the effectiveness of role play in teaching speaking
Post on 27-Jan-2017
234 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ROLE PLAY
IN TEACHING SPEAKING
(An Experimental Study for Eighth Grade of SMPN 244
North Jakarta)
By
M. NOOR AFDILLAH A.A
109014000075
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS’ TRAINING
SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2015
i
The Effectiveness of Role Play in Teaching Speaking A Quasi-Experimental Study at the Eight Grade of SMPN 244 Jakarta
“A Skripsi”
Presented to the Faculty of Tarbiya and Teacher’s Training in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for Degree of S.Pd. in English Language Education
DEPARTEMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TARBIYAH AND TEACHERS TRAINING
SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2014
f__
ENDORSEMENT SHEET
The Examination Committee of the faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Trainingcertifies that the "skripsi" (Scientific Paper) entitled The Effectiveness of Role Ptayin Teaching Speaking (A Qnrasi-Experimental Study at Eighth Grade of SMPN244 North Jakarta), written by M.Noor Afditlah A.A , NIM 109014000075 wasexamined by the committee on January 19,2015. The "skripsi" has been accepted anddeclared to have fulfilled one of the requirements for Degree of S.Pd (Sl) in EnglishLanguage Education at the English Department.
Jakarta,
Chairman:
Secretary:
EXAMINATION COMMITTEE
Drs. Svauki" M. Pd. (
NIP. 196412r2199103 L 002
Zaharil Auasv. M. HumNrP. 19761 007 2007 r0 I 002
Examiner I: Ismaliqnins Eviwliwati. M.Hum.NIP. 19740723 200003 2 001
Examiner II: Desi Nahartini. M.Ed.
Acknowledged by
Dean of Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training
Dra. Nurlena Rifa'i M.A. Ph.DNrP. 19591020 198603 2 001
iv
ABSTRACT
M. Noor Afdillah AA, 2014, The Effectiveness of Role Play towards Students’
Speaking Ability, Skripsi, English Education Department,
The Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training, Syarif
Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.
Advisors : Dr. Fahriany, M.Pd., Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum.
Key Words : Speaking, role play technique.
The aim of this research was carried out to find the effectiveness of using role
play in teaching speaking for second grade of junior high school at SMPN 244
North Jakarta whether there is significance different in speaking achievement of
the students who are taught using a role play and those who are taught without
using a role play. The subjects of the study were 56 students.
The method used in this study was quantitative research through quasi-
experimental study by using pre-test and post-test design. The researcher divided
two classes into an experimental class and a control class. Before the treatment,
the researcher did a pre-test in both classes. Moreover, the researcher taught
speaking by a role play technique in the experimental class. The last, the
researcher conducted a post-test in both classes to know whether a role play
technique is effective for teaching speaking in experimental class.
The researcher scored five components of speaking skills (Comprehension,
Fluency, Vocabulary, Pronunciation, and Grammar) of each student in both
classes. After that, he calculated t-test to analyze the data. Value of the tobserve was
7.49 and the degree of freedom (df) was 54 whereas the value of ttable on the
degree of significant of 5% was 2.00. As the result, the value of tobserve was higher
than ttable. It can be concluded that the using of role play technique in teaching
speaking at SMPN 244 North Jakarta was effective and the hypothesis tested in
this study was accepted.
v
ABSTRACT
M. Noor Afdillah AA, 2014, The Effectiveness of Role Play towards Students’
Speaking Ability, Skripsi, English Education Department,
The Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training, Syarif
Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.
Dosen Pembimbing : Dr. Fahriany, M.Pd., Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum.
Kata Kunci : Speaking, role play technique.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan keefektifan pengunaan role play dalam
pengajaran speaking untuk kelas 2 tingkat SMP di SMP 244 Jakarta Utara apakah
ada perbedaan yang signifikan terhadap murid-murid dalam pencapaian
pengajaran speaking yang menggunakan role play dengan yang tidak
menggunakan role play. Sample penelitian ini terdiri dari 58 siswa.
Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode kuantitatif yaitu
metode eksperimen semu dengan menggunakan desain pre-test dan post-test.
Peneliti membagi dua kelas yaitu kelas eksperimen dan kelas control. Sebelum
peneliti melakukan treatment, peneliti melakukan pre-test di kedua kelas tersebut.
Selanjutnya, Peneliti mengajarkan speaking dengan menggunakan teknil role play
di kelas eksperimen. Tahap terakhir, peneliti melakukan post-test di kedua kelas
tersebut untuk mengetahui apakah teknik role play efektif dalam pengajaran
speaking di kelas eksperimen.
Peneliti melakukan penilaian berdasarkan lima komponen speaking yaitu
(Komprehensif, Kefasihan, Kosakata, Pelafalan, dan Struktur Kalimat) pada
masing-masing murid di kedua kelas. Setelah itu, peneliti mengkalkulasi t-test
untuk menganalisis data. Nilai dari tobserve adalah 7.49 dan nilai degree of freedom
(df) adalah 54 sedangkan nilai ttable dengan derajat signifikan 5% adalah 2.00.
Maka nilai tobserve lebih tinggi dari nilai ttable. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa
penggunaan teknik role play dalam pengajaran speaking di SMPN 244 Jakarta
Utara efektif dan hipotesis yang diuji dapat diterima.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. All praises be to Allah,
the Lord of the world who has given the Mercy and Blessing upon the writer in
completing this Skripsi. Peace and salutation be upon the prophet Muhammad, his
family and his followers.
In this occasion, the writer would like to express his greatest appreciation,
honour and gratitude to his beloved parents (Dudung Gunawan, S.Pd and Yeti
Setiawati), for their valuable supports and moral encouragement in motivating the
writer to finish his study. And also his beloved sister (Shofia Hanifah Az-Zahra)
for their supports to the writer in writing this Skripsi
The writer also would like to express his deepest gratitude to Dr. Fahriany,
M.Pd and Zaharil Anasy , M.Hum for their advices, guidances, corrections, and
suggestions in finishing this Skripsi.
His gratitude also goes to:
1. All lecturers of Department of English Education who have taught and
educated the writer during his study at UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.
2. Drs. Syauki, M.Pd., The Head of Department of English Education.
3. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum., The Secretary of Department of English
Education.
4. Dra. Nurlena Rifa’i, MA., Ph. D The Dean of Faculty of Tarbiya and
Teachers` Training.
5. Drs.Mulyana., The Headmaster of SMPN 244 Jakarta, who has given a
great chance to the writer to carry out the research at the school he leads.
6. Indah Sri Rezeki, S.Pd and Linda Rizky Nurrahmani, The English teacher
of SMPN 244 Jakarta who has helped the writer in conducting this
research.
7. Shaumi Fitriyanti, S.Pd. who always gives her support, care, love and
spirit to the writer.
vii
8. His friends in Department of English Education Academic Year
2009/2010 for sharing their knowledge, times, cares and supports.
9. To any other person who cannot be mentioned one by one for their
contribution to the writer during finishing his Skripsi. The words are not
enough to say any appreciations for their help.
May Allah bless them for all of what they have done.
Finally, the writer feels that it is really pleasure for him to receive critics
and suggestions to make this Skripsi better. He also hopes that this Skripsi would
be beneficial, particularly for him and for those who are interested in it.
Jakarta, November 04, 2014
The writer
M. Noor Afdillah A.A
viii
TABLE OF CONTENT
APPROVAL…………………………………………………………... i
ENDORSEMENT SHEET…………………………………………... ii
SURAT PERNYATAAN KARYA SENDIRI………………………. iii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………... iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT……………………………………………... vi
TABLE OF CONTENT……………………………………………… viii
LIST OF TABLE……………………………………………………... xii
LIST OF FIGURE……………………………………………………. xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES……………………………………………... xiv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study………………………….. 1
B. Identification of the Problem……………………… 5
C. Limitation of the Problem………………………….5
D. Formulation of the Problem……………………….. 6
E. Objective of study…………………………………. 6
F. Significance of the Study………………………….. 6
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Speaking…………………………………………….... 7
1. The Nature of Speaking……………………………. 7
2. The Objectives of Teaching Speaking…………….. 8
3. The Elements of Speaking…………………………. 10
4. The Components of Speaking……………………... 11
a. Grammatical Competence…………………….12
ix
b. Discourse Competence……………………… 12
c. Sociolinguistic Competence…………………. 12
d. Strategic Competence……………………….. 13
5. Classroom Activities………………………………. 13
6. Speaking Assessment……………………………... 15
B. Role Play……………………………………………... 18
1. Definition of Role Play……………………………. 18
2. Reason for Using Role Play……………………….. 20
3. Types of Roles in Role Play……………………….. 21
4. The Purpose of Role Play………………………….. 22
5. The Advantages of Role Play……………………… 22
6. Teaching Speaking Using Role Play………………. 24
C. Previous Study……………………………………….. 25
D. Theoretical Thinking…………………………………..27
E. Hypothesis of the Research…………………………... 28
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Place and Time of the Research………………………29
B. The Method of the Research…………………………. 29
C. Population and Sampling……………………………...29
D. The Technique of Collecting Data…………………….30
E. The Research Instrument……………………………... 30
x
F. The Technique for Data Analysis…………………….. 32
G. Statistical Hypothesis………………………………… 35
CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS
A. Description of Data…………………………………... 37
I. The Description of the Pre-test Data……………….. 39
a. Comprehension Scores………………………… 39
b. Fluency Scores…………………………………. 39
c. Vocabulary Scores……………………………... 39
d. Pronunciation Scores…………………………... 39
e. Grammar Scores……………………………….. 40
II. The Description of the Post-test Data…………….. 40
a. Comprehension Scores………………………… 40
b. Fluency Scores…………………………………. 41
c. Vocabulary Scores……………………………... 41
d. Pronunciation Scores…………………………... 41
e. Grammar Scores……………………………….. 41
1. Pre-test Scores……………………………………... 41
2. Post-test Scores……………………………………. 45
3. Gained Scores……………………………………… 47
B. Analysis of Data……………………………………… 49
I. Results of Pre-test of Experimental and
Control Class…………………………………… 49
a. Experimental Class………………………….. 49
b. Control Class………………………………… 51
2. Results of Post-test of Experimental and
Control Class…………………………………… 53
a. Experimental Class…………………………..53
b. Control Class………………………………... 54
3. Normality Test…………………………………. 56
a. The Normality Test of Pre-test in
xi
Experimental Class…………………………..56
b. The Normality Test of Post-test in
Experimental Class…………………………..58
c. The Normality Test of Pre-test in
Controlled Class…………………………….. 61
d. The Normality Test of Post-test in
Controlled Class…………………………….. 58
4. Homogeneity Test……………………………...62
5. Hypothesis Test……………………………….. 64
C. Interpretation of the Data…………………………. 68
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion………………………………………… 70
B. Suggestion………………………………………… 70
BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………... 72
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………….. 75
xii
LIST OF TABLE
Table 3.1 Five Components of Grading Speaking Scale………………………….. 30
Table 4.1 The students’ scores of pre-test of experimental class
and controlled class……………………………………………………... 43
Table 4.2 The students’ scores of post-test of experimental class
and controlled class……………………………………………………... 45
Table 4.3 The students’ gained scores comparison between pre-test
and post-test in experimental class and controlled class………………... 47
Table 4.4 The Frequency Distribution of the Experimental Class Pre-test……….. 50
Table 4.5 The Frequency Distribution of the Control Class Pre-test……………… 51
Table 4.6 The Frequency Distribution of the Experimental Class Post test………. 53
Table 4.7 The Frequency Distribution of the Control Class Post-test…………….. 54
Table 4.8 Calculation of Pre-Test Normality in Experimental Class……………… 56
Table 4.9 Calculation of Post-Test Normality in Experimental Class…………….. 58
Table 4.10 Calculation of Pre-Test Normality in Controlled Class.......................... 59
Table 4.11 Calculation of Post-Test Normality in Controlled Class………………. 61
Table 4.12 Calculation of Hypothesis Test in the Experimental Class
and Controlled Class…………………………………………………... 64
xiii
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 4.1 Diagram of Results of pre-test of Experimental Class
and Control Class………………………………………………………... 40
Figure 4.2 Diagram of Results of post-test of Experimental Class
and Control Class……………………………………………………….. 42
Figure 4.3 Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Experimental
Class Pre-test……………………………………………………………. 50
Figure 4.4 Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Experimental
ClassPre-test……………………………………………………………. 52
Figure 4.5 Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Experimental
Class Post-test…………………………………………………………... 53
Figure 4.6 Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Control
Class Post-test…………………………………………………………... 55
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix I (RPP Kelas Eksperimen)
Appendix II (RPP Kelas Kontrol)
Appendix III(Frequency Distribution Calculation of Pre-test and Post-test)
Appendix IV (Hasil Pre-test and Post-test)
Appendix V (Soal Pre-test dan Post test)
Appendix VI (Figures of the Research)
Appendix VII (Pengesahan Proposal Skripsi)
Appendix VIII (Surat Bimbingan Skripsi)
Appendix IX (Surat Permohonan Izin Penelitian)
Appendix X (Surat Keterangan Penlitian)
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of Study
Since English as an international language has already become one
of the compulsory subjects of both senior and junior high school, and
elementary school, it cannot be denied, that the importance of English has
gained a lot of attention from many people all over the world. It entails
Indonesian to master English; especially speaking ability successfully.
Therefore, Indonesian can communicate with people all over the world in
English fluently.
Moreover, learning English in the second grade junior high school
students has three objectives; they are to develop communicative
competence, it supposes to have an ability in comprehending and or
producing kinds of texts or certain literacy whether in oral or written
which should be fulfilled four English basic skills (listening, speaking,
reading, and writing), to improve students’ English ability in functional
level (it means students have to be able to use English in a daily life), and
to develop students’ ability in English communication skill for facing a
globalization era. Concerning to the problems above, the writer focuses on
developing the students’ competence in speaking ability. As stated on
KTSP (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan) that the objective English
in Junior High School is to develop communicative competence in
achieving functional literacy level whether in written or oral.1
To improve speaking ability, the role of teaching speaking in
Indonesia is very important in order to achieve communicative
competence. Therefore, not only for senior high school but also for junior
high school, Speaking becomes one of the goals of teaching and learning
1 Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan, Kurikulum 2006, Standar Isi Untuk Satuan
Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, (Jakarta:2006), p. 278.
2
in Indonesia. Those are the reason why the writer interested in having a
research about speaking skill towards students; especially the students in
second grade of junior high school. The goals of teaching English
speaking for the second grade junior high school students at even semester
also stated in English syllabus as follows:
Standard Competence and Minimum Standard Competence of English
Subject for the Second Grade Junior High School Students at Even
Semester.
Standard
Competence
Minimum Standard Competence
Speaking
9. To express the
meaning in short
verbal simple
transactional and
interpersonal
conversation to
interact with their
surroundings.
9.1 To express the meaning of transactional and
interpersonal conversation by using kinds of
expression accurately. Such as asking, giving, and
refusing permission, receiving and denying
information, agreeing and disagreeing opinion, and
offering and asking for help.
9.2 To express the meaning of transactional and
interpersonal conversation by using kinds of
expression accurately. Such as asking and giving
agreement, responding the statement, and receiving a
message from the telephone.
10. To express the
meaning of
functional and
monologue oral
10.1 To express the meaning of short functional oral text
accurately.
10.2 To express the meaning of short monologue oral text
3
text in recount
and narrative text.
accurately in recount and narrative text.
Based on the standard competence and the minimum standard
competence, there are two objectives in teaching speaking that should be
fulfilled by 8th
grade of junior high school, like: “To express the meaning
in short verbal simple transactional and interpersonal conversation to
interact with their surroundings” and “To express the meaning of
transactional and interpersonal conversation by using kinds of expression
accurately. Such as asking, giving, and refusing permission, receiving and
denying information, agreeing and disagreeing opinion, and offering and
asking for help”.2
Therefore, the emphasis is not only on the competence of the
language learners but also on the development of the students’
communicative ability. In order to develop learners’ communicative
ability, the teacher needs to create a scenario to teach the target language
enthusiastically, actively, and interestingly. Besides, the technique that
used by the teacher should be interesting because the teacher should
motivate the students to speak English confidently and to make the
students interest in speaking English. As Candlin and Neil in their book,
they stated that “The teacher’s job is to match his or her teaching style as
well as the learner’s learning style to the method”.3 It means that the
teacher has an important role in making a success of the students’ learning
and he or she should decide the teaching style which can build a
motivation for improving students’ ability; especially in speaking.
Furthermore, based on the writer experience when he taught a
speaking in junior high school, he often found some problems towards the
2 Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan, Kurikulum 2006, op.cit.,, p. 289.
3 Christoper N. Candlin and Neil Mercer, English Language Teaching Its social context,
(London: Routledge, 2001), p.168.
4
students. The student problems frequently found by the writer were: first,
they still had poor vocabulary. Second, they were not interested in the
material about English that was given. Third, they rarely practiced
speaking. And the last, they were not confident and felt shy to speak in
front of class. In order to solve the problems, there are many techniques
that can be applied including a role play, because many research findings
say that this technique is effective to be used in teaching speaking.
