skripsi pendidikn bahasa inggris

i
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING (CLL) TOWARD STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY AT THIRD SEMESTER STUDENTS OF ENGLISH EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT AT
UNIVERSITY “45” MAKASSAR
Thesis
Yohanes W. Tukan
4510101048
ENGLISH EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITAS “45”MAKASSAR
2013
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING (CLL) TOWARD STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY AT THIRD SEMESTER STUDENTS OF ENGLISH EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT AT
UNIVERSITY “45” MAKASSAR
THESIS
Submitted to the Faculty of Teacher Training and Educational Science
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the
Bachelor of Science Degree
By
YOHANES W. TUKAN
4510101048
ENGLISH EDUCATIONAL DEPARTEMENT
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY "45” MAKASSAR
2013

SKRIPSI
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING (CLL) TOWARD STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY AT THIRD SEMESTER STUDENTS OF ENGLISH DEPARTMENT AT
UNIVERSIITY “45” MAKASSAR
Arranged and Submitted by
YOHANES W. TUKAN
4510101048
Has been defended in front of Skripsi Examination Committee
December 17th, 2013
Approved by
Supervisor I, Supervisor II,
Drs. H. Herman Mustafa, M.Pd. Rampeng, S.Pd., M.Pd.
NIDN 0931126306 NIDN 0916047806
Known by
Dean of Faculty Head of English
Teachership and Educational Science, Education Department,
Prof. Dr. Muh. Yunus, M.Pd. Rampeng, S.Pd., M.Pd.
NIDN 0031126204 NIDN 0916047806
Kupersembahkan karya ini kepada Lelaki tua berseragam lusuh berkantorkan di lokasi Lewogei’ berpulpenkan cangkul dan parang berbukukan Bulan dan Musim, bertemankan Rumput Teki yang selalu setia sepanjang masa yang melahirkan istilah dan inovasi sepanjang lereng Taleonong, Wotonubang dan Ile Wengot, beranggotakan enam bersaudara serta seornag perempuan tua yang selalu tegar disampingnya dimanapun dan kapanpun dia berada.
MOTTO
Education is the most powerful weapon we can use to change the world
(Nelson Mandela)
Dunia tanpa Guru, Buta
Dunia tanpa Bahasa, Bisu
Sedangkan dunia tanpa Ilmu dan Pengetahuan, semuanya tak berarti.
Mori ko’oŋ Lewotana,
mata ko’oŋ Lewotana,
ile pito di go gere ro,
woka lema di go hu baŋ ro.
ABSTRAK
YOHANES W. TUKAN 2013. The Effectiveness of Community Language Learning Toward Students’ Speaking Ability at Third Semester Students Of English Educational Department at University “45” Makassar. (Dibimbing Oleh H. Herman Mustafa dan Rampeng).
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui sejauh mana keefektifan pembelajaran bahasa Inggris secara kelompok (Community Language Learning), terhadap kemampuan berbicara mahasiswa semester ketiga Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris di Universitas “45” Makassar. Sampel penelitian ini berjumlah 20 orang mahasiswa yang masih aktif kuliah di Universitas “45” semester ketiga, tahun akademik 2012/2013.
Metode yang digunakan oleh penulis dalam penelitian ini adalah pre-experimental dengan satu group pre-test dan post-test, dimana teknik pengambilan sampelnya menggunakan teknik acak, dan Instrumen penelitiannya adalah observasi dan test berbicara.
Data hasil penelitian membuktikan bahwa Pembelajaran Bahasa secara Kelompok sangat efektif diterapkan dalam pembelajaran bahasa khususnya kemampuan berbicara (Speaking ability) mahasiswa, hal ini didukung dengan hasil analisis data yang dapat dilihat berikut ini.
Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa nilai t-test adalah 7,44 yang lebih besar dari T-table 1.943 pada tingkat signifikan (α ) = 0.05, sedangkan menurut skala pemerolehan skor oleh Heaton dalam Cancerina (2011 :30), skor 7,44 tergolong dalam kategori cukup baik. Sehingga dapat disimpulkan bahwa metode pembelajaran bahasa secara kelompok cukup effektif dalam pengajaran bahasa khususnya kemampuan berbicara. Sehingga diharapkan kepada guru serta dosen untuk mencoba menerapkan metode CLL dalam pengajaran bahasa Inggris.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks very much the writer would like to praise to Almighty God, for the blessing, the writer could finished this thesis entitle “The Effectiveness of Community Language Learning Toward Students Speaking Ability at Third Semester Students of English Educational Department, of the University “45” Makassar”
During the writing of this thesis, the writer received much assistance and guidance. Therefore the writer would like to express the gratitude to them, particularly to Drs. H. Herman Mustafa, M.Pd as the first supervisor who has given support to finish this thesis, and Rampeng S.Pd, M.Pd as the second supervisor and the Head of English Educational Department, who always provided direction and guidance with full sincerity and patience until the completion of writing this thesis.
Thanks to all lecturers and staffs of Teacher Training and Educational Science Faculty who have provided education and science that are very useful for the writer and will not be forgotten, and all students at class A, of the third semester at English Educational Department, the University “45” Makassar, for their participation in this research.
Special gratitude thanks for his beloved parents, Benyamin S. Tukan and Veronika W. Tukan who have given the great motivation, encouragements, advice, and prayer, and his beloved brother Bapa Sandro
and Mama Sandro, who always give spirit and endorsement, and his beloved girlfriend, Ervina Pala who always accompany the writer wherever he is, for finishing this thesis.
The writer also express thanks to all friends at English Education Department, they are Samsul, Surya, Korrie Ritan, Sovyan, Yuniarsi, Frit, Siska, Ana, Lopes, Evri, Toni, Alex, Ramida, Riri and Hikma and especially for the 2010 academic year who have given information, suggestion, attention, and motivation, and his best friend in Malino when he was KKN namely Andro, Hermanus, Iyand, Tiwi, Aspina, Desi, Eis, Dina, Juanda, Hasdin and Ronal Enal, and the next are my all my friends at Pondok Afdal specialy to Abang Balen, Abang Yusuf, Afsari Sitonra, Alfan Selayar, Umi, Junes and everyone who always support the writer when he was there.
