J1 Saya juga senang…walau jarang ikut tambahan ini…. R G2

H2 I2 J2 F2 R H3 I3 J3 F3 G3

Apa perasaan kamu ketika sudah belajar speaking beberapa pertemuan? Karena ini hampir tiap minggu dan aktivitasnya banyak pakai SOM… jadi ya lama kelamaan bosan juga sih miss.. tapi kalau ini ada jedanya mungkin enggak Menurut saya juga miss… soalnya hampir tiap minggu kita rekaman miss…. hehehe jadi agak berat. Kalau saya biasa aja miss.. karena rekaman kayak gini mending banget daripada maju satu-satu gitu miss… Sama kayak I… saya masih belum pede… jadi ini membantu banget untuk latihan Saya sama dengan I dan J sih miss… jadi kegiatan seperti ini cukup menarik Menurut kalian, apakah belajar bicara dengan SOM itu menarik? Secara keseluruhan menarik kok miss… hanya itu saja… mungkin perlu jeda agar ga rekaman terus-terusan Kalau saya menarik aja miss.. saya baru tahu kalau bisa dubbing kayak gini miss..hehhehe Saya sih suka dengan kegiatan ini… secara saya belum yakin kalau harus ngomong langsung Saya suka aktivitas ini miss.. hanya saja… memang banyak sekali persiapan dan alat-alat yg dibutuhkan Kalau saya… saya juga suka miss.. aktivitas-aktivitasnya di kelas ini membantu


270 saya untuk banyak praktek bicara… sebelum ini praktek bicara saya sedikit sekali R I4 J4 F4 G4

H4

R J5 F5 G5 H5 I5

R

F6

G6 H6

Jadi kalian suka fitur-fitur yang ada pada SOM? Fitur-fiturnya lumayan sih miss.. bisa buat animasi simple gitu… Saya pikir… fitur-fiturnya di SOM itu simple banget miss… Cuma malah bisa buat simulasi presentasi… lumayan menarik miss fitur-fiturnya kalau menurut saya.. tapi memang lebih menarik kalau bisa digabungkan dengan aplikasi lain.. Fitur-fiturnya ada yang bagus ada yang kurang miss.. seperti kalau nambahin suara dari luar ga bisa.. harus pakai aplikasi lain kayak movie maker atau adobe premier… Fitur-fitur SOM yang versi gratis ini lumayan miss..bisa buat belajar presentasi dan tahu mana yang harus ditingkatkan Apakah berlatih menggunakan SOM membantu kalian untuk lebih percaya diri dalam berbicara Bahasa Inggris? Yang jelas saya lebih berani miss untuk bicara Bahasa Inggris.. meski masih banyak salah… tp kalau latihan-latihan gitu, semoga lebih lancar lagi ya miss Kalau tambah pede iya… karena kita ga perlu lihat pendengar langsung.. tapi belum pede banget miss… Ya saya merasa lebih pe-de sih miss.. karena direkam, meski belum pede banget.. meski aneh banget kalau dengerin suara sendiri… hehehe Kalau pe-de belum terlalu miss.. tapi jadi tahu dimana aja kesalahanku.. jadi bisa buat pegangan buat latihan-latihan selanjutnya Ya.. lebih pe-de sedikit miss.. saya ngerasa banget pas ujian semesteran kemarin… sepertinya agak lancar.. hehehe Baik terimakasih…sebenarnya ada banyak masalah ketika berbicara Bahasa Inggris yang sangat menghambat kita untuk lancar bicara di Bahasa Inggris…. seperti kita tidak tahu pakai kata-kata apa, karena vocab masih terbatas, tidak pede, takut grammar kalian salah, tidak tahu menyusun kalimat Bahasa Inggris, tidak punya ide, takut salah dan sebagainya. Nah, saya ingin tahu….apakah berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan SOM ini membantu kamu mengatasi masalah-masalah di kemampuan berbicara kamu? Tadi apa aja ya miss… hmmm.. lumayan membantu sih ya… karena dengan rekaman..kita denger suara kita….. meskipun aneh… heee….hmm.. abis di dengerin dan ternyata ngrasa ada yang gak yakin.. saya dan partner saya biasanya cari di kamus atau tanya teman atau tanya miss atau miss Wedo… Saya setuju dengan yang lain… SOM bantu saya analisa apa saja kesalahan saya…hmmm sehingga ke depannya bisa lebih baik lagi…. Meskipun ga langsung, saya juga merasa aplikasi ini bantu kita mengatasi masalah2 speaking.. karena kita jadi tahu salah kita dimana n kita bisa benerin