Using a Role Play in teaching speaking is one of the ways to build
the students’ interest, motivation and fluency in speaking English by
creating interaction in the class and ordering students to imagine
themselves in a situation like in the real world. As Littlewood states “in
role playing techniques learners are asked to imagine themselves in
situation which occur outside the classroom, they are asked to adopt a
specific role in this situation, they asked to behave as if the situation really
existed”.4
Role play is very important in teaching speaking because it gives
students an opportunity to practice communication in different social
context and in different social roles. It also allows students to be creative
and to put themselves in another person’s place for a while. As Brown
stated “Role play allows some rehearsal time so that student can map out
what they are going to say, and it has the effect of lowering anxieties as
students can, even for a few moments, take on the persona of someone
other than themselves”.5
The writer hopes that in teaching speaking through a role play can
help the learning process for the students and the students become easy in
studying English. It is also required to support teaching and learning
activities in speaking. Besides, the classroom will be fun and the students
4 William Littlewood, Communicative Language Teaching - An Introduction, (Cambridge:
Cambridge University, 2002), p.49 5 Douglas Brown, Language Assessment: Principle and Classroom Practice. (San
Francisco: Longman, 2003), p.174.
5
will be more active in study. In addition, the problems of teaching
speaking English will be covered by applying technique.
As a result, it can measure and lead the students to the better
improvement and when one strategy doesn’t work, the teacher just need to
improve that strategy or change into suitable strategy which fits with
students’ condition or material being taught. It seems that a role play is
useful teaching technique that can be used in order to entertain students
and increasing their motivation in learning speaking.
B. Identification of the Problem
The writer identifies some common problems that appear in
teaching speaking:
1. Most of students still have low motivation in learning English;
especially in speaking, because they are too shy and afraid to take
apart in the conversation. They just speak when the teacher ask
them.
2. The students still do not know how to speak English well.
3. Most of the students do not realize the importance of learning
English to communicate.
4. The teacher also become one of problem that can make students is
not interested in speaking. It can happen because the teacher does
not use the communicative teaching that can motivate the students
to speak.
C. Limitation of the Problem
The writer limits the scope of this study only to discuss the
effectiveness of role play in teaching speaking in the second grade of
junior high school at SMPN 244 North Jakarta in 2013-2014 academic
years.
6
D. Formulation of the Problem
Based on the explanation on the background the writer formulates
the problem of the research as follows: “Is role play effective in teaching
speaking for the eighth grade students at SMPN 244 North Jakarta?”
E. Objective of the Study
The objective of the study is to find the effectiveness of using role
play in improving the students’ speaking skill whether there is significance
difference in speaking achievement of the students who are taught using a
role play and those who are taught without using a role play.
F. Significance of the Study
The study of this research is expected to know the effectiveness of
using role play in teaching speaking for second grade of junior high
school. Therefore, it can be one of solving problems in teaching and
learning speaking that faced by the teachers in improving the students’
speaking ability.
Besides, by using a role play, it can motivate the students to speak
English without considering of mistakes and error in speaking. Moreover,
it helps to provide knowledge on ways to develop natural ways in speaking
activities and to become the students more active in teaching-learning
process.
This method probably will be used as a reference for those who
want to conduct a research in English teaching process, especially to know
the effectiveness of Role Play when it applied in speaking class.
7
CHAPTER II
THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Speaking
1. The Nature of Speaking
Speaking is the most natural way to communicate. It is also used
for interacting between two people in daily life, such as: at school, at home
or some other places. As Gottlieb quoted Underhill‟s opinion “speaking
generally involves two ways communication with interactive role
switching between the speaker, who conveys a message, and the listener,
who interprets responds to it”1.
Besides, speaking also is the way to express ideas, opinions, or
feelings with others by using words or sounds in delivering message. As
human beings, especially as social creatures have a need to make meaning
of their surroundings by communicating each other. They have a need to
express their thoughts, opinions, or feelings in order to be accepted in
social life. Speaking does not only make sound by the speech organs but
ideas and emotions. As Cameron states “Speaking is the active use of
language to express meaning so that other people can make sense of them,
therefore, the label of “receptive” and “productive” uses of language can
be applied to speaking respectively”.2
Furthermore, most of people communicate each other to share
some information. As Thomas says “They may want to exchange
information about something specific with one or more people, or they just
want to keep socially active by exchanging pleasantries with friends,
1 Margo Gottlieb, Assessing English Language Learners, (California: Corwin Press,
2006), p.45. 2 Lynne Cameron, Teaching Language to Young Learners, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001), p.40.
8
neighbors, or working colleagues”.3 Therefore, if people want to share
information with others, they have to focus on what they want to say in
order to deliver the specific message clearly.
In addition, in delivering ideas and meanings of a certain situation,
a speaker has to use an accurate pattern and choose the correct words that
fit into it. As Ur stated “people who know a language are referred to as
„speakers‟ of that language, as if speaking included all other kinds of
knowing; and many if not most foreign language learners are primarily
interested in learning to speak”.4 Another expert Marianne also stated “the
ability to speak a language is synonymous with knowing that language
since speech is the basic means of human communication”.5 As a result, a
speaker should know well about a language that he or she is used for
communicating; in order to her or his interlocutor get a good
understanding and interest with what he or she said.
Based on the definitions above, it can be concluded that speaking is
the process of sharing information with another person, one‟s knowledge,
interests, opinions or ideas. Besides, speaking also is the way to make
someone interest to the information that the speaker wants to share.
2. The Objectives of Teaching Speaking
Speaking is one of some language skills which are essential. The
reason of people want to speak because he or she has some purposes or
functions that he or she has to be communicated with others to get his or
her goals or what he or she needs. As Richard and Renandya stated “When
we engage in discussion with someone, on the other hand, the purpose is
to seek or express opinions, to persuade someone about something, or to
3 Thomas S.C. Farrel, Succeeding with English Language Learners, (Thousand Oaks:
Corwin Press, 2006), p.74. 4 Penny Ur, A Course in Language Teaching, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996),p.121. 5 Marianne Celle-Murcia, Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, (Boston:
Heinle & Heinle, 2001), p.103.
9
clarify information. In some situations, we use speaking to give
instructions or get things done”.6 Thus, the objectives of teaching speaking
are to persuade someone about something, to give instructions or
transaction which serves to get things done as performance which serves
some talks which are needed relate to social relationship.
McDonough and Shaw also stated “when genuinely
communicative, speaking is desire and purpose driven, in other words we
genuinely want to communicate something to achieve a particular end.
This may involve expressing ideas and opinion; expressing a wish or a
desire to do something; negotiating and/or solving a particular problem; or
establishing and maintaining social relationships and relationships.”7 It
means that when someone speaks, he or she has an intended for expressing
his or her ideas to his or her interlocutor.
Furthermore, there are some objectives that have to be reached by
English teacher in teaching speaking process, as Jeremy Harmer stated
“There are three basic reasons why it is a good idea to give students
speaking tasks which provoke them to use all any language at their
command. Rehearsal: getting students to have a free discussion gives them
a chance to rehearse having discussion outside the classroom. Feedback:
Speaking tasks where students are trying to use all and any language they
know provides feedback for both teachers and students. Engagement: good
speaking activities should be highly motivating.”8 As a result, the students
will get the benefit from the practice speaking task; like: he or she will get
use to speak English whether inside or outside the classroom by practicing
it, the students will get a feedback about his or her ability in speaking
6 Jack C Richard & Willy A. Renandya, Methodology in Language Teaching,
(Cambridge: University Press, 2002), p. 201. 7 Jo McDonough and Christopher Shaw. Materials and Methods in ELT, (Oxford:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2003), p.134. 8 Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach English – An Introduction of Practice English Language
Teaching, (England: Addison Wesley Longman, 1998), pp. 87-88.
10
English and the students will be motivated in increasing his or her
speaking ability by following kinds of speaking activity in the classroom.
Besides, the objectives of teaching speaking should also focus on
intonation, pronunciation, stressing, etc. Teacher should be aware of those
parts because it could develop the students‟ production skill in linguistic
aspect. As Hughes states “other aim which the teacher might have: for
instance, helping student to gain awareness of or to practice some aspect
of linguistic knowledge, or to develop production skills, or to raise
awareness of some socio-linguistic or pragmatic point.”9
As a result, the objective of teaching speaking above is primarily to
give a chance for the students to express their ideas about everything that
promote their speaking ability, to train the students‟ pronunciation,
intonation, stressing, etc in speaking English, and to build the students‟
motivation in speaking English; even though, there will be some mistakes
that the students did while he or she is trying to speak English.
3. The Elements of Speaking
Speaking is very important for student to acquire the ability to
express their ideas and opinions. Consequently, this competency should be
mastered by learners‟ language. According Jeremy Harmer, there are two
elements of speaking. First, language features, consist of:
a. Connected speech is the modifying in sound production or
utterances such as assimilation, omission, addition, and
weakened (through contraction and stress pattering)
b. Expressive devices are the alteration of speed, volume, and
stress of utterances to show the feeling. The use of device
contributes the ability to convey meaning.
9 Rebecca Hughes, Teaching and Researching Speaking, (London: Pearson Education,
2002), p. 6.
11
c. Lexis and grammar related to the ability to use number
common lexical phrases, especially in the performance of
certain language functions.
d. Negotiation language is the ability to gets benefits from
negotiators language we use to seek clarification and to
show of structure of what we are saying.
The second element of speaking is mental or social processing,
consist of:
a. language processing: the ability to process language in their
own heads and put it into coherent order so that it comes
out it forms that are not only comprehensible, but also
convey the meanings that are intended.
b. Interacting with others. It‟s mean that speaking also
involves a good deal of listening, and understanding of how
the other participants are feeling.
c. Information processing: the ability to process the
information the moment we get it.10
In a conclusion, the elements of speaking are language features;
which includes pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and
comprehension, and mental or social processing.
4. The Components of Speaking
There are four components of speaking based on Richards and
Renandya quoted from Kang Shumin who highlights the components
which underlies speaking effectiveness:11
10
Harmer,op.cit., p 270.
11
Richard & Renandya, op.cit., p. 207-208.
12
a. Grammatical Competence
Grammatical competence is an umbrella concept that
includes increasing expertise in grammar (morphology and syntax),
vocabulary and mechanics. The terms mechanics refer to basic
sounds of letters and syllables, pronunciation and stress. As
Richards and Rodgers said that grammatical competence refers to
linguistic competence and formally possible because relates to
grammatical and lexical capacity.12
Thus, grammatical competence
enables speakers to use English language structure accurately and
unhesitatingly, which contributes to their fluency.
b. Discourse Competence
Learners must develop discourse competence because they
should can make or arrange the communication whether in spoken
or written cohesively and coherence in order to convey the
conversation in a meaningful way, which is concerned with
intersentential relationships. As Olshtain and Cohen stated
“Discourse competence relates to features of text, whether it
spoken or written”13
. Thus, the component of speaking not only
should be based on sentence-level grammar, but also it should be
meaningful.
c. Sociolinguistic Competence
Language teaching is influenced by sociolinguistic
competence in order to increase language and learning. Knowledge
of language does not adequately prepare learners for effective and
appropriate of target language. In teaching speaking, the teacher
could approach the students in teaching speaking by understanding
12
Jack C. Richards and Theodore S. Rodgers, 2nd
Edition, Approaches and Methods in
Language Teaching, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 71. 13
Elite Olshtain and Andrew Cohen, Teaching Speech Act Behavior to Nonative Speakers,
(Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 2001), p.154.
13
the social context in which communication takes place or situation
of speaker and interlocutor.
As Richards and Rodgers says “Sociolinguistic competence
refers to an understanding of the social context in which
communication takes place, including role relationship, the shared
information of the participants, and the communicative purpose for
their interaction.”14
d. Strategic Competence
Concerning to the component of speaking, strategic
competence refers to the ability to know and how to keep
conversation going, how to finish the conversation, and how to
clear up communication breakdown as well as comprehension
problems. As harmer stated “when choosing who should come out
to the front of class we need to be careful not to choose the shyest
students first, and we need to work to create the right kind of
supportive atmosphere in the class.”15
From the explanation above, the writer can concludes that
there are four components areas of speaking skill which each area
plays as its function and there are also some factors affect the
effectiveness of speaking and should be in the teaching speaking.
5. Classroom Activities
Most English teachers face the problem of having passive students
who difficult to speak in the class and no willingness to speak in class. In
traditional classroom activity, speaking practice often takes the form or
drills which one person asks question and another gives an answer. The
purpose of asking and answering the question is to demonstrate the ability
14
Richards and Rodgers, loc.cit. 15
Jeremy Harmer, The Practice of English Language Teaching, (Cambridge: Pearson
Education Limited, 2001), p.8.
14
to ask and answer the question. However, it can make the students get
bored and get a low motivation in trying to speak English.
Therefore, to create classroom speaking activities that will develop
communicative competence, the teacher should provide students with
communicative activities in which the student can engage actively in
teaching and learning process. Gottlieb give “some example of typical
speaking activities that occur in the classrooms:
a. Book talks in which story grammar (characters, setting,
events) is revealed
b. Debates on school related topics or current issues
c. Dialogues between students on social or culturally related
topics
d. Interviews between students or between students and adults
e. Presentations/reports on content related assignments
f. Role plays/ dramatizations of historical or social events
g. Speeches or reports based on research or topic of interest
h. Task analyses or demonstrations on how to do activities,
processes, or procedures
i. Story retelling from illustrations or personal experiences
j. Student led conferences on original works of portfolios
k. Think-alouds (personal reactions to reading) on articles,
stories, or literature
l. Two way tasks on maps or missing information”16
Besides, in classroom activity teacher need preparation in order to
during teaching learning activity do not feel boring. To anticipate this case
Ur and Wright give the step that teacher may need:
a. A quick warm up for the beginning to get your students into
the right mood for learning;
16
Gottlieb, op.cit., p.47.
15
b. An idea for a brief vocabulary review before starting a new
text;
c. A light filler to provide relief after a period of intense effort
and concentration;
d. A brief orientation activity to prepare a change of mood or
topic;
e. A game or amusing item to round off the lesson with a
smile.17
The writer emphasize that the classroom activities in teaching
speaking should be interest and interactive because it will motivate the
students in achieving the goals of teaching speaking. These are some
classroom activities that can be conducted by the teacher in teaching
speaking, such as: role plays, storytelling, presentation, debates, etc.
6. Speaking Assessment
Speaking is a complex skill that using different ability to assess it.
Speaking skill is generally recognized in analysis of speech process that is
pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. As
Gottlieb stated “The principal components of speech include grammar,
vocabulary, intonation and stress, pronunciation, fluency and accuracy.”18
However, before the teacher assesses the students, Nation and Newton
stated there are “two main aspects of direct procedure for testing speaking
1. The way in which the person being tested is encouraged to speak, 2. The
way in which the speaker‟s performance is assessed.”19
For assessing
speaking performance, it is include rating scale and communicative result.
17
Penny Ur and Andrew Wright, Five Minutes Activities, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University, 2007), p. x.
18
Gottlieb, op.cit.p.46 19
I.S.P Nation and J. Newton, Teaching ESl/EFL Listening and Speaking, New York and
London: Routledge, 2009), p.171.
16
Moreover, the criteria of assessing speaking should be to young
learner curriculum. As McKay stated “they can be written to reflect the
construct being assessed and to reflect the young learner curriculum”.20
Based on the criterion above the writer using Penny McKay for
scoring speaking, the writer chooses five criteria that will be used for
speaking assessment. There are Comprehension, Fluency, Vocabulary,
Pronunciation, and Grammar for describes performance and to see
progress of the students. As Mckay stated “the scale describes
performance in lower levels in negative terms, as incorrect and week. For
positive impact, criteria and descriptors for young learners are more
suitable when they describe strengths and progress rather than errors.”21
Below is the rating scale that will be used by the researcher in
assessing the students‟ speaking based on McKay: 22
Proficiency Description
Comprehension:
1. Cannot understand even simple conversation.
2. Has great difficulty following what is said. can comprehend only
“socal conversation”spoken slowly and with frequent repittition.
3. Understand most of what is said at slower-than-normal speed with
repetition.
4. Understands nearly everything at normal speed. Although
occasional repetition may be necessary.
5. Understand everyday conversation and normal classroom
discussions without difficulty.
20 Penny Mckay, Assessing Young Language Learners, (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2006), pp. 292. 21
Penny Mckay, op.cit., p. 290 22
Penny Mckay, op.cit., pp. 290-292
17
Fluency :
1. Speech is so halting and fragmentary as to make conversation
virtually impossible.
2. Usually hesiatant; often forced into silence by languge limitations.
3. Speech in everyday communication and classroom dicussion is
frequently disrupted by the student‟s search for the correct manner
of expression.
4. Speech in everyday communication and classroom discussion in
generally fluent, with occasional lapses while the students searches
for the correct manner of expression.
5. Speech in everyday conversation and in classroom discussion is
fluent and effortless approximating that of a native speaker.
Vocabulary :
1. Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to make conversation
virtually impossible.
2. Misuse of words and very limited vocabulary make comprehension
quite difficult.
3. Frequently uses the wrong words conversation somewhat limited
because of inadequte vocabulary.
4. Occasionally uses inappropriate terms or must rephrase ideas
because of inadequate vocabulary.
5. Use of Vocabulary and idioms approximates that of a native
speaker.
Pronunciation :
1. Pronunciation problem so severe as to make speech virtually
unintelligible.
2. Very hard to understand because pronunciation problem, must
frequently be asked to repeat in order to be understood.
18
3. Pronunciation problems necessitate concentration on the part of
listener and occasionally lead to misunderstanding.
4. Always intelligible, though one is concious of a definite accent and
occasinal inappropriate intonation patterns.
5. Pronunciation and intonation approximates that a native speaker.
Grammar :
1. Errors in grammar and word order so severe as to make speech
virtually unintelligible.
2. Grammar and word order error make comprehension difficult.
Must often rephrase or restrict what is said to basic patterns.
3. Makes frequent errors of grammar and word order which
occasionally obscure meaning.
4. Occasionally make grammatical or word order errors which do not
obscure meaning.
5. Grammatical usage and word order approximate a native speaker‟s.
B. Role Play
1. Definition of Role Play
As the writer focuses in his research, he will explain about the
nature of role play, as a specific topic that will be discussed.