Thanks for HIMAPBING, MENWA, and KMK, which have made the positive change to the writer.
The last but not least, the writer realizes that this thesis is still far from the perfectness therefore the constructive criticism is needed to be useful for the writer to develop his writing
Makassar, December 2013
The Writer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE OF TITTLE ..................................................................................... i
PAGE OF APPROVAL .............................................................................. ii
MOTTO ..................................................................................................... iii
PAGE O DEDICATION .............................................................................. iv
PAGE OF ASSERTION ............................................................................. vi
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................... vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................ viii
TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................... x
LIST OF TABLE ........................................................................................ xii
LIST OF APPENDIX ................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background ....................................................................... 1
B. Statement of Problems ...................................................... 2
C. Objective of Research ...................................................... 3
D. Significance of Research ................................................. 3
1. Theoretically ............................................................... 3
2. Practically ................................................................... 4
E. Scope and Limitation of Research ................................... 4
1. Subject ........................................................................ 4
2. Object ......................................................................... 4
Page
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Previews findings ............................................................. 5
B. The Theory of Language ....................................................... 6
C. The Theory of Learning ..................................................... 7
D. Community language learning .......................................... 7
1. Concept of CLL ........................................................... 8
2. Design of CLL ............................................................. 9
E. Speaking Ability ................................................................ 13
1. The meaning of speaking ability ................................. 13
2. The aspect of speaking ability..................................... 14
F. Theoretical Framework ..................................................... 17
G. Hypothesis ........................................................................ 17
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Research Design............................................................... 18
B. Population and Sample ..................................................... 18
1. Population ................................................................... 18
2. Sample ....................................................................... 19
C. Instrument ......................................................................... 19
D. Technique of Data Collection ............................................ 20
E. Data Analysis .................................................................... 21
1. Accuracy ..................................................................... 22
2. Fluency ....................................................................... 23
3. Comprehensibility ....................................................... 24
4. Mean score ................................................................. 25
5. Test of significance ..................................................... 25
CHAPTER IV: FINDING AND DISCUSSION
A. Finding ..................................................................................... 26
B. Discussion ................................................................................ 38
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion ............................................................................... 43
B. Suggestion ............................................................................... 44
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The writer presented some subheading below to make easy for the reader to read this thesis. The subheadings to be referred are background, statements of problem, objective of research, significance of research and scope and limitation of the research.
A. Background
Indonesia is known by its various cultures and ethnics that expanded from the west to the east. Each ethnic have their local language and it is different one to another. To unity the various language in Indonesia, the government of Indonesia declare a language namely Bahasa Indonesia.
Beside Bahasa Indonesia, the curriculum of Indonesia allowed all students to learn a foreign language especially English in learning teaching process, which is taught from elementary school up to the university. In learning process the students are faced by some problems and it is proper to foreign language learner. For example the writer took the sample in USA which is known with their first language is English, the students who has a language other than English at home still difficult in learning a language specifically English.
To support the above statement, the writer quote the Cohen, et al,
(2004: 02), statement that in USA the number of school-age children who speak a language other than English at home and have difficulty speaking English was 2.4 million in 1995, or 5 percent of all school-age children (Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 1998). This case showed us that the students in USA are still difficult to learn English, moreover in Indonesia that uses English as their second language with most students have their own local language, so to teach the English in this beloved country, it is need a good technique and method to transform it so the target of teaching is gotten. “Method is an established, habitual, logical, or prescribed practice or systematic process of achieving certain ends with accuracy and efficiency”.( Merriam-Webster.com)
A systematical process makes the learner are easy to join the class and fell free to join the lesson. This case made the writer got his own interested to handle a research about the Effectiveness of Community Language Learning (CLL) toward Students’ Speaking Ability at Third Semester Students of English Educational Department at University “45” Makassar.
B. Statements of Problem.
Based on the background above, the research problem could be formulated to:
1. How the students speaking ability is, before CLL is applied to the third semester students at English Department, of the University “45” Makassar?
2. How to apply the CLL in learning teaching process at the third semester students at English Department, of the University “45” Makassar?
3. How effective the CLL influences the students’ speaking ability at the third semester students at English Department, of the University “45” Makassar?
C. Objective of the Research
Based on the research statement, the aimed of this research is to finding out the effect of CLL toward students’ speaking ability of the third semester students at English Department of the University “45” Makassar.
D. Significance of the Research
The result of the study is expected to be used theoretically and practically:
1. Theoretically
a. The result of this study is expected to enrich the method or technique of the teacher in learning teaching process in order to make a positive alteration of student’s speaking ability.
b. To aware the students that to improve the speaking ability we have to change the way to learn from learning by individual to learning by community.
c. As a reference to other writers who want to study CLL more intensively in teaching speaking.
2. Practically
Practically the result of this study is suggested to apply the Community Language Learning (CLL) to make the positive alteration in students’ speaking ability.
E. Scope and Limitation of the Study
The scopes of the study are limited to the subject and object investigated.
1. Subject
The subject of this research is the students’ speaking ability at the third semester of English Department of the University “45” Makassar at the academic year 2013/2014.
2. Object
The object of this research is the applying of Community Language Learning (CLL)
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Some related information topics of the recent study are written below to be hoped for supporting this investigation. The item is presented under the following sub headings; they are previews finding, the theory of language, the theory of learning, Community Language Learning, Speaking Ability, , Theoretical framework, and hypothesis.
A. Previews finding
Some researches had conducted on the use of Community Language Learning to improve students’ speaking ability. They are as follows:
1. Yunarti (2008) in her research entitle Penerapan Metode Community Language Learning (CLL) dalam Pembelajaran Keterampilan Kalam Siswa Kelas VIII di MTsN Prambanan Klaten she took all students at VIII grade of MTsN Prambanan Klaten which total of students was 189 students as her sample of research. She found that the experiment class got the mean score on posttest was 28,872, meanwhile the mean score on control class was 26,297, so she concluded that Community Language Learning was effective to be applied to improve the students’ Al-Kalam learning.
