PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT PLAGIATMERUPAKAN MERUPAKANTINDAKAN TINDAKANTIDAK TIDAKTERPUJI TERPUJI

THE EFFECTS OF IMPLEMENTING SCIENTIFIC APPROACH IN KTSP TO HELP ARJUNA VOCATIONAL SCHOOL STUDENTS IN MASTERING SPEAKING SKILL

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

By Inka Ayu Henelawati Student Number: 111214079

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2015




STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and that references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, August 10, 2015

The Writer,

Inka Ayu Henelawati 111214079

iv


LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma: Nama

: Inka Ayu Henelawati

Nomor Mahasiswa

: 111214079

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakan Universitas Santa Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul: THE EFFECTS OF IMPLEMENTING SCIENTIFIC APPROACH IN KTSP TO HELP ARJUNA VOCATIONAL SCHOOL STUDENTS IN MASTERING SPEAKING SKILL beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalty kepada saya selama tetap mencatumkan nama saya sebagai penulis, Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta Pada tanggal: 10 Agustus 2015 Yang menyatakan

Inka Ayu Henelawati

v


ABSTRACT Henelawati, Inka Ayu. 2015. The Effects of Implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP to Help Arjuna Vocational School Students in Mastering Speaking Skill. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Sanata Dharma University. Communicative skill, especially speaking skill, can be improved by motivating the students to learn and widely open the opportunity for the students to practice during the teaching learning activity. However, in Arjuna vocational high school (disguised), the students lack in practicing their speaking skill because most of the tasks given by the teacher were covered by written assignments. Lack of having interaction with the teacher and the other students could also lead to cognitive problem because they were not able to experience meaningful learning in constructing their knowledge. Those problems, especially in communicating, become the factors which can influence the students to build up their perception that mastering speaking skill is difficult. The researcher proposes using Scientific Approach within KTSP in teaching learning process to open the opportunity for the students in practicing speaking skill. In the implementation of Scientific Approach, the students could experience fun and meaningful learning activity through six stages of learning: observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating. In this research, the researcher addresses two research problems, namely (1) What is the students’ perception on their problem in mastering speaking skill? (2) What are the effects of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP on the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill? To answer the research problems, the researcher uses the theory of Scientific Approach, theory of perception, and attitude. In order to collect the data, the writer first distributed the questionnaire to 29 students of 11th grade of Arjuna vocational school. The result of the questionnaire was strengthened by the result of FGD (Focus Group Discussion) by interviewing 6 students as the representative of the class. Those two methods were conducted in order to help the writer discover the answer for the first question. Answering the second research question, the researcher presented the result of hypothesis testing of the speaking tests which show an observable improvement in mastering speaking skill. The description of the process of implementing Scientific Approach through the researcher’s field notes during the treatment can strengthen the result of the hypothesis testing. It solves the students’ problem in mastering speaking skill and changes their perception that speaking is difficult. Keywords: Scientific Approach, perception, KTSP

vi


ABSTRAK Henelawati, Inka Ayu. 2015. The Effects of Implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP to Help Arjuna Vocational School Students in Mastering Speaking Skill. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sanata Dharma. Keterampilan berkomunikasi, terutama keterampilan berbicara dapat ditingkatkan dengan memotivasi para siswa untuk belajar dan membuka luas kesempatan bagi siswa untuk berlatih selama aktifitas belajar. Tetapi, di SMK Arjuna (disamarkan), para siswa kurang diberi kesempatan untuk melatih keterampilan berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris karena sebagian besar tugas yang diberikan oleh guru merupakan tugas tertulis. Hal tersebut dikarenakan para siswa kurang mengalami interaksi dengan guru dan siswa yang lain juga dapat mengacu kepada masalah kognitif karena mereka tidak dapat mengalami pembelajaran yang bermakna dalam membangun pengetahuan mereka. Masalahmasalah tersebut, terutama dalam berkomunikasi, menjadi faktor yang dapat mempengaruhi siswa dalam membangun persepsi mereka bahwa menguasai kemampuan berbicara itu sulit. Peneliti mengajukan penggunaan Pendekatan Saintifik yang diterapkan dalam KTSP pada proses belajar mengajar untuk membuka kesempatan bagi para siswa untuk melatih keterampilan berbicara. Pada penerepan pendekatan saintifik, para siswa dapat merasakan kegiatan belajar yang menyenangkan dan bermakna melalui enam tahapan pembelajaran: mengamati, menanya, mencoba, mengasosiasikan, mengkomunikasikan, dan mencipta. Dalam penelitian ini, penulis mengajukan dua rumusan masalah, yakni (1) Apa persepsi para siswa terhadap masalah mereka dalam menguasai keterampilan berbicara? (2) Apa efek dari penerapan pendekatan saintifik dalam KTSP terhadap kemampuan para siswa dalam menguasai keterampilan berbicara? Untuk menjawab rumusan masalah tersebut, penulis menggunakan teori mengenai pendekatan saintifik, teori tentang persepsi, dan sikap. Untuk mengumpulkan data, pertama penulis mendistribusikan lembar kuesioner kepada 29 siswa kelas 11 SMK Arjuna. Hasil dari kuesioner diperkuat dengan hasil dari FGD (fokus diskusi grup) dengan mewawancarai 6 siswa sebagai wakil kelas. Kedua metode tersebut dilaksanakan dengan tujuan untuk membantu penulis dalam menemukan jawaban untuk pertanyaan pertama. Untuk menjawab pertanyaan kedua, peneliti menyajikan hasil dari pengujian hipotesis dari tes berbicara yang menunjukan peningkatan yang terlihat dalam menguasai keterampilan berbicara. Deskripsi dari proses penerapan pendekatan saintifik melalui catatan penulis selama mendapatkan perlakuan khusus dapat memperkuat hasil pengujian hipotesis. Hasil tersebut dapat memecahkan masalah para siswa dalam menguasai kemampuan berbicara dan merubah persepsi mereka bahwa berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris itu sulit. Kata kunci: Scientific Approach, Perception, KTSP

vii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all I would like to thank God for giving me strength and courage in the process of completing my thesis. I was able to finish this thesis by His blessings and guidance. He gives me power to believe and pursue my dream to finish this thesis. I am also thankful to my major sponsor, P. Kuswandono, Ph.D., my thesis advisor, for his support, patience, advice, guidance, comments, suggestions, and encouragement. I am thankful for all lecturers for their valuable knowledge during my years of study in English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. May God always bless them. My appreciation goes to the headmaster and all of teachers of Arjuna vocational high school (disguised) especially the English subject teacher for allowing me to conduct my observation in their school. To all my respondents, my students of grade 11 of Arjuna Vocational High School, I really thank them for their participation in my research. I would like to thank my parents, Kastomo and Indarsih, who always support me mentally and financially. They always give me strength whenever I am down and encourage me to keep up. Their remarkable effort to educate me is one of the greatest loves that they give to me. My sincerest thanks go to my friends: Pipin, Dini, Intan, Prima, Sita, Anita, Dino and all my PBI friends 2011. They always listen, encourage me, and

viii


support me every time I need them. I also want to express my thanks to all people that I cannot mention one by one here.

Inka Ayu Henelawati

ix


TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE .............................................................................................. i APPROVAL PAGES .................................................................................ii STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ....................................... iv PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ........................................ v ABSTRACT ............................................................................................... vi ABSTRAK ..................................................................................................vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................viii TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................... x LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................xiii

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.............................................................. 1 A. Research Background ....................................................................... 1 B. Research Problems ........................................................................... 6 C. Problem Limitation .......................................................................... 6 D. Research Objectives ......................................................................... 7 E. Research Benefits ............................................................................. 7 F. Definition of Terms .......................................................................... 8

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ................... 11 A. Theoretical Description .................................................................. 11 1. Scientific Approach ............................................................ 11 2. Scientific Approach Theory ............................................... 14 3. Perception ........................................................................... 17 4. Attitude............................................................................... 20 5. Related Studies ................................................................... 20

x


B. Theoretical Framework .................................................................... 23 1. Hypothesis ............................................................................... 23

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY ....................................................... 25 A. Research Method ............................................................................ 25 B. Research Participants ..................................................................... 26 C. Research Setting ............................................................................. 27 D. Research Instruments ..................................................................... 27 1. Questionnaire ......................................................................... 28 2. FGD ......................................................................................... 30 3. Speaking Test: Pre-test and Post-test ...................................... 30 4. Field Notes .............................................................................. 31 E. Data Gathering Technique .............................................................. 31 1. Preparation .............................................................................. 31 2. Distributing Questionnaire and Conducting the FGD ............ 32 3. Conducting the Pre-test ........................................................... 32 4. Treatment ................................................................................ 32 5. Conducting the Post-test ......................................................... 33 F. Data Analysis Technique ................................................................ 33

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ........... 36 A. Students’ Perception on Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill ............................................................... 36 1. The Nature of Perception ................................................... 37 2. Factors Influencing Perception .......................................... 43 3. Students’ Attitude to Solve Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill ............................................... 47 B. The Effect of Implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP ............. 50 1. Hypothesis Testing ............................................................. 51 xi


2. The Researcher Field Notes During The Treatment in Class ........................................... 52

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....... 59 A. Conclusions .................................................................................... 59 B. Recommendations .......................................................................... 62

REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 65 APPENDICES .......................................................................................... 68

xii


LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

Appendix 1 School Permission Letter........................................................ 69 Appendix 2 Scientific Approach Lesson Plan ........................................... 70 Appendix 3 Result of Questionnaire .......................................................... 82 Appendix 4 Speaking Test’s Instruction .................................................... 89 Appendix 5 Rubric of the Pre-test .............................................................. 90 Appendix 6 Rubric of the Post-test ............................................................ 92 Appendix 7 Scoring Guide for Speaking Test ........................................... 94 Appendix 8 Result of T-test ....................................................................... 96 Appendix 9 Result of FGD ...................................................................... 101 Appendix 10 Researcher’s Field Notes .................................................... 105

xiii


LIST OF TABLES

Page

3.1 The Nature of Perception ..................................................................... 29 3.2 The Factors Influencing Perception ..................................................... 29 3.3 Student’s Attitude to Solve Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill .................................................................... 30 3.4 The Scoring Grade for Questionnaire .................................................. 34 4.1 The Nature of Perception ..................................................................... 37 4.2 The Factors Influencing Perception ..................................................... 44 4.3 Student’s Attitude to Solve Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill ...................................................................................... 48

xiv


LIST OF FIGURE

Page

3.1 One Group Pre-test Post-test Design.................................................... 25

xv


CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This research investigates the implementation of Scientific Approach in KTSP to help vocational high school students in mastering speaking skill in language learning, especially in where the research was conducted. This introductory chapter consists of six major sections, namely the research background, the research problems, the problem limitation, the research objectives, the research benefit, and the definition of terms.

A. Research Background Many students who have been studying English for three years in vocational high school still find some problems in achieving communicative competence in English language learning. There are some common issues which hinder their process in having communication with others, for instance lack of vocabulary, poor pronunciation, lack of confidence, and lack of grammar (Syafriyadin, Rahmawati, & Widiastuti, 2013). Meanwhile, communication skill can be learnt best through the process of using the language to communicate. By trying to use the language, the students can improve their speaking skill and also find out the error and learn it better. The research was conducted in Arjuna Vocational High School (disguised) in order to conduct the research on students’ ability in speaking English. The researcher’s decision to disguise the school’s name is to protect the school’s privacy. It is because of the research results

1


2 criticize the teacher’s performance and school’s facilities. In Arjuna Vocational High School, the students tend to use Javanese and Indonesian languages during the English subject teaching learning activities. It happened because the teaching method which was used by the teacher did not facilitate the students to practice their speaking ability during the teaching learning activities. The learning activity that was dominated by written assignments without the teacher’s guidance also limits the students’ opportunity to practice in speaking. It also decreases the students’ motivation in learning. Moreover, the lack of teaching learning books that was not enough for the total number of the students also hindered the learning process. Those problems influence the students to build up negative perception that speaking skill is difficult. According to Ferianda (2013), perception can also be determined by the environment, interaction, and also behavior, that in this case, happen to the students. It can be concluded that the students give up trying to use the language in the learning process. They had already built up their perception that speaking English is difficult because the environment and the interaction with the teacher or the other students did not support them to improve their speaking ability. Moreover, Arjuna Vocational High School is an automotive mechanical engineering school with the majority of male students. It was a bit difficult to handle the classroom management because the students who were not interested in the learning subject would tend to sleep, draw, or skip the class. It happened almost in all classes that the teachers were in trouble managing the class, especially the 11th grade, in which population is 33 students. During her PPL


3 period in teaching English subject, the researcher was appointed to teach the 11th grade. That is why the researcher found the proof to strengthen the issues that led the researcher did this research. According to UU 20/2003, about national education system and PP no. 32/2013 about standard national education, every subject of learning is focused on covering three domains namely affective, knowledge, and skill (Kemendikbud, 2012). Those domains are also stated on the process standard of Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (henceforth abbreviated as KTSP). However, on the implementation of the learning process in the KTSP, the most dominant domain is on the knowledge domain. The real example was framed in Arjuna Vocational High School through the teacher’s method that only left written assignments without considering students’ need to have fun and to have meaningful learning activities. Through teacher’s method, it can be seen that the other two domains are not fully achieved. The other two domains are covering the students’ interaction and participation in gaining the knowledge in order to have real experience in meaningful learning activities. Taher (2013) notes that affective domain deals with the student’s interaction with their teacher and the other students to build up positive behavior in learning. To have sufficient interaction, the students need to become active participants. That is why the researcher proposes to implement the Scientific Approach to teach the students. The Scientific Approach is an approach that challenges the students to be more creative and productive in the learning process through six stages: observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating.


4 Scientific Approach in teaching English focuses on the achievement of integrated skills, which means that the speaking skill is also counted as important part of learning. Further definition of integrated skills is also employed by Brown (2004) (as cited in Ferianda, 2013). It is a whole language approach if a course deals with speaking skill, then, it will also deal with listening, writing, and reading skills. For example, the purpose of learning is to improve students’ speaking skill. The learning activity consists of meaningful reading and writing tasks of the topic. For the application can be in a discussion and oral presentation which requires speaking and listening skills. The six stages also stimulate the students to improve their speaking skill because the opportunity to speak English is widely opened. The aim of the implementation of Scientific Approach is the students can maintain their motivation in learning and change their perception that speaking in English is difficult. This perception is influenced by the old teaching method that was not facilitating the students to practice. Therefore, through this study, the researcher is going to find out the result of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP to help the students in mastering speaking skill. The implementation itself is not only considering the knowledge construction, but also the students’ interaction and participation in order to achieve the goal in mastering the language to communicate. The researcher’s decision to implement Scientific Approach in KTSP is based on the statement in Permendiknas no.41/2007 which states that the teacher is able to use any approaches, media, and any other sources of learning (BNSP,


5 2007, p. 15). In the implementation of KTSP, there are a lot of approaches that were implemented in teaching learning activities. Badan Nasional Satuan Pendidikan (henceforth abbreviated as BNSP) does not mention Specific Approach that must be implemented in every subject. BNSP only states about the teaching method as it is stated in Permendiknas no.41/2007, that the teaching method should be appropriate for the students’ situation and condition. The characteristic of each indicator and the competence must be achieved in each subject (p. 10). According to Nasution (2005), a method can also be interpreted as a model or an approach of learning, depends on the characteristic of the approach or the strategy that is chosen. There are any other researches that were conducted study on the implementation of any other approaches, for instance the work of Rabawati, Sutama, and Gosong (2013) in the implementation of communicative approach in teaching Bahasa for student grade XI in SMK Negeri 1 Denpasar. The curriculum which was implemented in SMK Negeri 1 Denpasar was KTSP. Another approach that was implemented in KTSP was CTL (Contextual Teaching and Learning) that was explained by Trianto (2009) about innovative-progressive learning activity. Moreover, the original approach that was implemented in Arjuna Vocational School was process skill approach. It was because the strategy that was used in the learning process are EEC (Exploration, Elaboration, and Confirmation). That is the ground reason for the researcher to implement the Scientific Approach in KTSP without changing the spirit of the KTSP and fading the readers’ vision whether the research focuses on KTSP or Curriculum 2013.