Ur stated “Role play is used to refer to all sorts of activities where
learners imagine themselves in a situation outside classroom, sometimes
playing the role of someone other than themselves, and using language
appropriately to the new context.”23
Based on the definition above, role
play is a method to play the role of others character in any kinds of
situations.
23
Penny Ur, A Course in Language Teaching, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996), p. 131.
19
Moreover, according to Snow, “role plays are form of pair practice
that allows students freedom to play, improvise, and create.”24
In this case,
students can come to real situation although they are not in that situation.
For example, students pretend to be travel agents and customers in a
conversation about how to book an airplane‟s ticket.
Besides, according to Diane, “Role plays are very important in
CLT because they give students an opportunity to practice communicating
in different social contexts and in different social roles, and Role plays can
be set up so that they are very structured or in less a less structured way”25
It means the teacher tells the students who they are and what they should
do. The teacher also tells the students what the situation is, and what they
are talking about, but the students determine what they will say. Students
also receive feedback on whether or not they have effectively
communicated.
In Role play there are many subject topics available for role play
purposes, such as compiling and presenting a news magazine program for
radio or television. According to McDonough and Shaw “Role play
materials are often written specifically to get learners to express opinions,
to present and defend points of view and to evaluate arguments.”26
On the
other hand in Role play learners also require learners to use language to
get the meaning, and learners also require paying more attention to
maintenance of social relationships.
From the explanations above, the writer concluded that the role
play is a technique which involves fantasy or imagination to be someone
else or to be ourselves in a specific situation for a while, improvising
dialogue and creating a real world scenario. It aims at the students to
24
Don Snow, From Language Learner to Language Teacher, (Virginia: TESOL, Inc,
2007), p.112. 25
Diane Larsen-Freeman, Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching, (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000), p.134. 26
McDonough and Shaw, op.cit., p.145.
20
encourage their thinking and creativity, to develop and train the students of
a new language and behavioral skills in relatively nonthreatening setting,
and to create the motivation of the students in speaking.
2. Reason for Using Role Play
There are many reasons why teacher using role play technique in
teaching speaking. By using role play, students feel free to play, improvise
and create their idea. Besides, many students will be more creative and
active to play their role because the teacher gives opportunities to students
to explore their actions. As Duffy quoted on Featherstone and Cummings
“imaginative play gives children opportunities to explore and represent
actions, roles, relationships, situation, characters from a variety of sources,
narratives and stories.”27
Furthermore, using role play in teaching speaking the students also
can train their intellectual, social and imaginative because by using role
play students have a chance to train choice and make decisions about the
nature and direction of their play. Rogers quoted on Rogers and Evans
“the use of highly structured role play environment raises some important
questions about the extent to which children in early childhood settings
have the opportunity to exercise choice and to make decisions about the
nature and direction of their play”28
In addition, according to Ladousse “Perhaps the most important
reason for using Role Play is that it is fun”.29
In role play technique the
students expected enjoy when they play their roles in front of the class.
While students understand what is expected of them, they thoroughly
enjoy letting their imagination.
27
Sally Featherstones with Anne Cummings, Role-Play in the Early Years, (London: A&C
Black Publishers, 2009), p.6. 28
Sue Rogers and Julie Evans, Inside Role Play in Early Childhood Education, (New York:
Routledge Taylor and Francis Group), p.37.
29
Gillian Porter Ladousse, Role Play, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), p.7
21
The writer can conclude that the using of role play in teaching
speaking for the students are attracting the students‟ interest in speaking,
decreasing the students anxiety of speaking, increasing the students
imaginative and creativity, and achieving the goals of speaking.
3. Types of Roles in Role Play
There are some types of roles in a role play that explained by
Smilansky and Shefatya quoted on Rogers”:
a. Functional play involves repetition and imitation, and offers
the child the opportunity for exploration of the environment
b. Constructive play appears in early childhood but may
characterize play throughout childhood and even adulthood.
It involves manipulation and exploration of the material. It
also involves the addition of a preconceived plan
c. Games with rules are divided into two distinct forms of
games. First, there are table games such as dominoes, cards,
etc. Second, there are physical games such as hide and seek
and ball games. Both require children to accept the
existence of rules and to modify their behaviors accordingly
d. Dramatic play is a distinct form of play with an important
distinction between dramatic play and its more mature
form, sociodramatic play, which must also involve
cooperation between at least two children.”30
Thus, the overall aim of those types of role is offer a way of
understanding role play since it considers the play environment or context
as significant in shaping children‟s perceptions and to train students to
deal with unpredictable nature of language.
30
Ibid.,p.33.
22
4. The Purpose of Role Play
The main purpose of role play according to Tolan and Lendrum “A
Role play can develop skills by inviting participants to engage with each
other more directly and immediately through the use of roles.”31
It means
the students need to communicate the play theme to one another, and they
need to interpret from the play environment and from the gestures or facial
expressions. The realistic communication situation gives the students new
experience is good for remembering what they have learned.
Moreover, the purposed of Role play is the students should be
active in the class. In role play activities, students pretend as they are in
various social contexts and have a variety of social roles. As ur stated
“Role play is used to all of activities where learners imagine themselves in
a situation outside classroom.”32
In additions Tolan and Landrum stated “purpose of role play (a)
project their own experiences to develop their own imaginative and
emphatic capacities; and (b) think about and discuss different facilitative
responses.”33
It means the purpose of role play as an activity which a
person imitates, consciously or unconsciously, and a role uncharacteristic
of the students to develop their imaginative.
The writer concludes the goal of role play in teaching speaking is
to improve the students‟ speaking skill without making students anxious
and afraid of trying to speak English.
5. The Advantages of Role Play
In teaching speaking using Role Play, the students are given a
situation in performing their role play and this technique will be effective
31
Janet Tolan and Susan Lendrum, Case Material and Role Play in Counseling Training,
(London and New York: Routledge, 1995), p.26. 32
Penny Ur, A Course in Teaching Language, loc.cit. 33
Tolan and Lendrum, loc.cit.
23
if the students confident and cooperative. As Ur stated “This is virtually
the only way we can give our learners the opportunity to practice
improvising a range of real life spoken language in the classroom, and is
an extremely effective technique if the students are confident and
cooperative; but more inhabited or anxious people find role play difficult
and sometimes even embarrassing.”34
Besides, role play also train students‟ intellectual, social and
imagination because role the students involves in problem solving; to
encourage negotiation, to develop in communication to one another, etc.
As Rogers and Evans stated “We can summaries the main points of this
chapter as follows:
a. Role play encourages representational thinking
b. Role play helps children to develop perspective taking
skills
c. Role play displays children‟s language competence
d. Role play involves problem solving
e. Role play encourages turn taking and negotiation
f. In role play, children have a strong desire to affiliate with
one another and to maintain peer interactions
g. In role play, children have a strong to self generate themes
h. Role play helps to establish and sustain children‟s peer
culture.”35
Another advantages in teaching speaking through role play
technique based on Tolan and Lendrum:”Role play enables them to
practice their skills in a protected environment before they transfer them to
their own work.”36
It means in role play the students usually try to
34
Penny Ur,op.cit., p.133. 35
Sue Rogers and Julie Evans, op.cit., pp.37-38. 36
Tolan and Lendrum,op.cit, p.26.
24
complement the work which course members undertake on their practice
placement. Role play provides the practice in communicating.
Based on the statement above, the writer assumes that role play
gives many advantages: as follows: improving speaking ability, motivating
them to practice their English, and the most important one is the students
feel fun in learning English because role play is also a kind of games.
6. Teaching Speaking Using Role Play
In teaching speaking skill through role play, the teacher and
collaborator ask the students to perform group by group. The teacher
should give the topic which is related to a standard competence and a
based competence. For example: the teacher gives the topic to the students
based on the second grade of junior high school students‟ standard
competence and based competence, such as: “to deliver meaning in short
verbal simple transactional and interpersonal conversation to interact with
their surroundings. It also supported by based competence: to deliver
meaning in a variety of simple spoken transactional and interpersonal
conversations accurately, fluently, and meaningfully to interact with the
surrounding environment that involves speech acts: ask for, give, refuse
favor, ask for, give, and reject things, admit and deny the facts, and ask for
and give opinions37
.
In addition, to hold role playing, the teacher must prepare some
steps to make good performance. Here are stages in role play activity:38
a. The teacher arranges or prepares scenario that will be
performed by the students.
37
Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan, Kurikulum 2006, Standar Isi Untuk Satuan
Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, (Jakarta:2006), p. 289. 38
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, Model Pembelajaran yang Efektif, (Jakarta:
Depdiknas, 2009), p.4.
25
b. The teacher appoints some students to learn about the
scenario several days before teaching and learning activity.
c. The teacher makes groups of students consist of five people
per group.
d. The teacher explains about competence will be achieved.
e. The teacher calls a group of students who have been chosen
to play prepared scenario
f. Each student in his/her group observes scenario being
performed.
g. After finishing performance, each student is given work
sheet for discussing each group performance.
h. Every group which has performed gives conclusion about
what scenario has been performed.
i. The teacher gives general conclusion.
j. Evaluation
k. Closing
C. Previous Study
The writer found some previous study about Role Play technique.
He took two previous studies; those were Nurina Permata Sari and Agus
Budiman.
The first previous study is conducted by Sari under the title
Improving Students‟ Speaking ability by using Role Play (A Classroom
Action Research at the first grade students of SMPN 251 Jakarta Timur).39
This study is aimed at developing Students‟ Speaking ability at first grade
of SMPN 251 Jakarta Timur through Role Play activities. The method of
the study used a classroom action research (CAR). She did two cycles in
which each cycle consists of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting.
The data were gathered through qualitative and quantitative data. The 39
Nurina Permata Sari, Improving Students’ Speaking Ability by Using Role Play, Skripsi,
(Tangerang: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2006), not published.
26
qualitative data were gained by analyzing the interview and observation
result. Moreover, quantitative data were obtained from the students‟
speaking score of pre test and post test and questionnaire. The result of
this study indicated that the implementation of role play technique was
successful. Besides, the result of observation, interview and questionnaire
showed that by using role play technique students were active involved in
the classroom.
The second previous study is conducted by Budiman under the title
the use of Role Play to enhance students‟ speaking ability (A Classroom
Action Research at the third grade students of Daarul Ma‟arif Junior High
School)40
. This research is aimed at knowing whether students‟ speaking
skill could be improved by using role play and to know how the
implementation of these technique. The correspondent of this research
consisted of 30 students. The method of this research used classroom
action research (CAR). Similarly, he used the same cycle as the first
previous study which consisted of planning, acting, observing, and
reflecting. In sustaining the research result, two types of data are collected;
qualitative data that derived from observation and interview towards the
students and the teacher as well. On the other hand, quantitative data were
designed by pre test and post test. The last the data would be analyzed by
using descriptive analysis and statistic. The result of this study showed that
the implementation of role play towards students‟ speaking skill is
effective. In addition, the interview result showed the students were more
motivated and interested in learning English.
The similarity between both previous studies with this research is
aimed at knowing the effectiveness of teaching speaking by using Role
Play technique. Besides, there are two differences between both previous
studies and this study. The first, both previous studies used A Classroom
40
Agus Budiman, Role Play to Enhance Students’ Speaking Ability, Skripsi, (Tangerang: UIN
Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2004), not published.
27
Action Research (CAR) method, while this study uses an experimental
method. Second, the sampling of the first previous study was the first
grade of junior high school students and the second previous study was the
third grade of Junior High School students. However, the sampling of this
study is the second grade of Junior High School students.
D. Theoretical Thinking
It has been mentioned before in the above discussion that speaking
involves two ways communication with interactive role switching between
the speaker, who conveys a message, and the listener, who interprets
responds to it. Speaking is one of the four language basic skills that occur
in every situation. Learners of a language should develop effective
communication skill in daily situations.
The writer concludes from some experts that role play is a
technique which involves fantasy or imagination to be someone else or to
be ourselves in a specific situation for a while, improvising dialogue and
creating a real world scenario.
A role play is a highly flexible learning activity which has a wide
scope for variation and imagination. According to Ladousse, role play uses
different communicative techniques and develops fluency in the language,
promotes interaction the classroom and increases motivation.
Role play can improve learners speaking skills in any situation, and
can help learners to interact. As for the shy learners, role play helps by
providing a mask, where learners with difficulty in conversation are
liberated. In addition, it is fun and most learners will agree that enjoyment
leads to better learning.
It can be seen that role play is a technique which can develop
students speaking ability. The meaning delivers fluency in target language,
28
promotes students to speak or interact with others in the classroom,
increases motivation and makes the teaching learning process more enjoy.
E. Hypothesis of the Research
There are two hypothesis of this research:
1. The alternative hypothesis (H1) shows that using role play is effective
in teaching speaking.
2. The null hypothesis (Ho) shows that using role play is not effective in
teaching speaking.
29
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Place and Time of the Research
The research of this study was held at SMPN 244 North Jakarta. It
located on Jl. Cilincing Bakti VI Jakarta. The research was conducted into
six meeting included the conduction of pre-test and post-test from 7th
up to
May 31st, 2014.
B. The Method of the Research
In this quantitative research the writer uses a quasi-experimental
study by using “pre-test and post-test design”. In this research, the
researcher wants to see whether the role play technique is effective in
teaching speaking for second grade students of junior high school. There
were two classes in this research namely experimental class and controlled
class. This research conducts in six meeting. Each meeting conducted with
a lesson plan specifically designed by the writer based on existing
curriculum and proposed theories whether in the experimental class or in
the control class.
C. Population and Sampling
The populations of the study are students at SMPN 244 North
Jakarta. There are six classes in second grade. The writer uses purposive
sampling and took two classes for sampling; class A for Experimental
class and Class D for Controlled class. In each class contains 28 students.
It means the amount populations from two classes are 56 students.
30
D. The Technique of Collecting Data
The data needs to be analyzed in order to get answer of the
research of quantitative data; those were taken from the scores of students
during pre-test and post-test through speaking test.
E. The Research Instrument
The writer uses a test as the research instrument to see the
effectiveness of teaching speaking by using role play. The writer gives oral
test to the students in the pre-test and the post-test at the first meeting and
the last meeting. For measuring the effectiveness of using a role play in
teaching speaking, the writer divides the score into five components based
on Penny McKay1; those are Comprehension, Fluency, Vocabulary,
Pronunciation, and Grammar.
The writer scores all five components of speaking skill whether in
the pre-test and the post-test of experimental class and control class.
Hereby, the instrument used to get the data needed in the research
followed:
Table 3.1
Five Components of Grading Speaking Scale:
Comprehension
Understand everyday conversation and
normal classroom discussions without
difficulty.
5 93-99
Understands nearly everything at
normal speed. Although occasional
repetition may be necessary.
4 83-92
Understand most of what is said at
slower-than-normal speed with
repetition.
3 73-82
Has great difficulty following what is
said. can comprehend only “socal
conversation”spoken slowly and with
frequent repittition.
2 63-72
1 Penny Mckay, Assessing Young Language Learners, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2006), pp. 290-292
31
Cannot understand even simple
conversation. 1
Below
62
Fluency
Speech in everyday conversation and in
classroom discussion is fluent and
effortless approximating that of a
native speaker.
5 93-99
Speech in everyday communication
and classroom discussion in generally
fluent, with occasional lapses while the
students searches for the correct
manner of expression.
4 83-92
Speech in everyday communication
and classroom dicussion is frequently
disrupted by the student’s search for
the correct manner of expression.
3 73-82
Usually hesiatant; often forced into
silence by languge limitations. 2 63-72
Speech is so halting and fragmentary as
to make conversation virtually
impossible.
1 Below
62
Vocabulary
Use of Vocabulary and idioms
approximates that of a native speaker. 5 93-99
Occasionally uses inappropriate terms
or must rephrase ideas because of
inadequate vocabulary.
4 83-92
Frequently uses the wrong words
conversation somewhat limited because
of inadequte vocabulary.
3 73-82
Misuse of words and very limited
vocabulary make comprehension quite
difficult.
2 63-72
Vocabulary limitations so extreme as
to make conversation virtually
impossible.
1 Below
62
Pronunciation
Pronunciation and intonation
approximates that a native speaker. 5 93-99
Always intelligible, though one is
concious of a definite accent and
occasinal inappropriate intonation
patterns.
4 83-92
32
Pronunciation problems necessitate
concentration on the part of listener
and occasionally lead to
misunderstanding.
3 73-82
Very hard to understand because
pronunciation problem, must
frequently be asked to repeat in order
to be understood.
2 63-72
Pronunciation problem so severe as to
make speech virtually unintelligible. 1
Below
62
Grammar
Grammatical usage and word order
approximate a native speaker’s. 5 93-99
Occasionally make grammatical or
word order errors which do not obscure
meaning.
4 83-92
Makes frequent errors of grammar and
word order which occasionally obscure
meaning.
3 73-82
Grammar and word order error make
comprehension difficult. Must often
rephrase or restrict what is said to basic
patterns.
2 63-72
Errors in grammar and word order so
severe as to make speech virtually
unintelligible.
1 Below
62
F. The Technique for Data Analysis
1. Validity
The researcher used content validity to attain students the evidence
of valid instrument. The researcher uses the school English syllabus as the
main achievement. There are 5 points will be measured in terms of
Comprehension, Fluency, Vocabulary, Pronunciation, and Grammar. The
researcher did consultation to the thesis advisor and the English teacher
related to validity of instrument in which the test would be given to the
students. In order to the instrument is valid (see the appendix); the
researcher had made role play card, the rating scale, and the instruction
based on the SK-KD (StandarKompetensi-KompetensiDasar).