2. Rika(2008) on her thesis entitle Community Language Learning
Method in Improving Listening Competence which was handled at SMP Amir Hamzah Medan, at VII grade in academic year 2007/2008, she took 35 students as her sample of research, the finding of this research is there was an improvement in students’ listening comprehension either on cycle 1 or cycle 2. On cycle 1 there was an improvement from 22, 86% up to 54, 29% on the next meeting, and likewise on the cycle 2, there was an improvement in students’ listening comprehension as 74,28% on beginning test up to 82,86 %, she found that Community Language Learning was an effective method to improve students’ listening competence
B. The Theory of Language
To present the sub heading, the writer presents some theory of language as follows.
According to Bloomfield in Bashir, (2011:35), stated that Language is a formal system of signs governed by grammatical rules of combination to communicate meaning. This definition stresses the fact that human languages can be described as closed structural systems consisting of rules that relate particular signs to particular meanings
Furthermore Bloch and Trager in Bashir (2011:35) wrote: “A language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a social group co-operates. Meanwhile, (Bashir: 2011:35) state that
Language is a system of arbitrary symbols for human beings’ communication in speech and writing that is used by the people of a particular community. Meanwhile Chomsky in Bashir (2011:35) a language is a set of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements.
From the above statements it could be conclude as Language is flexible systems of communication to express human ideas, feeling and wishes by the use of signs, sounds, gestures, or marks having understood meaning related to the context.
C. The Theory of Learning
There are so many theory of learning that is suggested by the scientist. Below the writer would like to present some theories according to some scientists.
According to Cronbach, in Suryabrata (2010:231) stated that learning is shown by a change in behavior as a result of experience. Furthermore Spear in Suryabrata (2010:231), state that Learning is to observe, to read, to imitate, to try something themselves, to listen, to follow direction. From the above explanation the writer would like to conclude that learning is the result of experience, in this case the learner gained by observation, imitation, listen, read, which is shown by the change of behavior.
D. Community Language Learning (CLL)
Community language learning (CLL) is an approach in which students work together to develop what aspects of a language they would like to learn. The teacher acts as a counsellor and a paraphraser, while the learner acts as a collaborator, although sometimes this role can be changed (http://en.wikipedia.org/).
Community Language Learning (also called Counseling Language Learning) was created by Charles A Curran, a Jesuit priest and professor of psychology, and Paul La Forge inspired by the humanistic psychology of Carl Rogers. It aims to remove the anxiety from learning by changing the relationship between the teacher and students. The Counseling-Learning educational model is applied to language learning, and in this form it became known as Community Language Learning seeks to encourage teachers to see their learners as whole persons, where their feelings, intellect, interpersonal relationships, protective reactions, and desire to learn are addressed and balanced (Nagaraj, 2009:176). Two aspect of Community Language Learning will discuss below, consisting of concept of CLL and design of CLL.
1. Concept of CLL
The community language learning is the name of a method which is oriented on humanistic approach, which is designed to ease the
learners in acquiring the target language. Here the writer describes about CLL procedure in class, where the learners are divided into some groups, and the teacher is standing outside of their groups. Each group is given their own topic. The students discuss the given topics. The students, who didn’t understand delivering a message to the teacher in L1 (Bahasa Indonesia), the teacher translates it into the foreign language L2, (English); the students repeat the message in the foreign language into a mobile phone; after that the students are given a chance to compose further messages in the foreign language with the teacher's help; students reflect about their feelings. This method is expected to the students to save the message for long time because the message is their own message.
2. Design of CLL
Design of CLL discusses about three activities of teaching learning using CLL technique they are: types of learning and teaching activities, learner roles, and teacher roles.
a. Types of Learning and Teaching Activity
The innovative way in Community Language learning activities to cover some items they are: translation, group work, recording, transcription, analysis, reflection and observation, listening, and free conversation.
1. Translation.
The students are divided into some small groups. The learners deliver the message they want to express, the next teacher translate the message into English. The students repeat the teacher’s translation.
2. Group work.
Each group discussed their own topic, made the conversation and prepared a summary to present their presentation to the other groups. After group presentation, the teacher summarizes all groups’ presentation and corrected some incorrect words or sentences.
3. Recording.
Students record conversations in English into a mobile phone.
4. Transcription
Students transcribe utterances and conversation they have recorded for practice and analysis of linguistic forms.
5. Analysis.
The learners analyze and study the sentence they have recorded in order to focus on grammar and particular lexical usage or on the application of particular grammar rules.
6. Reflection and observation.
Learners reflect and report on their experience of the class, and express their emotion about the type of learning .
7. Listening.
Students listen to a monologue by the teacher involving elements they might have elicited or overhear in class interactions.
8. Free conversation.
Students engage in free conversation with the teacher or with other learners.
b. Learner’s Roles
In community language learning, the learners roles as the part of community, their fellow learners and the teacher through interacting with each other and the member of the community. The students are expected to listen carefully what the teacher said, they have a chances to express whatever the meanings they wish to expressed, to repeat the English without doubtfulness, to report deep inner feelings and frustrations and to become counselors to other learner.
Meanwhile, Nagaraj (2009:178) stated that there are five stages of Community Language Learning as follows:
1. Birth
The learners know nothing of the target language, and are completely dependent on the teacher for everything they want to say. This step the teacher’s role is independent to explain about linguistic content. The students are expected to repeat the utterances in target language made by the teacher.
2. Self
The learners start to get an idea of how the language works and to use it for themselves, but still seek the teacher’s help. This stage the students are gotten the chance to express and to try using their own words freely with the teacher’s help to correct some words if they are getting mistake.
3. Separate Existence
They start to use the language without referring to the teacher. In this stage, the learners begin to understand others directly in the target language.
4. Adolescence
The learners continue to express themselves independently, but being aware of gaps in their knowledge, and start to turn back to the teacher. In this stage, the learners function independently although his or her knowledge of the English is still limited.
5. Independence
The learners continue their learning independently. They no longer need the teacher, and may start to act as counselors for less advanced students.