6 B. Research Problems This study is aimed to address these following research questions: 1. What is the students’ perception on their problems in mastering speaking skill? 2. What are the effects of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP on the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill?

C. Problem Limitation The researcher focuses her study on the implementation of Scientific Approach on the teaching method. The researcher did not do in depth study on EEC (Exploration, Elaboration, and Confirmation) as the original of the process standard of KTSP. Therefore, this research only focuses on the effect of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP to help the students in mastering the speaking skill. First, the researcher would find out about the students’ perception on their problem limited on the nature of perception, factors which influence perception, and students’ attitude to solve their problems in mastering speaking skill. Second, the researcher focuses on the effect of implementing the stages of Scientific Approach which are observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating to maximize students’ opportunity to use the language in active teaching learning process. The research was conducted in Arjuna Vocational High School from April 7, 2015 up to May 4, 2015.


7 D. Research Objectives Based on the problem limitation, this research has two objectives. The first one is to find out the students’ perception on their problems in mastering speaking skill. The second one is to know the effects of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP on the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill.

E. Research Benefits It is expected that the results of the study can be beneficial for the students, the teacher, and the future researchers. It is expected that the students are able to solve their problems in mastering speaking skill by implementing Scientific Approach. For the teacher and the future researchers, the study can help to find better solution on the implementation of Scientific Approach. 1. The Students The result of this research is expected to give benefit to the students who have problem in mastering speaking skill, such as lack of vocabulary, lack of spoken interaction, and communication strategies. The result of this research is expected to find the solution of the students’ perception on their problem in mastering speaking skill. The solutions are the parts of the learning process by maximizing the opportunity to use English in active learning process through the stages of Scientific Approach: observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating. This study is expected to improve the students’ ability in speaking skill.


8 2. The Teacher This study helps the teacher to understand how to maximize the Scientific Approach in the learning process. The result of this research is also expected to have contribution to the development of the teaching learning process. Furthermore, this study will help the teacher to understand the students’ problems in speaking skill. This research can help the teacher to make a beneficial decision to improve the students’ awareness and motivation in mastering the speaking skill. 3. The Future Researchers This study will help the future researchers to understand the students’ perception on the speaking problems. The future researchers can try to find out better solutions for the educational development, especially ELT in Indonesia. This study can also help the future researchers to develop the study on the implementation of the Scientific Approach as the original process standard of Curriculum 2013.

F. Definition of Terms In this sub-chapter, the researcher provides some definition of terms which are used as the basis theories in the discussion. The definition of terms can help the readers to understand the meaning of the terms which is used in the research. The definition of terms consists of the brief explanation of speaking, Scientific Approach, KTSP, Curriculum 2013, and perception.


9 1. Speaking The important idea of speaking is a tool of communication which refers to the medium of the message (aural/oral or written). According to Bailey (2005), speaking is a productive aural/oral skill which consists of producing systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning (p. 48). 2. Scientific Approach, KTSP and Curriculum 2013 Scientific Approach is an approach that is used for giving a material based on fact which can be explained by logic. The result of learning is expected to create productive, creative, innovative, and affective students by integrating their attitude, skill, and knowledge (Kemendikbud, 2013). Scientific Approach consists of six stages namely, observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating which are the compilations of many stages in affective, skill, and knowledge domain (Permendikbud, 2013). KTSP or School-Based Curriculum is designed based on PP No. 19/2005. Sutena, Padmadewi, and Artini (2013) states that the schools are allowed to make their own syllabus and lesson plan under the supervision of district or city department. However, in the curriculum development, the newest curriculum namely Curriculum 2013 was implemented on July, 2014. According to Lazim (2013), Curriculum 2013 is covering the competence of attitude, skill, and knowledge. 3. Student’s Perception Perception is a sensory input and it is interpreted meaningfully, which can be constructive in what people see. Perception can also be affected by individual’s


10 expectations (Hochberg, 1978). By having such experience in learning, the student will interpret and shape their view based on their experience in learning. The students’ perception is being observed in order to find out their problems in mastering speaking skill. In the next chapter, the researcher provides the theories which can be used as the underlying theories to answer the research problems. The theories are Scientific Approach, the theory of Scientific Approach, the theory of perception and attitude stated by Altman and Valenzi (1985).


CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this chapter, the researcher is going to present some related theories to the research problem. It consists of two major sections, namely the theoretical description and the theoretical framework.

A. Theoretical Description The researcher would like to discuss some theories which are related to the topic. The theories are Scientific Approach, the theory of Scientific Approach, the theory of perception, and attitude. The purposes of using those theories are to strengthen the result of the research and to find out the correlation between the result of the research and also theories proposed by the experts. 1. Scientific Approach According to Permendikbud no. 65/2013 about Curriculum 2013, the characteristic of learning in every education unit is related to the output standard and the content standard (Permendikbud, 2013, p. 3). Therefore, the purpose of learning is to develop three domains which are affective, knowledge, and skill. Those domains can be achieved by implementing Scientific Approach. In the affective domain, the students know why they have to learn. On the skill domain, the students know how they gain their knowledge. The last one which is the domain of knowledge, the students know what they are learning. As the result,

11

PLAGIAT PLAGIATMERUPAKAN MERUPAKANTINDAKAN TINDAKANTIDAK TIDAKTERPUJI TERPUJI 12

the students increase and balance their ability in soft skills and hard skills to build up students’ productivity and creativity. In the curriculum development, there is a change in the learning process of the implementation of Scientific Approach in Curriculum 2013. Based on (Kemendikbud, 2012), Scientific Approach has five stages of learning process, namely observing, questioning, associating, experimenting, and networking. Those are the original stages that are proposed by the government. According to Permendikbud no. 65/2013 about the process of standard, the stages in the learning process become 6 steps which are observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating. The last step is taken from the knowledge domain which is adapted to complete the learning process (p. 3). Another definition of Scientific Approach as it is stated by Sani (2014), Scientific Approach is developed from Dyer’s theory about components of innovative skill integrated in

the

learning process

which

are

observing,

questioning,

experimenting, associating, and networking (p. 53). However, the researcher uses the component of Scientific Approach as it is proposed by Permendikbud no.65/2013 with six stages of learning process, namely observing, questioning, associating, experimenting, networking, and creating. All stages are described below: 1. In the process of observing, it primarily focuses on meaningful learning. This method has some specific benefit like providing realia, challenging, and interesting process.


2. In the questioning stage, the role of the teacher can be optimally needed. An effective teacher becomes the inspiration for the students to increase and develop their attitude, skill, and knowledge (Lazim, 2013, p. 4). The teacher, who is trying to give a question to the students, can direct the students to be a good learner. While the teacher gives the answer of the students’ question, he/she pushes the students to be a good listener. Almost all of the questions in this stage are primarily seek for verbal feedback by changing the structure of the question word into statement. 3. In the experimenting stage, in order to get factual and authentic result, the students must hold an experiment. In language learning, the students must comprehend the concept of language as a tool of communication in their daily life. The students also must develop their knowledge and are able to use scientific methods to solve the problems that happen in their daily life. 4. In the process of associating, the teacher and the students are the active participants. However the students must be more active in the learning process. Associating itself is the process of logic and systematic thinking based on empiric and observable fact to get the node in the form of knowledge. 5. Networking is a means of collaborative learning. Collaboration essentially is an interaction between the students and teacher-student. Collaborative learning makes the students conduct such interaction with others to communicate and share their knowledge in order to enrich their information from others.


6. Creating is the stage in which the student shows a result of their learning process. Those stages are primarily used to make the students understand and be more active in the learning activities. The students are challenged to be more creative and innovative in order to achieve the goal of learning. The following paragraph explains about the Scientific Approach theory. 2. Scientific Approach Theory In the implementation of Scientific Approach, Taher (2013) has said that the learning process is mainly focused on these three taxonomy; Bloom’s taxonomy on the knowledge domain, Krathwohl’s affective domain, and Dyer’s skill domain that support five stages in Scientific Approach. The cognitive process dimension or in the knowledge domain, contain six stages from the low order of thinking skills up to the higher order which are remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, pp. 67-68). The students will determine the meaning of instructional messages, including oral, written, and graphic communication. Then, the students will apply their knowledge in a given situation. The students begin to analyze by breaking the material into its constituent parts, detecting how the parts relate to one another, and to an overall structure or purpose. The students go on to make judgments based on criteria and standards so they will put element together to make an original product which is belong to the higher order of thinking (Anderson & Krathwohl 2001, pp. 67-68). Those six stages are maximized in the


Scientific Approach’s stages and strengthening the domain of the student’s knowledge. The researcher has mentioned that Scientific Approach is dealing with three domains. The next domain is Krathwohl’s affective domain. There are some interrelationship between cognitive domain and affective domain. This interaction helps to build the correlation between comprehension and responding in order to apply and value the information (Taher, 2013). On the next theory, the researcher is going to explain further about Krathwohl’s affective domain. Affective domain deals with emotions, attitudes, and value (Krathwohl, 1961) (as cited in Taher, 2013). In teaching learning process, it deals with the interaction between the teacher and the students to build a relationship. This theory is about how the students build their value system based on the students’ learning experiences. Krathwohl’s affective domain is originally contains five levels which are receiving, responding, valuing, organizing, and characterizing (Taher, 2013). From the lowest level that is receiving, the students pay attention to the stimulus to form positive behavior from their respond to the stimulus which is given in the learning process. For example, a student who loves reading gradually makes it as his/her positive behavior as the result of the stimulus and the direction from the teacher in the learning activity by using books. As the students who have already paid attention and built up their positive behavior, the students will actively participate as a part of their habit. The learning result of this stage is the students’ respond; this stage seeks for the students’ interest in the learning process. On the valuing stage, once the students have already given their respond,


the students will deal with act of determining value, belief, and attitude toward the learning process. The students will show their commitment in the learning process. Then, the students will organize his/her commitment in the learning process until the students gain their own characterization and build up a value system to control their behavior. Those are the explanation of the students’ attitude in receiving and digesting the knowledge. On the next paragraph, the researcher will explain the Dyer’s theory about skill domain. Originally, this theory is used for creative leadership by Dyer (2011). This domain contains five stages, which are associating, questioning, observing, experimenting, and networking. Dyer (2011) states that people have more creative capacity than they think. It is about innovative ideas coming from and the ability to connect seemingly unrelated ideas and put them together in new ways. 1. In the associating stage, a student is trying to associate his/her creative thinking, lateral thinking, associational thinking, and right brained thinking. The students’ creativity is connecting things as a creative people connecting experiences that they have and synthesize new things (Dyer, 2011, p. 6). 2. In the questioning stage, the students must actively question at the steady state at a given time (Dyer, 2011, p. 26). The students gain understanding of what the problem is and make an identification to solve it. 3. In the observing stage, the students understand the job-to-be done and gain insights for new ways to do things by finding ideas.


4. In the experimenting stage, the students learn new skill, taking apart ideas and processes. The students must piloting ideas to test hypothesis to answer the questions (Dyer, 2011). 5. In the networking stage, a student is finding and testing ideas with a network of individuals who are diverse in both background and perspective (Dyer, 2011, p. 53). As the conclusion, in the skill domain, students are actively processing their

discovery

behavior

namely

associating,

questioning,

observing,

experimenting, and networking by using their cognitive skill in associating to make a product as the result of the students’ creative idea. Scientific Approach is believed can help the students to improve their ability in speaking and change their perception. The change of students’ perception can influence their attitude in learning; not to use Javanese and Indonesian language but trying to use English during the teaching learning process. 3. Perception Perception, as it is described by Altman and Valenzi (1985) is the way stimuli are selected and grouped by a person so that they can be meaningfully interpreted (p. 85). Each person will have the different point of view because they select information (stimuli) and interpret in the different way. The process of perception can help us to understand and adapt with the environment in where we live. If people do not sort out the stimuli in their environment, they will be overwhelmed by the “sensory input” (Altman & Valenzi, 1985, p. 85).