33
2. Reliability
The researcher used Inter-rater reliability (the researcher and the
English teacher) to score the same students’ performance with the same
rating scale. The researcher has provided the rating scale and also the
result of scoring inter-rater reliability (scored by the researcher and the
English teacher) in order to the instrument is reliable (see the appendix).
Having the pre-test data, the writer analyzed and processed the data
using statistic calculator of T-test formula with significance degree 5%.2
The formula is follows:
The T-test formula is stated as follows:
M 1 : Mean of the Difference of Experiment Class
M 2 : Mean of the Difference of Control Class
SE M 1 : Standard Error of Experiment Class
SE M 2 : Standard Error of Control Class
The Procedure of calculation ware as follows:
2 Prof. DR. Sugiono, StatistikPenelitian, (Bandung: Alphabeta, 2004), attached.
34
1. Determine mean of variable with formula:
=
2. Determine mean of variable Y with formula:
=
3. Determine Standard deviation variable X with formula:
SDx or SD1 =
4. Determine Standard deviation of variable Y with formula:
SDy or SD2 =
5. Determine Standard error of variable X with formula:
SE Mx =
6. Determine standard error of variable Y with formula:
SE My =
7. Determine standard error means of differences mean of
variable X and variable Y, with formula:
SEMx-My =
8. Determining t0 with formula:
9. Determining t-table in significance level 5% with Degree of
Freedom (df):
df = (N1+N2) – 2
3. Normality
Normality test is done towards two classes; those are experimental
class and control class. The normality test is done with Liliefors test with
35
requirement as follows: If score of Lmax ≤ Ltable , so the data comes from
the normal population, but if it is not fulfilled this requirement, so the data
does not come from normal population. Score of Lmax is got from Liliefors
formula as follows:
in which,
Zi = normality
Xi = data from every sample
= deviation standard
= mean
4. Homogeneity
After normality test gives indication that the data is distributed
normally, so it needs to do homogeneity test with Fisher test/ F test. The
steps of determining homogeneity are:
Dividing the highest variance by the lowest one. If the variances are
similar to each other, the F-value will be close to 1. The more the
variances differ, the larger the F-value will be.
Comparing the obtained F-value to the appropriate one in the table. If
the obtained F-value is equal to or larger from the table value, then the
data is lack homogeneity of variance.
G. Statistical Hypothesis
There are two kinds of hypothesis in this research, as follow:
36
1. Hypothesis Test
2. Verbal Hypothesis
H1 : The use of role play technique is effective in teaching speaking
to second grade of junior high school students of SMPN 244
North Jakarta
Ho : The use of role play technique is not effective in teaching
speaking to second grade of junior high school students of
SMPN 244 North Jakarta.
37
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH FINDINGS
A. Description of Data
The data that the writer used in this study is English oral test which
is taken from Role Play for Today.1 The students did the test in groups,
each groups consists of four students with given time 15 minutes for
preparation.
There are two types of technique that the writer used. They are
dialogue technique and role play technique.
In the dialogue technique, the students asked to memorize the
dialogue that made by the researcher about going to the doctor and to
describe colors, types, and extra information in the shoe shop. (See in
appendix)
Then, in the role play technique, the students were asked to make a
group and to choose one of the envelopes provided which contain two role
cards for them to play (see in appendix) then they performed it.
For the test, the researcher used instrument that was checked by
advisor lectures, the researcher gave the situation, as follows; in the post
office, there is a post office cashier and customers who want to do some
transaction. Then the customers ask a help to a post office cashier to fulfill
their transaction.
After that, the researcher made a group and each groups consist of
4 students as cashier, customer A, customer B, and customer C. Next, he
gave the students 15 minutes to read and prepare what they are going to
say based on the cards. The students needed to create a counter in front of
the classroom and put the customers in a queue, and told the cashier to call
1 Jason Anderson, Role Play for Today, (Hoe Lan: Delta Publishing, 2006), p.i.
38
up the customers by saying “next please”. When they had finished, they
should swap roles and start again.
Last, the researcher explained to the students about the rules and
instruction of role play. The researcher asked the students whether the
instruction given was clear enough and also observing how the role play
run.
The instrument was claimed have a good validity after signed by
the English teacher. Inter-rater reliability was checked through scoring the
oral test by the researcher and also the English teacher. It was to ensure
that the scorers got the gist of rating indicators and also to reduce the
subjectivity. As the result, both of scorers had clear undestanding about the
indicators for they decided the scores (see the appendix).
Before doing further description of the data, the researcher
presented the data of students’ pre-test, post-test, gained scores and the
distributing of data from the experimental class and the controlled class.
The data was illustrated into table.
The writer used pre-test and post-test based on the syllabus for
second grade Junior High School at SMP N 244 North Jakarta. The
students did test by grouping which consisted of four students. The writer
gave the same situation to the students in the pre-test and the post-test
whether in the experimental class and control class. It aimed for avoiding
the bias in measuring the effectiveness of using a role play technique in
teaching speaking.
The tests focused on the five components of speaking skill based
on Penny McKay; those were: Comprehension, Fluency, Vocabulary,
Pronunciation, and Grammar. The students’ scores could be classified as
followed:
Firstly, the writer gave pre-test to the students of experimental class
and control class. To process the data, the writer gave the scores of the pre-
39
test by using scoring sheet directly which contain five components
speaking. The description of the pre-test data as followed:
I. The Description of the pre-test data:
a. Comprehension scores
The average of comprehension test for the pre-test in the
experimental class is 64.46 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 72.5 and the lowest score is 60. Besides, the average of
pre-test in the control class is 67.8 from 28 students. The highest
score is 77.5 and the lowest score is 60 (See Appendix).
b. Fluency scores
The average of fluency test for the pre-test in the
experimental class is 68.12 from 28 students. Furthermore, the
highest score is 85 and the lowest score is 60. Besides, the average
of pre-test in the control class is 69.6 from 28 students. The highest
score is 82.5 and the lowest score is 60 (See Appendix).
c. Vocabulary scores
The average of vocabulary test for the pre-test in the
experimental class is 66.78 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 82.5 and the lowest score is 60. Besides, the average of
pre-test in the control class is 68.03 from 28 students. The highest
score is 80 and the lowest score is 65 (See Appendix).
d. Pronunciation scores
The average of pronunciation test for the pre-test in the
experimental class is 68.52 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 80 and the lowest score is 60. Besides, the average of pre-
40
test in the control class is 68.66 from 28 students. The highest score
is 82.5 and the lowest score is 60 (See Appendix).
e. Grammar scores
The average of grammar test for the pre-test in the
experimental class is 66.5 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 85 and the lowest score is 60. Besides, the average of pre-
test in the control class is 67.95 from 28 students. The highest score
is 77.75 and the lowest score is 60 (See Appendix).
61
62636465666768
6970
Comprehension
Fluency
Vocabulary
Pronunciation
Gramm
ar
Experimental Class
Control Class
Figure 4.1
The results of pre-test of Experimental Class and Control Class
Secondly, the writer did the post-test in the experimental
class and the control class, as followed:
II. The Description of Post-test Data
a. Comprehension scores
The average of comprehension test for the post-test in the
experimental class is 72.32 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 82.5 and the lowest score is 65. Besides, the average of
41
post-test in the control class is 69.96 from 28 students. The highest
score is 77.5 and the lowest score is 60 (See Appendix).
b. Fluency scores
The average of fluency test for the post-test in the
experimental class is 75.89 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 85 and the lowest score is 60. Besides, the average of post-
test in the control class is 71.98 from 28 students. The highest score
is 85 and the lowest score is 61.5 (See Appendix).
c. Vocabulary scores
The average of vocabulary test for the post-test in the
experimental class is 74.10 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 85 and the lowest score is 65. Besides, the average of post-
test in the control class is 69.03 from 28 students. The highest score
is 85 and the lowest score is 60 (See Appendix).
d. Pronunciation scores
The average of pronunciation test for the post-test in the
experimental class is 74.55 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 85 and the lowest score is 70.89. Besides, the average of
post-test in the control class is 61.5 from 28 students. The highest
score is 85 and the lowest score is 61.5 (See Appendix).
e. Grammar scores
The average of grammar test for the post-test in the
experimental class is 74.46 from 28 students. Moreover, the highest
score is 85 and the lowest score is 65. Besides, the average of post-
test in the control class is 70.32 from 28 students. The highest score
is 82.5 and the lowest score is 62.5 (See Appendix).
42
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
Comprehension
Fluency
Vocabulary
Pronunciation
Gramm
ar
Experimental Class
Control Class
Figure 4.2
The results of post-test of Experimental Class and Control
Class
From the description of the data above, the writer assumed that the
average score of five components of speaking skill in the experimental
class were improved than the control class.
1. Pre-test scores
The pre-test scores of two experimental classes and a
controlled class are described in table 4.1. The table consists of
three columns, the first column showed the students’ identification
number. Each of class contained of 28 students. The second column
showed the pre-test scores of students in experimental class A. The
third column showed the scores of students in controlled class.
43
Table 4.1
The students’ scores of pre-test of experimental class (VIII-A)
and controlled class (VIII-D)
Experimental Class (Class A)
Control Class (Class D)
No Name Score Name Score
1 AF 81 AV 72
2 AN 73 AA 63
3 AM 62 AP 66
4 DA 65 AS 71
5 DS 76 AR 62
6 EW 69 CY 74
7 FR 64 DP 72
8 FA 60 DK 63
9 FT 62 DD 64
10 FD 67 DC 71
11 FR 63 DO 74
12 FF 64 EF 70
13 LG 66 F 76
44
14 LA 66 FS 74
15 LS 63 IN 73
16 MA 71 MF 62
17 MV 64 MFR 63
18 MN 61 MZ 63
19 NM 64 MS 70
20 R 67 NA 72
21 RS 72 NAP 80
22 RA 65 ON 64
23 S 78 SF 65
24 SH 65 SK 66
25 SM 70 SH 70
26 TN 68 SV 67
27 WP 61 SP 63
28 YR 73 S 71
∑ 1880 ∑ 1921
Average 67.14 Average 68.61
The table 4.1 showed the pre-test score of experimental
class and controlled class. The test was given at the first meeting
before the treatment took place. Based on the table above, it is
45
known that the lowest score of experimental class is 60 and the
lowest score in the controlled class is 62.
2. Post-test scores
The description of students’ post-test scores in experimental
class A, experimental class B and in controlled class are presented
on the table 4.2. The test was given in the last meeting after all of
the treatments were done. The table shows the comparison of the
students’ post-test scores between the three classes, each of class
has the same number of students. The total students of the two
classes are 56 students.
Table 4.2
The students’ scores of post-test of experimental class (VIII-A)
and controlled class (VIII-D)
Experimental Class (Class A)
Control Class (Class D)
No Name Score Name Score
1 AF 83 AV 74
2 AN 76 AA 65
3 AM 72 AP 69
4 DA 75 AS 70
5 DS 78 AR 68
6 EW 77 CY 77
7 FR 74 DP 76
46
8 FA 70 DK 67
9 FT 63 DD 71
10 FD 77 DC 71
11 FR 69 DO 75
12 FF 70 EF 71
13 LG 75 F 79
14 LA 75 FS 76
15 LS 74 IN 72
16 MA 82 MF 63
17 MV 71 MFR 65
18 MN 65 MZ 65
19 NM 72 MS 73
20 R 77 NA 71
21 RS 81 NAP 83
22 RA 67 ON 67
23 S 83 SF 67
24 SH 77 SK 69
25 SM 75 SH 71
26 TN 77 SV 70
27 WP 70 SP 65
47
28 YR 83 S 69
∑ 2088 ∑ 1979
Average 74.57 Average 70.68
The table 4.1 showed the post-test score of experimental
class and controlled class. The test was given at the first meeting
before the treatment took place. Based on the table above, it is
known that the lowest score of experimental class is 63 and the
lowest score in the controlled class is 63.
3. Gained score
After showing the comparison of students’ pre and post-test
scores, the table shows the gained score among those two classes.
The gained score can be seen from the increasing score of students’
pre-test scores compared with students’ post-test scores.
Table 4.3
The students’ gained scores comparison between pre-test and
post-test in experimental class (VIII-A) and controlled class
(VIII-D)
Experimental Class
Control Class
No Name Score Name Score
1 AF 2 AV 2
2 AN 3 AA 2
48
3 AM 10 AP 3
4 DA 10 AS -1
5 DS 2 AR 6
6 EW 8 CY 3
7 FR 10 DP 4
8 FA 10 DK 4
9 FT 1 DD 7
10 FD 10 DC 0
11 FR 6 DO 1
12 FF 6 EF 1
13 LG 9 F 3
14 LA 9 FS 2
15 LS 11 IN -1
16 MA 11 MF 1
17 MV 7 MFR 2
18 MN 4 MZ 2
19 NM 8 MS 3
20 R 10 NA -1
21 RS 9 NAP 3
22 RA 2 ON 3
49
23 S 5 SF 2
24 SH 12 SK 3
25 SM 5 SH 1
26 TN 9 SV 3
27 WP 9 SP 2
28 YR 10 S -2
∑ 208 ∑ 58
Average 7.43 Average 2.07
The table 4.3 showed that the minimum score of
experimental class is 1 the minimum score of controlled class is -2.
The highest score of experimental class is 12 and controlled class is
7. The average gained score of experimental class is 7.43 and for
controlled class is 2.07.
B. Analysis of Data
After the researcher got and described the data, then he analyzed
the data. The analysis of data will be presented in five points namely
results of pre-test, results of post-test, normality test, homogeneity test,
and hypothesis test.
1. Results of Pre-test of Experimental and Control Class
a. Experimental Class
Results gained from a pre-test in class VIII A as an
experimental class of this research are presented in a frequency
distribution table below:
50
Table 4.4
The Frequency Distribution of the Experimental Class Pre-test
No Interval Low Class
Boundary
Frequency
Absolute Relative
1 60 – 63 59.5 7 25%
2 64 – 67 63.5 11 39.29%
3 68 – 71 67.5 4 14.29%
4 72 – 75 71.5 3 10.71%
5 76 – 79 75.5 2 7.14%
6 80 – 83 79.5 1 3.57%
Figure 4.3
Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Experimental Class
Pre-test
51
The lowest score in class interval was 60 while the highest
one was 83. By using Sturgess rule, there were 6 classes for class
interval. Then, the length of the interval was 4. From the result
which could be seen from the table 4.4, the low class boundary
from the first class interval was 59.5, while the low class boundary
from the sixth class interval was 82.5. The total absolute frequency
was 28. In addition, the total frequency which was formulated in
percentage (relative frequency) was 100%. The table showed that
the most students’ pre-test score appeared in the experimental class
was in class interval 64-67 with highest absolute frequency 11.
However, the lowest absolute frequency was in class interval 80-83
with absolute frequency 1. For the completed statistical calculation
description, it can be seen on appendix.
b. Control class
Table 4.5
The Frequency Distribution of the Control Class Pre-test
No Interval Low Class
Boundary
Frequency
Absolute Relative
1 60 – 62 59.5 2 7.14%
2 63 – 65 62.5 8 28.57%
3 66 – 68 65.5 3 10.71%
4 69 – 71 68.5 7 25%
5 72 – 74 71.5 7 25%
6 75 – 77 74.5 1 3.57%
52
Figure 4.4
Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Experimental
Class Pre-test
Based on the table of frequency distribution of the pre-test
above, it could be obtained someinformation. The numbers of the
class interval were 6 and the length of the interval was 3. For the
class interval, the lowest score was 60 and the highest one was 77.
In addition, he total numbers of students were 28 students.The
most frequency appearance on distribution was the score 63-65
with the numbers of absolute frequency 8. However, the least
appearance of score was interval 75-77 with frequency 1. The total
frequency which was formulated into relative frequency was
100%.Then, the low class boundary of the first class interval was
59,5 and the low class boundary of the last class was 74.5. For the
completestatistical calculation description, it can be seen on
appendix.
53
2. Results of Post-test of Experimental and Control
Class
a. Experimental Class
Table 4.6
The Frequency Distribution of the Experimental Class Post test
No Interval Low Class
Boundary
Frequency
Absolute Relative
1 63 – 66 62.5 2 7.14%
2 67 – 70 66.5 5 17.86%
3 71 – 74 70.5 5 17.86%
4 75 – 78 74.5 11 39.29%
5 79 – 82 78.5 2 7.14%
6 83 – 86 82.5 3 10.71%
Figure 4.5
Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Experimental Class
Post-test
54
Based on the table of frequency distribution above, it could
be obtained some information. The numbers of the class interval
were 6 and the length of the interval was 4. For the class interval,
the lowest score was 63 and the highest one was 86. In addition,
the total numbers of students were 28 students. The most frequency
appearance on distribution was the score 75-78 with the numbers
of absolute frequency 11. However, the least appearance of score
was interval 63-66 and 79-82 with frequency 2 for each. The total
frequency which was formulated into relative frequency was 100%.
Then, the low class boundary of the first class interval was 62,5
and the low class boundary of the last class was 82.5. For the
complete statistical calculation description, it can be seen on
appendix.
b. Control class
Table 4.7
The Frequency Distribution of the Control Class Post-test
No Interval Low Class
Boundary
Frequency
Absolute Relative
1 63 – 66 62.5 5 17.86%
2 67 – 70 66.5 9 32.14%
3 71 – 74 70.5 8 28.57%
4 75 – 78 74.5 4 14.29%
5 79 – 82 78.5 1 3.57%
6 83 – 86 82.5 1 3.57%
55
Figure 4.6
Diagram of Frequency Distribution of the Control Class Post-
test
Based on the table of frequency distribution above, it could
be obtained that the numbers of the class interval were 6 and the
length of the interval was 4. For the class interval, the lowest score
was 63 and the highest one was 86. In addition, the total numbers
of students were 28 students. The most frequency appearance on
distribution was the score 67-70 with the numbers of absolute
frequency 9. However, the least appearance of score was interval
79-82 with frequency 1. The total frequency which was formulated
into relative frequency was 100%. Then, the low class boundary of
the first class interval was 62,5 and the low class boundary of the
last class was 82,5. For the complete statistical calculation
description, it can be seen on appendix.