271

I6

J6

R G7 H7

I7

J7 F7

R H8 I8 J8 F8 G8

R I9

J9

kesalahan itu miss. Saya sama…hhmm menurut sya berlatih SOM bagus untuk saya yang ga pedean gini… saya masih banyak latihan miss.. jadi kalau disuruh maju dan bicara gitu, saya langsung ga punya ide harus ngomong apa… beda kalau di sini… saya ada persiapan dulu sebelum bicara… saya banyak belajar tadi… menyusun kalimat yang bener, pengucapan, vocab tambahan dan sebagainya… Saya sama dengan I miss… saya piker… berlatih menggunakan SOM itu sangat membantu miss.. saya belum pede miss kalau langsung bicara spontan gitu.. kalau pake SOM ini kan kita rekam, ada waktu untuk mempersiapkan..ada waktu untuk belajar..ada waktu untuk cari kata-kata yang pas.. dan karena berulang-ulang.. jadi lebih ingat Apakah kalian termotivasi untuk belajar speaking secara mandiri? Kalau saya pengennnya gitu miss.. bisa belajar mandiri…tidak tergantung dosen.. mungkin bisa kerja sama dengan teman Saya iya. Sepertinya dengan aplikasi SOM ini, terus lembar-lembar refleksi kemarin, saya bisa belajar sendiri… Cuma itu ya miss.. persiapannya jadi lebih panjang Saya juga sih miss.. tapi saya merasa sekarang masih perlu dosen atau kayak miss gini buat kasih masukan apa komentar… dah bener belum… mana yang perlu ditambahi dikurangi gitu Hmm.. berlatih menggunakan SOM ini memang membantu saya untuk bisa belajar mandiri… Saya setuju dengan yang lain.. memang dengan adanya aplikasi ini membantu kita untuk bisa belajar sendiri dan kerjasama dengan teman miss..saling bantu membantu… Jadi apakah kalian senang bisa bekerja sama dengan teman kalian? Jelas senang dong miss.. ya saling ngasih masukan dan ide… Senanglah miss… kalau ada teman gitu, bisa saling support and jadi ga terlalu berat… Senang miss.. Cuma ya itu kalau sama-sama ga bisa ya kami kepentok miss…gat ahu harus ngapain…hehehee Senang miss.. hmmm karena… sama dengan yang lain… ga sendirian, saling bantu, saling ngasih masukan Senanglah miss… Cuma itu tadi miss.. saya kadang-kadang tetep perlu dosen atau apa ya yang pinter Bahasa Inggris…untuk kasih masukan ke saya… Menurut kalian, apa kelebihan dari berlatih menggunakan SOM? Kelebihannya … dengan SOM kita tu bisa latihan presentasi sambal direkam… jadi bisa didengerin ulang... terus bisa minta tolong orang lain untuk ngasih masukan dan hasil presentasinya lancar.. Kelebihan SOM itu bisa merekam apa saja yang ada di layar komputer dan itu


272

F9

G9 H9

bisa dijadikan buat presentasi… bisa buat latihan kayak Kelebihan SOM itu… ya itu td miss… bisa buat latihan sebelum presentasi… terlebih buat seperti saya yang…. agak malu-malu gitu miss.. apa ya belum pede kalau harus ngomong langsung dan banyak depan orang… Kalau menurut saya…. kelebihan simple aja sihh miss…bisa untuk latihan presentasi dimana aja, kapan aja…mudah juga..tinggal bawa laptop Ya.. kelebihan SOM itu… kita bisa latihan untuk belajar mandiri miss.. kan kita bisa cek kalimat apa kata-kata kita udah bener apa belum setelah rekaman