In line with Altman and Valenzi’s definition, the journal of perception and human perception (as cited in Ferianda, 2013) states that perception is the way human try to understand the world around them (p. 27). People gather information through their five sense organs, and perception adds meaning to the sensory inputs. Each person can have different ways in interpreting the information about the environment. In line to the theory of perception, perception in learning has correlation between belief and concept. It has connection with belief about knowledge that is able to influence students’ behavior toward learning (Ferianda, 2013). It means that perception plays an important role in the process of gaining the knowledge. According to Biggs (1992) (as cited in Ferianda, 2013), in gaining the knowledge, there is a system which relates the concept with the environment. The concept is formed by the stimuli coming from the environment namely interactive system. Interactive system has three elements which are presage, process, and product or learning outcome (Ferianda, 2013, p. 13). Presage is an indicator of future occurrence. It includes learning conception and learning context for example teachers and school’s facility, and also students’ understanding about knowledge (Biggs, 1992). The example of presage is students’ eagerness in participating during the learning process. Process is a factor that includes students’ perception in the learning environment and specific learning strategies that they experience in learning tasks (Biggs, 1992). The example of the process is how the students’ learn appropriately with the teaching method to achieve the subject’s competence. The third element is product; it is the learning outcome which is influenced by the


learning strategies used. According to Ferianda (2013), the students can have good learning outcome when the learning strategies that are used are suitable for them. The learning outcome can make the students have positive perception on the learning process. Students’ perception in learning is influenced by the teaching method and process of teaching learning activities. Campbell (2001) (as cited in Ferianda, 2013), states that those three elements are also mentioned in the five elements of the language teaching learning activities that build the students’ perception. The five elements cover 1) the way the teacher teaches the students, 2) the kind of materials that the teacher wants the students to learn, 3) the students behavior in class during the learning process, 4) the materials that the students learn, 5) the goal of learning the language (p. 14). a. Factors Influencing Perception There are four factors that influence a person’s perception; 1) selection of stimuli, 2) organization of stimuli, 3) the situation, and 4) the person’s selfconcept (Altman & Valenzi, 1985, pp. 85-90). 1) Selection of Stimuli People focus only on a small number from the entire stimuli around them. This process is known as a selection and one reason why people perceive things differently. Each person selects specific cues and filters, or screens, out of others. 2) Organization of Stimuli After the information has been selected, it must be arranged so it can be meaningful. The mind tries to bring order out of the chaotic onslaught of sensory


data by selecting certain items and putting them together in a meaningful way based on experience. 3) The Situation The third factor which influences perception is the situation. A person’s perception familiarity with, or expectations about, a situation, as well as his/her past experience, affects what that person perceives. Perceiving a situation accurately is also related to how well a person adjusts his/her behavior to situations. 4) Self-concept The fourth factor that influences perception is self-concept. The way people feel about and perceive themselves is known as self-concept. The way people see themselves affects their perception of the world around them. 4. Attitude According to Altman and Valenzi (1985), attitude is a person relatively enduring disposition toward people, objects, events, or activities (p. 94). Those feeling can be positive or negative and typically learned over a period of time. Because attitude itself is multidimensional, they manifest the simultaneous operation of several factors, on of it is conative component (p. 95). Conative component is behavioral disposition a person exhibits toward an attitude object. 5. Related Studies There are some research studies which are relevant to this research. The first one is a postgraduate e-journal about the implementation of process standard of teaching English at SMK NEGERI 1 Gianyar by Sutena, Padmadewi, and Artini


(2013). This study mainly talks about the implementation of process standard and also refers to the vocational student’s problem in speaking. However, their finding focus on the implementation of process standard in teaching English in terms of planning, learning process, assessment used in lesson plan and the problem faced by the teacher in implementing the process standard of teaching English in SMK Negeri 1 Gianyar. The process standard that has been mentioned in this study is the process standard of KTSP. Therefore, through Sutena, Padmadewi, and Artini’s study, the researcher tried to find the comparison by implementing Scientific Approach especially in the learning process which changed the process from Exploration, Elaboration, and Confirmation into observing, questioning, experimenting, associating, networking, and creating. The researcher only focuses on the effect of implementing the steps in Scientific Approach in the learning process. The second study is about Scientific Approach in curriculum 2013 to improve student’s skill in critical thinking by Leksono (2014). This study focuses on how the Scientific Approach can increase students’ ability to think critically. Therefore, through this study, the researcher tried to relate how the implementation of Scientific Approach in teaching vocational high school students. The difference between Leksono’s study and the researcher’s study is that in Leksono’s study, he only describes each step of Scientific Approach and how it can increase the students’ ability to think critically. In the researcher’s study, the researcher tried to see the effect by describing the process also testing the


hypothesis to see whether there are any observable effects or not. The other difference is that in the researcher study, she tried to implement Scientific Approach in KTSP not in Curriculum 2013. The reason is because the researcher tried to suggest the school which returns into KTSP can also implement Scientific Approach in their learning process. In Permendiknas no 41/2007 about the process standard, it is clearly stated that teacher can implement any approaches, media, and sources of learning without changing the spirit of KTSP (p. 15). It can be a solution to prepare both the teacher and the students when the Curriculum 2013 is implemented to all schools later on. This approach is also suggested to make the students become active and creative in the learning process through its steps. The third related study was a thesis by Ferianda (2013) about perception in the implementation of integrated skills in critical listening and speaking class by English language education students of Sanata Dharma University. The thesis is discussed about the students’ perception on integrated skills by considering the nature of perception, the factors that influence students’ perception in order to see whether the integrated skills are applicable and acceptable or not. The similarity between Ferianda’s study and the researcher’s study is that both studies use the same theory by Altman and Valenzi (1985) about perception which are the nature of perception and the factors that influence students’ perception. However, in the researcher study, the main idea does not only stop on perception but also on the students’ attitude.


B. Theoretical Framework The theories above are the basis of the theoretical framework for the research. There are two research problems in this research. The first one concerns with the students’ problems in mastering speaking skill. The second one is about the effects of implementing Scientific Approach on the students’ ability in speaking skill. To answer the first research problem, the researcher chooses to use the theory of perception and the students’ attitude by Altman and Valenzi (1985). The theory of perception and attitude were used as the basis for constructing the questionnaire. The nature of perception is used as the guidance to see the student’s perception toward English subject. The second one is the factors that influence the student’s perception. However, the researcher only used 3 factors and took out the organization of perception. The last 3 statements in the questionnaire, the researcher relates the result with the theory of attitude. To answer the second research problem, the researcher analyzes the data to proof that implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP can improve the students’ ability in speaking by calculating the data manually using a paired sample t-test. In order to strengthen the proof, the researcher explains the factors which influence the observable improvement through the researcher’s field notes during the treatment that can be explained by using Scientific Approach and the theory of Scientific Approach. 1. Hypothesis The conceptual hypothesis of this research is stated as follows: the implementation of Scientific Approach in KTSP can improve the students’


speaking skill. The statistical hypothesis of this research is stated as follows: Null hypothesis (

will be rejected if there is a difference between the pre-test and

the post-test mean score of the experimental group. It means that the implementation of Scientific Approach in KTSP can improve the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill.


CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

The methodology and procedures employed in this research are presented in this chapter. This chapter is organized into six major sections, namely the research method, the research participants, the research setting, the research instruments, the data gathering technique, and the data analysis technique.

A. Research Method This research is conducted by using a mixed method, the triangulation of qualitative and quantitative research. According to Creswell (2012), mixed method design is a procedure for collecting, analyzing, and utilizing both quantitative and qualitative research and method in a single study to understand a research problem. Mixed method design is used to provide a better understanding of the research problem. Creswell (2012) states that mixed method can help the researcher to see in multiple view points for being pragmatism. In this research, both of quantitative and qualitative researches were used so the researcher can provide more detail information by collecting numeric data and text data. To gain the data for research problem number one, the researcher used closed-ended questionnaire and Focus Group Discussion (henceforth abbreviated as FGD). Afterwards, to gain the data for research problem number two, the researcher conducted speaking test by using pre-experimental design; one group pre-test and post-test design with the result in numeric data. To be the proof of the students’

25


improvement, the researcher used field notes to record and described the students’ activities and improvement during the learning process. There are two types of pre-experimental design (Salkind, 2011). The first one is one group of pre-test and post-test design. This type is a simple experimental research design without the involvement of a control group. The reason for not involving a control group is because there was only one class for the 11th grade. This type is considered as a pre-experimental design because it includes only one group of participants. This design can be diagrammed as:

Students assigned to group Pre-test treatment implemented Figure 3.1 One Group Pre-Test Post-Test Design

Post-test

To see the effect of implementing Scientific Approach, the researcher compared the result of the pre-test and the post-test. Pre-test was given before the group got the treatment. After the students got the treatment, the researcher conducted the post-test.

B. Research Participants The population is defined as all members of any well-defined class of people, events, or objects (Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh, 2005). The target population of this research was the 11th grade of Arjuna Vocational High School in which population is 33 students. Therefore, the researcher chose to invite all of the students because the researcher wanted to meet the objective results. The participants of the research gave contribution on the information collecting. There were 5 steps on the data gathering technique, which were questionnaire, FGD


(Focus Group Discussion), pre-test, post-test, and field notes. The researcher invited all of the students of 11th grade to be the participants to gain the data for the questionnaire. However, the participants of the questionnaire were 29 students who attended the class because there were 4 students who were absent at that time. Afterwards, the researcher selected 6 students as the representative of the class. The selection was based on their participation in the class and their grade of mark. For the field notes and speaking evaluation, the researcher invited the entire members of the class. Those steps will be explained further in the research instruments and the data gathering technique.

C. Research Setting This research was conducted in the second grade of Arjuna Vocational High School (disguised). The researcher’s decision to disguise the school’s name was to protect the school’s privacy. It is because the research’s results criticize the teacher’s performance and school’s facility. The decision is made as the consideration that the result might harm the school’s name. The information collection was done in Arjuna Vocational High School. The research was begun on April 7, 2015 up to May 4, 2015.

D. Research Instruments The instruments for the research and collecting the information were 5 steps on the data gathering technique which were questionnaire, FGD, pre-test,


post-test, and field notes. The instruments were used to collect the data in order to answer the research questions in the research problems. 1. Questionnaire The first instrument was questionnaire. According to Taylor (1996) (as cited in Ferianda, 2013), questionnaire is used as a tool to get information which can be managed in a form of table and discussion. The questionnaire was closedended form to get the data of the students’ perception on their problem in mastering speaking skill. It was divided into three categories which are the nature of perception, the factors which influence students' perception, and students’ attitude to solve their problems. The first category was about the nature of perception. It was about the students’ motivation, interaction, and environment. The second category was about factors that influence the students’ perception. The specific statements of the factors were divided into some parts. The first was about the situation which influenced the student’s perception about their problem in mastering speaking skill. The second part was the selection of stimuli, which are the common problems which hinder the students in learning English subject. The last part was the students’ self-concept. The third category was about the student’s attitude to solve their problem. The questionnaire used Indonesian language to avoid some confusion or misunderstanding for the participants. The questions of the questionnaire will be shown below.


Table 3.1 The Nature of Perception

Explanation No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Statements

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

I love English I am interested in learning and mastering English I am highly motivated to learn English The teacher has explained the material clearly I can understand the teacher’s explanation Classmate(s) influence my motivation in mastering English Future jobs will affect my motivation in mastering English language actively Table 3.2 The Factors Influencing Perception

Explanation No 8

9

10 11

12

13

Statements I have difficulty in learning English, especially speaking skill I have difficulty in memorizing vocabulary; therefore, my speaking ability is limited I have difficulty in learning grammar and tenses I have difficulty in memorizing tenses which makes me cannot spontaneously speak in English I have difficulty to pronounce the words which makes me hesitant to speak in English I have difficulty to speak in English because lack of opportunity to practice it during teaching learning activities

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


No

Statements

14

It is easier for me to write / read rather than speak / listen during teaching learning activities

Explanation Strongly Agree Disagree Agree

Strongly Disagree

Table 3.3 The Student’s Attitude to Solve Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill

Explanation No

Statements

15

I learn actively in class so that I am able to master English language, especially speaking skill. I try to solve my problem and difficulty in learning by consulting to the teacher subject. It is easier for me to master English language by practicing and discussing it with friends.

16

17

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2. FGD (Focus Group Discussion) Focus Group Discussion (FGD) is a group interview. It offers the opportunity to interview several respondents systematically and simultaneously (Boateng, 2012). In this research, FGD was used as a tool to gather the data to strengthen the result of the questionnaire. The respondents of the FGD were 6 students. They were selected as the order: 2 students who always get high scores, 2 students who were in the middle and 2 students who were in the low rank. The questions of the interview were originally used in the questionnaire (see Appendix 9). 3. Speaking Test The researcher taught the class by implementing the Scientific Approach. After several meetings, the researcher conducted an evaluation to see the


influence of implementing Scientific Approach. The evaluations were conducted twice by using the same instruction (see Appendix 4). The evaluation was conducted based on scoring guide for speaking in Brown’s book (2004) about oral proficiency scoring categories and speaking rubric (see Appendix 7). Originally, in Brown’s rubric, there are 6 aspects to assess. However, in this research, the researcher omitted one aspect, namely task. This action was taken because during the oral presentation, the students did not get through question and answer session. 4. Field Notes During the treatment, the researcher wrote the improvement and the students’ engagement by using field notes (see Appendix 10). The researcher wrote down the process of the pre-test on April 9, 2015 until the post-test on May 4, 2015. Therefore, the reason of presenting the field notes was to strengthen the result of the speaking evaluation that the students improve their ability in speaking by participating during the learning process in the implementation of Scientific Approach.

E. Data Gathering Technique In order to collect the data, the researcher took several steps. These steps of data gathering technique will be explained below. 1. Preparation In the preparation, the researcher asked permission from the school to do a research in the school (see Appendix 1). The researcher discussed the time to


conduct the research with the subject teacher. Last, the researcher came to school and conducted the researcher from April 7, 2015 until May 4, 2015. 2.

Distributing Questionnaire and Conducting FGD In order to get the data of the students’ perception on their problems in

mastering speaking skill, the researcher distributed the questionnaire in April 7, 2015. The questionnaire was distributed to 29 students who attended the class (see Appendix 3). After distributing the questionnaire, the researcher asked 6 students to do FGD with her. Those respondents were selected based on the researcher’s observation while teaching them during PPL. The selection was done by involving 2 students who always get higher score, 2 students in the middle, and 2 students in the lower score to meet the objective result. 3.

Conducting the Pre-test To measure the students’ ability in speaking before getting any treatment,

the researcher conducted the pre-test. It was done in April 9, 2015. In the pre-test, the students had to individually make a brief persuasive speech about persuading their friends on the theme “students should/should not smoke in school area”. Their speech was assessed using speaking rubric (see Appendix 5). 4. Treatment The treatment was done 4 times from April 21, 2015 until April 30, 2015. The treatment was about the implementation of Scientific Approach in the process standard, especially on the teaching strategy (see Appendix 2). The researcher gave the treatment to the students by giving opportunity to the students to practice


their speaking. The process of the treatment would be explained further in the Chapter IV using the result of the researcher’s field notes (see Appendix 10). 5. Conducting the Post-test After conducting the pre-test, the researcher gave treatment to the students. The treatment was done by implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP. The final result of the treatment was measured by post-test. Similar to the pre-test, the students had to make a persuasive speech to persuade their friends on the theme “students should/should not smoke in school area”. The post-test was assessed by using the same rubric used to assess the pre-test (see Appendix 6).

F. Data Analysis Technique In this study, the researcher used 5 steps on the data gathering technique, which were questionnaire, FGD, pre-test, and post-test, and field notes. 1. Questionnaire The questionnaire in this study is used a likert scale (Ary, Jacob, & Sorensen, 2006) which is also used by Ferianda, (2013) in his thesis. A likert scale is a topic in a form of statement and the respondent should choose whether they strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. The scoring technique will be presented on the following table:


Table 3.4 Scoring Grade for Questionnaire Option Strongly agree (sangat setuju) Agree (setuju) Disagree (tidak setuju) Strongly disagree (sangat tidak setuju)

Score 5 4 2 1

To find out the choices of the respondents, they had to circle the answer. The researcher had calculated the results and presents it in a form of percentage with the formula below:

x100%

X: the total number of students based on the degree of agreement

n: the number of all students 2. Statistical Hypotheses The researcher collected the scores of the pre-test and the post-test as the data of the research. The data was calculated manually by using formula of the paired sample t-test (Supranto, 2009). First, the researcher would calculate the standard deviation with formula: Ho: the mean score of post-test is equal or less than the mean score of pre-test Ha: the mean score of post-test higher than the mean score of the pre-test Ho is refused if t ≥ t table; α: 0.05.

S=


S: standard deviation n: the total number of all students : the total of the mean of difference After that, the researcher would calculate the “t” by using formula:

t=

the mean of difference Sd: standard deviation n: the total number of all students


CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the researcher presents and discusses the data. First, to answer the first research problem, the researcher focuses on finding the student’s perception on their problems in mastering speaking skill based on KTSP. Second, the researcher focuses on answering the second research problem about the effects of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP on the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill.