56
3. Normality Test
The normality test is proposed to know whether the data is
normally distributed or not. After finishing the normality test, the
researcher got two kinds of value; Lmax and Ltable. The both values
can be used to see the normality of the data.
We use the criteria below to see the normality of the data:
H1 : Lmax>Ltable
H0 : Lmax<Ltable
Note :
H1 = Data is not normally distributed
H0 = Data is normally distributed
a. The Normality Test of Pre-Test in Experimental Class
Table 4.8
Calculation of Pre-Test Normality in Experimental Class
No. X f fX fX2
p=f/n ∑P z = (Xi-X)/s ф T=ф-∑p
1. 60 1 60 3600 0.035714 0.035714 -1.35538086 0.0901 -0.05439
2. 61 2 122 7442 0.071429 0.107143 -1.16562754 0.1251 -0.01796
3. 62 2 124 7688 0.071429 0.178571 -0.97587422 0.1685 0.010071
4. 63 2 126 7938 0.071429 0.25 -0.7861209 0.2206 0.0294
5. 64 4 256 16384 0.142857 0.392857 -0.59636758 0.2776 0.115257
6. 65 3 195 12675 0.107143 0.5 -0.40661426 0.3446 0.1554
7. 66 2 132 8712 0.071429 0.571429 -0.21686094 0.4168 0.154629
8. 67 2 134 8978 0.071429 0.642857 -0.02710762 0.492 0.150857
9. 68 1 68 4624 0.035714 0.678571 0.162645703 0.5636 0.114971
10. 69 1 69 4761 0.035714 0.714286 0.352399024 0.6368 0.077486
11. 70 1 70 4900 0.035714 0.75 0.542152345 0.7054 0.0446
12. 71 1 71 5041 0.035714 0.785714 0.731905665 0.7673 0.018414
13. 72 1 72 5184 0.035714 0.821429 0.921658986 0.8212 0.000229
14. 73 2 146 10658 0.071429 0.892857 1.111412307 0.8665 0.026357
15. 76 1 76 5776 0.035714 0.928571 1.680672269 0.9535 -0.02493
57
16. 78 1 78 6084 0.035714 0.964286 2.06017891 0.9803 -0.01601
17. 81 1 81 6561 0.035714 1 2.629438872 0.9957 0.0043
Total 1166 28 1880 127006
=
= 4535.93 – 4508.16
= 27.77
S = 5.27
S= 5.27
S2= 27.77
rata2(x)= 67.14286
Lmax= 0.15
Ltable= 0.164
The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L
(0.05)(28) = 0.164
H1 : Lmax> 0.164
H0 : Lmax< 0.164
In the table 4.4, the Lmax value is 0.15. Therefore, H0 is
accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable. It
means that the data of pre-test in experimental class is normally
distributed.
58
b. The Normality Test of Post-Test in Experimental Class
Table 4.9
Calculation of Post-Test Normality in Experimental Class
No. X f fX fX2 p=f/n ∑P z = (Xi-X)/s Ф T=ф-∑p
1. 63 1 63 3969 0.035714 0.035714 -2.2164751 0.0136 0.022114
2. 65 1 65 4225 0.035714 0.071429 -1.83333333 0.0336 -0.03783
3. 67 1 67 4489 0.035714 0.107143 -1.45019157 0.0735 0.033643
4. 69 1 69 4761 0.035714 0.142857 -1.06704981 0.1446 -0.00174
5. 70 3 210 14700 0.107143 0.25 -0.87547893 0.1922 0.0578
6. 71 1 71 5041 0.035714 0.285714 -0.68390805 0.2483 0.037414
7. 72 2 144 10368 0.071429 0.357143 -0.49233716 0.3121 0.045043
8. 74 2 148 10952 0.071429 0.428571 -0.1091954 0.4602 0.031629
9. 75 4 300 22500 0.142857 0.571429 0.082375479 0.5319 -0.03953
10. 76 1 76 5776 0.035714 0.607143 0.27394636 0.6064 -0.00074
11. 77 5 385 29645 0.178571 0.785714 0.465517241 0.3228 -0.46291
12. 78 1 78 6084 0.035714 0.821429 0.657088123 0.7422 0.079229
13. 81 1 81 6561 0.035714 0.857143 1.231800766 0.8907 -0.03356
14. 82 1 82 6724 0.035714 0.892857 1.423371648 0.9222 -0.02934
15. 83 3 249 20667 0.107143 1 1.614942529 0.9463 0.0537
Total 1103 28 2088 156462
=
= 5587.93 – 5560.89
= 27.25
S = 5.22
S= 5.22
59
The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L
(0.05)(28) = 0.164
H1 : Lmax> 0.164
H0 : Lmax< 0.164
In the table 4.5, the Lmax value is 0.08. Therefore, H0 is
accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable. It
means that the data of post-test in experimental class is normally
distributed.
c. The Normality Test of Pre-Test in Controlled Class
Table 4.10
Calculation of Pre-Test Normality in Controlled Class
No. X f fX fX2 p=f/n ∑P z = (Xi-X)/s Ф T=ф-∑p
1. 62 2 124 7688 0.071429 0.071429 -1.35728953 0.0885 -0.01707
2. 63 5 315 19845 0.178571 0.25 -1.15195072 0.1251 -0.1249
3. 64 2 128 8192 0.071429 0.321429 -0.94661191 0.1736 -0.14783
4. 65 1 65 4225 0.035714 0.357143 -0.7412731 0.2296 0.127543
5. 66 2 132 8712 0.071429 0.428571 -0.53593429 0.2981 0.130471
6. 67 1 67 4489 0.035714 0.464286 -0.33059548 0.3707 0.093586
7. 70 3 210 14700 0.107143 0.571429 0.285420945 0.6103 -0.03887
S2= 27.25
rata2(x)= 74.57143
Lmax= 0.08
Ltable= 0.1641
60
8. 71 3 213 15123 0.107143 0.678571 0.490759754 0.6879 -0.00933
9. 72 3 216 15552 0.107143 0.785714 0.696098563 0.7549 -0.03081
10. 73 1 73 5329 0.035714 0.821429 0.901437372 0.8159 0.005529
11. 74 3 222 16428 0.107143 0.928571 1.106776181 0.8643 0.064271
12. 76 1 76 5776 0.035714 0.964286 1.517453799 0.9345 0.029786
13. 80 1 80 6400 0.035714 1 2.338809035 0.9901 0.0099
Total 903 28 1921 132459
=
= 4730.68 – 4706.94
= 23.74
S = 4.87
S= 4.87
S2= 23.74
rata2(x)= 68.60714
Lmax= 0.13
Ltable= 0.1641
The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L
(0.05)(28) = 1.64.
H1 : Lmax> 0.164
H0 : Lmax< 0.164
61
In the table 4.6, the Lmax value is 0.13. Therefore, H0 is
accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable. It
means that the data of pre-test in controlled class is normally
distributed.
d. The Normality Test of Post- Test in Controlled Class
Table 4.11
Calculation of Post-Test Normality in Controlled Class
No. X f fX fX2 p=f/n ∑P z = (Xi-X)/s ф T=ф-∑p
1. 63 1 63 3969 0.035714 0.035714 -1.6587473 0.0495 0.013786
2. 65 4 260 16900 0.142857 0.178571 -1.22678186 0.1112 0.067371
3. 67 3 201 13467 0.107143 0.285714 -0.79481641 0.2148 0.070914
4. 68 1 68 4624 0.035714 0.321429 -0.57883369 0.2843 0.037129
5. 69 3 207 14283 0.107143 0.428571 -0.36285097 0.3594 0.069171
6. 70 2 140 9800 0.071429 0.5 -0.14686825 0.4443 0.0557
7. 71 5 355 25205 0.178571 0.678571 0.069114471 0.5239 0.154671
8. 72 1 72 5184 0.035714 0.714286 0.285097192 0.6103 0.103986
9. 73 1 73 5329 0.035714 0.75 0.501079914 0.6915 0.0585
10. 74 1 74 5476 0.035714 0.785714 0.717062635 0.7611 0.024614
11. 75 1 75 5625 0.035714 0.821429 0.933045356 0.8238 -0.00237
12. 76 2 152 11552 0.071429 0.892857 1.149028078 0.8729 -0.01996
13. 77 1 77 5929 0.035714 0.928571 1.365010799 0.9131 0.015471
14. 79 1 79 6241 0.035714 0.964286 1.796976242 0.9633 0.000986
15. 83 1 83 6889 0.035714 1 2.660907127 0.9961 0.0039
Total 1082 28 1979 140473
=
= 5016.89 – 4995.46
62
= 21.43
S = 4.63
S= 4.63
S2= 21.43
rata2(x)= 70.67857
Lmax= 0.15
Ltable= 0.1641
The Liliefors shows that the significant degree of 0.05 in L
(0.05)(28) = 1.64.
H1 : Lmax> 0.164
H0 : Lmax< 0.164
In the table 4.7, the Lmax value is 0.15. Therefore, H0 is
accepted because the result shows that Lmax is lower than Ltable. It
means that the data of post-test in controlled class is normally
distributed.
4. Homogeneity Test
Moreover, the writer did the homogeneity test for
measuring whether the students in the experimental class and the
controlled class have a same ability. Concerning to the
homogeneity test, he tested the score of pre-test and post-test in
both experimental and controlled class using Fisher test.
Hyphothesis:
63
H0 : The experimental class is homogenous to the controlled
class.
H1 : The experimental class is not homogenous to the
controlled class.
The criteria of the test:
α = 0.05
H0 : Fα(n1-1, n2-1) < F < α (n1-1, n2-1)
H1 : F >Fα (n1-1, n2-1)
The formula which is used is such below:
Or
Then, the writer got the result for Pre-test homogeneity as follows:
Post-test homogeneity test
64
F0.05(n1-1,n2-1) = 1.88
According to the calculation above, the data of
experimental and controlled class pre-test is homogenous. It can be
seen from F < Fα (n1-1, n2-1) or 1.17 < 1.88. The data of post-test
of both classes also shows their homogeneity it can be seen from F
< Fα (n1-1, n2-1) or 1.27 < 1.88. Thus, the writer concludes that
the data of pre-test and post-test for both classes are homogeneous.
5. Hypothesis Test
In this part, the writer would like to measure whether the
using of role play is effective in teaching speaking at SMPN 244
North Jakarta. Furthermore, the writer decided to compare the
result of tobserve with ttable to approve the hypothesis that the writer
has decided in the chapter two.
Tabel 4.12
Calculation of Hypothesis Test in the experimental class and
controlled class
Students' Identification
Number
X(Experimental
Class)
Y(Controlled
Class)
X-MX
Y-MY
(X-
MX)2
(Y-
MY)2
1 2 2 -5.46 -0.07 29.811
6
0.0049
2 3 2 -4.46 -0.07 19.891
6
0.0049
3 10 3 2.54 0.93 6.4516 0.8649
4 10 -1 2.54 -3.07 6.4516 9.4249
5 2 6 -5.46 3.93 29.811
6
15.444
9 6 8 3 0.54 0.93 0.2916 0.8649
7 10 4 2.54 1.93 6.4516 3.7249
65
8 10 4 2.54 1.93 6.4516 3.7249
9 1 7 -6.46 4.93 41.731
6
24.304
9 10 11 0 3.54 -2.07 12.531
6
4.2849
11 6 1 -1.46 -1.07 2.1316 1.1449
12 6 1 -1.46 -1.07 2.1316 1.1449
13 9 3 1.54 0.93 2.3716 0.8649
14 9 2 1.54 -0.07 2.3716 0.0049
15 11 -1 3.54 -3.07 12.531
6
9.4249
16 11 1 3.54 -1.07 12.531
6
1.1449
17 7 2 -0.46 -0.07 0.2116 0.0049
18 4 2 -3.46 -0.07 11.971
6
0.0049
19 8 3 0.54 0.93 0.2916 0.8649
20 10 -1 2.54 -3.07 6.4516 9.4249
21 9 3 1.54 0.93 2.3716 0.8649
22 2 3 -5.46 0.93 29.811
6
0.8649
23 5 2 -2.46 -0.07 6.0516 0.0049
24 12 3 4.54 0.93 20.611
6
0.8649
25 5 1 -2.46 -1.07 6.0516 1.1449
26 9 3 1.54 0.93 2.3716 0.8649
27 9 2 1.54 -0.07 2.3716 0.0049
28 10 -2 2.54 -4.07 6.4516 16.564
9 ∑ 209 58 0.12 0.04 288.96
48
107.85
72 Average 7.464286 2.071429 0.0042
86
0.0014
29
10.320
17
3.8520
43
From the table 4.8, the researcher would like to determine
the mean, standard of deviation, and standard error of variable X
(Experimental Class) and variable Y (Controlled class). He also
would like to determine the standard error of difference of mean of
variable X and Y, to and ttable. The calculations are explained in the
following steps:
1. Determining Mean of variable XA, with formula:
MX =
=
= 7.46
2. Determining variable Y:
66
MY =
=
= 2.07
3. Determining Standard of Deviation Score of Variable XA:
SDX =
=
=
= 3.21
4. Determining Standard of Deviation Score of Variable Y:
SDY =
=
=
= 1.96
5. Determining Standard Error of Mean of Variable XA, with
formula:
SEMX =
=
=
= 0.62
6. Determining Standard Error of Mean of Variable Y, with
formula:
67
SEMy =
=
=
= 0.38
7. Determining Standard Error of Difference of Mean of
Variable X and Y:
SEMX-MY =
=
=
=
= 0.72
8. Determining to with formula:
to =
=
= 7.49
9. Determining t-table in significance level 5% with degree of
freedom (df):
df = ( + )– 2
= ( 28 + 28 )– 2
= 56 – 2
= 54
*ttable= 2,00
The ttable showed that the degree of freedom (df) is 54 with
5% significant level, there is a gained value higher than 2.00. For
the critical value of the tobserve, the writer gained 7.49. From the
68
calculation above, it can be proven that the result of comparison
between the tobserve and the ttable, that is: 7.49 > 2.00 = tobserve>ttable.
C. Interpretation of the Data
The researcher had pre-test and post-test for experimental and
control class with the same test and motions. The mean score of
experimental class in pre-test was 67.14 and in post-test was 74.57. On the
other hand, The mean score of control class in pre-test was 68.60 and
70.68 for their post-test. The range of their mean score on pre-test and
post-test were actually quite different. The range of experimental class
mean score in pre-test and post test gained 7.43. Meanwhile, the range on
control class mean score gained 2.07.
Furthermore, based on the calculation data in the part of analysis
data, the writer can interpret that the scores of students’ speaking in the
experimental class is higher than the scores of students’ speaking in the
control class. It also can be proven by calculating the score of hypothesis
test that shows tobserve and the ttable, that is: 7.49 > 2.00 = tobserve>ttable. The
writer used t-test formula in the significance degree of 5% to do the best.
Thus, the using of role play in teaching speaking is effective for the second
grade students at SMPN 244 North Jakarta. It can be inferred that one of
the effective way to increase the speaking ability for the students is using a
role play.
The researcher concludes that role play could improve the students’
speaking ability because the students gave an opportunity to practice in
communication. As Diane stated “Role plays are very important in CLT
because they give students an opportunity to practice communicating in
69
different social contexts and in different social roles, and Role plays can be
set up so that they are very structured or in less a less structured way”2
2 Diane Larsen-Freeman, Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching, (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000), p.134.
70
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
The writer concludes that teaching speaking using role play
technique is effective. It can be seen from the gained score that is obtained
in the experimental class. The research shows the gained score obtained in
the experimental class (208) is higher than control class (58). And the
result of calculation of t-test shows that t0 is bigger than tt , to = 7.49 and tt
= 2.00 It means the writer hypothesis H1 (there is a significant difference in
teaching speaking by using role play technique to the second year of SMP
N 244, is accepted).
This result has answered the research question that the use of role
play in teaching speaking is quite effective. The use of role play makes the
speaking and learning activity more enjoyable and interesting. It’s because
role play helps the shy students by providing an opportunity, where
students with difficulty in conversation are liberated. In addition, it is fun
and most students will agree that enjoyment leads to better learning. The
use of role play makes the students more motivated in learning and easier
to grasp the lesson.
B. Suggestion
After conducting the research, the writer gives some suggestion for
teacher and students as follows:
a. For teacher:
1. The teacher should choose the materials that are appropriate
and not too difficult for the students.
2. Before assigning the role play to the students, the teacher
should make sure that the students have fully understood
and have the information they need.
71
3. The teacher should keep control the students’ activities.
4. The teacher should present the language materials by using
enjoyable, relaxed and understandable ways.
b. For the students:
1. The students are hoped not to be shy in acting out their role.
2. The students are hoped to active and creative in enriching
their vocabularies.
3. The students are hoped to use English when they practice
role play activities although it is hard for them.
4. The students should take part much in acting out role play.
5. The students should ask to the teacher if there is something
that they don’t understand regarding to the role play
activities
72
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Anderson, Jason. 2006. Role Play for Today. Hoe Lane: Delta Publishing
Badan Standar nasional Pendidikan. 2006. Standar Isi Untuk Satuan Pendidikan
Dasar dan Menengah. Jakarta.