R J10

Kalau kekurangannya apa? Kalau menurut saya.. fitur di SOM ini biasa aja… tapi yang paling membantu aktivitas latihan menggunakan SOM itu membantu banget.. jadi kalau banyak rekaman, banyak latihan itu bisa membantu untuk lebih lancar bicara Bahasa Inggris.. jadi kalau gak banyak dipakai untuk latihan, ya memang tidak bisa membantu banyak… F10 Saya setuju dengan J miss… aplikasi ini kelebihannya bisa ngeshot yang bergerak gitu… kayak film…beda dengan printscreen di computer apa screen shot di hp… kalau kekurangannya ya itu miss.. yang Pro harus beli…. G10 Mungkin kekurangannya… kita tetep harus minta orang lain .. kayak miss atau miss Wedo atau temen buat koreksi kita miss… tapi kalau sudah terbiasa, tidak perlu sih miss H10 Kekurangannya… di laptop saya agak sulit di install miss.. ga tau kenapa… harus minta bantuan miss kan dulu itu.. I10 Kekurangannya… yang free version ini fitur-fiturnya ga selengkap yang Pro… kalau yang Pro kayaknya bisa buat hightlight gitu ya miss.. nah kalau yang free recorder ini masih terbatas.. R

Oke jadi ini masalahnya lebih ke Pro sama yang Free recorder yaa… Baik.. interview kita sudah cukup.. terimakasih atas partisipasi dan kerjasama kalian ya… semoga sukses selalu…

Group 3 R Hai semuanya…makasih ya sudah mau datang. Sekarang, saya mau interview kalian tentang kelas speaking kita. Saya akan bertanya kepada salah satu dari kalian, lalu yang lain silakan menambahkan atau mengutarakan opini kalian. Jadi..jika berbeda tidak apa-apa..it malah bagus.. yang penting ini berdasrakan pengalaman teman-teman dan apa yang teman-teman rasakan…. sebelumnya maaf, saya akan merekam interview ini, tapi identitas teman-teman akan saya rahasiakan. Oke? R Baik… kita mulai sekarang ya


273 R K1 L1 M1 N1 O1

Apakah kalian senang dengan kelas speaking ini? Senanglah miss.. karena ga banyak tambahan materi Senang miss.. Cuma saya banyak ga datangnya… Senang miss.. saya banyak belajar dari teman-teman juga Ya pasti senang miss… banyak belajar Senang miss.. banyak bantu untuk lebih lancar berbicara… lebih berani bicara lagi

R L2

Apa perasaan kamu ketika sudah belajar speaking beberapa pertemuan? Kalau senang pasti ya miss.. soalnya kan pakai komputer.. sedangkan saya kan jarang pakai komputer.. Kalau saya..apa ya.. mungkin sedikit tertantang miss..karena pada akhirnya rekaman itu kan akan didengarkan orang lain miss.. jadi ya tertantang buat menarik…eye catching gitu miss Setuju miss. saya juga tertantang buat operasiin komputer cepet..cari ide..terus nyusun ppt..terus rekaman apa buat naskah dulu..hmmm tertantang untuk operasiin aplikasi SOM dan aplikasi pendukung lainnya Tertantang iya miss.. Cuma kan kemarin ini kami kayak dikejar-kejar gitu miss.. tiap minggu harus latihan Iya miss.. belajar speaking pakai aplikasi ini membantu banget miss.. tp kalau tiap minggu terus-terusan, saya agak bosan miss.. hehehe