A. Students’ Perception on Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill The first problem in this research focuses on the students’ perception on their problems in mastering speaking skill. In order to answer the first research problem, the researcher used close-ended questionnaire and FGD to gather the data. The questionnaires were distributed to 29 students from the total 33 students of Arjuna Vocational High School of 11th grade. Through the data that was gained from the questionnaire and FGD, the students built up their perception that speaking is difficult. It was concluded from the students’ answers that they did not have much time to practice their speaking. For further explanation, the data is presented into three parts, namely: (1) the nature of perception, (2) factors that influence perception, and (3) students’ attitude to solve their problem in mastering speaking skill.

36


37 1. The Nature of Perception Table 4.1 presents the students’ perception on their problem in mastering speaking skill, especially on the nature of perception. It is stated by Ferianda (2013) that perception can also be determined by looking at these points, such as environment, interaction, and also behavior, that in this case, happen to the students as the nature of perception. Numbers 1 up to 7 investigate the students’ eagerness in learning, interaction, and the environment in which shows the nature of perception. The statements 1 up to 3 investigate the students’ eagerness in learning. Table 4.1 The Nature of Perception

Explanation No

Statements

Strongly Agree Disagree Agree 1 27 1 (3.44%) (93.10%) (3.44%) 3 25 1 (10.34%) (86.20%) (3.44%)

1

I love English

2

I am interested in learning and mastering English I am highly motivated 1 26 2 to learn English (3.44%) (89.65%) (6.89%) The teacher has 3 23 2 explain the material (10.34%) (79.31%) (6.89%) clearly I can understand the 2 19 7 teacher’s explanation (6.89%) (65.51%) (24.13%) Classmate(s) influence 3 12 11 my motivation in (10.34%) (41.37%) (37.93%) mastering English Future jobs will affect 3 17 9 my motivation in (10.34%) (58.62%) (31.03%) mastering English language actively

3 4

5 6

7

Strongly Disagree 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (3.44%) 0 (0%) 3 (10.34%) 0 (0%)


38 The first statement was about their interest in the English subject. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 27 students (93.10%) agreed, 1 student (3.44%) strongly agreed, 1 student (3.44%) disagreed, and none of the students (0%) who chose strongly disagreed. The data showed that more than 90% of the students were interested in English subject. This result was proven by the data of FGD that was conducted by inviting 6 students as the classroom representatives to strengthen the data. Most of the students said that they were interested in learning English subject. All of the students have already learnt English since elementary school from the first grade until now, which means that the students have learnt for 11 years. However, when the researcher asked about what they have learnt for 11 years, the students just mentioned very limited materials that they remembered. The second statement was about the students’ interest in learning and mastering English subject. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 25 students (86.20%) agreed, 3 students (10.34%) strongly agreed, 1 student (3.44%) disagreed and none of the student (0%) who chose strongly disagreed. The data showed that the students were interested in learning and mastering English subject actively. This data was proven by the result of FGD, that the students were interested in learning and mastering English language. Most of them live in Kaliurang, so there are many possibilities for them to meet foreigners and communicate with them. Besides, the students also love to listen to western songs and watch movies. It actually forms the habit of learning and motivates them to learn English language. It will be explained more on the third statement.


39 The third statement was about the students’ motivation to learn English subject. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 26 students (89.65%) agreed, 2 students (6.89%) disagreed, 1 student (3.44%) strongly agreed, and none of the student (0%) who chose strongly disagreed. The data showed that the students were highly motivated in learning English subject. However, there were two students who were not highly motivated. Motivation is actually something which energizes someone’s behavior (Rhodes & Steers, 1981). In this case, the students were motivated to learn because they were accustomed to listen to western song or watching movies and also interested on the new teaching method which was used by the researcher. However, Altman and Valenzi (1985) states that motive which a person has for a particular action cannot be seen; it can only be inferred (p. 146). It means that even when the student looks active in class; it cannot definitively shows that he/she is highly motivated to learn. The statements numbers 4-6 are about the students’ interaction that support their learning experienced that will be explained further in the paragraphs below. The fourth statement was about the roles of the teacher in teaching and giving explanation about the English subject in class. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 23 students (79.31%) agreed and 3 students (10.34%) strongly agreed. It means that the teacher has the important roles based on the students’ perception. However, responding to the fourth statement, 2 students (6.89%) disagreed, and 1 student (3.44%) strongly disagreed. It showed that some of the students were not satisfied with the teacher’s explanation. The data showed that 80% students satisfied with the teacher’s explanation about the


40 English subject in class. However, the result from FGD was against this result. The students said that the teacher’s explanation was not clear. The method that she used in the class was only giving assignments and then left the class. She rarely explained it until the students understood about the material. It will be explained further on the fifth statement about the teacher’s explanation in the class. The fifth statement was about the students’ ability to understand the teacher’s explanation. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 19 students (65.31%) agreed and 2 students (6.89%) strongly agreed. Meanwhile, 7 students (24.13%) disagreed and none of the student (0%) strongly disagreed. The data showed that even though the teacher tried to explain the material, some of the students could not really understand it well. However, the data from FGD was against this result, it has been mentioned that the teacher rarely explains the material until the students understood. In FGD, the students said that they just made their facial expression look like they understood, but the fact was they were still confused. This action could be defined as their rationalization. Altman and Valenzi (1985) see rationalization was defense mechanism of someone to make excuse for failure (p. 148). The students said that they were not satisfied by the teacher’s method in teaching and it was affecting their motivation in learning English subject. This statement could be their excuse to show their frustration because their need of satisfaction was hard to accomplish alongside with the teacher’s inability to motivate her students in learning.


41 The sixth statement was about the roles of the classmates in influencing the students’ motivation and interest in mastering English subject actively. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 12 students (41.37%) agreed and 3 students (10.34%) strongly agreed. Meanwhile, 11 students (37.93%) disagreed and 3 students (10.34%) strongly disagreed. From the data, the results showed that it was almost equal between the agreement and the disagreement on the importance of the classmates’ role in influencing their motivation and interest in mastering English subject actively. The result of FGD showed that the students’ interaction with their friends to learn English was very limited. The students was having very limited opportunity to speak in English to have interaction with their friends. They would ask the way to solve the problem in doing the assignments or just cheating. They chose to give up with active interaction which is not motivating them (Alman & Valenzi, 1985, p. 149). The seventh statement was about the environment that might affect the students’ motivation and interest in mastering English subject. The statement was about the roles of the students’ future chances on their job field, whether it will influence their motivation and interest in mastering English subject or not. From the respondents’ answers, the researcher found that 17 students (58.62%) agreed, 3 students (10.34%) strongly agreed, 7 students (31.03%) disagreed and none of the student (0%) strongly disagreed with the statement. It showed that the students’ future goal on their job field was not necessarily influence their motivation and interest in mastering English subject, especially speaking skill.


42 The researcher related those 7 statements to the theory that would strengthen the data. Ahen (2009) states that the ability to communicate in a second language enables people to interact with each other and changes the way they perceived things and matters happening to them. Proficiency in the English language is determined by the students’ motivation and attitude in learning the language. In the statements numbers 1 up to 3 indicated the students’ eagerness in learning based on the students’ motivation. More than 80% of the students were motivated in learning English subject. According to Gardner and Lambert (as cited in Brown, 1994, p. 168), motivation is a construct made up from certain attitudes. In this case, the students’ motivation in improving their speaking skill could be affected by their attitude in learning. Hence, the students’ performance in the learning process will be determined by their motivation in learning process which results from their perception and attitudes (Ahen, 2009, p. 2). According to Gardner and Lambert (as cited in Ahen, 2009), the positive or negative attitude is derived from individual’s perception toward certain objects or matters. Campbell (2001) as cited in Ahen (2009) states that perception is a process where one will form an impression about someone or something. The input that is gained through one’s observation will produce certain judgment or belief which influenced the attitudes of an individual toward certain things or events occur around them (p. 3). The researcher also found out another meaning of perception according to Hardy and Heyes on Kurniyati’s journal (2006) as it is cited in Ferianda (2013) that perception is a form of behavior that allows individuals to interact with or adjust to the varying demands of environment (p. 69). The researcher concluded


43 that perception could also be determined by looking at the interaction and the environment. On the following paragraph, the researcher would give further explanation about factors that influence the students’ perception especially on their problems in speaking skill. 2. Factors Influencing Perception In Table 4.2, the researcher presents the factors that influence the students’ perception. The statement number 8 was about the situation in which the students’ problem came up, especially in speaking. The statements number 9-12 were about the selection of stimuli. The statements number 13 and 14 were about selfconcept. The eighth statement was about the situation in which the students’ problems emerge, especially in speaking skill. From the respondents’ answers, 17 students (58.62%) agreed and 7 students (24.13%) strongly agreed. However, the researcher found out that 5 students (17.24%) disagreed. From the data, the results showed that 80% students had problem in mastering English subject, especially speaking skill. Altman and Valenzi (1985) define that situation is also the factor that influence someone’s perception. The situation like they did not understand with the teacher explanation and the teaching method which was not satisfied their expectation could affect the students’ perception.


44 Table 4.2 Factors Influencing Perception

Explanation No 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Statements I have difficulty in learning English, especially speaking skill I have difficulty in memorizing vocabulary; therefore, my speaking ability is limited I have difficulty in learning grammar and tenses I have difficulty in memorizing tenses which makes me cannot spontaneously speak in English I have difficulty in pronouncing the words which makes me hesitant to speak in English I have difficulty to speak in English because lack of opportunity to practice it during teaching learning activities It is easier for me to write / read rather than speak / listen during teaching learning activities

Strongly Agree Disagree Agree 7 17 5 (24.13%) (58.62%) (17.24%)

Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

4 22 3 (13.79%) (75.86%) (10.34%)

0 (0%)

4 21 4 (13.79%) (72.41%) (13.79%)

0 (0%)

6 20 3 (20.68%) (68.96%) (10.34%)

0 (0%)

4 21 (13.79%) (72.41%)

0 (0%)

2 (6.89%)

3 20 5 (10.34%) (68.96%) (17.24%)

1 (3.44%)

4 16 9 (13.79%) (55.17%) (31.03%)

0 (0%)

The ninth statement was about their problem in memorizing vocabulary which limits their ability in speaking skill. From the respondents’ answers, 22 students (75.86%) agreed and 4 students (13.79%) strongly agreed. The researcher concluded that more than 80% of the students were facing problem in memorizing vocabulary. On the contrary, there were 3 students (10.34%) who chose disagreed


45 and none of the student (0%) strongly disagreed. From this data, it could be concluded that more than 80% students was facing problem in memorizing vocabulary. The tenth statement was about the students’ problem in learning grammar and tenses in English subject. From the respondents’ answers, 21 students (72.41%) agreed, 4 students (13.79%) strongly agreed, 4 students (13.79%) disagreed, and none of the student (0%) strongly disagreed. It could be proven that the students were facing problems in learning grammar and tenses. When the researcher asked a question during the FGD to the students to translate the simplest sentence “saya adalah seorang pelajar” in English, only 3 students tried to answer it and they forgot to add the article “a” in the sentence, so their answer was “I am student” without “a”. The eleventh statement was about the students’ problem in memorizing tenses which caused the limitation of the students’ ability to speak spontaneously. From the respondents’ answers, 20 students (68.96%) agreed and 6 students (20.68%) strongly agreed. The researcher did observation in class while PPL, the researcher found that the students still could not memorize the tenses very well. Meanwhile, the results showed that there were 3 students (10.34%) disagreed with the statement and none of the student (0%) strongly disagreed. The twelfth statement was about the students’ problem in pronouncing some of the words in English which made the students could not speak spontaneously. From the respondents’ answers, 21 students (72.41%) agreed, 4 students (13.79%) strongly agreed, 2 students (6.89%) disagreed and none of the


46 student (0%) strongly disagreed. From the result, the researcher concluded that more than 80% students were facing problem to speak when the students did not know how to pronounce the words well. From those explanations, the researcher related it with Altman and Valenzi’s (1985) definition about selection of stimuli, because individual tends to focus only on small number of stimuli. This sorting process is known as “selection” and becomes the reason why each person perceives things differently (p. 86). In learning English, especially in mastering speaking skill, students sortout their problem in a very common problem that people face in learning English like vocabulary, pronunciation, and tenses. However, people have different threshold levels (Altman & Valenzi, 1985, p. 87). Some students might not face any difficult problem in memorizing vocabulary and tenses, whereas others cannot remember what vocabulary that he/she has learnt before. However, the same person may have different threshold at different times; this phenomenon is called “sensory adaptation”, a diminished sensitivity to stimuli that evolves upon continued exposure (Altman & Valenzi, 1985, p. 87). When the students are not distracted by their speaking problems again, it is because they tried to adapt the situation, in which can decrease their motivation in participating during the teaching learning activities. Those problems can also be affected by their selfconcept that will be explained in the next paragraph. The thirteenth statement was about the students’ belief in why the students facing problem in speaking was because the less chance for them to directly use it when the teaching learning process happened. From the respondents’ answers, 20


47 students (68.96%) agreed, 3 students (10.34%) strongly agreed, 5 students (17.24%) disagreed and 1 student (3.44%) strongly disagreed. It happened because the teacher were rarely explained the material in class. Based on the students’ statement during FGD, they said that the teacher only gave them written assignments to be done without any chance to practice their speaking skill. The fourteenth statement was about the students’ belief that writing and reading were easier for the students rather than listening and speaking when the teaching learning process happens. From the respondents’ answers, 16 students (55.17%) agreed and 4 students (13.79%) strongly agreed. However, 9 students (31.03%) disagreed and none of the student (0%) strongly disagreed. Altman and Valenzi (1985) see that self-concept is also the factor that can influence perception (p. 91). The problem in mastering speaking skill is not only the basic grammar and vocabulary but also the students belief in other aspect like less chance to sharpen their ability in speaking skill and their belief that other skills is much easier that speaking spontaneously. The students believed that they are facing difficulties in mastering speaking skill because their mental pictures of themselves determine much of what they perceive and do (Altman & Valenzi, 1985, p. 90). However, the researcher tried to dig deeper to find out their way to solve the problems in mastering speaking skill through their attitude that would be explained further in the paragraphs below. 3. Students’ Attitude to Solve Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill In Table 4.3, the researcher tried to present the students’ attitude to solve their problem in mastering speaking skill.


48 Table 4.3 Students’ Attitude to Solve Their Problem in Mastering Speaking Skill

Explanation No 15

16

17

Statements

Strongly Agree I learn actively in class 0 so that I am able to (0%) master English language, especially speaking skill. I try to solve my problem 2 and difficulty in learning (6.89%) by consulting to the teacher subject. It is easier for me to 0 master English language (0%) by practicing and discussing it with friends.