Brown, Douglas. 2003. Language Assessment: Principle and Classroom Practice.
San Francisco: Longman.
Budiman, Agus. 2004. Role Play to Enhance Students’ Speaking Ability. Skripsi.
Tangerang: not published
Cameron, Lynne. 2001. Teaching Language to Young Learners. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Candlin, N. Christoper and Mercer, Neil. 2001. English Language Teaching in its
social context. London: Routledge.
Celle-Murcia, Mariane. 2001. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language.
Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2009. Model Pembelajaran yang Efektif. Jakarta:
Depdiknas
Farrel, Thomas.S.C. 2006. Succeeding with English Language Learners. California:
Corwin Press.
Featherstone. Sally and Cummings, Anne. 2009. Role-Play In The Early Years.
London: A&C Black Publishers Limited
Gottlieb, Margo. 2006. Assessing English Language Learners .California: Corwin
Press.
Harmer, Jeremy. 1998. How to Teach English – An Introduction of Practice English
Language Teaching. England: Addison Wesley Longman.
73
Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Pearson Education Limited.
Hughes, Rebecca. 2002. Teaching and Researching Speaking. London: Pearson
Education.
Ladousse, Gillian Porter. 2004. Role Play. New York: Oxford University Press.
Littlewood, William. 2002. Communicative Language Teaching-An Introduction.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McDonough, Jo and Shaw, Christopher. 2003. Materials and Method in ELT.
Oxford: Balckwell Publishing Ltd.
McKay, Penny. 2006. Assesing Young Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Nation, I.S.P and Newton, J. 2009. Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking. New
York: Routledge.
Olshtain, Elitea and Cohen, Andrew. 2001. Teaching Speech Act Behavior to
Nonnative Speakers. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.
Richard, Jack C & Renandya, Willy A. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: University Press.
Richards, Jack, C. and Rogers, Theodore, S. 1986. 2nd
Edition Approaches and
Methods in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, Sue and Evans, Julie. 2008. Inside Role-Play in Early Childhood Education.
London and New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group
Sari, Nurina Permata. 2006. Improving Students’ Speaking Ability by Using Role
Play. Skripsi. Tangerang: not published.
Snow, Don. 2007. From Language Learner to Language Teacher. Virginia: Teachers
of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.
Sugiono, Prof. DR. 2004. Statistik Penelitia. Bandung: Alphabeta
74
Ur, penny and Wright, Andrew. 2007. Five-Minutes Activities-A Resource Book of
Short Activity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ur, Penny.1996. A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
APPENDIX I
RPP (Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran)
SMP/MTs : SMP N 244 Jakarta Utara
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/semester : VIII/2 (Experimental Class)
Skill / Keterampilan : Speaking
Alokasi Waktu : 4 x 45menit
Standar Kompetensi :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional dan interpersonal lisan pendek
sederhana untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat.
Kompetensi Dasar :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional (to get things done) dan interpersonal
(bersosialisasi) pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa lisan secara akurat, lancar,
dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat yang melibatkan : meminta dan
memberi pendapat, menyatakan suka atau tidak suka, meminta klarifikasi, merespon secara
interpersonal.
Jenis teks : Conversation Transactional and Interpersonal
Tema : visiting doctor
Materi Utama : asking for and giving advice
1. Tujuan Pembelajaran :
Di akhir kegiatan pembelajaran siswa dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi dengan tepat, cermat teliti makna ungkapan yang digunakan untuk meminta,
memberi persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepontekun serta percaya diri.
2. Menyimak dialog yang diperdengarkan dan memilih/ menuliskan respon yang tepat &
komunikatif berdasarkan ungkapan yang didengar dengan teliti dan cermat agar siswa dapat
menerima perbedaan/ meghargai pendapat orang lain.
3. Membuat dialog untuk mengungkapkan makna dalam tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan menggunakan ungkapan yang tepat dengan sopan dan sesuai norma.
4. Melakukan dialog/bermain peran dengan menggunakan tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan percaya diri dan kerjasama yang baik,
2. Materi Pembelajaran
Visiting the Doctor
Student A – Patient
You are a patient at your local doctor’s surgery. Choose one of the illnesses from the chart
and tell the doctor the answers to these questions:
How, when and where did it start?
What symptoms have you got?
Have you taken any medicine or done anything else to help?
Target Language
It started… (a week ago)
I feel… (tired, hot, etc.)
I had an accident when…
It hurts here.
I’ve got… (a sore throat, a swollen ankle)
I can’t sleep.
Is it serious?
What should I do?
Student B – Doctor
You are the doctor. Listen to student A, who will describe her/his symptoms.
Ask questions using the Target Language expression
Tell the patient what you think the illness is.
Give the patient some advice
TARGET LANGUAGE
What seems to be the problem?
Does it hurt here?
Is the pain getting worse?
Do you have…(a cough, a temperature, a swollen ankle)?
Can you… (move your hand, go near parks and flowers)?
Are you allergic to anything?
I think you have…
You should I shouldn’t…
Try (not) to…(verb)
Look at the table below. It describes seven common reasons for going to the doctor. Complete
the table using the information from the boxes.
Symptoms
Diarrhea Red eyes
A sore throat Can’t move my hand
Insomnia (can’t sleep) A swollen ankle
Advice
Prescription medicine Take vitamin C
Go to hospital Use crutches
Don’t eat anything Take Paracetamol
Illness/Complaint Cause Symptoms Advice
A cold A virus, usually
caught through
contact and sneezing.
A runny nose, a
cough.
Keep warm, get some
rest.
The flu A virus, usually
caught through
contact or sneezing.
As for a cold, also a
high temperature,
aching bones and
head.
Go to bed.
Food poisoning Eating food that isn’t
fresh.
Sromache ache,
vomiting.
Get some rest, drink
water.
Stress Too many problems,
especially at work.
Worrying too much,
loss of appetite.
Take sleeping pills,
take a long holiday.
A broken arm A serious fall, (e.g.
off a ladder).
A very strong pain in
arm.
Set arm in plaster.
A sprained ankle An unexpected fall,
(e.g. when playing
football).
Can’t walk. Bandage the ankle.
Hay fever An allergy to flowers
and plants in summer
Runny nose. Stay away from parks
and gardens.
3. Teknik Pembelajaran : Role Play
4. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan :
a. Kegiatan Pendahuluan
Memberi salam
Berdoa
Mengecek Kehadiran
Memperkenalkan topic
Menjelaskan tujuan pembelajaran
b. Kegiatan Inti
Memperkenalkan role play
Memberikan kartu role play untuk masing-masing siswa sesuai perannya
Memberikan waktu untuk membaca dan memahami vocabulary yang ada di tabel
Memahami target language yang ada di tabel
Memberikan siswa 10-15 menit untuk mempersiapkan diri
c. Kegiatan penutup
Menanyakan kesulitan siswa selama KBM
Menyimpulkan materi pembelajaran
5. Sumber Belajar
a. Role Play for Today, Jason Anderson, Delta Publishing, 2006
b. Gambar-gambar yang relevan
6. Penilaian
a. Teknik: Tes Lisan
b. Bentuk : Role Play
c. Rubrik Penilaian
Comprehension
Understand everyday conversation and
normal classroom discussions without
difficulty.
Understands nearly everything at
normal speed. Although occasional
repetition may be necessary.
Understand most of what is said at
slower-than-normal speed with
repetition.
Has great difficulty following what is
said. can comprehend only “socal
conversation”spoken slowly and with
frequent repittition.
Cannot understand even simple
conversation.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Fluency
Speech in everyday conversation and in
classroom discussion is fluent and
effortless approximating that of a native
speaker.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom discussion in generally
fluent, with occasional lapses while the
students searches for the correct manner
of expression.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom dicussion is frequently
disrupted by the student’s search for the
correct manner of expression.
5
4
3
93-99
83-92
73-82
Usually hesiatant; often forced into
silence by languge limitations.
Speech is so halting and fragmentary as
to make conversation virtually
impossible.
2
1
63-72
Below 62
Vocabulary
Use of Vocabulary and idioms
approximates that of a native speaker.
Occasionally uses inappropriate terms
or must rephrase ideas because of
inadequate vocabulary.
Frequently uses the wrong words
conversation somewhat limited because
of inadequte vocabulary.
Misuse of words and very limited
vocabulary make comprehension quite
difficult.
Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to
make conversation virtually impossible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Pronunciation
Pronunciation and intonation
approximates that a native speaker.
Always intelligible, though one is
concious of a definite accent and
occasinal inappropriate intonation
patterns.
Pronunciation problems necessitate
concentration on the part of listener and
occasionally lead to misunderstanding.
Very hard to understand because
pronunciation problem, must frequently
be asked to repeat in order to be
understood.
5
4
3
2
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Pronunciation problem so severe as to
make speech virtually unintelligible.
1 Below 62
Grammar
Grammatical usage and word order
approximate a native speaker’s.
Occasionally make grammatical or
word order errors which do not obscure
meaning.
Makes frequent errors of grammar and
word order which occasionally obscure
meaning.
Grammar and word order error make
comprehension difficult. Must often
rephrase or restrict what is said to basic
patterns.
Errors in grammar and word order so
severe as to make speech virtually
unintelligible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Jakarta 23, Mei 2014
Mengetahui:
Kepala Sekolah SMPN 244 Jakarta Guru Praktikan Bahasa Inggris
Drs. Mulyana M.Noor Afdillah A.A
NIP. 196411181989031004
APPENDIX I
RPP (Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran)
SMP/MTs : SMP N 244 Jakarta Utara
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/semester : VIII/2 (Eksperimental Class)
Skill / Keterampilan : Speaking
Standar Kompetensi :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional dan interpersonal lisan pendek
sederhana untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat.
Kompetensi Dasar :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional (to get things done) dan interpersonal
(bersosialisasi) pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa lisan secara akurat, lancar,
dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat yang melibatkan tindak tutur:
meminta dan member jasa, meminta dan member barang, dan meminta dan member fakta.
Jenis teks : Conversation Transactional and Interpersonal
Tema : Shoe shop
Materi Utama : asking for and giving something
1. Tujuan Pembelajaran :
Di akhir kegiatan pembelajaran siswa dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi dengan tepat, cermat teliti makna ungkapan yang digunakan untuk meminta,
memberi persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepontekun serta percaya diri.
2. Menyimak dialog yang diperdengarkan dan memilih/ menuliskan respon yang tepat &
komunikatif berdasarkan ungkapan yang didengar dengan teliti dan cermat agar siswa dapat
menerima perbedaan/ meghargai pendapat orang lain.
3. Membuat dialog untuk mengungkapkan makna dalam tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan menggunakan ungkapan yang tepat dengan sopan dan sesuai norma.
4. Melakukan dialog/bermain peran dengan menggunakan tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan percaya diri dan kerjasama yang baik,
2. Materi Pembelajaran
Shoe Shop
A. Draw lines to complete the descriptions of the shoes in the pictures:
Colour Type Extra
of Shoe Information
I’m looking for some … A. beige slip-ons with buckles
B. white sandals with high heels
C. brown boots with laces
D. black trainers for work
B. Take it in turns to be the customer and the shop assistant.
Customer: you are looking for some shoes. Decide which style and colour.
Assistans: the classroom is your shop. Imagine you have lots of different style in the
shop.
1 Assistant greets customer
2 Customer says what s/he wants
3 Assistant shows customer some shoes
4 Customer chooses 2-3 pairs to try on
5 Assistant ask for size and gets the shoes
6 Customer tries shoes on, makes comments
7 They discuss fit/ style/ colour
8 Customer makes a decision
Target Language – Customer
Could I trey on those ones?
My size is…
They’re (a bit) too tight.
They’re not big enough.
I don’t like the colour.
They’re very comfortable.
Have you got…
…the next size up/down?
…something a bit cheaper?
How much are they?
I think I’ll take them.
I think I’ll leave it.
3. Teknik Pembelajaran : Role Play
4. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan :
a. Kegiatan Pendahuluan
Memberi salam
Berdoa
Mengecek Kehadiran
Memperkenalkan topic
Menjelaskan tujuan pembelajaran
b. Kegiatan Inti
Memperkenalkan role play
Memberikan kartu role play untuk masing-masing siswa sesuai perannya
Memberikan waktu untuk membaca dan memahami vocabulary yang ada di tabel
Memahami target language yang ada di tabel
Memberikan siswa 10-15 menit untuk mempersiapkan diri
c. Kegiatan penutup
Menanyakan kesulitan siswa selama KBM
Menyimpulkan materi pembelajaran
5. Sumber Belajar
a. Role Play for Today, Jason Anderson, Delta Publishing, 2006
b. Gambar-gambar yang relevan
6. Penilaian
a. Teknik: Tes Lisan
b. Bentuk : Role Play
c. Rubrik Penilaian
Comprehension
Understand everyday conversation and
normal classroom discussions without
difficulty.
Understands nearly everything at
normal speed. Although occasional
repetition may be necessary.
Understand most of what is said at
slower-than-normal speed with
repetition.
Has great difficulty following what is
said. can comprehend only “socal
conversation”spoken slowly and with
frequent repittition.
Cannot understand even simple
conversation.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Speech in everyday conversation and in
classroom discussion is fluent and
effortless approximating that of a native
speaker.
Speech in everyday communication and
5
4
93-99
83-92
Fluency
classroom discussion in generally
fluent, with occasional lapses while the
students searches for the correct manner
of expression.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom dicussion is frequently
disrupted by the student’s search for the
correct manner of expression.
Usually hesiatant; often forced into
silence by languge limitations.
Speech is so halting and fragmentary as
to make conversation virtually
impossible.
3
2
1
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Vocabulary
Use of Vocabulary and idioms
approximates that of a native speaker.
Occasionally uses inappropriate terms
or must rephrase ideas because of
inadequate vocabulary.
Frequently uses the wrong words
conversation somewhat limited because
of inadequte vocabulary.
Misuse of words and very limited
vocabulary make comprehension quite
difficult.
Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to
make conversation virtually impossible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Pronunciation and intonation
approximates that a native speaker.
Always intelligible, though one is
concious of a definite accent and
occasinal inappropriate intonation
5
4
93-99
83-92
Pronunciation
patterns.
Pronunciation problems necessitate
concentration on the part of listener and
occasionally lead to misunderstanding.
Very hard to understand because
pronunciation problem, must frequently
be asked to repeat in order to be
understood.
Pronunciation problem so severe as to
make speech virtually unintelligible.
3
2
1
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Grammar
Grammatical usage and word order
approximate a native speaker’s.
Occasionally make grammatical or
word order errors which do not obscure
meaning.
Makes frequent errors of grammar and
word order which occasionally obscure
meaning.
Grammar and word order error make
comprehension difficult. Must often
rephrase or restrict what is said to basic
patterns.
Errors in grammar and word order so
severe as to make speech virtually
unintelligible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Jakarta, 21, Mei 2014
Mengetahui:
Kepala Sekolah SMPN 244 Jakarta Guru Praktikan Bahasa Inggris
Drs. Mulyana M.Noor Afdillah A.A
NIP. 196411181989031004
APPENDIX II
RPP (Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran)
SMP/MTs : SMP N 244 Jakarta Utara
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/semester : VIII/2 (Control Class)
Skill / Keterampilan : Speaking
Alokasi Waktu : 4 x 45menit
Standar Kompetensi :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional dan interpersonal lisan pendek
sederhana untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan sekitar.
Kompetensi Dasar :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional (to get things done) dan interpersonal
(bersosialisasi) pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa lisan secara akurat, lancar,
dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat yang melibatkan : meminta dan
memberi pendapat, menyatakan suka atau tidak suka, meminta klarifikasi, merespon secara
interpersonal.
Jenis teks : Conversation Transactional and Interpersonal
Tema : visiting doctor
Materi Utama : asking for and giving advice
1. Tujuan Pembelajaran :
Di akhir kegiatan pembelajaran siswa dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi dengan tepat, cermat teliti makna ungkapan yang digunakan untuk meminta,
memberi persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepontekun serta percaya diri.
2. Menyimak dialog yang diperdengarkan dan memilih/ menuliskan respon yang tepat &
komunikatif berdasarkan ungkapan yang didengar dengan teliti dan cermat agar siswa dapat
menerima perbedaan/ meghargai pendapat orang lain.
3. Membuat dialog untuk mengungkapkan makna dalam tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan menggunakan ungkapan yang tepat dengan sopan dan sesuai norma.
4. Melakukan dialog/bermain peran dengan menggunakan tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan percaya diri dan kerjasama yang baik,
2. Materi Pembelajaran
Visiting the Doctor
Look at the table below. It describes seven common reasons for going to the doctor. Complete
the table using the information from the boxes.
Illness/Complaint Cause Symptoms Advice
A cold A virus, usually
caught through
contact and sneezing.
A runny nose, a
cough.
Keep warm, get some
rest.
The flu A virus, usually
caught through
contact or sneezing.
As for a cold, also a
high temperature,
aching bones and
head.
Go to bed.
Food poisoning Eating food that isn’t
fresh.
Sromache ache,
vomiting.
Get some rest, drink
water.
Stress Too many problems,
especially at work.
Worrying too much,
loss of appetite.
Take sleeping pills,
take a long holiday.
A broken arm A serious fall, (e.g.
off a ladder).
A very strong pain in
arm.
Set arm in plaster.
A sprained ankle An unexpected fall,
(e.g. when playing
football).
Can’t walk. Bandage the ankle.
Hay fever An allergy to flowers
and plants in summer
Runny nose. Stay away from parks
and gardens.