The last stage is clear explained about the student who had understood may become as counselor for his friends who are still less understanding.
c. Teacher’s Roles
In teaching learning activity, the teachers have significant roles to delivering the knowledge and as the students’ problem solver. The teacher (counselor) role is to respond calmly and non-judgmentally, in a supportive manner and help the students try to understand his or her problems better by the applying order and analysis them. It was the model of teacher as counselor that Curran attempted to bring to language learning. The teacher provides the enjoyable class and facilitates the students in learning teaching process supportively. The next are providing assistance to correct some incorrect words, supply the idioms and guideline the usage of words related to grammar.
E. Speaking Ability
In speaking ability the writer presented some points to discuss namely the meaning of speaking ability, and aspect of speaking ability.
1. The Meaning of Speaking Ability
According to Brown: 1994; Burns & Joyce, 1997 in http://area.dgidc.min-edu.com stated that speaking is an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing and receiving and processing information. In the other word speaking could be defined as the capability in transforming everything in our mind and emotion orally.
Meanwhile answers.ask.com defined that ability is the quality of being able to something especially the physical, mental and even financial responsibilities. Maybe even the legal way of doing something.
It could be said that speaking ability is the capability of human to speak well and right in delivering a message, a whishes, a thought and an opinion.
2. The Aspect of Speaking Ability
Speaking must be clear so the listener could understand what we say. There are some aspects of speaking ability they are; grammatical accuracy, pronunciation, comprehensibility, vocabulary, and content and meaning
a. Grammatical accuracy
To prevent the misunderstanding, someone has to use a good grammatical to convey what is he or she want to express. To support the above statement the writer took a statement from English Language Development In eldblog.weebly.com that was the mistakes of many non-native speakers of English commit are those that often change the meaning of sentences they want to express, and thus create a misunderstanding. That’s exactly the reason why non-native speakers have to study grammar more than native speakers.
Grammar is composition of structure to monitor the meaning of words that is uttered, as Crystal, "In Word and Deed." TES Teacher, 2004 stated that grammar is the structural foundation of our ability to express ourselves. The more we are aware of how it works, the more we can monitor the meaning and effectiveness of the way we and others use language. It can help foster precision, detect ambiguity, and exploit the richness of expression available in English and it can help everyone--not only teachers of English, but teachers of anything, for all teaching is ultimately a matter of getting to grips with meaning. ( Nordquist, About.com)
b. Pronunciation
One of the important skills in speaking is the pronunciation. Pronunciation must be clear, so the message could be understood.
The next is intonation and stress, including words choosing must be appropriate with sentence. Referring to this statement, Tarigan (1985: 55) stated that “the speaking process through discussion, briefing, argumentation, chatting, interview, asking and answering, to utter clearly since the expression of thought which is delivered to audience could be understood.
c. Vocabulary
According to Zach in answers.reference.com stated that vocabulary is the personal collection of words that any given person knows and uses on a daily basis. Furthermore, Thesaurus in thefreedictionary.com state that vocabulary is the system of techniques or symbols serving as a means of expression (as in arts or crafts) it could be concluded that vocabulary is a group of words to make sentence structure in conveying idea or message to the listener.
d. Content and Meaning
To prevent the boredom in processing of communication the content and meaning is much needed. Dealing with this statement, Tarigan (1985: 45) states that; “the content and meaning in speaking ability can be seen from mistake, competence, clarification, and simplicity what the topic is about”
F. Theoretical Framework
To make this research is more concrete; the writer described the theoretical framework as follow:
The above sketch showed that, to make an alteration in speaking we used Community language Learning. If this method is suitable, the students speaking ability would be gotten high score, but if this method is unsuitable the students got low scoring in speaking.
G. Hypothesis
H0 (Null hypothesis): There is no significant difference of the students’ speaking performance in using Community Language Learning H1 (Alternative hypothesis): There is significant difference of the students’ speaking performance in using Community Language Learning.
Suitable
Unsuitable
Low Scoring
Community Language Learning
Students’ speaking ability
High Scoring
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The writer presented some subheadings below to clarify the research methodology that is begin with the research design, population and sample, instrument, technique of data collection, data analysis, and hypothesis testing.
F. Research Design
This research was an pre-experimental research, which the writer manipulated the subject as the dependent variable (students’ speaking ability) to the object (Community Language Learning) as the independent variable.
G. Population and Sample
The population and sample that was taken by the writer as below;
1. Population
Population is a complete set of elements (persons or objects) that possess some common characteristic defined by the sampling criteria established by the Writer (University of Missouri-St. Louis in www.umsl.edu/ html )
Population is association of some elements that have certain common characteristic that is studied by the writer to get the conclusion. As the above explanation the writer took all of the students in the third semester at English Department of the University “45” Makassar in the academic year 2013/2014 as the writer’s population of research.
2. Sample
The sample that was taken by the writer was cluster random sampling, where the writer took one class as experimental class, consisted of 20 students, taken from the population of the research, where the sample was taken randomly by the writer which the writer gave them some secret number. All students got the same chance to choose the number. The students who get the number 3 will be the sample of this research.
H. Instrument
There were three points in instrument. They were pre-test, treatment and post-test.
1. Pre-test
In pre-test the subjects were instructed to talking about the university; state university or private university, while their answers were recorded, the next the writer analyzed their answers in the other to
give the treatment.
2. Treatment
The subjects were divided into some groups to discuss about the given topic, the writer helped the students to translate some word or phrase those subjects needed to express, the subject continued to discuss about their given topic and presented their presentation individually, while their presentations were recorded, afterward the writer opened their presentation in a tape to analyze the linguistic forms and focus on grammar and particular lexical usage, the next the learners reflected and reported their experienced of the class, and expressed their emotion about the type of learning.
3. Post-test
In post-test the writer did the same way as in pretest to know how effective the CLL influences the students speaking ability.
I. Technique of Data Collection
To collect the data the writer did the observation and test.