26 3 (89.65%) (10.34%)

Strongly Disagree 0 (0%)

21 5 (72.41%) (17.24%)

1 (3.44%)

23 6 (79.31%) (20.68%)

0 (0%)

Agree

Disagree

The fifteenth statement was about the students’ participation in the teaching learning process, especially in mastering the speaking skill. From the respondents’ answers, 26 students (89.65%) agreed and 3 students (10.34%) disagreed, none of the student (0%) who chose strongly agreed or strongly disagreed. However, during the treatment, some of the students rarely participated in the learning activities and some students chose to sleep. The sixteenth statement was about the students’ effort to overcome their problems in learning by consulting to the teacher’s subject. From the respondents’ answers, 21 students (72.41%) agreed, 2 students (6.89%) strongly agreed, 5 students (17.24%) disagreed, and 1 student (3.44%) strongly disagreed. The seventeenth statement was about the students’ opinion that learning can be easier if the students get more chance to discuss the material with their


49 friends. From the respondents’ answers, 23 students (79.31%) agreed and 6 students (20.68%) disagreed. From those three statements, the researcher relates those actions with conative component of attitudes (Altman & Valenzi, 1985, p. 95). Conative component is the students’ behavioral disposition toward their problem. Martin (1967) (as cited in Altman & Valenzi, 1985) states that some psychologists believe that a certain attitude will lead to predictable behavior (p. 447). It can be positive attitude like actively participating in teaching learning activities, consulting to the teacher, and discussing the material with their friends. However, before the implementation of Scientific Approach, the students did not indicate those behaviors during the teaching learning activities. Therefore, the researcher used it as part of the treatment for the students to participate in learning, consulting and receiving feedback from the teacher, and also having discussion during the teaching learning activities. To conclude, the students are interested in learning English subject and feel motivated to learn. However, the teacher’s method in teaching and unclear explanation can lead to unmotivated students’ perception. Another problem that comes up is their selection of stimuli which can affect their perception on their problem in mastering speaking skill like vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and tenses. Those sorts out of stimuli are strengthened by their self-concept that they have less chance to practice their ability in speaking. The students also built the perception that speaking skill is harder than other skill because they accustomed to learn in written assignments rather than having speaking activity in class which


50 was guided by the teacher. Most of the students agreed that they needed to have attitudes to solve their problems like what Altman and Valenzi (1985) define as conative action or behavioral disposition to solve their problem in positive ways. Referring to this result, the researcher tried to solve the problem by implementing Scientific Approach in class during the treatment. The aim of the implementation itself is to give the students chance to increase their speaking skill. According to Ferianda (2013), the students’ perception and behavior can be changed through the process of learning. On this research, at first, the students experienced that speaking was difficult. However, since speaking activities were adjusted to the students’ condition and interest, they could consider the speaking activity is interesting. In the next paragraph will be explained about the research findings to answer the second research question in quantitative ways by using t-test to see whether the implementation of Scientific Approach in KTSP can help vocational school students in mastering speaking skill.

B. The Effect of Implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP The second problem of this research focused on the effect of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP on the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill. In order to know the effect of the implementation, the researcher first presented the hypothesis testing for the result of the pre-test and the post-test. The researcher also explained about the process of implementing Scientific Approach in class during the treatment as the factor that influenced the result of the experiment. In


51 the paragraph below, the result of speaking evaluation and the field notes show that the implementation of Scientific Approach can improve the students’ ability in speaking and change the students’ perception and attitude that speaking is difficult. 1. Hypothesis Testing The hypothesis testing was done to see whether there is any improvement after implementing the treatment or not. In testing the hypothesis, the researcher used t-test. There are two assessors in assessing speaking skill to get the objective results. The samples of this research were 32 male students and 1 female student in one group. However, during the pre-test and the post-test, there were 5 students who were absent. So, for those who were not participating on the pre-test or posttest, they would not be included in the analysis. Therefore, the total number of the participant which was analyzed was 28 students. The assessors were the researcher and the teacher. That is why in the hypothesis testing, there are two results from the researcher and the teacher. First, the researcher would do the hypothesis testing on the researcher’s rubric in the pre-test and post-test. The result of the analysis shows that the treatment could influence the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill. It is shown based on the result of the t-test which was counted manually. This shows that the result of the analysis shows that the

is bigger than the

of the researcher is 10.7288 whereas the

= 1.7033 (see Appendix 8). The value of with α: 0.05, which is shown in

in which the

is taken by the db that is 27

= 1.7033. The result of the rubric that was

done by the teacher also shows an improvement with the

=11.0480;


52 whereas, the

= 1.7033. In conclusion, the result of the research after

collecting and calculating the data, the result of the t-test showed the difference in the mean score from the pre-test and the post-test. The null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis is used. 2. The Researcher Field Notes during the Treatment in Class In this part, the researcher explained the factor that was found during the research. Before implementing Scientific Approach in the teaching learning activities, the researcher did the pre-test. The aim of doing pre-test and post-test is as direct evaluation to assess the progress of the students in learning the material. The thing that needed to be evaluated was the students’ improvement in speaking skill. The material that the researcher chose was the expression of persuading. However, this material was integrated with the expression of convincing others, the next topic after persuading, because it can be assessed together through persuasive text and speech. There were 4 times meeting for the treatment that was scheduled on Tuesday and Thursday. On Tuesday, the time allocation is 2x45 minutes. On Thursday, the time allocation is 2x45 minutes. However, the learning activity is following the school’s prayer activities, so the time allocation is reduced 30 minutes in every Thursday meeting. The pre-test was done on April 9, 2015. The students had received the information for the very first meeting after conducting questionnaire’s survey was the pre-test evaluation. The pre-test evaluated the students’ in performing oral presentation in a form of brief persuasive speech. Even though they had already


53 received the information to prepare their speech in the previous meeting, the students did not prepare it well. Most of the students did the preparation in the class which made the evaluation was postponed for 30 minutes. The students only made a very brief speech consisted of one up to two sentences. The first treatment was done on April 21, 2015. The researcher as the teacher introduced the expression to persuade others to do something. In this treatment, the researcher first gave stimulus to the students by asking about the material in expressing opinion and agreeing disagreeing that has been learnt before in the previous meeting. However, the students could not remember about those materials without looking at the handout. During the teaching learning process while doing the PPL, the researcher were using handout and worksheet to anticipate the text books which were not available enough for the total number of the students. In the core activity, the students got information about the expression of persuading / forbid someone to do something. The students were delivered the handout about the expression that can be used in persuading and also the example of the dialogue. However, they found it difficult to pronounce some of the words. The speaking treatment that was used in this meeting was a game. The teacher anticipated passive and unsuccessful activity in playing the game by giving the example together with active students in class. In this game, the students must work together in order to accomplished the game. The students needed to make a group consisted of 6-7 students who would stand in a row. They had to whisper the situation that was given to the last player on the back up to the front player. Then, the front player should write down the answer on the white


54 board. Those who had written down the answer would run immediately to the back. Through the researcher’s notes, the students were enjoying the game. However, the students’ habit to answer the teacher’s question in Javanese language was hardly omitted. The students who were not interested in playing the game would make a group and did not pay attention to the learning activities. The researchers anticipated this action by walking around the class and dragged them back to their group. The game was quite interesting for the students. However, it was a bit difficult to control the classroom management because the students who played the game tended to move around. The game was the part of networking stage and the result was the students who were usually quiet and passive tried to participate. The speaking treatment itself happened in networking and creating stages (Kemendikbud, 2013). In the teaching learning process, the students were already having a lot of interaction with the teacher to build the students’ engagement. According to Krathwohl (1961) (as cited in Taher, 2013), the learning activity and the students’ experience is the basic process in which the students build their value system. With the majority of male students, teaching became more challenging because the teacher should make sure that all of the students paid attention and built up their positive behavior to become students who would actively participate in teaching learning activity. Therefore, teaching the material in the stages of observing, questioning, experimenting, and associating were only covered the knowledge domain. In order to thrill the students’ excitement, the use of game could help all of the students to actively


55 participate. The treatment by using game was the process in which the students having interaction and creating the product as the result of their learning process at the same time in interesting way. The second treatment was done on April 23, 2015. The researcher was giving extra time to the students to practice their speaking skill through drilling. First, the students got information about the next topic. The topic was about “if clause type 2” in which the students had experienced the stage of observing. The researcher plays the slide show about the topic. The students read the example and the construction of the sentence. According to Dyer (2011), observing is the process where the students gain their insight by finding the ideas. The process of observing could affect the students’ engagement in the learning activity because the students build up their knowledge in order to be able in participating actively. Then on the speaking treatment, the students were drilled by changing “if clause type 1” into “if clause type 2” one by one beginning from the students sitting at the back to the front. The researcher took notes that the students could not easily get involve in the drilling process because they never experienced it before. Even though the students had read the example, they still hesitated in answering. It could happen because the students did not optimally use the stages of questioning and experimenting. According to Dyer (2011), in the stage of questioning, the students must actively question what they did not know and gain the understanding what was the problem. Because of the drill was new for the students, the students could find the other sources to enrich their knowledge which belong to experimenting.


56 The researcher took this opportunity to make the students work in pair which belongs to associating process. This action could be the stimulus to the students to understand the material better because they had the responsibility to explain to their partner. The researcher tried to minimalize the use of Javanese language by giving the rules for those who speak in Javanese; they had to answer two questions. After some trials in two rows, the students could follow the drilling process and showed their result of learning in speaking spontaneously. The third treatment was done on April 28, 2015. In the induction phase, the researcher gave stimulus to the students to recall what they have learnt in the previous meeting which was about if clause type 2. In the core activity, the students got information about the competence, learning object, function and steps of the lesson about persuasive text. The students received a handout about the topic. The speaking treatment was a group discussion. They had to make a group of 4. Each student was given a handout with reading passages of the persuasive text. There were 8 groups and each group had the responsibility to explain to the whole class about the paragraph that was appointed for them based on the number of the group. This opportunity was created to make the students to be able to speak in English to explain to their friends. However, not all of the students were able to explain because of the time limitation. The students tended to give the responsibility to the cleverest student in their group to explain. The fourth treatment was done on April 30, 2015. The researcher introduced persuasive speech and helped the students to prepare for their post-test by introducing the theme that will be used. The students discussed the theme with


57 their friend in pair about student should/should not smoke in school area. The students consulted to the researcher or their friends about the content of their oral presentation in the post-test. The students also tried to find the way to pronounce the words and mind the content of their speech. The post-test was conducted on May 4, 2015. There are three students who were absent because they had test on another subject. The review was shown that the students made an improvement compared to the pre-test. There were still a few mistakes in pronouncing the words. But, overall, the students could improve their speaking and communicating skill. To conclude, the process of implementing Scientific Approach during the treatment helps the students in mastering speaking skill. Students’ improvement could not be separated from the process of shaping their positive perception in the learning process. The students’ preparation in learning, their engagement during the teaching learning activities, and the product of learning indicated that the element of language teaching which built the students’ perception that mastering speaking skill could be fun. It could be compared with the learning process during the subject teacher classroom activities, researcher’s PPL classroom activities, and the treatment. During the subject teacher classes, the students lack of opportunity in practicing their speaking skill because the teacher tended to give writing assignments. During the PPL, the researcher was implementing the process skill approach and followed the process in the lesson plan that was given by the teacher. However, the students’ engagement in learning could not show any improvements. By optimizing the opportunity to practice speaking by


58 implementing Scientific Approach, the students were able to solve their problem in mastering speaking skill. It happened because the implementation of Scientific Approach was using integrated skills. According to Oxford (2001) (as cited in Ferianda, 2013), integrated skills or integration of skills can be defined as the combination of two or more skills within a communicative task. In the language learning process, listening, speaking, reading, and writing should be treated as integrated, interdependent, and inseparable element of language (Ferianda, 2013). Harmer (2009) states that productive skills (writing-speaking) and receptive skills (reading-listening) are two sides of a coin that cannot be separated, because one skill can reinforce another in a number of ways. Work just one side of the coin as the subject teacher did, it would yield wrong results for the students and they would have a broken English learning, which show up the deficiencies about any skill (Ferianda, 2013). The integrated skill that was supported by affective, knowledge, and attitude domains in term of students’ interaction, knowledge construction, and active participation could bring the greatest chance of successful learning outcomes. The treatment by implementing Scientific Approach was also decreasing the students’ habit to speak Javanese and Indonesian languages during the teaching learning process. In each stage, the students had to practice their English during the treatment in order to maximize their speaking in English. By trying to change their habit and improve their ability in speaking, the result showed that the students’ perception in learning had changed altogether with their improvement in speaking.


CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this chapter, the researcher presented the conclusions and the recommendations of the research. There are two sections discussed in this research. The first section is the conclusions of the research based on the result in chapter IV. The second section is the recommendations for the teacher, and the future researchers.

A. Conclusions In this section, the researcher divides the conclusions into two parts. The first one is about the conclusion of the students’ perception on their problems in mastering speaking skill. The second one is the effects or the result of implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP on the students’ ability in mastering speaking skill. In order to get the data, the researcher used 5 instruments, namely questionnaire, FGD (Focus Group Discussion), pre-test, post-test, and field notes. The data was obtained first by distributing questionnaire to the students of 11th grade of Arjuna Vocational High School. To answer the first research question, the researcher gathered both the questionnaire and FGD in order to obtain the data from the participants about the students’ problem in mastering speaking skill. The main data was gathered from the result of the pre-test and the post-test. Besides, the researcher also wrote field notes in order to take notes while giving the

59


treatment to the students. The aim of writing field notes is to record the students’ participation and the students’ improvement in class during the treatment. For the answer of the first research problem, the result of the questionnaire has already corroborated with the findings of FGD. However, there are some different points from the results of the questionnaire and the FGD. The aspects that the researcher tries to find out are the nature of the perception, the factors which influence the students’ perception, and the student’s attitude to solve their problems. The first conclusion was drawn by the researcher based on the first research problem that was about the students’ perception on their problems in mastering speaking skill. The researcher distributed questionnaire to the students to get the data. From the nature of perception, the researcher found out that the students’ eagerness in learning is high. The data of the questionnaire show that more than 80% of the students were interested in learning English subject. Most of the students are highly motivated in learning English subject by looking at the result of the data which is shown more than 80% of the students who are motivated to learn. It is also strengthened by the result of FGD that most of the participants agreed that they are motivated. However, the result that was shown on the questionnaire and the result from the FGD for the question number 4 are quite different. It is about the teacher roles in teaching and giving explanation in class. Based on the result of the questionnaire, most of the students were satisfied with the teacher’s explanation about English subject. On the other hand, the result of FGD showed that the teacher’s explanation was unclear and she seldom taught in


class and only gave written assignments. This action can be defined as their rationalization. The students said that they are not satisfied by the teacher’s method in teaching and it was affecting their motivation in learning English subject. This statement can be the students’ excuse to show that they were frustrated because their need of satisfaction was hard to accomplish alongside with the teacher’s inability to motivate her students in learning. The researcher also concludes that the students’ environment does not really influence the students’ motivation in mastering English language actively. From the factors that influenced the students’ perception, there was the situation in which the students’ problems emerge, especially in speaking skill. The factors that would also influence the students’ perception on their problems in speaking skill was also derived from the common problems hat might happen like vocabulary, tenses, pronunciation and grammar which limit their ability in mastering speaking skill. However, the problems in mastering speaking skill were not only the basic grammar and vocabulary, but also the students’ belief in other aspects. For example, less chance to sharpen their ability in speaking skill and their belief that the other skills were much easier than speaking spontaneously. The students belief that they are facing difficulties in mastering speaking skill because their mental pictures of themselves determine much of what they perceive and do. Referring to this result, the researcher tried to solve the problem by implementing Scientific Approach in class during the treatment. The aim of the implementation itself was to give the students chance to increase their speaking


skill and change the students’ perception that speaking is difficult. The change of students’ attitude influenced the students’ participation in the learning activities. The second conclusion is drawn from the results of the hypothesis testing of the pre-test and the post-test. The result showed that the

both from the

teacher and the researcher indicate an observable improvement after receiving the treatment. The researcher’s

was 10.7288 and the

11.0480. Those results were higher that 0.05 for the 28 students showed

of the teacher was

with the critical region of a test (α) = 1.7033. The result showed that the

students improved their ability in speaking skill after receiving treatment by implementing Scientific Approach in KTSP. The results that were written in field notes also showed that the students had more chance to practice by discussing and communicating with their friends, that is why the teacher can try to implement Scientific Approach to give the students more chance to improve their speaking ability.