3. Teknik Pembelajaran : Conversation
4. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan :
a. Kegiatan Pendahuluan
Memberi salam
Berdoa
Mengecek Kehadiran
Memperkenalkan topic
Menjelaskan tujuan pembelajaran
b. Kegiatan Inti
Membagi murid menjadi berpasang-pasangan
Memperkenalkan topic
Memberikan tabel berbagai macam penyakit, penyebab terjadinya sakit, gejala,
dan saran.
Menyuruh siswa untuk membuat conversation bedasarkan tabel
Memberikan waktu untuk membaca dan memahami informasi yang ada di tabel
Memberikan siswa 10-15 menit untuk mempersiapkan diri
c. Kegiatan penutup
Menanyakan kesulitan siswa selama KBM
Menyimpulkan materi pembelajaran
5. Sumber Belajar
a. Role Play for Today, Jason Anderson, Delta Publishing, 2006
b. Gambar-gambar yang relevan
6. Penilaian
a. Teknik: Tes Lisan
b. Bentuk : Role Play
c. Rubrik Penilaian
Comprehension
Understand everyday conversation and
normal classroom discussions without
difficulty.
Understands nearly everything at
normal speed. Although occasional
repetition may be necessary.
Understand most of what is said at
slower-than-normal speed with
repetition.
Has great difficulty following what is
said. can comprehend only “socal
conversation”spoken slowly and with
frequent repittition.
Cannot understand even simple
conversation.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Fluency
Speech in everyday conversation and in
classroom discussion is fluent and
effortless approximating that of a native
speaker.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom discussion in generally
fluent, with occasional lapses while the
students searches for the correct manner
of expression.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom dicussion is frequently
disrupted by the student’s search for the
correct manner of expression.
Usually hesiatant; often forced into
5
4
3
2
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
silence by languge limitations.
Speech is so halting and fragmentary as
to make conversation virtually
impossible.
1
Below 62
Vocabulary
Use of Vocabulary and idioms
approximates that of a native speaker.
Occasionally uses inappropriate terms
or must rephrase ideas because of
inadequate vocabulary.
Frequently uses the wrong words
conversation somewhat limited because
of inadequte vocabulary.
Misuse of words and very limited
vocabulary make comprehension quite
difficult.
Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to
make conversation virtually impossible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Pronunciation
Pronunciation and intonation
approximates that a native speaker.
Always intelligible, though one is
concious of a definite accent and
occasinal inappropriate intonation
patterns.
Pronunciation problems necessitate
concentration on the part of listener and
occasionally lead to misunderstanding.
Very hard to understand because
pronunciation problem, must frequently
be asked to repeat in order to be
understood.
Pronunciation problem so severe as to
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
make speech virtually unintelligible.
Grammar
Grammatical usage and word order
approximate a native speaker’s.
Occasionally make grammatical or
word order errors which do not obscure
meaning.
Makes frequent errors of grammar and
word order which occasionally obscure
meaning.
Grammar and word order error make
comprehension difficult. Must often
rephrase or restrict what is said to basic
patterns.
Errors in grammar and word order so
severe as to make speech virtually
unintelligible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Jakarta 21, Mei 2014
Mengetahui:
Kepala Sekolah SMPN 244 Jakarta Guru Praktikan Bahasa Inggris
Drs. Mulyana M.Noor Afdillah A.A
NIP. 196411181989031004
APPENDIX II
RPP (Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran)
SMP/MTs : SMP N 244 Jakarta Utara
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/semester : VIII/2 (Control Class)
Skill / Keterampilan : Speaking
Standar Kompetensi :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional dan interpersonal lisan pendek
sederhana untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat.
Kompetensi Dasar :
Mengungkapkan makna dalam percakapan transaksional (to get things done) dan interpersonal
(bersosialisasi) pendek sederhana dengan menggunakan ragam bahasa lisan secara akurat, lancar,
dan berterima untuk berinteraksi dengan lingkungan terdekat yang melibatkan tindak tutur:
meminta dan member jasa, meminta dan member barang, dan meminta dan member fakta.
Jenis teks : Conversation Transactional and Interpersonal
Tema : Shoe shop
Materi Utama : asking for and giving something
1. Tujuan Pembelajaran :
Di akhir kegiatan pembelajaran siswa dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi dengan tepat, cermat teliti makna ungkapan yang digunakan untuk meminta,
memberi persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepontekun serta percaya diri.
2. Menyimak dialog yang diperdengarkan dan memilih/ menuliskan respon yang tepat &
komunikatif berdasarkan ungkapan yang didengar dengan teliti dan cermat agar siswa dapat
menerima perbedaan/ meghargai pendapat orang lain.
3. Membuat dialog untuk mengungkapkan makna dalam tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan menggunakan ungkapan yang tepat dengan sopan dan sesuai norma.
4. Melakukan dialog/bermain peran dengan menggunakan tindak tutur: meminta, member
persetujuan, merespon pernyataan, memberi perhatian terhadap pembicara, mengawali,
memperpanjang, dan menutup percakapan, dan mengawali, memperpanjang, dan menutup
percakapan telepon dengan percaya diri dan kerjasama yang baik,
2. Materi Pembelajaran
Shoe Shop
A. Draw lines to complete the descriptions of the shoes in the pictures:
Colour Type Extra
of Shoe Information
I’m looking for some … A. beige slip-ons with buckles
B. white sandals with high heels
C. brown boots with laces
D. black trainers for work
B. Take it in turns to be the customer and the shop assistant.
Customer: you are looking for some shoes. Decide which style and colour.
Assistans: the classroom is your shop. Imagine you have lots of different style in the
shop.
1 Assistant greets customer
2 Customer says what s/he wants
3 Assistant shows customer some shoes
4 Customer chooses 2-3 pairs to try on
5 Assistant ask for size and gets the shoes
6 Customer tries shoes on, makes comments
7 They discuss fit/ style/ colour
8 Customer makes a decision
3. Teknik Pembelajaran : Conversation
4. Langkah-langkah Kegiatan :
a. Kegiatan Pendahuluan
Memberi salam
Berdoa
Mengecek Kehadiran
Memperkenalkan topic
Menjelaskan tujuan pembelajaran
b. Kegiatan Inti
Membagi murid menjadi berpasang-pasangan.
Memperkenalkan topic.
Memberikan deskirpsi tentang berbagai macam warna, tipe dan informasi
tambahan tentang sepatu.
Menyuruh siswa untuk membuat conversation bedasarkan garis gambar yang
siswa buat.
Memberikan waktu untuk membaca dan memahami garis gambar yang siswa
buat.
Memberikan siswa 10-15 menit untuk mempersiapkan diri.
c. Kegiatan penutup
Menanyakan kesulitan siswa selama KBM
Menyimpulkan materi pembelajaran
5. Sumber Belajar
a. Role Play for Today, Jason Anderson, Delta Publishing, 2006
b. Gambar-gambar yang relevan
6. Penilaian
a. Teknik: Tes Lisan
b. Bentuk : Role Play
c. Rubrik Penilaian
Comprehension
Understand everyday conversation and
normal classroom discussions without
difficulty.
Understands nearly everything at
normal speed. Although occasional
repetition may be necessary.
Understand most of what is said at
slower-than-normal speed with
repetition.
Has great difficulty following what is
said. can comprehend only “socal
conversation”spoken slowly and with
frequent repittition.
Cannot understand even simple
conversation.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Fluency
Speech in everyday conversation and in
classroom discussion is fluent and
effortless approximating that of a native
speaker.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom discussion in generally
fluent, with occasional lapses while the
students searches for the correct manner
of expression.
Speech in everyday communication and
classroom dicussion is frequently
disrupted by the student’s search for the
correct manner of expression.
Usually hesiatant; often forced into
5
4
3
2
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
silence by languge limitations.
Speech is so halting and fragmentary as
to make conversation virtually
impossible.
1
Below 62
Vocabulary
Use of Vocabulary and idioms
approximates that of a native speaker.
Occasionally uses inappropriate terms
or must rephrase ideas because of
inadequate vocabulary.
Frequently uses the wrong words
conversation somewhat limited because
of inadequte vocabulary.
Misuse of words and very limited
vocabulary make comprehension quite
difficult.
Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to
make conversation virtually impossible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Pronunciation
Pronunciation and intonation
approximates that a native speaker.
Always intelligible, though one is
concious of a definite accent and
occasinal inappropriate intonation
patterns.
Pronunciation problems necessitate
concentration on the part of listener and
occasionally lead to misunderstanding.
Very hard to understand because
pronunciation problem, must frequently
be asked to repeat in order to be
understood.
Pronunciation problem so severe as to
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
make speech virtually unintelligible.
Grammar
Grammatical usage and word order
approximate a native speaker’s.
Occasionally make grammatical or
word order errors which do not obscure
meaning.
Makes frequent errors of grammar and
word order which occasionally obscure
meaning.
Grammar and word order error make
comprehension difficult. Must often
rephrase or restrict what is said to basic
patterns.
Errors in grammar and word order so
severe as to make speech virtually
unintelligible.
5
4
3
2
1
93-99
83-92
73-82
63-72
Below 62
Jakarta, 14, Mei 2014
Mengetahui:
Kepala Sekolah SMPN 244 Jakarta Guru Praktikan Bahasa Inggris
Drs. Mulyana M.Noor Afdillah A.A
NIP. 196411181989031004
APPENDIX III
Frequency Distribution Calculation of the Pre-test
A. The Calculation of Frequency Distribution, Mean, Variance, and Standard Deviation of
the Control Class Pre-test
1. The Total of Samples (n) = 28
2. Score distribution
62 62 63 63 63 63 63 64 64 65 66 66 67 70
70 70 70 71 71 71 72 72 72 73 74 74 74 76
3. Class Range (R)
R = Xmax - Xmin
= 76 - 62
= 14
4. The Number of Class (K) Using Sturgess Rule
K = 1 + 3.3 log (n)
= 1 + 3.3 log 28
= 1 + 3.3 log (1.45)
= 1 + 4.792
= 5.79
≈ 6 (Upper integration)
5. The Length of Interval (P)
P =
=
= 2,3
≈ 3 (Upper integration)
Interval Low Class Boundary
Up Class Boundary
Xi fi fk Xi2 fi.Xi fi.Xi2
1 60 – 62 59,5 62,5 61 2 2 3721 122 7442
2 63 – 65 62,5 65,5 64 8 10 4096 512 32768
3 66 – 68 65,5 68,5 67 3 13 4489 201 13467
4 69 – 71 68,5 71,5 70 7 20 4900 490 34300
5 72 – 74 71,5 74,5 73 7 27 5329 511 37303
6 75 – 77 74,5 77,5 76 1 28 5776 76 5776
28 1912 131056
6. Mean ( X )
X =∑
∑
X =
X = 68.28
7. Variance (S2)
S2
= ∑
(∑ )
( )
S2
= ( ) ( )
( )
S2
=
S2
= 18.29
8. Deviation Standard (Sd)
Sd = √
Sd = √
Sd = 4,28
B. The Calculation of Frequency Distribution, Mean, Variance, and Standard Deviation of
the Experimental Class Pre-test
1. The Total of Samples (n) = 28
2. Score distribution
60 61 61 62 62 63 63 64 64 64 64 65 65 65
66 66 67 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 73 76 78 81
3. Class Range (R)
R = Xmax - Xmin
= 81 - 60
= 21
4. The Number of Class (K) Using Sturgess Rule
K = 1 + 3.3 log (n)
= 1 + 3.3 log 28
= 1 + 3.3 log (1.45)
= 1 + 4.792
= 5.79
≈ 6 (Upper integration)
5. The Length of Interval (P)
P =
=
= 3,5
≈ 4 (Upper integration)
Interval Low
Class
Boundary
Up Class
Boundary
Xi fi fk Xi2 fi.Xi fi.Xi2
1 60 – 63 59.5 63.5 61.5 7 7 3782.25 430.5 26475.75
2 64 – 67 63.5 67.5 65.5 11 18 4290.25 720.5 47192.75
3 68 – 71 67.5 71.5 69.5 4 22 5112.25 278 20449
4 72 – 75 71.5 75.5 73.5 3 25 5700.25 220.5 17100.25
5 76 – 79 75.5 79.5 77.5 2 27 6320.25 155 12640.5
6 80 – 83 79.5 83.5 81.5 1 28 6972.25 81.5 6972.25
28 1886 130830.5
6. Mean ( X )
X =∑
∑
X =
X = 67,36
7. Variance (S2)
S2
= ∑
(∑ )
( )
S2
= ( ) ( )
( )
S2
=
S2
= 140.55
8. Deviation Standard (Sd)
Sd = √
Sd = √
Sd = 11.85
C. The Calculation of Frequency Distribution, Mean, Variance, and Standard Deviation of
the Control Class Post-test
1. The Total of Samples (n) = 28
2. Score distribution
63 65 65 65 65 67 67 67 68 69 69 69 70 70
71 71 71 71 71 72 73 74 75 76 76 77 79 83
3. Class Range (R)
R = Xmax - Xmin
= 83 - 63
= 20
4. The Number of Class (K) Using Sturgess Rule
K = 1 + 3.3 log (n)
= 1 + 3.3 log 28
= 1 + 3.3 log (1.45)
= 1 + 4.792
= 5.79
≈ 6 (Upper integration)
5. The Length of Interval (P)
P =
=
= 3,3
≈ 4 (Upper integration)
Interval Low
Class
Boundary
Up Class
Boundary
Xi fi fk Xi2 fi.Xi fi.Xi2
1 63 – 66 62.5 66.5 64.5 5 5 4160.25 322.5 20801.25
2 67 – 70 66.5 70.5 68.5 9 14 4692.25 616.5 42230.25
3 71 – 74 70.5 74.5 72.5 8 22 5256.25 580 42050
4 75 – 78 74.5 78.5 76.5 4 26 5852.25 306 23409
5 79 – 82 78.5 82.5 80.5 1 27 6480.25 80.5 6480.25
6 83 – 86 82.5 86.5 84.5 1 28 7140.25 84.5 7140.25
28 1990 142111
6. Mean ( X )
X =∑
∑
X =
X = 71.07
7. Variance (S2)
S2
= ∑
(∑ )
( )
S2
= ( ) ( )
( )
S2
=
S2
= 25.14
8. Deviation Standard (Sd)
Sd = √
Sd = √
Sd = 5.01
D. The Calculation of Frequency Distribution, Mean, Variance, and Standard Deviation of
the Experimental Class Post-test
1. The Total of Samples (n) = 28
2. Score distribution
63 65 67 69 70 70 70 71 72 72 74 74 75 75
75 75 76 77 77 77 77 77 78 81 82 83 83 83
3. Class Range (R)
R = Xmax - Xmin
= 83 - 63
= 20
4. The Number of Class (K) Using Sturgess Rule
K = 1 + 3.3 log (n)
= 1 + 3.3 log 28
= 1 + 3.3 log (1.45)
= 1 + 4.792
= 5.79
≈ 6 (Upper integration)
5. The Length of Interval (P)
P =
=
= 3,3
≈ 4 (Upper integration)
Interval Low
Class
Boundary
Up Class
Boundary
Xi fi fk Xi2 fi.Xi fi.Xi2
1 63 – 66 62.5 66.5 64.5 2 2 4160.25 129 8320.5
2 67 – 70 66.5 70.5 68.5 5 7 4692.25 342.5 23461.25
3 71 – 74 70.5 74.5 72.5 5 12 5256.25 362.5 26281.25
4 75 – 78 74.5 78.5 76.5 11 23 5852.25 841.5 64374.75
5 79 – 82 78.5 82.5 80.5 2 25 6480.25 161 12960.5
6 83 – 86 82.5 86.5 84.5 3 28 7140.25 253.5 21420.75
28 2090 156819
1. Mean ( X )
X =∑
∑
X =
X = 74.64
2. Variance (S2)
S2
= ∑
(∑ )
( )
S2
= ( ) ( )
( )
S2
=
4390932-4368100
S2
= 30.20
3. Deviation Standard (Sd)
Sd = √
Sd =√
Sd = 5.49
Class D Pre test (Control Class)
C F V P G C F V P G C F V P G
70 70 70 70 70 75 70 75 70 80 72.5 70 72.5 70 75 72 72
70 60 68 60 68 60 60 65 60 60 65 60 66.5 60 64 63.1 63
70 70 70 70 70 70 75 70 70 70 70 72.5 70 70 70 70.5 71
70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 75 70 70 70 70 72.5 70.5 71
70 75 70 75 70 70 80 75 75 75 70 77.5 72.5 75 72.5 73.5 74
65 63 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 61.5 65 65 65 64.3 64
65 63 65 63 65 65 60 65 60 60 65 61.5 65 61.5 62.5 63.1 63
70 75 70 75 70 70 80 70 85 75 70 77.5 70 80 72.5 74 74
78 78 68 78 68 80 80 65 80 65 79 79 66.5 79 66.5 74 74
68 68 68 68 68 65 65 65 65 65 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 67
68 63 68 63 68 65 60 65 60 65 66.5 61.5 66.5 61.5 66.5 64.5 65
68 78 68 68 68 70 75 70 65 70 69 76.5 69 66.5 69 70 70
75 85 80 85 75 80 80 80 80 80 77.5 82.5 80 82.5 77.5 80 80
65 75 65 60 60 70 75 70 60 60 67.5 75 67.5 60 60 66 66
65 60 65 60 60 65 60 65 60 60 65 60 65 60 60 62 62
65 75 70 75 70 70 75 65 80 70 67.5 75 67.5 77.5 70 71.5 72
70 75 70 75 70 80 80 75 80 80 75 77.5 72.5 77.5 75 75.5 76
70 60 65 60 65 65 60 65 60 60 67.5 60 65 60 62.5 63 63
70 75 65 70 70 70 75 65 70 70 70 75 65 70 70 70 70
70 70 70 70 70 70 75 70 70 70 70 72.5 70 70 70 70.5 71
65 75 65 75 70 70 80 70 80 75 67.5 77.5 67.5 77.5 72.5 72.5 73
65 75 65 75 70 60 75 70 75 70 62.5 75 67.5 75 70 70 70
60 65 65 65 65 60 60 65 60 65 60 62.5 65 62.5 65 63 63
60 60 65 65 60 60 60 65 65 60 60 60 65 65 60 62 62
65 60 65 60 65 65 60 65 60 70 65 60 65 60 67.5 63.5 64
65 65 65 65 65 65 70 65 65 65 65 67.5 65 65 65 65.5 66
Dhimas Khafid Hidayatullah 65 60 65 65 65 60 60 65 60 60 62.5 60 65 62.5 62.5 62.5 63
65 75 70 70 70 70 75 75 75 75 67.5 75 72.5 72.5 72.5 72 72
68.41071429 68
Final Score ScoreName FinalResearcher: Afdi
M. Zikri Aldiansyah
Oktamevia Nurhandiani S.