1. Observation
The writer did the observation to the subject, to apply the Community Language Learning and handle the class during the observation
2. Test
Testing had been done two times during the observation namely in
the pre-test and post-test. The writer did the pre-test to know the students’ speaking ability and post-test to measure the effectiveness of CLL.
J. Data Analysis
The collected data were tabulated into scoring classification. The scoring classification included some items, they are: accuracy, fluency, comprehensibility. While all the results of the data were classified into tabulation as the table 5 below:
Table 1. the students’ Score Achievements.
(Gay, 1981 in Cancerina , 2011:30)
Score
Classification
9,6-10
Excellent
8,6-9,5
Very good
7,6-8,5
Good
6,6-7,5
Fairly good
5,6-6,5
Fair
3,6-5,5
Poor
0-3.5
Very poor
1. Accuracy
The writer tabulated the scores of comprehensibility as follow:
Table 2. Accuracy’s scoring
Classifications
Scores
Criteria
Excellent
5
Pronunciation is only slightly influenced by mother tongue. A few grammatical and lexical errors but most utterance is correct.
Good
4
Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother tongue. No serious phonological errors. A few grammatical and lexical errors but only cause confusion.
Average
3
Pronunciation is influenced by mother tongue. Only a few serious phonological errors. several grammatical and lexical errors, even some of which cause confusion
Poor
2
Pronunciation seriously influenced by the mother tongue with errors causing breakdown in communication. Many basic grammatical and lexical errors.
Very poor
1
Serious pronunciation errors as well as many basic grammatical and lexical errors. No evidence of having mastered any of the language skills areas practiced in the course.
2. Fluency
The writer tabulated the scores of fluency as follow:
Table 3. Fluency’s scoring
Classifications
Scores
Criteria
Excellent
5
Speaks without get an effort with a fairly wide range of expression. Searcher for words occasionally but only one or two unnatural pauses. Should make an effort at time to search for words. Nevertheless, smooth delivery on the whole and any a few unnatural pauses.
Good
4
They have to make an effort at times to search for words. Nevertheless, smooth delivery on the whole and any a few unnatural pauses.
Average
3
Although they have to make an effort and search for words, there are not too many unnatural pauses. Fairies smooth delivery mostly. Occasionally fragmentary but succeeds in conveying the general meaning fair range of expression..
Poor
2
Has to make an effort for much of the time. Often, has to search for the described meaning. Rather halting delivery and fragmentary. Range of expression often limited
Very poor
1
Long pauses while he search for the desire meaning. Frequently fragmentary and halting delivery. Almost gives up making the effort at times. Limited range of expression..
3. Comprehensibility
The writer tabulated the score of comprehensibility as follow:
Table 4. Comprehensibility’s Scoring
(Heaton in Johan: 2010)
Classification
Scores
Criteria
Excellent
5
Easy for listener to understand the speaker intention and general meaning. Very few interruption of clarification required.
Good
4
The speaker intention and general meaning are fairly clear. A few interruptions by the listener for the sake of clarification are necessary.
Average
3
Most of the speaker say is easy to follow. His attention is always clear but several interruptions are necessary to help him to convey message or to seek clarification.
Poor
2
The listener can understand much of what is said but he must constantly seek clarification .cannot understand many of the speaker more complex or longer sentence.
Very Poor
1
Only small bits (usually short sentence and phrases) can be understood and then with considerable effort by someone who is listening to the speaker
4. Mean score
The writer used the formula to find out the mean score as follows
5. Test of significance
To know the significant different between the score of the pre-test and post-test, the writer calculated the value of the test by using the following formula: t D√ D2 ( D) NN (N 1)
X= Σ𝑋𝑁
Where:
X= the mean score
x total of row scorer
N= the total number of subject
(Gay, 1981 in Johan 2010:33)
Where:
t =Test of Significant
D = The mean of difference between pretest and post-test (x2-x1)
D= the sum of difference score
N = Total number of sample.
Gay, in Cancerina, 2011:30
CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
To present the result of this research, the writer summarized them in findings and discussion.
A. Findings
In the finding section the writer would like to presents some result of research to report the finding of the effectiveness of Community Language Learning toward student speaking ability specially students’ speaking performance in accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility.
To find out the students speaking ability, the writer done two kind of test namely pre-test and post-test. Pre-test have had done on 12 November 2013 to measure how far the students speaking ability. After the writer found the result of pre test the writer done a treatment on 15 November 2013, the aim of this treatment was finding the effectiveness of Community Language Learning toward students’ speaking ability. And the last was pos test. Post test has had done on 17 November 2013. The aim of post test was finding out how far the Community Language Learning influences the students speaking ability.
The result of the research showed that the use of Community Language Learning could convey the positive change toward students speaking ability at students of English Department of University “45” Makassar. All the result of data analysis could be seen as students’ mean score of pre-test and post-test as follows:
1. The Result of Mean Score of Students’ Speaking Accuracy.
The result of mean score of students’ speaking accuracy could be seen as table as follows:
Table 5. The mean Score and standard Deviation of pre-test and post- test
Test
Mean Score
Standard Deviation
Pre-test
2.5
1
Post-test
3,75
0.71
The table 6 shows that the mean score of the students’ post-test was higher than the mean score of students in pre- test, while the standard deviation of the students’ pre- test was higher than the standard deviation of students’ post- test. So the result of the mean score indicates that students’ speaking accuracy was very influenced by Community Language Learning.
The students’ speaking accuracy before and after giving treatment could also be seen at the following table:
Table 6. The rate percentage of students’ speaking accuracy
No
Classification
Score
Pre-test
Pos-test
Freq.
Percent
Freq.
Percent
1.
Excellent
5
0
0 %
3
15 %
3.
Good
4
4
20 %
9
45 %
4.
Average
3
5
25 %
8
40 %
5.
Poor
2
8
40 %
0
0 %
6
Very Poor
1
3
15 %
0
0%
Total
20
100 %
20
100 %
The data of the pre-test and post-test on table 7 shows that a significant difference of the students’ speaking performance in accuracy after treatment was given. In pre-test, the table indicates that no learners got the excellent score. Only 4 (20%) students got good score, 5 (25%) students got the average score, most of students 8 (40%) got poor score, meanwhile 3 (15 %) students got very poor score, While in post-test, the table indicates that 3 (15%) student got excellent score, the next were 9 (45%) students got good score, and the last was 8 (40%) students got average score.