B. Recommendations After finishing the research, the researcher would like to give some recommendations to the teacher who teaches students of 11th grade of Arjuna Vocational High School. The recommendations are aimed to improve the teaching learning process to be better by implementing Scientific Approach. The aim of implementing Scientific Approach is to create active learning process so the students can improve their ability and master all English skills, especially speaking skill. Moreover, the researcher also gives some recommendations to the


future researchers who want to conduct a similar research dealing with the Scientific Approach. The following are the recommendations given by the researcher. 1. Recommendations for English Subject Teachers The teacher can improve her teaching method which can motivate her students to learn English. The teacher can use her knowledge related to Scientific Approach to create active teaching methods and materials to be applied in the class. The researcher hopes that this research can be implemented or applied to teach the students. It is because, sooner or later, the Curriculum 2013 will be implemented again and it can help both the teacher and the students to prepare themselves and be accustomed to this approach. Furthermore, by applying this approach, the teacher can also apply interesting teaching strategies to support the students to learn actively and encourage them to speak more. 2. Recommendations for Future Researchers For the future researchers, it is suggested to focus on the Scientific Approach and to find more theories related to Scientific Approach. The future researchers can try to find the more details information about the educational documents which explain about Scientific Approach on the idea of mixing three domains which are knowledge, affective, and skill in order to give a wide description about it. This approach is actually implemented in Curriculum 2013, so if it is possible the future researchers can do a research about the implementation of Scientific Approach in Curriculum 2013 to help the students in


mastering speaking skill. Furthermore, the future research can compare the results of this research and the result of the future researchers’ research.


REFERENCES Ahen, J.A. (2009). Students’ perception towards English for self expression. Unpublished Thesis. Sarawak: University Malaysia Sarawak. Altman, S., & Valenzi, E. (1985). Organizational behavior: Theory and practice. London: Academic Press. Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D. (Eds.). (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman. Ary, D., Jacob, L. C., & Sorensen, C. K. (2006). Introduction to research in education (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (2005). Introduction to research in education (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group. Bailey, K.M. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Speaking. New York: McGraw-Hill. Biggs, J. (1992). From theory to practice: A cognitive systems approach. Paper presented at the annual conference of the higher education research and development society of Australia. Melbourne: Monash Universty Press. BNSP (2007). Peraturan menteri pendidikan nasional republik Indonesia nomor 41 tahun 2007 tentang standar proses satuan pendidikan dasar dan menengah. Jakarta: BNSP. Boateng, W. (2012). Evaluating the efficacy of focus group discussion (FGD) in qualitative social research. International Journal of Business and Social Science ( vol. 3 No. 7; April 2012). Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles. New York: Pearson ESL. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. New York: Pearson Education. Campbell, S. (2001). Students’ perception of teaching and learning: the influence of students’ approaches to learning and teachers’ approaches to teaching. Teachers and teaching: Theory and practice, vol.7, No.2 pp. 173-187. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

65


Dyer, J. (2011) The innovator’s DNA. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://www.childrenshospitals.net/Content/ContentFolders34/EducationMee tings2/SpringConference/2013/PlenarySpeakers/Keynote_Presentation_The _Innovators_DNA.pdf Ferianda, S. (2013). Perception on integrated skills implementation in critical listening and speaking class by English language education students of Sanata Dharma University. Unpublished Thesis. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W.E. (1972). Attitude and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. London: Pearson Education. Hoghberg, J. (1978). Art and visual perception. In E. Carette & M. Friedman (Eds.) Handbook of perception (Vol. X, pp. 225-258). New York: Academic. Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (2012). Bahan uji publik kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Kemendikbud. Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (2013). Draft kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Kemendikbud. Kurniyati, C. D. (2006). Students’ perceptions toward teacher written feedback on their compositions. Unpublished Thesis. Sanata Dharma University. Lazim, M. (2013). Penerapan pendekatan saintifik dalam pembelajaran kurikulum 2013. Retrieved January 8, 2014, from www.p4tksbjogja.com/2013/index.php/pendekatan-saintifik.html/. Leksono, J. W. (2014). Proceeding of APTEKINDO ’07: Pendekatan saintifik pada Kurikulum 2013 untuk meningkatkan ketrampilan berpikir kritis siswa. Surabaya: Unesa. Nasution, S. (2005). Berbagai pendekatan dalam proses belajar dan mengajar. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (2013). Standar proses pendidikan dasar dan menengah. salinan lampiran nomor 65 tahun 2013 tentang standar proses pendidikan dasar dan menengah. Rabawati, K., Sutama, M., & Gosong, M. (2013). Penerapan pendekatan komunikatif dalam pembelajaran bahasa Indonesia siswa kelas XI SMK


Negeri 1 Denpasar. E-journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha (Volume 2 tahun 2013). Rhodes, S. R., & Steers, R. M. (1981). Conventional vs. work-owned organizations. Human Relations, 34 (12), pp. 1013-1035, 1981. Salkind, N. J. (2001). Exploring research: Pre and true experimental research designs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Sani, R. A. (2014). Pembelajaran saintifik untuk implementasi Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara. Supranto, J. (2009). Statistik: Teori dan aplikasi. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga. Sutena, W., Padmadewi, N., & Artini, L. P. (2013). The implementation of process standard of teaching English at SMK Negeri 1 Gianyar. E-journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha (Volume 1 tahun 2013). Syafriyadin, Rahmawati, I. N., & Widiastuti, R. (2013). Improving grade X students’ speaking assessment under round robin technique. International Journal on Education. Volume 1, No. 1, April 2013, pp. 74-82. Taher, M. (2013). Implementasi penilaian sikap pada pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013. Retrieved June 3, 2015, from http/sumut.kemenag.go.id/ Trianto (2009). Mendesain model pembelajaran innovative-progresif. Landasan dan implementasinya pada Kurikulum Satuan Tingkat Pendidikan (KTSP). Jakarta: Kencana Predana Media Group.


APPENDICES


Appendix 1: School Permission Letter

(Disguised)

(Disguised)


Appendix 2: Scientific Approach Lesson Plan RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN 4 (RPP) B. 16. PERSUADING

Nama Sekolah Mata Pelajaran Kelas / Semester Alokasi Waktu Standar Kompetensi Kompetensi dasar hati KKM

: SMK Arjuna (Disguised) : Bahasa Inggris : XI / 2 : 8 x 45’ : Berkomunikasi dengan Bahasa Inggris setara level Elementary : 2.5. Mengungkapkan berbagai macam maksud : 7,0

A. INDIKATOR Pertemuan 1

2

3

4

Indikasi yang harus dicapai: - Sikap bersahabat dan komunikatif dalam mengucapkan bujukan atau larangan untuk melakukan sesuatu diwujudkan secara tepat. - Sikap bersahabat dan komunikatif dalam merespon ucapan atas bujukan/larangan untuk melakukan sesuatu dari orang lain dilakukan secara tepat. - Gemar membaca dan menemukan informasi umum dan khusus dari percakapan yang menjelaskan tentang bujukan/larangan untuk melakukan sesuatu dijawab secara komperehensif. - Kebiasaan bicara/menulis dengan bahasa yang benar dengan menggunakan ungkapan dalam menyatakan bujukan/larangan diimplementasikan secara tepat. - Kebiasaan bicara/menulis dengan bahasa yang benar dengan menggunakan conditional sentence type 2 dalam menyatakan bujukan/larangan diimplementasikan secara tepat. - Mengidentifikasi penyusunan teks yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya - Siswa dapat mengidentifikasi langkah- langkah penyusunan pidato singkat yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan sesuai dengan konteks penggunaanya - Siswa mendiskusikan tema yang akan digunakan dalam pidato singkat yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan dengan guru dan teman


-

Siswa dapat mempersiapkan teks pidato singkat yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan

B. TUJUAN PEMBELAJARAN Setelah selesai proses pembelajaran, siswa dapat: 1. Menggunakan ungkapan-ungkapan untuk menyatakan bujukan untuk melakukan suatu hal/ kegiatan tertentu. 2. Menggunakan ungkapan-ungkapan untuk menyatakan larangan untuk melakukan suatu hal/ kegiatan tertentu, 3. Menggunakan pola kalimat if clause tipe 2 yang relevan dengan topic bujukan/larangan 4. Mengidentifikasi penyusunan teks yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya 5. Mengidentifikasi langkah- langkah penyusunan pidato singkat yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan sesuai dengan konteks penggunaanya 6. Mempraktikan pidato singkat yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan yang sudah dibuat di depan kelas. C. MATERI PEMBELAJARAN Ungkapan-ungkapan untuk menyatakan meyakinkan atau melarang terhadap suatu hal/kegiatan tertentu: Expression to show Persuasions  If I were you, I would just stay at home.  I think you ought to ...  Oh, come on!  I really think you’d do well to ...  How can I persuade you to ...?  Why don’t you .... ?  You’d better .. / You should .. / Why don’t you ....  It might not be a bad idea if .....  My advice would be to ....  I would .... , if I were in your position.


Expressions are used to forbid someone to do something  I don’t think you should ....  You’d better not ....  It’s up to you but I wouldn’t .....  I wouldn’t advice .....

Contoh Dialog Tentang Persuading Farhan

: How are you doing? I haven’t seen you for a long time. Is everything, OK with you?

Anggit

: I’m not very well at the moment. Actually I have a bad cold but I have to be here, just the same. How are you, Farhan? Yes, we haven’t met since Purbaya’s party last month.

Farhan

: I’m allright, thank you, Anggit. Why don’t you just stay at home. You can ask for permission not to be here now. You do look terrible.

Anngit

: I would like to stay at home, but I’m in charge of escorting guests to the conferene room. I’ll be back when the conference starts a moment later.

Farhan

: you had better be careful. If I don’t attend the conference, I will take you home

Anggit

: it’s OK, I’ll take a taxi.

Farhan

: I think you’d better see the doctor this afternoon.

Anggit

: Yes, I’ll do that. Now, go inside the room or you’ll be late. It’s good to see you again. Bye bye

Farhan

: I hope you’ll soon be better. I’ll come to your house this evening.

Anggit

: I’ll wait. Thanks and good bye

Answer these questions! 1.

How long is it since Farhan and Anggit seeing each other?

2.

What is the matter with Anggit?

3.

What does Farhan advice her to do?


4.

Is Anggit going to do what Farhan has suggested?

5.

What is Farhan’s promise to Anggit

Contoh persuasive text Children should have to play sport

Children all over Australia are getting fatter and fatter and the way we live is making it worse. So how can we help? The best way is to get kids of all ages involved in playing sport. Being active by playing sport is going to keep kids strong, fit, and healthy. Growing bodies need lots of daily exercise and the way to do this is to play sport. Scientists have shown that kids who play sport have less health problems that kids who sit at home and watch too much TV. There are lots of sports that kids can play such as soccer and netball in the winter, and softball and cricket in the summer. They can also play sports like gymnastics, tennis and basketball all year round. So it doesn’t matter what you like or where you live, there is a sport for everyone. You won’t have to complain about being bored! It is obvious that all children should have to play sport. It helps them make new friends, keep fit and healthy and learn how to work with others. playing a sport is fun and exciting and it is much better that being bored at home. Contoh persuasive speech Preparing for the persuasive speech: 1. Determining your specific purpose To change audience’s belief (that something is true or false) To change audience’s opinion To change audience’s behavior 2. Choosing your topic Choose a topic that really interests you


Choose a topic that is controversial 3. Analyzing your audience Agree completely Be indifferent Disagree completely 4. Gathering information Write down your own observations or experience related to your topic Conducting library or internet research Interviewing expert Quote specific people or use information 5. Preparing Visual aids Visual aids- pictures, graphs, or objects- can make your speech more interesting and can be very powerful persuasive tools. 6. Organizing your speech Opener building on areas of agreement Statement purpose Body Summary Memorable concluding remarks

D. Metode Pembelajaran 1. Metode Scientific Approach 2. Cooperative learning 3. Problem based learning

E. Sumber Belajar English for Vocational Schools II B http://britishcourse.com/expressions-of-persuading-encouraging-andhoping.php Public speaking Handout: speaking to persuade


NAPLAN* Persuasive Text

F. Media Pembelajaran 1. Media

:

Laptop, LCD / Projector, viewer, whiteboard, boardmarker dan speaker 2. Alat dan Bahan

:

Power Points Slides dan video. G. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran 1. Pertemuan Pertama Pendahuluan (10 menit) 1. Guru masuk kelas, memberi salam, menanyakan kabar dan memberi kesempatan berdoa sebelum pelajaran dimulai 2. Guru memeriksa kehadiran siswa 3. Guru memeriksa kesiapan siswa untuk menerima pelajaran 4. Siswa mengingat kembali materi yang diajarkan pada pertemuan sebelumnya 5. Guru memberi penjelasan mengenai keterkaitan materi sebelumnya dengan materi hari ini 6. Guru memberi penjelasan tujuan pembelajaran yang akan dicapai 7. Guru memberikan instruksi mengenai kegiatan yang dilakukan hari ini Kegiatan Inti (70 menit) Mengamati 1. Siswa mengamati serta menyebutkan ungkapan bujukan/larangan yang terdapat pada lingkungan mereka 2.Siswa mengamati penjelasan guru mengenai ungkapan bujukan/larangan 3. Siswa menyebutkan dan menirukan ungkapan-ungkapan dalam memberi bujukan persuading and responses dari handout Menanyakan 1. Siswa diberi kesempatan untuk bertanya mengenai pernyataan yang belum dimengerti dalam ungkapan meberi bujukan/larangan 2. Siswa diberi kesempatan menanyakan dan mempertanyakan perbedaan antara memberi bujukan dan larangan 3. Siswa diberi kesempatan untuk bertanya mengenai ucapan, tekanan kata, dan intonasi yang benar