Fitri Sahidah
Adisti Sriwardini
A. Velda Reissa Valeska
Ahmad Rifaldi
Shaja Kamila Dwi Putri
Dinda Chairunnisa
Magdalena Silalahi
Abdul Alam
Fatimatuzuhra
Researcher: Ms.Linda
M. Fikri Fareza
Sonia Pertiwi
Ervani Faradillah
Ilma Naslia Aulia
Nadilla Ardiyanty
M. Fiqih Rizal
Natasya Arsyi Prameswari
Shofia Hanifah A.
Selviani Fitri H
Silvia Vera Verenia
Dinda Octaviani
Chairul Yaqin
Dewi Puspa M.
Ade Panji
Dimas Dwi Adiputro
Sumanto
Class D Post test (Control)
C F V P G C F V P G C F V P G
67 70 70 65 67 80 70 75 70 80 73.5 70 72.5 67.5 73.5 71.4 71
68 63 68 63 68 65 60 65 60 65 66.5 61.5 66.5 61.5 66.5 64.5 65
68 68 68 68 68 70 70 70 70 70 69 69 69 69 69 69 69
68 68 68 68 68 70 70 70 70 75 69 69 69 69 71.5 69.5 70
72 82 70 80 70 70 80 75 80 80 71 81 72.5 80 75 75.9 76
70 65 65 65 65 70 65 70 65 65 70 65 67.5 65 65 66.5 67
65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 62.5 64.5 65
75 80 75 80 70 70 80 80 80 75 72.5 80 77.5 80 72.5 76.5 77
78 78 68 78 68 80 80 70 75 70 79 79 69 76.5 69 74.5 75
68 78 68 68 68 70 75 65 65 70 69 76.5 66.5 66.5 69 69.5 70
68 68 68 68 68 70 65 65 65 65 69 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 67 67
68 78 68 78 68 70 75 65 65 70 69 76.5 66.5 71.5 69 70.5 71
75 85 85 85 80 80 85 85 85 85 77.5 85 85 85 82.5 83 83
70 75 70 60 65 70 75 70 65 70 70 75 70 62.5 67.5 69 69
63 65 70 65 65 70 70 70 70 70 66.5 67.5 70 67.5 67.5 67.8 68
75 70 70 80 75 75 70 70 75 75 75 70 70 77.5 75 73.5 74
75 75 75 75 75 85 80 80 80 85 80 77.5 77.5 77.5 80 78.5 79
70 63 70 63 65 65 60 65 65 65 67.5 61.5 67.5 64 65 65.1 65
75 75 70 75 70 75 75 70 70 70 75 75 70 72.5 70 72.5 73
70 75 70 70 70 75 75 70 70 65 72.5 75 70 70 67.5 71 71
65 75 60 75 70 70 80 65 80 80 67.5 77.5 62.5 77.5 75 72 72
65 75 60 76 70 70 75 60 80 75 67.5 75 60 78 72.5 70.6 71
60 65 60 70 70 60 65 60 70 70 60 65 60 70 70 65 65
60 60 60 70 70 60 60 60 65 65 60 60 60 67.5 67.5 63 63
70 75 70 65 65 70 75 75 70 70 70 75 72.5 67.5 67.5 70.5 71
70 65 65 65 65 70 75 75 70 70 70 70 70 67.5 67.5 69 69
Dhimas Khafid Hidayatullah 65 65 65 65 65 65 70 65 70 70 65 67.5 65 67.5 67.5 66.5 67
70 80 75 75 75 75 80 75 75 80 72.5 80 75 75 77.5 76 76
70.4392857 70
Name Final Score Score
Ervani Faradillah
Sonia Pertiwi
M. Fikri Fareza
Dimas Dwi Adiputro
Ade Panji
Dewi Puspa M.
Researcher: Afdi Researcher: Ms.Linda
Natasya Arsyi Prameswari
Shaja Kamila Dwi Putri
Ahmad Rifaldi
Final Score
Silvia Vera Verenia
Selviani Fitri H
Shofia Hanifah A.
A. Velda Reissa Valeska
Fatimatuzuhra
Abdul Alam
Nadilla Ardiyanty
M. Fiqih Rizal
Sumanto
Ilma Naslia Aulia
Adisti Sriwardini
Fitri Sahidah
Oktamevia Nurhandiani S.
M. Zikri Aldiansyah
Chairul Yaqin
Dinda Octaviani
Magdalena Silalahi
Dinda Chairunnisa
Class A Pre test (Treatment)
C F V P G C F V P G C F V P G
65 70 75 80 70 70 70 70 80 75 67.5 70 72.5 80 72.5 72.5 73
65 75 65 80 70 70 75 70 80 70 67.5 75 67.5 80 70 72 72
65 60 60 65 70 65 65 60 60 65 65 62.5 60 62.5 67.5 63.5 64
65 75 75 75 65 70 75 80 75 70 67.5 75 77.5 75 67.5 72.5 73
65 70 65 70 65 70 70 65 70 70 67.5 70 65 70 67.5 68 68
60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
65 60 60 60 60 65 60 60 60 60 65 60 60 60 60 61 61
65 70 65 65 65 65 70 65 65 65 65 70 65 65 65 66 66
70 75 65 65 70 75 75 70 70 70 72.5 75 67.5 67.5 70 70.5 71
65 65 65 75 65 65 65 65 70 65 65 65 65 72.5 65 66.5 67
65 65 65 65 60 65 65 60 65 60 65 65 62.5 65 60 63.5 64
65 60 65 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 62.5 60 62.5 60 60 61 61
75 80 80 75 75 75 80 75 85 80 75 80 77.5 80 77.5 78 78
60 60 65 65 60 60 60 60 65 65 60 60 62.5 65 62.5 62 62
65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 62.5 64.5 65
60 60 65 65 65 60 60 65 65 65 60 60 65 65 65 63 63
60 65 65 65 65 60 70 65 65 65 60 67.5 65 65 65 64.5 65
60 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 64 64
60 65 60 65 65 60 60 60 65 65 60 62.5 60 65 65 62.5 63
60 75 65 75 65 60 75 70 70 70 60 75 67.5 72.5 67.5 68.5 69
70 85 80 75 85 75 85 85 80 85 72.5 85 82.5 77.5 85 80.5 81
70 80 75 70 75 75 80 80 75 75 72.5 80 77.5 72.5 75 75.5 76
65 65 65 75 60 65 65 65 70 60 65 65 65 72.5 60 65.5 66
65 75 70 75 65 65 75 70 75 65 65 75 70 75 65 70 70
60 65 65 65 65 60 70 70 70 70 60 67.5 67.5 67.5 67.5 66 66
60 60 65 60 65 60 60 65 60 60 60 60 65 60 62.5 61.5 62
60 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 64 64
60 65 65 65 65 60 70 65 70 65 60 67.5 65 67.5 65 65 65
66.85714286 67
Appendix iv
Name Final Score Score
Rachmat Saifullah
M. Vicry A.
Andika Noor
Tiara Nisya Gayatri
Devi Anggraeni
Salamatusshodri
Fauzi Triyanto
Rifki Ardani
Lisa Shiruni
Siti Hana Fajarwati
Fikri Faridah S.
Fiesta R. Putri
Eva Wulandari
Alwan Fauzan Aziz
Dinda Sihol M.P
Lara Gabriela
Siti Mardiyah
Lisa Annur Arum J
Arif Muhammad Y.
Novita Magdalena
Fajar Ramadhan
Marissa N.
Fausyan Alfiansyah
Wahyu Pratama
Researcher: Afdi Researcher: Ms.Indah Final Score
Febriani Dwi Saputri
M. Adji
Rachmat
Yose Rizal B.
Class A Post test (Treatment Class)
C F V p G C F V P G C F V P G
75 85 85 85 80 80 85 80 85 85 77.5 85 82.5 85 82.5 82.5 83
70 85 80 85 80 75 85 85 80 80 72.5 85 82.5 82.5 80 80.5 81
70 70 70 70 70 75 75 70 70 70 72.5 72.5 70 70 70 71 71
75 80 75 70 75 80 85 70 75 75 77.5 82.5 72.5 72.5 75 76 76
70 75 75 80 85 75 75 75 75 80 72.5 75 75 77.5 82.5 76.5 77
65 75 70 70 70 65 70 70 70 70 65 72.5 70 70 70 69.5 70
70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
70 75 75 80 75 75 75 80 80 80 72.5 75 77.5 80 77.5 76.5 77
75 80 80 85 80 80 85 80 85 85 77.5 82.5 80 85 82.5 81.5 82
70 75 75 85 75 75 75 75 80 80 72.5 75 75 82.5 77.5 76.5 77
70 75 80 70 70 75 75 80 70 70 72.5 75 80 70 70 73.5 74
65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 60 65 65 65 65 62.5 65 64.5 65
80 80 80 85 80 85 80 85 85 85 82.5 80 82.5 85 82.5 82.5 83
65 60 65 60 65 65 60 65 60 65 65 60 65 60 65 63 63
65 65 65 65 65 70 70 70 70 65 67.5 67.5 67.5 67.5 65 67 67
70 80 75 70 70 70 75 75 75 75 70 77.5 75 72.5 72.5 73.5 74
70 75 70 85 80 70 75 75 85 80 70 75 72.5 85 80 76.5 77
70 75 70 65 65 65 75 75 65 70 67.5 75 72.5 65 67.5 69.5 70
70 75 70 65 65 70 75 70 65 65 70 75 70 65 65 69 69
70 75 75 85 80 70 75 75 80 80 70 75 75 82.5 80 76.5 77
80 85 85 75 85 80 85 85 80 85 80 85 85 77.5 85 82.5 83
75 80 80 75 75 75 80 80 80 80 75 80 80 77.5 77.5 78 78
75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75
75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 70 75 75 75 75 72.5 74.5 75
70 75 70 75 75 75 80 70 75 80 72.5 77.5 70 75 77.5 74.5 75
70 75 70 70 70 75 80 70 70 70 72.5 77.5 70 70 70 72 72
70 75 70 70 70 75 80 70 70 70 72.5 77.5 70 70 70 72 72
70 75 70 75 75 75 80 70 80 80 72.5 77.5 70 77.5 77.5 75 75
74.26785714 74
Researcher : Afdi Researcher: Ms.Indah Final ScoreName Final Score Score
Tiara Nisya Gayatri
Fausyan Alfiansyah
Wahyu Pratama
Febriani Dwi Saputri
M. Adji
Yose Rizal B.
Rachmat Saifullah
M. Vicry A.
Andika Noor
Rifki Ardani
Lisa Shiruni
Siti Hana Fajarwati
Fikri Faridah S.
Fiesta R. Putri
Rachmat
Fajar Ramadhan
Marissa N.
Salamatusshodri
Fauzi Triyanto
Lisa Annur Arum J
Arif Muhammad Y.
Novita Magdalena
Devi Anggraeni
Eva Wulandari
Alwan Fauzan Aziz
Dinda Sihol M.P
Lara Gabriela
Siti Mardiyah
Appendix v
Instrument
A. Situation
In the post office, there is a post office cashier and customers who want to do some transactions. Then,
customers ask a help to a post office cashier to fulfill their transaction.
B. Instruction
Introduce each role to the students and ask the students to make a group consist of four students. Give
the students 15 minutes to read through and prepare what they are going to say based on the cards
below (customers A-C). Create a counter in front of the classroom and put the customers in a queue,
and tell the cashier to call up the customers by saying “next please”. When they have finished, they
should swap roles and start again.
Customer A:
- to send three postcards to your village
- to change $100 into Rupiah
Customer B:
- to buy an envelope
- to send Rp.2000.000,- to your village
Customer C:
- to buy 5 stamps for letters
- to send a letter to your parents
C. Target Language
Post Office Cashier: Customer:
- Next please. Can I help you? - Could I send.…?
- Where do you want to send it? - Do you sell….?
- They cost….(Rp) - Is it possible to….?
- Here’s your change - I need to….
Appendix vi
Figures of the Research
Appendix vi
Appendix vi
-
KEMENTERIAN AGAMAUIN JAKARTAF!TKJl. lr. H. JuaDda No 95 Ciputat 15412 lndonesia
Nomor : Un.01/F. l/KM.0 1.3/.q*.? .12014Lamp. :-Hal : Bimbingan Skripsi
Nama
NIM
Jurusan
Semester
Judul Skripsi
Tembusan:1. Dekan FITK2. Mahasiswa ybs.
FITK.FR-AKD-082
FORM (FR)
M.Noor Afclillah A.A
109014000075
Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
IX (Sembilan)
"The Effect of Role Play towards Students Speaking
Jakarta, 15 Januari 2014
Kepada'r'th../ t. nr. Fahriany, M.pd
2. Zahar\l Anasy, M.HumPembimbing SkripsiFakultas llmu Tarbiyah dan KeguruanUIN Syarif HidayatullahJakarta.
Ass alamu' alaikum w r.w b.
Dengan ini diharapkan kesediaan Saudara untuk Menjadi pembiinbin(rnateri/teknis) penulisan skripsi rnahasiswa:
Ability"
Judul tersebut telah disetujui oleh Jurusan yang bersangkutan pada tanggal 9 September2013, abstraksi/outline terlampir. Saudara dapat melakukan perubahan redaksional padajudul tersebut. Apabila perubahan substansial dianggap perlu, mohon pembimbingmenghubungi Jurusan terlebih dahulu.
Bimbingan skripsi ini diharapkan selesai dalam wakfu 6 (enam) bulan, dan dapatdiperpanjang selama 6 (enam) bulan berikutnya tanpa surat perpanjangan.
Atas perhatian dan kerja sarna Saudara, kami ucapkan terima kasih.
Was s al otn u' al ai kum w r.w b.
Tgl. Terbit : 1 Maret 2010
SURAT BIMBINGAN SKRIPSI
kan Bahasa Inggris
KEMENTERIAN AGAMAUIN JAKARTAFITKJl. lr. H. Juanda No 95 Ciputat 15412 lndonesia
FORM (FR)
No. Dokumen : FITK-FR-AKD-082
Tgl. Terbit : 1 Maret 2010
Hal : 111
SURAT PERMOHONAN IZIN PENELITIAN
''r
Nomor . Un.01/F. 1/KM.01 .31........12014Lamp. :-Hal : Permohonan lzin Penelitian
Nama
Nltll
Jurusan
Semester
Tembusan:1. Dekan FITK2. Pembantu Dekan Bidang Akademik3. Mahasiswa yang bersangkutan
Jakarta. 06 - 05 -2014
KepadaYth.KepalaSekolah SMP N 244 Jakarta
diTempat
A s sal am u' al aiku mwr.wb.
Dengan hormat kami sampaikan bairwa,
: M. Noor Afdillah AA
:109014000075
: Pendidikan Bahasa lnggris
, : X (Sepuluh)
TahunAkademik :201312014
Judul Skripsi : "The Effectiveness of Role Play Towards Sfudenfs'
Speaking Ability"
adalah benar mahasiswa/i FaKultas llmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Jakarta yangsedang menyusun skripsi, dan akan mengaciakan penelitian (riset) diinstansi/sekolah/madrasah yang Saudara pimpin.
Untuk itu kami mohon Saudara dapat mengizinkan mahasiswa tersebutmelaksanakan penelitian dimaksud.
Atas perhatian dan kerja sama Saudara, kami ucapkan terima kasih.
Wa s sal am u' al aiku m wr.wb.
Bahasa Inggris
\
Pd199103 I 002
li tF
\
PEMERINTAH PROVINSI DAERAH KHUSUS IBUKOTA JAKARTA
DINAS PENDIDIKANSMP NEGERI 244
Jl. Cilincing BhaktiVI/28 Telp. 4400872 Fax. 44836760Web Site:http :// www.smpn-244jkt.com E-Mail : smpn_244@yahoo.co.id.
JAKARTA UTARAKode Pos : l4l2O
SURAT KETERANGANNomor : 158/073.82 12074
Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) Negeri 244 Jakarta,
M. NOOR AFDILLAH AA
109014000075
Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
X (sepuluh)
201312014
s.1.
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini Kepala
menerangkan bahwa :
Nama
No. Registrasi
Program Studi
Semester
Tahun Akademik
Jenjang Pendidikan
Nama tersebut di atas benar telah menyelesaikan Penelitian di SMP Negeri 244 Jakarta sejak tanggal 7
s.d, 30 Mei20L4, dengan judul :
"The Effectiveness of Role Play Towards Students'Speaking Ability'
Demikian surat keterangan ini dibuat untuk dipergunakan sebagaimana mestinya.
q#s
W
ta, 30 September 2014la SMP Negeri 244 Jakarta
MULYANA
NIP. 196411181989031004
top related