In order to know whether or not the mean score is different from the two variables (pre- test and post-test) at the level of significance 0.05 with degrees of freedom (df) = n - 1, where n =
Source: Third Semester Students of English Education Department
number of students (20), t- test for non independent sample was applied. The following table shows the result of the calculation.
Table 7. The T-Test of students’ accuracy achievement
Variable
t- test value
t- table value
X2 – X1
7,14
1,943
Table 8 above shows that t- test value is higher than t- table value, it can be concluded, that there was significant between the result of the students’ pre- test and post- test.
2. The result of analysis of Students’ Speaking Fluency
The data analysis shows that the use of Community Language Learning could take the positive alteration toward students’ speaking fluency of third semester students at English Department, the result of the data analysis could be seen as follow:
Table 8. The mean Score and standard Deviation of pre-test and post- test
Test
Mean Score
Standard Deviation
Pre-test
2,95
1,27
Post-test
4,15
0,74
The above table shows that the mean score of students on pre-test in fluency was 2,95 and the mean score of pos-test was 4,15 The standard deviation of the pre-test was 1,27 while the standard deviation of students’ post-test in fluency was 0,74. The mean score of the students’ post-test was higher than the mean score of pre- test, while the standard deviation of the students’ pre- test was higher than the standard deviation of students’ post- test. So the result of the mean score indicates that Community Language Learning has the good effect to improve students’ speaking ability.
The students’ speaking fluency before and after giving treatment could be seen as following table:
Table 9. The rate percentage of students’ speaking fluency
No
Classification
Score
Pre-test
Pos-test
Freq.
Percent
Freq.
Percent
1
Excellent
5
2
10 %
7
35 %
2
Good
4
5
25 %
9
45 %
3
Average
3
7
35 %
4
20 %
4
Poor
2
2
10 %
0
0%
5
Very Poor
1
4
20 %
0
0%
Total
20
100%
20
100%
The data of the pre-test and post-test show a significant difference of the students’ speaking performance in fluency after
Source: Third Semester Students of English Education Department
treatment was given. In pre-test, the table indicates that 2 (10 %) got the excellent score, 5 (25 %) students got the good score, 7 (35 %) students got average score, and 2 (10%) students got poor score, and 2 (20%) others got very poor score. While in post-test, the table indicates that 7 (35%) students got excellent score, the next are 9 (45 %) students got good score, and the last 4 (20%) average score.
The data of the pre-test and post-test show a significant difference of the students’ speaking performance in fluency that after treatment was given, there was an alteration was happened to their fluency.
In order to know whether or not the mean score is different between the two variables (pre- test and post-test) at the level of significance 0.05 with degrees of freedom (df) = n - 1, where n = number of students (20), t- test for non independent sample was applied. The following table shows that the result of the calculation.
Table 10. The T-Test of students’ fluency achievement
Variable
t- test value
t- table value
X2 – X1
9,23
1,840
Table 11 above shows that t- test value is higher than t- table value, it can be concluded, that there is significant between the result of the students’ pre- test and post- test.
3. The result of analysis of Students’ Speaking Comprehensibility
The data analysis shows that the use of Community Language Learning is effective to make a positive alteration in students’ speaking comprehensibility at third semester students of English of Department at University “45” Makassar, the result of the data analysis could be seen as follow:
Table 11. The mean Score and standard Deviation of pre-test and post-test
Test
Mean Score
Standard Deviation
Pre-test
2,45
1,90
Post-test
3,95
0,82
Table 12 shows that the mean score of students’ pre-test in comprehensibility was 2,45 and the mean score of pos-test was 3,95 The standard deviation of the pre-test in accuracy was 1,97 while the standard deviation of students’ of post-test in accuracy was 0.82 The mean score of the students’ post-test was higher than the mean score of pre- test, while the standard deviation of the students’ pre- test was
higher than the standard deviation of students’ post- test. So the result of the mean score indicates students’ speaking comprehensibility could be improved by Community Language Learning
The students’ speaking comprehensibility before and after giving treatment can also be seen in the following table:
Table 12. The rate percentage of students’ speaking comprehensibilty
No
Classification
Score
Pre-test
Pos-test
Freq.
Percent
Freq.
Percent
1.
Excellent
5
1
5 %
6
30 %
2.
Good
4
2
10 %
7
35 %
3.
Average
3
8
40%
7
35 %
4.
Poor
2
3
15 %
0
0 %
5.
Very Poor
1
6
30 %
0
0 %
Total
20
100%
20
100%
The data of the pre-test and post-test show a significant difference of the students’ speaking performance in comprehensibility that after treatment was given. In pre-test, the table indicates that 1 (5 %) students got excellent score, 2 (10 %) students got good score, meanwhile the most students 8 (40 %) got average score, 3 (15 %) students got poor score and the last 6 (30 %) students got very poor
Source: Third Semester Students of English Education Department
score. While in post-test, the table indicates that 6 (30 %) out of 20 students have excellent score, while 7 (35 %) students got good score, and the 7 (35 %) other students got average score. It means that most of the students are good in comprehensibility after teaching by Community Language Learning
In order to know whether or not the mean score is different from the two variables (pre- test and post-test) at the level of significance 0.05 with degrees of freedom (df) = n - 1, where n = number of students (20), t- test for non independent sample was applied. The following table shows that the result of the calculation.
Table 13. The T-Test of students’ comprehensibility achievement
Variable
t- test value
t- table value
X2 – X1
15
1,761
Table 14 above shows that t- test value is higher than t- table value, it can be concluded, that there is significant between the result of the students’ pre- test and post- test.