Mencoba/mengumpulkan Data atau Informasi 1. Siswa membaca berbagai sumber untuk mendapat contoh ungkapan memberi bujukan/larangan untuk melakukan sesuatu 2. Siswa membaca contoh dialog mengenai ungkapan bujukan/larangan 3. Siswa menandai ungkapan yang menyatakan bujukan/larangan yang terdapat pada dialog Menalar 1. Siswa mendiskusikan ungkapan yang digunakan untuk memberi bujukan/larangan 2. Siswa mendapat feedback dari guru dan teman atas tugas yang dikerjakan Mengkomunikasikan 1. Siswa menyampaikan hasil analisa tentang ungkapan memberi bujukan/larangan dengan teman sekelompok dalam kegiatan game Mencipta 1. Siswa membuat beberapa kalimat dengan menggunakan ungkapan memberi bujukan/larangan untuk melakukan sesuatu dalam kegiatan game Penutup (10 menit) 1. Siswa dan guru melakukan refleksi terhadap kegiatan pembelajaran yang telah dilakukan 2. Siswa dan guru menyimpulkan materi yang telah dipelajari bersama 3. Siswa mendapat tugas mandiri 4. Siswa menerima informasi tentang materi pembelajaran berikutnya 2. Pertemuan kedua Pendahuluan (10 menit) 1. Guru masuk kelas, memberi salam, menanyakan kabar dan memberi kesempatan berdoa sebelum pelajaran dimulai 2. Guru memeriksa kehadiran siswa 3. Guru memeriksa kesiapan siswa untuk menerima pelajaran 4. Siswa mengingat kembali materi yang diajarkan pada pertemuan sebelumnya 5. Guru memberi penjelasan mengenai keterkaitan materi sebelumnya dengan materi hari ini 6. Guru memberi penjelasan tujuan pembelajaran yang akan dicapai 7. Guru memberikan instruksi mengenai kegiatan yang dilakukan hari ini


Kegiatan Inti (40 menit) Mengamati 1. Siswa memperhatikan slide show yang ditampilkan oleh guru mengenai if clause type 2 2. Guru memberi contoh cara mengubah bentuk kalimat if clause type 1 menjadi bentuk kalimat if clause type 2 dengan cara diucapkan 3. Siswa menirukan pengucapan bentuk kalimat if clause type 1 dirubah menjadi bentuk kalimat if clause type 2 4. Siswa mengidentifikasi perbedaan bentuk kalimat if clause type 1 dengan if clause type 2 Menanyakan 1. Siswa diberi kesempatan untuk bertanya mengenai pernyataan yang belum dimengerti dalam mengubah bentuk kalimat if clause type 1 menjadi bentuk if clause type 2 Mencoba/ mengumpulkan Data atau Informasi 1. Siswa membaca secara seksama penjelasan pada slide show dan juga membaca berbagai sumber untuk mendapatkan informasi mengenai if clause type 2 Menalar 1. Siswa berdiskusi dengan teman sebangku tentang informasi mengenai if clause type 2 Mengkomunikasikan 1. Siswa bertukar informasi dengan teman lain bangku tentang informasi mengenai if clause type 2 Mencipta 1. Siswa satu persatu secara berurutan merubah bentuk kalimat if clause type 1 menjadi bentuk if clause type 2 secara spontan melalui kegiatan drilling Penutup (10 menit) 1. Siswa dan guru melakukan refleksi terhadap kegiatan pembelajaran yang telah dilakukan 2. Siswa dan guru menyimpulkan materi yang telah dipelajari bersama 3. Siswa mendapat tugas mandiri 4. Siswa menerima informasi tentang materi pembelajaran berikutnya 5. Kegiatan pembelajaran diahiri dengan salam penutup


3. Pertemuan Ketiga Pendahuluan (10 menit) 1. Guru masuk kelas, memberi salam, menanyakan kabar dan memberi kesempatan berdoa sebelum pelajaran dimulai 2. Guru memeriksa kehadiran siswa 3. Guru memeriksa kesiapan siswa untuk menerima pelajaran 4. Siswa mengingat kembali materi yang diajarkan pada pertemuan sebelumnya 5. Guru memberi penjelasan mengenai keterkaitan materi sebelumnya dengan materi hari ini 6. Guru memberi penjelasan tujuan pembelajaran yang akan dicapai 7. Guru memberikan instruksi mengenai kegiatan yang dilakukan hari ini Kegiatan inti (70 menit) Mengamati 1. Siswa memperhatikan slide show yang ditampilkan oleh guru mengenai persuasive text 2. Siswa mengidentifikasi fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan persuasive text 3. Siswa mengamati contoh persuasive text yang terdapat pada handout untuk masing- masing siswa Menanyakan 1. Siswa diberi kesempatan untuk bertanya mengenai pernyataan yang belum dimengerti dalam mengidentifikasi fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan persuasive text Mencoba/ Mengumpulkan Data atau Informasi 1. Siswa membaca berbagai sumber untuk mendapatkan contoh persuasive text Menalar 1. Siswa berdiskusi dalam kelompok mengenai informasi yang mereka dapat tentang contoh persuasive text 2. Siswa mengidentifikasi body of persuasive text 3. Siswa mendapat feedback dari guru dan teman atas tugas yang dikerjakan Mengkomunikasikan 1. Siswa menyampaikan hasil diskusi mengenai persuasive text secara berurutan antar kelompok melalui diskusi perkelompok


Mencipta 1. Siswa mencoba membuat contoh persuasive text dengan tema yang telah ditentukan Penutup (10 menit) 1. Siswa dan guru melakukan refleksi terhadap kegiatan pembelajaran yang telah dilakukan 2. Siswa dan guru menyimpulkan materi yang telah dipelajari bersama 3. Siswa mendapat tugas mandiri 4. Siswa menerima informasi tentang materi pembelajaran berikutnya 5. Kegiatan pembelajaran diahiri dengan salam penutup Pertemuan Keempat Pendahuluan (10 menit) 1. Guru masuk kelas, memberi salam, menanyakan kabar dan memberi kesempatan berdoa sebelum pelajaran dimulai 2. Guru memeriksa kehadiran siswa 3. Guru memeriksa kesiapan siswa untuk menerima pelajaran 4. Siswa mengingat kembali materi yang diajarkan pada pertemuan sebelumnya 5. Guru memberi penjelasan mengenai keterkaitan materi sebelumnya dengan materi hari ini Kegiatan Inti (40 menit) Mengamati 1. Siswa memperhatikan video yang ditampilkan oleh guru tentang contoh persuasive speech 2. Siswa memperhatikan power point slide show yang ditampilkan oleh guru mengenai persuasive speech 3. Siswa memperhatikan penjelasan guru mengenai langkah-langkah yang harus diperhatikan dalam mempersiapkan persuasive speech Menanyakan 1. Siswa diberi kesempatan untuk bertanya mengenai pernyataan yang belum dimengerti mengenai langkah-langkah yang perlu diperhatikan dalam mempersiapkan persuasive speech 2. Siswa diberi kesempatan menanyakan dan mempertanyakan perbedaan antara persuasive text dan persuasive speech


Mencoba/Mengumpulkan Data atau Informasi 1. Siswa membaca berbagai sumber untuk mendapatkan contoh membuat persuasive speech Menalar 1. Siswa berdiskusi dalam kelompok kecil mengenai informasi yang mereka dapat tentang mempersiapkan dan membuat persuasive speech 3. Siswa mendapat feedback dari guru dan teman atas hasil diskusi Mengkomunikasikan 1. Siswa menyampaikan informasi yang mereka dapat tentang mempersiapkan dan membuat persuasive speech di depan kelas dengan diwakili satu siswa tiap kelompok

Penutup (10 menit) 1. Siswa dan guru melakukan refleksi terhadap kegiatan pembelajaran yang telah dilakukan 2. Siswa dan guru menyimpulkan materi yang telah dipelajari bersama


3. Siswa mendapat tugas mandiri 4. Siswa menerima informasi tentang materi pembelajaran berikutnya 5. Kegiatan pembelajaran diahiri dengan salam penutup H. Penilaian a. b. c. d. e.

Teknik Penilaian : Tertulis & Observasi Bentuk Instrumen : Rubrik Penilaian Speaking Kisi- kisi : Scoring Guide Speaking (terlampir) Speaking Rubric (terlampir)


Appendix 3: Result of the Questionnaire Questionnaire Jenis Kelamin : L / P (coret yang tidak perlu) Saya mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma ingin meminta bantuan untuk mengisi kuisioner ini sebagai salah satu bahan pendukung skripsi saya. Tolong diisi sesuai dengan pengalaman dan kebutuhan adik saat belajar Bahasa Inggris. Berilah tanda (√) pada pilihan jawaban yang dipilih. Keterangan No . 1 2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Pernyataan

Sangat Setuju

Setuju

Tidak Setuju

Saya menyukai mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Saya tertarik untuk mempelajari dan menguasai kemampuan berbahasa Inggris yang baik secara aktif. Saya memiliki motivasi yang tinggi untuk mempelajari Bahasa Inggris. Guru telah memberikan penjelasan yang jelas saat menjelaskan materi Bahasa Inggris dikelas. Saya dapat mengerti penjelasan guru saat menjelaskan pelajaran Bahasa Inggris dengan baik. Teman sekelas mempengaruhi motivasi dan minat saya untuk menguasai Bahasa Inggris secara aktif. Prospek bidang kerja yang akan saya hadapi mempengaruhi motivasi dan minat saya untuk menguasai Bahasa inggris secara aktif. Saya menemukan kesulitan dalam belajar Bahasa Inggris, terutama berbicara menggunakan Bahasa Inggris.

1 (3,44%) 3 (10,34%)

27 (93,10%) 25 (86,20%)

1 (3,44%) 1 (3,44%)

Sangat tidak Setuju 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

1 (3,44%)

26 (89,65%)

2 (6,89%)

0 (0%)

3 (10,34%)

23 (79,31%)

2 (6,89%)

1 (3,44%)

2 (6,89%)

19 (65,51%)

7 (24,13%)

0 (0%)

3 (10,34%)

12 (41,37%)

11 (37,93%)

3 (10,34% )

3 (10,34%)

17 (58,62%)

9 (31,03%)

0 (0%)

7 (24,13%)

17 (58,62%)

5 (17,24%)

0 (0%)


No . 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Keterangan Pernyataan

Saya mengalami kesulitan dalam menghafal vocabulary sehingga saya hanya mampu berbicara menggunakan Bahasa Inggris secara terbatas. Saya mengalami kesulitan dalam belajar tata bahasa (grammar dan tenses) dalam Bahasa Inggris Saya mengalami kesulitan dalam menghapal tenses Bahasa Inggris sehingga kesulitan dalam berbicara secara spontan dalam bahasa inggris Saya mengalami kesulitan dalam pengucapan kata (pronunciation) dalam Bahasa Inggris sehingga membuat saya ragu- ragu untuk berbicara dalam Bahasa Inggris. Saya kesulitan untuk berbicara dengan menggunakan Inggris karena kurangnya kesempatan untuk mempergunakan kemampuan berbahasa Inggris secara langsung ketika pelajaran. Saya merasa lebih mudah mempergunakan Bahasa Inggris ketika menulis/membaca daripada untuk berbicara/mendengarkan saat pelajaran. Saya belajar secara aktif dikelas agar dapat selalu terlibat dalam kegiatan belajar mengajar agar dapat menguasai Bahasa Inggris terutama speaking skill. Saya mencoba mengatasi

Sangat Setuju

Setuju

Tidak Setuju

4 (13,79%)

22 (75,86%)

3 (10,34%)

Sangat tidak Setuju 0 (0%)

4 (13,79%)

21 (72,41%)

4 (13,79%)

0 (0%)

6 (20,68%)

20 (68,96%)

3 (10,34%)

0 (0%)

4 (13,79%)

21 (72,41%)

2 (6,89%)

0 (0%)

3 (10,34%)

20 (68,96%)

5 (17,24%)

1 (3,44%)

4 (13,79%)

16 (55,17%)

9 (31,03%)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

26 (89,65%)

3 (10,34%)

0 (0%)

2

21

5

1


17

kesulitan yang saya hadapi dalam mempelajari Bahasa Inggris dengan berkonsultasi dengan guru mata pelajaran. Saya merasa akan lebih mudah menguasai Bahasa Inggris apabila lebih sering diberi kesempatan untuk berdiskusi dengan teman.

(6,89%)

(72,41%)

(17,24%)

(3,44%)

0 (0%)

23 (79,31%)

6 (20,68%)

0 (0%)


Example of students’ questionnaire





Appendix 4: Speaking Test’s Instruction Speaking test: Pre-test on April 9, 2015. 1. Make an oral presentation about persuasive speech min. performance 3 minutes. 2. The topic is “student should/ should not smoke in school area”. 3. Each student is allowed to bring notes during the presentation. 4. Having the same content is NOT ALLOWED! 5. The student is allowed to use aids during the presentation i.e. ppt, pictures, white board, etc.

Speaking test: Post-test on May 4, 2015. 1. Make an oral presentation about persuasive speech min. performance 3 minutes. 2. The topic is “student should/ should not smoke in school area”. 3. Each student is allowed to bring notes during the presentation. 4. Having the same content is NOT ALLOWED! 5. The student is allowed to use aids during the presentation i.e. ppt, pictures, white board, etc.


Appendix 5: Rubric of the Pre-test RUBRIC PENILAIAN PRE-TEST SPEAKING No. 1

Name Student Aa

2

Student Ab

3

Student Ac

4

Student Ad

5

Student Ae

6

Student Af

7

Student Ag

8

Student Ah

9

Student Ai

10

Student Aj

11

Student Ak (D.O)

12

Student Al

13

Student Am

14

Student An

15

Student Ao

16

Student Ap (D.O)

17

Student Aq

18

Student Ar

19

Student As

20

Student At

21

Student Au

22

Student Av

23

Student Aw

24

Student Ax

Grammar

Vocabulary

Comprehension

Fluency

Pronunciation


No.

Name

25

Student Ay

26

Student Az

27

Student Ba

28

Student Bb

29

Student Bc

30

Student Bd

31

Student Be

32

Student Bf

33

Student Bg

34

Student Bh

35

Student Bi

Grammar

Vocabulary

Comprehension

Fluency

Pronunciation


Appendix 6: Rubric of the Post-test RUBRIC PENILAIAN PRE-TEST SPEAKING No. 1

Name Student Aa

2

Student Ab

3

Student Ac

4

Student Ad

5

Student Ae

6

Student Af

7

Student Ag

8

Student Ah

9

Student Ai

10

Student Aj

11

Student Ak (D.O)

12

Student Al

13

Student Am

14

Student An

15

Student Ao

16

Student Ap (D.O)

17

Student Aq

18

Student Ar

19

Student As

20

Student At

21

Student Au

22

Student Av

23

Student Aw

24

Student Ax

Grammar

Vocabulary

Comprehension

Fluency

Pronunciation


No.

Name

25

Student Ay

26

Student Az

27

Student Ba

28

Student Bb

29

Student Bc

30

Student Bd

31

Student Be

32

Student Bf

33

Student Bg

34

Student Bh

35

Student Bi

Grammar

Vocabulary

Comprehension

Fluency

Pronunciation


Appendix 7: Scoring Guide for Speaking Test

I

II

II I

I V

GRAMMAR Errors in grammar are frequent, but speaker can be understood by a native speaker used to dealing with foreigners attempting to speak his language. Can usually handle elementary constructions quite accurately but does not have thorough or confident control of the grammar

VOCABULARY Speaking vocabulary inadequate to express anything but the most elementary needs

COMPREHENSION Within the scope of his very limited language experience, can understand simple questions and statements if delivered with showed speech, repetition, or paraphrase

FLUENCY (no specific fluency description. Refer to other four language areas for implied level of fluency.)

PRONUNCIATION Errors in pronunciation are frequent but can be understood by a native speaker used to dealing with foreigners attempting to speak his language.