M2

N2

O2 K2

R M3 N3 O3 K3 L3 R N4 O4 K4 L4 M4

Menurut kalian, apakah belajar bicara dengan SOM itu menarik? Saya suka aktivitas-aktivitas yang pakai SOM.. sangat menantang dan menarik.. Yang jelas lebih menarik daripada bicara sendirian di depan kelas miss.. apalagi saya kadang-kadang langsung kehilangan ide kalau disuruh maju depan kelas Menurut saya ini menarik kok miss.. hanya saja kalau tiap minggu rekaman saya lelah miss…hehehe Ya miss…latihan pakai SOM ini menarik sekali dan menantang karena ga harus belajar Bahasa saja tapi harus keahlian di komputer juga… Setuju dengan yang lain miss… menarik dan menantang Lalu apakah kalian suka fitur-fitur yang ada pada SOM? Fitur-fiturnya banyak membantu saya..simple dan mudah dioperasikan Ya…menurut saya miss.. fitur-fiturnya tidak jauh beda dengan aplikasi-aplikasi lama..hanya lebih simple dan mudah dioperasikan Fitur-fiturnya menarik..tapi tetap membutuhkan aplikasi pendukung ya miss. Ya… saya kira fitur-fiturnya menarik, simple dan mudah dioperasikan… Setuju dengan K.. kalau hanya latihan sih tidak perlu latihan pendukung.. tp kalau mau presentasi yang modern..hmm keren gitu emang bagusnya pakai yang Pro dan digabungkan dengan yang aplikasi pendukung lain seperti movie maker, picatto, dan lain-lain misss


274 R O5 K5 L5 M5 N5

R

K6

L6

M6

N6 O6

R L7 M7

Baik….apakah berlatih menggunakan SOM membantu kalian untuk lebih percaya diri dalam berbicara Bahasa Inggris? Ya saya merasa lebih pe-de sih miss.. karena direkam, meski belum pede banget.. meski aneh banget kalau dengerin suara sendiri… hehehe Ya.. lebih pe-de sedikit miss.. saya ngerasa banget pas ujian semesteran kemarin… sepertinya agak lancar.. hehehe Kalau tambah pede iya… karena kita ga perlu lihat pendengar langsung.. tapi belum pede banget miss… Yang jelas saya lebih berani miss untuk bicara Bahasa Inggris.. meski masih banyak salah… tp kalau latihan-latihan gitu, semoga lebih lancar lagi ya miss Kalau pe-de belum terlalu miss.. tapi jadi tahu dimana aja kesalahanku.. jadi bisa buat pegangan buat latihan-latihan selanjutnya Baik terimakasih…sebenarnya ada banyak masalah ketika berbicara Bahasa Inggris yang sangat menghambat kita untuk lancar bicara di Bahasa Inggris…. seperti kita tidak tahu pakai kata-kata apa, karena vocab masih terbatas, tidak pede, takut grammar kalian salah, tidak tahu menyusun kalimat Bahasa Inggris, tidak punya ide, takut salah dan sebagainya. Nah, saya ingin tahu….apakah berlatih berbicara Bahasa Inggris menggunakan SOM ini membantu kamu mengatasi masalah-masalah di kemampuan berbicara kamu? Meskipun ga langsung, saya juga merasa aplikasi ini bantu kita mengatasi masalah2 speaking.. karena kita jadi tahu salah kita dimana n kita bisa benerin kesalahan itu miss. Kalau saya ya miss… saya pikir… berlatih menggunakan SOM itu sangat membantu miss.. saya belum pede miss kalau langsung bicara spontan gitu.. kalau pake SOM ini kan kita rekam, ada waktu untuk mempersiapkan..ada waktu untuk belajar..ada waktu untuk cari kata-kata yang pas.. dan karena berulang-ulang.. jadi lebih ingat Saya sama…hhmm menurut sya berlatih SOM bagus untuk saya yang ga pedean gini… saya masih banyak latihan miss.. jadi kalau disuruh maju dan bicara gitu, saya langsung ga punya ide harus ngomong apa… beda kalau di sini… saya ada persiapan dulu sebelum bicara… saya banyak belajar tadi… menyusun kalimat yang bener, pengucapan, vocab tambahan dan sebagainya… Saya setuju dengan yang lain… SOM bantu saya analisa apa saja kesalahan saya…hmmm sehingga ke depannya bisa lebih baik lagi…. Tadi apa aja ya miss… hmmm.. lumayan membantu sih ya… karena dengan rekaman..kita denger suara kita….. meskipun aneh… heee….hmm.. abis di dengerin dan ternyata ngrasa ada yang gak yakin.. saya dan partner saya biasanya cari di kamus atau tanya teman atau tanya miss atau miss Wedo… Apakah kalian termotivasi untuk belajar speaking secara mandiri? Kalau saya pengennnya gitu miss.. bisa belajar mandiri…tidak tergantung dosen.. mungkin bisa kerja sama dengan teman Saya iya. Sepertinya dengan aplikasi SOM ini, terus lembar-lembar refleksi