Based on above data, the score of all students either pre-test or post-test are tabulated as follow:
Table 14. The all students’ score of pre-test and post-test in Experimental class
NO
IS
ACC
FLU
COM
TOTAL
PRE
POST
PRE
POST
PRE
POST
PRE
POST
1
AD
3
4
3
4
3
5
9
13
2
JO
1
3
2
4
1
3
4
10
3
AM
1
3
1
3
1
3
3
9
4
AR
2
4
1
3
1
3
4
10
5
SA
4
4
5
5
4
5
13
14
6
RA
3
4
3
4
4
5
10
13
7
RI
2
3
1
3
1
3
4
9
8
FA
3
5
3
5
2
5
8
15
9
LA
2
5
2
4
2
5
6
14
10
XO
2
3
3
4
2
3
7
10
11
AN
2
3
3
4
3
4
8
11
12
AY
2
3
1
3
1
3
4
9
13
FE
3
4
3
4
3
4
9
12
14
IT
1
3
4
5
1
3
6
11
15
NA
4
5
5
5
5
5
14
15
16
RI
2
3
4
4
3
4
9
11
17
AF
4
4
4
5
3
4
11
13
18
AS
3
4
4
5
3
4
10
13
19
GR
4
4
4
5
3
4
11
13
20
IN
2
4
3
4
3
4
8
12
TOTAL
50
75
59
83
49
79
158
237
Source: Third Semester Students of English Education Department
Assertion:
IS = Initial of students.
ACC = Accuracy.
FLU = Fluency.
COM = Comprehensibility.
PRE = Pre-test.
Post = post-test.
The Mean Score of Students based on Pre-test and Post-test of experiment class could be analyzed in t-test as below:
SS1 = √Σ (Σ )
=√ ( )
=√ ( )
=√
=√
= 7,44
The result above indicated that after applying the Community Language Learning the students’ speaking ability got fairly good referred to the scale according to Gay in Cancerina , 2011:30
B. Discussion
The result of the data analysis was going to be discussed below. This part describe about how the role of the Community Language Learning toward students’ speaking ability at the third semester students of English Department at university “45” Makassar.
As we know that speaking is very important thing in getting communication, therefore students are hoped to be able for speaking. The crucial problem that had been faced by the students are there was no braveness to start speaking with someone who is considered could speak well than them. So the alternative way that had been chosen by some learner was never talking with anybody. Actually they wanted to express their idea but because of there was no braveness so their idea were not conveyed as well as they hoped. To face this problem, the writer chose the alternative way to make active the students to speak by let them speak with their friends in a community. By this way the writer found there was a change in students’ speaking ability, so the Community Language Learning is Effective to be applied to make active the students’ speaking ability at third semester of English Department at university “45” Makassar.
During the research the writer let them to make some groups to discuss about “state university and private university”. In these groups the
students interacted with their friends bravely to express their idea, giving and asking the question to the others. This way could make their self confidence is built automatically. In the other hand they could fell the conducive situation and sense of acceptable pronunciation and grammar accuracy and good diction in their community, and also the motivation to learn English is gotten by them.
During the pre-test the writer asked their opinion about “what is the different between private university and state university” for 10 students and the second question is “do you agree with the statement that continue our study at private university will be difficult in getting the job”, for 10 other students. The writer asked them one by one according to their listing name. Most of them only gave the short answer and the others got poor in accuracy because many basic grammatical errors, and their Pronunciation seriously influenced by the mother tongue with errors causing a breakdown in communication. Most of them only gave short answer, and the others still shy to speak. Most of them were poor in accuracy because their pronunciation influenced by mother tongue; they were also poor in fluency because they used wrong vocabulary that caused misunderstanding; in comprehensibility, most of the students got poor because there were only some sentences can be understood because of wrong grammar.
The treatment was conducted two times on Saturday 16 and 18 November 2013. The students felt free to express their idea and asked their friends in a group. The students were more active in giving comments or made grammatical correction spontaneously to the other friends. . At the end of the lesson, the writer asked them about their feelings during the Community Language Learning was applied.
On November 18th 2013, the writer conducted the post test as the measuring of what they had learned. The same questions were given by the writer. The writer found the alteration in students speaking in grammar accuracy, fluency and comprehensibility. Generally, during the teaching by Community Language Learning there were some students could expressed their idea directly, but the others still ask to their friends in group to help him.
The most difficulties for students in speaking were in grammar. It was proved by the using of grammatical errors in speaking English. The examples of these problems could be seen as follows:
1. The using of verbal form as: …I’m not agree……, should be I don’t agree …
2. The using of verb in a sentence: I think differentiate between…, should be …I think the difference between…
3. Using present perfect tense: …have getting should be have gotten
4. Expression of idea: according to me… should be in my opinion or in my mind…
5. Neither nor, either or: the word …be private or state… should be neither private nor state or either private or state
The other mistakes they usually did were the word choice or diction. They usually use Bahasa Indonesian when they did not know those words in English or missing idea. The examples can be seen as follows:
1. Terserah pribadi in Bahasa Indonesia should be depend on someone in English
2. Missing idea, for example: …may be apa? Should be…what I mean or what I want to say….
The next mistake is mispronunciation that always also done by the students. The kinds of mispronunciation which occurred in students’ speaking performance such as
1. The word “private” pronounce as priveit which should be
/ ´praɪvət/
2. The word “difficult” pronounce as defikult which should be /´dɪfɪkəlt/
3. The word “think” pronounce as tingk which should be /өink/
4. The word “thank you” pronounce as tengk yu which should be /өæŋk ju:/
According to Heaton in Johan (2010), the main factors in assessing speaking ability were fluency, accuracy and comprehensibility. Those
factors were related to each other. The listener could understand what the speaker said when they uttered their message, with good pronunciation, correct grammar and right vocabularies. These categories would determine the message is conveyed as well as we hoped.
Community Language Learning is effective to be applied where the students discuss everything in their mind and they did not afraid to do the wrong, because they have the same level in speaking although some students could speak well but they did not feel ashamed because they are friendship. In the group they have the time to speak and discuss about grammar or everything in English as Hasnawati (2004) resulted in her research that using small group discussion in the speaking class enhance the students speaking classroom interaction, the students have positive attitude toward small group discussion because they have opportunity to speak, they are not ashamed and afraid of speaking and also because they have self confidence in speaking.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
There are two items that will be presented by the writer In this section namely conclusion and suggestion.