Has speaking vocabulary sufficient to express himself simply with some circumlocutions

Can get the gist of most conversations of nontechnical subjects (i.e., topics that require no specialized knowledge).

Accent is intelligible though often quite faulty.

Control of grammar is good. Able to speak the language with sufficient structural accuracy to participate effectively in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social, and professional topics. Able to use the language

Able to speak the language with sufficient vocabulary to participate effectively in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social, and professional topics. Vocabulary is broad enough that he rarely has to grope for a word.

Comprehension is quite complete at a normal rate of speech.

Can handle with confidence but not with facility most social situations, including introductions and casual conversation s about current events, as well as work, family, and autobiograph ical information. Can discuss particular interests of competence with reasonable ease. Rarely has to grope for words.

Can understand and participate in

Can understand any conversation within the

Able to use the language

Errors pronunciation

Errors never interfere with understanding and rarely disturb the native speaker. Accent may be obviously foreign.

in are


V

accurately on all levels normally pertinent to professional needs. Errors in grammar are quite rare.

any conversation within the range of his experience with a high degree of precision of vocabulary

range of experience.

his

fluently on all levels normally pertinent to professional needs. Can participate in any conversation within the range of this experience with a high degree of fluency.

quite rare.

Equivalent to that of an educated native speaker.

Speech on all levels is fully accepted by educated native speakers in all its features including breadth of vocabulary and idioms, colloquialism, and pertinent cultural references.

Equivalent to that of an educated native speaker

Has complete fluency in the language such that his speech is fully accepted by educated native speakers.

Equivalent to and fully accepted by educated native speakers.

Oral proficiency scoring categories (Brown, 2001, p.406-407)


Appendix 8: Result of the T-test Researcher No.

Name Pretest

Post-test

d

d2

1

Student Aa

7

10

3

9

2

Student Ab

5

7

2

4

3

Student Ac

8

10

2

4

4

Student Ad

7

11

4

16

5

Student Ae

8

10

2

4

6

Student Af

6

7

1

1

7

Student Ag

11

12

1

1

8

Student Ah

6

8

2

4

9

Student Ai

10

12

2

4

10

Student Al

7

10

3

9

11

Student An

6

9

3

9

12

Student Aq

7

8

1

1

13

Student Ar

8

11

3

9

14

Student As

6

8

2

4

15

Student At

7

7

0

0

16

Student Au

8

10

2

4

17

Student Av

7

8

1

1

18

Student Ax

10

13

3

9

19

Student Ay

6

8

2

4

20

Student Az

6

9

3

9

21

Student Ba

8

10

2

4

22

Student Bb

7

12

5

25

23

Student Bc

10

13

3

9


24

Student Be

5

8

3

9

25

Student Bf

9

13

4

16

26

Student Bg

7

12

5

25

27

Student Bh

8

12

4

16

28

Student Bi

10

15

5

25

RESULT

210

283

73

235

Mean pretest: 7,5 Mean posttest: 10,10714 Median pretest: 6,5 Median posttest: 7,5


Teacher No.

Name Pre-test

Post-test

D

d2

Student Aa

12

20

8

64

2

Student Ab

5

10

5

25

3

Student Ac

10

16

6

36

4

Student Ad

13

16

3

9

5

Student Ae

15

22

7

49

6

Student Af

17

20

3

9

7

Student Ag

20

22

2

4

8

Student Ah

12

15

3

9

9

Student Ai

11

15

4

16

10

Student Al

15

19

4

16

11

Student An

13

18

5

25

12

Student Aq

16

18

2

4

13

Student Ar

10

15

5

25

14

Student As

12

15

3

9

15

Student At

10

17

2

4

16

Student Au

11

15

3

9

17

Student Av

10

17

2

4

18

Student Ax

10

18

8

64

19

Student Ay

8

18

10

100

20

Student Az

8

16

8

64

21

Student Ba

11

17

6

36

22

Student Bb

15

19

4

16

23

Student Bc

11

17

6

36

24

Student Be

10

18

8

64

25

Student Bf

10

15

5

25

1


26

Student Bg

19

21

2

4

27

Student Bh

20

23

3

9

28

Student Bi

20

25

5

25

354

391

132

760

29

RESULT

Mean pretest: 12,642857 Mean posttest: 17,75 Median pretest: 11 Median posttest: 16


Hypothesis Testing

The researcher:

The teacher:

S=

S=

S=

S=

S=

S=

S= S = 1, 2863

S= S = 2,2584

t=

t=

t=

t=

t=

t= 11,0480

t=10,7288 db 27= 1,7033 db 27= 1,7033


Appendix 9: Result of FGD Transcription of FGD (Focus Group Discussion) written version from the audio recorder Peneliti

: FGD ini akan membicarakan tentang yang kemarin kalian isikan

dalam questionnaire. Tentang bahasa Inggris terutama. Dengan persetujuan sebelumnya saya sudah mengatakan bahwa saya sedang mengadakan penelitian tentang speaking skill kalian. Mayoritas kalian kemarin menjawab setuju untuk hampir semua pertanyaan yang diajukan entah itu jawaban kalian jujur atau tidak. Nah, disini saya mau bertanya, apakah benar kalian menyukai pelajaran Bahasa Inggris? Responden

: Benar

Peneliti

: alasanya kenapa kalian menyukai pelajaran Bahasa Inggris?

Responden

: biar bisa/ belum bisa/ pengen bisa.

Peneliti

: sudah berapa lama kalian belajar Bahasa Inggris?

Responden

: 9 tahun

Peneliti

: 9 tahun? Sejak?

Responden

: sejak SD (sekolah dasar)

Peneliti

: SD kelas berapa?

Responden

: iya, eh sudah 11 tahun dari kelas 1 SD jadi sudah 11 tahun./ sejak

TK sudah belajar malahan Peneliti

: oke, jadi kalau di total sudah ada sekitar 11 tahun kalian belajar

Bahasa Inggris? Nah kalian selama 11 tahun itu sudah dapat apa aja selama mempelajari Bahasa Inggris? Responden

: ya.. yes/no

Peneliti

: just yes/no? tidak ada yang lain?


Responden

: speaking, listening

Peneliti

: ya, itu skill nya. Kalau misalkan materinya apa yang di dapat?

Masih ingat tidak? Ketika SD dulu belajar apa? Responden

: fruit, berhitung, kosakata (vocabulary), alphabet

Peneliti

: terus apa yang sebenarnya membuat kalian tertarik, kemarin kan

kalian menjawan kalau kalian setuju tertarik untuk menguasai Bahasa Inggris, apa yang membuat kalian tertarik? Responden

: karena bagus

Peneliti

: pernah tidak terpikirkan kalau kalian menguasai Bahasa Inggris,

suatu saat nanti ketika bertemu dengan orang asing kemampuan itu dapat menguntungkan kalian? Responden

: iya

Peneliti

: pernah tidak bertemu orang asing? Pernah mencoba berbicara

dengan mereka? Responden

: pernah/ sering. Kadang lewat sepedaan di depan rumah.

Bicara/menyapa good morning/ good afternoon. Peneliti

: oke, itu tadi mengenai ketertarikan kalian terhadap Bahasa

Inggris, nah kalian suka nonton film atau lagu barat? Responden:

: ya, suka

Peneliti

: film yang menggunakan Bahasa Inggris atau lagu, apakah kalian

sebagian besar mengerti maksud/ arti dari percakapannya? Responden

: ngerti/ nggak. Terkadang mengerti kalau cuma film soalnya ada

subtitle nya. Kalau misalnya lagu ya dikira- kira. Peneliti

: kalau lagu/film dalam Bahasa Inggris yang kalian suka apa yang

berbahasa Inggris?


Responden

: six degree of separation/ iklan pepsodent/ iklan es krim katty

perry. Kalau film fast furious 6. Peneliti

: nah itu tadi kan tentang kenapa kalian suka Bahasa Inggris,

tertarik dengan pelajaran Bahasa Inggris dan pengalaman kalian. Nah apakah kalian termotivasi? Responden

: ya, termotivasi

Peneliti

: terutama ketika praktikan yang mengajar kalian termotivasi, nah

sebelum praktikan mengajar, kalian diajar oleh ibu Mawar (disamarkan), nah ketika Bu mawar memberikan penjelasan itu sudah jelas belum menurut kalian? Responden

: belum

Peneliti

: metode pengajarannya itu kayak gimana sih?

Responden

: kasih tugas, tinggal/ jadi sibuk sama urusannya sendiri. Kasih

contoh, trus suruh ngerjain. Kadang- kadang dijelaskan sampai mengerti tapi banyak nggak jelasnya. Peneliti

: cara mengajar beliau memotivasi kalian atau tidak?

Responden

: tidak jelas mengajar jadi tidak paham. Kalau dibandingkan

dengan praktikan beda cara mengajarnya, enak. Karena kalau praktikan diajar sampai sampai jelas. Kalau diajar sama Bu Mawar, pasang muka jelas (read: hanya pura- pura jelas) Peneliti

: prospek kerja kalian kedepan apa setelah lulus nanti?

Responden

: nggak tau/pengen jadi pengusaha.

Peneliti

: kalau misalkan kalian pengen jadi pengusaha, aka ada

kemungkinan kalian akan berhubungan/bekerja sama dengan orang asing, kirakira kalian mempelajari Bahasa Inggris itu membantu atau tidak? Responden

: membantu


Peneliti

: jadi prospek bidang kerja berpengaruh terhadap motivasi belajar

Bahasa Inggris. Nah, kalian pernah nggak sih berdiskusi dengan teman? Responden

: ya, bertanya pada Eka (disamarkan)/ mencontek/minta penjelasan

teman Peneliti

: kalau sama Bu Mawa pernah nggak belajar sambil bermain games

atau berdiskusi gitu? Responden

: tidak

Peneliti

: emm, Bahasa Inggris itu impossible kalau nggak ada masalah

dalam

mempelajarinya,

kalian

kesulitan

tidak

dalam

mempelajarinya?

Kesulitannya apa yang paling sering dihadapi? Responden

: sulit/ kesulitan dalam kosakata ( vocabulary) terutama speaking;

pronunciation. Jarang menjawab secara spontan karena tidak mengerti sususan kata dan pengucapannya. Peneliti

: berapa tenses yang kalian ketahui? Apakah kalian juga

mengalami kesulitan dalam grammar? Coba artikan kalimat “saya adalah seorang pelajar” dalam bahasa Inggris? Responden

: 3 tenses (simple present/past tense/future tense)/grammar juga

kesulitan/ I am student. Peneliti

: I am student? ada yang kurang karena kalian harus menambahkan

“a”, jadi I am a student. Nah itu tadi FGD kita hari ini, kalau di sum up maka hasil dari FGD adalah: kalian memiliki minat, dan motivasi tetapi mengalami penurunan motivasi dan mengalami kesulitan dalam speaking karena cara mengajar guru mata pelajaran yang kurang memuaskan dan kurangnya kesempatan.


Appendix 10: Researcher’s Field Notes Journal field notes: pre-test

April 9, 2015

1. Students make a brief speech Theme: students should/should not smoke in school area Even though the topic is related to their habit, the students still face some difficulties. They only made 1-2 lines of speech. Persuading, but the students begin their sentence by saying “I agree/ I disagree” 2. Error in pronunciation: should/ smoke/ school/ habit/ behavior 3. Classroom management in chaos because those who sit at the back tried to disturb their friend’s attention. As always the best performance is Student Bi. 4. The students’ voice>>> so soft!! (no confidence at all)


Journal field notes: the first treatment

April 21, 2015

The teacher (researcher) asked about the previous material but almost all of the students said that they do not remember. Action >> ask them to re-open their handout, a lot of students left it at home. The students’ habit: (1) forget to bring their pen and only bring the books of the most “killer” teacher. (2) speak in Javanese to the teacher, calling the teacher “mbak” instead of “Miss” Introduced the topic: persuading others Observing: handout, teacher’s explanation, tried to repeat the teacher’s instruction, walking around the class to prevent the students to sleep/ playing with their gadget Questioning: need to learn how to make the students feel curious, when the teacher ask “any question?” they keep silent, “Any difficulties?” silent. Treatment: games >> whispering game “what should I do?” Notes: networking + creating accomplished. 1. cheating 2. time consuming game 3. classroom management: active but need more help! 4. Javanese and Indonesian language still can be found 5. Another “group” of uninterested students comes up; action >> dragged them. Gaming is interesting, fun, full of interaction. Only need to make them practicing their speaking. Too many students with the majority of male students: BE PATIENCE. Notes: tried to make Student Aa. Aq, and Ad get engage with activity. Anthony >> compliment makes him active, keep it up.



Journal field notes: the second treatment

April 23, 2015

Speaking treatment >> drilling Topic >> if clause type 2 (conditional sentence) Media >> slide show power point Today, the students look very active, as usual Student Bi, Ag, Az my favorite students as the mood booster and role model for others. Notes: The process of observing: explain the sentence construction, listen and repeat example done. Experimenting: more info from the book Associating: because the sentence construction from LP2IP and PPT is different (kebalik/ the reverse) the students confused, need more explanation, pair. Networking: exchanging information with their friends, Javanese LANGUAGE IS PROHIBITED. Light punishment: need to answer twice if the students speak Javanese. Creating: drilling process. Notes: for those who doesn’t know the answer might cheating, when they know they’ll be punished if using Javanese language, they speak using Indonesian language. Classroom management can be controlled but still using the loudest voice.



Journal field notes: third treatment

April 28, 2015

Induction phase >> recall what they have learnt before, if clause type 2, expression to persuade others. Handout >> only for discussion (reading passage) Observing: giving the explanation about persuasive text. Questioning: make the students come up with question. Experiment + associating: the students are able to discuss the reading passage, the students are allowed to come to the teacher desk to see the Naplan’s explanation. Networking + creating: time limitation, the students dare to try to explain (at least only the idea), need more papers, only appoint/ make their cleverest students to speak up. Notes: prepare for the post-test, explain what they have to do, the same topic, next meeting, persuasive speech.


Journal field notes: the fourth treatment

April 30, 2015

My pens were gone  Speaking treatment >> discussion Today’s topic >> persuasive speech Observing: watch video about persuasive speech “ why I hate school but love education” the story of bottle water” “ I will not let an exam result decide my fate” by Suli break. Education is about inspiring ones mine not just filling their head- S.B My students love the videos very much, even though they only catch a bit of its idea. It is a good stimuluss which can lead their question and unexpectedly lots of them ask question about the video. The teacher’s job is directing them to think about it and make something as good as the video. Then explain the steps in making persuasive speech. The discussion helps them to prepare. “wild” idea for their speech come up. Speak both in English and Bahasa.


Journal field notes: post-test

May 4, 2015

The topic: student should/ should not smoke in school area. Error pronunciation (difficult for them to pronounce it) Danger / damage / cigarette / know / easily / twice / banned / smoke / moreover / toxins/Reason/addition/task/ugly/comfortable/avoid/active/disagree/around/cause/ effect/unfortunately/chemical/dangerous/waste/those/air/environment/study/shoud /decrease/miserable/why/smoker/damage/cough/indicating/disease/used/ damaging/break/rules/carelessly/obey/student/right now/an/irony/ if you cannot/now on.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

Recommend Documents