275

N7

O7 K7

R M8 N8 O8 K8 L8 R N9

O9 K9 L9

M9

R O10

K10

kemarin, saya bisa belajar sendiri… Cuma itu ya miss.. persiapannya jadi lebih panjang Saya juga sih miss.. tapi saya merasa sekarang masih perlu dosen atau kayak miss gini buat kasih masukan apa komentar… dah bener belum… mana yang perlu ditambahi dikurangi gitu Hmm.. berlatih menggunakan SOM ini memang membantu saya untuk bisa belajar mandiri… Saya setuju dengan yang lain.. memang dengan adanya aplikasi ini membantu kita untuk bisa belajar sendiri dan kerjasama dengan teman miss..saling bantu membantu… Dan apakah kalian senang bisa bekerja sama dengan teman kalian? Ya saya lebih suka kerja kelompok gini daripada kerja individual Saya senang bisa kerja sama dengan teman-teman kelas.. jadi bisa saling bantu juga Setuju dengan M dan N miss hehehe Sama juga miss Sama dengan semuanya.. Baik. Terimakasih. Menurut kalian, apa kelebihan dari berlatih menggunakan SOM? Berlatih SOM itu bisa dimana aja mis.. ga harus di dalam kelas.. ga harus pas pelajaran Bahasa Inggris .. ga harus dengan dosen juga. ya lebih mandiri dan fleksible Ya.. kelebihan SOM itu… kita bisa latihan untuk belajar mandiri miss.. kan kita bisa cek kalimat apa kata-kata kita udah bener apa belum setelah rekaman Kelebihan SOM itu bisa merekam apa saja yang ada di layar komputer dan itu bisa dijadikan buat presentasi… bisa buat latihan kayak Kelebihannya … dengan SOM kita tu bisa latihan presentasi sambal direkam… jadi bisa didengerin ulang... terus bisa minta tolong orang lain untuk ngasih masukan dan hasil presentasinya lancar.. Kelebihan SOM itu… ya itu td miss… bisa buat latihan sebelum presentasi… terlebih buat seperti saya yang…. agak malu-malu gitu miss.. apa ya belum pede kalau harus ngomong langsung dan banyak depan orang… Kalau kekurangannya apa? Kekurangannya menurut saya itu.. fitur-fiturnya tidak lengkap.. hmmm sama sih seperti movie maker atau adobe yang lebih terkenal.. dan movie maker dan adobe pun ga bisa buat kayak gini… dan SOM juga ga punya fitur yang ada di movie maker n adobe Seperti yang banayk teman-teman saya bilang…aplikasi ini kelebihannya bisa ngeshot yang bergerak gitu… kayak film…beda dengan printscreen di computer apa screen shot di hp… kalau kekurangannya ya itu miss.. yang Pro harus


276 beli…. Mungkin kekurangannya… kita tetep harus minta orang lain .. kayak miss atau miss Wedo atau temen buat koreksi kita miss… tapi kalau sudah terbiasa, tidak perlu sih miss M10 Kekurangannya banyak miss.. kayak ga bisa tambah suara dari dalam komputer.. jadi harus dengan aplikasi lain… jadi kadang lebih ribet N10 Sama dengan N miss.. sepertinya itu kekurangannya. R Oke jadi ini masalahnya lebih ke Pro sama yang Free recorder yaa… Baik.. interview kita sudah cukup.. terimakasih atas partisipasi dan kerjasama kalian ya… semoga sukses selalu… L10

IMPROVING THE STUDENTS SPEAKING COMPETENCE USING SCREENCAST-O-MATIC

Recommend Documents