.
A. Conclusion
Based on the result of data analysis and the discussion of the result in the previous chapter, the researcher concludes:
1. The students’ speaking accuracy of the third semester students of English Department at University “45” Makassar were poor before applying Community Language Learning and after treatment, their speaking accuracy improved into good level. It was proved by the t- test value greater than the t- table value.
2. The students’ speaking fluency of the third semester students of English Department at University “45” Makassar were poor before the applying the Community language Learning and after treatment, their speaking fluency improved into average level. It was proved by the t- test value greater than the t- table value.
3. The students’ speaking comprehensibility of the third semester students of English Education Department at University “45” Makassar were poor before the applying of Community Language Learning and
after treatment, their speaking comprehensibility improved into good level. It was proved by the t- test value greater than the t- table value.
These cases identified that the students’ speaking performance of the third semester of English Department at University “45” Makassar before and after using Community Language Learning showed an alteration which is shown by the t-test of all data either pretest or post-test namely 7,44 and it was fairly good according to heaton in Cancerina (2011:30) so the Community Language Learning is effective to be applied in teaching speaking.
B. Suggestion
Based on the above conclusions, the writer would like to recommend that
1. Let us try to applied Community Language learning in speaking class as an effective way to make the positive alteration in students’ speaking performance.
2. For the next researcher to use the Community Language Learning in doing futher research, because it can give enough opportunity to the students’ to practice their speaking ability and it was enjoyable way for learning.
3.For the learner, to make an alteration in speaking ability we have to change the way to learn from learning by individual to learning by community
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anonym. 2010. Factors affecting English speaking skills. (http://ieltsm.blogspot.com. Accessed on September 29th, 2013.
Anonym. Full Definition of method. (http://www.merriam-webster.com). Accessed on October 06th, 2013.
Anonym. SHS English Language Development. (http// eldblog.weebly.com). Accessed on September 20th, 2013
Anonym. What speaking is? (http://area.dgidc.min-edu.pt/gramatica). Accessed on September 27th, 2013.
Bashir, Marriam., Mohammad Azeem, & Ashiq Hussain Dogar. 2011. Factor Effecting Students’ English Speaking Skills, British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, Vol.2 No.1, ©British Journal Publishing, Inc.
Cancerina. 2011. Describing Famous People to Improve Speaking Ability of SMA Tamalatea Makassar. Unpublished Thesis. Makassar: Universitas 45.
Cohen, Elizabeth G., Celeste M. Brody, & Mara Shapon-Shevin. 2004. Teaching Cooperative Learning, ed.,Chalange for Teacher Education State, Albany, United States of America :University of New York Press.
Cohen, Louise., Lawrence Manion, & Keith Morrison K. 2005. Guide to Teaching Practice, 5th ed. 2004, Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Hasnawati. 2004. The Effectiveness of Small Group Discussion in Improving Speaking at the Second Year students of SMA 1 Bontonompo. Unpublished Thesis. Makassar: UNM.
Mitchell, Rosamond, & Florence Myles. 2004. Second Language Learning Theories. 2nd edition. Great Britain, London: Hodder Arnold, Hachette Livre UK Company.
Mohd Johan, Utto Bin. 2011 The Application of Questioning and Answering Method to Improve Students Ability in Speaking Of University “45” Makassar. Unpublished Thesis. Makassar: Universitas 45.
Nagaraj, P. 2009 Application of Community Language Learning for Effective Teaching. The modern journal of applied linguistic Volume 1:3 May 2009.
Nordquist, R. What Is Grammar? (http//www.about.com). Accessed on September 27th, 2013.
Rika. 2008. Community Language Learning Method in Improving Listening Competence (akademik.nommensen-id.org/portal/public_html) accessed on September 27th, 2013
Sugiyarbini. 2012. Pengertian Populasi Dan Sampel Dalam Penelitian, BLOG'S BIMBINGAN, (http://sugithewae.wordpress.com). Accessed on October 04th, 2013.
Suryabrata, Sumadi. 2010. Psikologi Pendidikan ed.5,-17. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Tarigan. G. 1985. Berbicara Sebagai Suatu Keterampilan Berbahasa. Bandung : Angkasa.
Thesaurus. Vocabulary. WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc, (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vocabulary), Accessed on October 08th, 2013.
Wikipedia, Community Language Learning (http://en.wikipedia.org), Accessed on September 19th, 2013.
Yuniarti. 2008. Penerapan Metode Community Language Learning (CLL) dalam Pembelajaran Keterampilan Kalam Siswa Kelas VIII di MTsN Prambanan Klaten, (http://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id). Accessed on September 27th, 2013
Z, Zach. Vocabulary. (http://answers.reference.com), Accessed on October 08th, 2013.
BIOGRAPHY
Yohanes W. Tukan was born on May 10th 1988 in Sukutukang, a village that nearby the border of Flores Timur and Sikka Regency. He is the third son of six siblings, from Benyamin S. Tukan and Veronica W. Tukan. He spent his time to elementary school at SDK Sukutukang, from 1994 until 1999. In 2000 he entered to junior high school at SMPN 1 Wulanggitang and finished it in 2003.
In 2004 he decided to help his parents as the farmer. The following year he entered to Tourism Vocational High School at SMK St. Thomas Maumere and finished it in 2008. Second following years he spent his time in Kalimantan Island, exactly in Talisayan sub-district, Tanjung Redep city, East Kalimantan. He worked at PT. TBPP, as the harvester of a type of palm tree with seeds that produce edible oil for a year past six months and he moved to Tarakan city and worked as assistant of bricklayer. In 2010 he entered at the University “45” Makassar, and finished in 2013.
Organizing Experience
The beginning year since he entered at University “45” Makassar he joint with some organizations they are HIMAPBING (Himpunan Mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris), BEM FKIP, KMK (Keluarga Mahasiswa Katoholik), HIMAM (Himpunan Mahasiswa Maumere Makassar), and the following year he joint with MENWA (Resimen Mahasiswa). He was the chief of HIMAPBING in 2012-2013 periods.