the effectiveness of using participation point system …

i

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING PARTICIPATION POINT SYSTEM

(PPS) METHOD IN TEACHING ENGLISH AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE

STUDENTS OF SMA MUHAMMADIYAH 9 MAKASSAR

(A Pre-Experimental Research)

A THESIS

Submitted to the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

Muhammadiyah University of Makassar in partial Fulfillment of the Requirement

for the Degree of Education in English Department

NILAM CAHYA KASMAN

10535 6174 14

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR

ii

2020Scanned by CamScanner

v

UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH MAKASSAR

FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

SURAT PERNYATAAN

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:

Nama : NILAM CAHYA KASMAN

Stambuk : 10535 6174 14

Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Judul Skripsi : The Effectiveness of Using Participation Point System in

Teaching English at The Eleventh Grade Students of

SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar (A Pre-Experimental

Research)

Dengan ini menyatakan bahwa :

Skripsi yang saya ajukan di depan Tim Penguji adalah ASLI hasil

karya saya sendiri, bukan hasil ciplakan dan tidak dibuatkan oleh

siapapun.

Demikian surat peryataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya dan saya bersedia

menerima sanksi apabila peryataan ini tidak benar.

Makassar, Oktober 2020

Yang Membuat Pernyataan

NILAM CAHYA KASMAN

vi

UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH MAKASSAR

FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

SURAT PERJANJIAN

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:

Nama : NILAM CAHYA KASMAN

Stambuk : 10535 6174 14

Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Dengan ini menyatakan perjanjian sebagai berikut:

1. Mulai dari penyusunan proposal sampai dengan selesainya skripsi ini, saya yang

menyusunnya sendiri (tidak dibuatkan oleh siapapun).

2. Dalam penyusunan skripsi, saya selalu melakukan konsultasi dengan

pembimbing yang telah ditetapkan oleh pimpinan fakultas.

3. Saya tidak melakukan penjiplakan (plagiat) dalam menyusun skripsi ini.

4. Apabila saya melanggar perjanjian seperti pada butir 1, 2, dan 3 maka saya

bersedia menerima sanksi sesuai dengan aturan yang berlaku.

Demikian perjanjian ini saya buat dengan penuh kesadaran.

Makassar, Oktober 2020

Yang Membuat Perjanjian

NILAM CAHYA KASMAN

vii

MOTTO

EVERYTHING WILL BE OKAY IN THE END.

IF IT IS NOT OKAY, IT IS NOT THE END.

viii

ABSTRACT

NILAM CAHYA KASMAN. 2020. The Effectiveness of Using Participation

Point System (PPS) Method in Teaching English at the Eleventh Grade Students

of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar. A thesis of English Education Deaprtment.

Faculty of Teachers Training and Education. Muhammadiyah University of

Makassar. Superviseded by Hj. Andi Tenri Ampa and Farisha Andi Baso.

This research aimed at finding out the improvement of the students’ writing

and speaking skill through Participation Point System (PPS) Method in teaching

English.

The researcher applied pre-experimental design. The population was the

Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar. The sample was

taken by total sampling technique. The total number of sample was 20 students. It

employed of eight meetings (one meeting for pre-test, six meetings for treatment,

and one meeting for post-test). It employed writing and speaking test as instrument.

The research findings showed that Participation Point System (PPS) Method

improved students’ writing and speaking skill. It was proved by the students’ pre-

test mean score in writing skill in terms of content was 48.30 pre-test to be 78.25 in

post-test with 62.00% improvement. Then, the mean score in terms of organization

was 45.80 pre-test to be 78.25 in post-test with 70.85% improvement. Meanwhile

the students’ pre-test mean score in speaking skill in terms of pronunciation was

43.30 pre-test to be 67.55 in post-test with 56.00%. Then, the mean score in terms

of vocabulary was 42.45 pre-test to be 62.50 in post-test with 47.23% improvement.

The t-test analysis showed that Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.000 which is smaller than α =

0.05. It means that there was a significant difference of students’ writing and

speaking skill before and after using Participation Point System (PPS) Method.

Based on the findings, it can be concluded that Participation Point System (PPS)

Method was effective to improve students’ skill in teaching English at the Eleventh

Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

Keywords: Writing, Speaking, Participation Point System Method

ix

ABSTRAK

NILAM CAHYA KASMAN, 2020. Efektivitas Penggunaan Metode

Participation Point System (PPS) dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris pada

Siswa Kelas Sebelas di SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar. Dipandu oleh Hj.

Andi Tenri Ampa dan Farisha Andi Baso.

Tujuan dari penelitian ini untuk menemukan peningkatan kemampuan

menulis dan berbicara siswa melalui Metode Participation Point System (PPS)

dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris.

Penelitian ini menerapkan desain pre-eksperimen. Populasi dari penelitian

ini adalah siswa kelas sebelas di SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar. Sampel dari

penelitan ini diambil dari teknik total sampling. Jumlah tota sampel penelitian

adalah 20 siswa. Penelitian ini menggunakan tes tertulis dan tes lisan sebagai

instrumen.

Temuan penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa Metode Participation Point

System (PPS) dapat meningkatkan kemampuan menulis dan berbicara siswa. Hal

ini dibuktikan dengan nilai rata-rata pre-test dalam menulis pada isi adalah 48.30

menjadi 78.25 di post-test dengan peningkatan 62.00%. Kemudian, nilai rata-rata

pre-test pada organisasi 45.80 menjadi 78.25 di post-test dengan peningkatan

70.85%. sementara nilai rata-rata siswa pre-test dalam berbicara pada pengucapan

43.30 menjadi 67.55 di post-test dengan peningkatan 56.00%. Kemudian, nilai rata-

rata pre-test pada kosa kata 42.45 menjadi 62.50 dengan peningkatan 47.23%.

Analisi t-test menunjukkan bahwa Sig.2-tailed = 0.000 < 0.05. Ini berarti bahwa

terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan dari kemampuan siswa dalam menulis dan

berbicara sebelum dan setelah menggunakan Metode Participation Point (PPS).

Berdsarkan temuan di atas, peneliti menyimpulkan bahwa Metode Participation

Point (PPS) efektif dalam meningkatkan kemampuan siswa dalam pembelajaran

bahasa Inggris pada siswa kelas sebelas di SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

Kata Kunci: Menulis, Berbicara, Metode Participation Point System

x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, the researcher would like to express her highest gratitude to the

almighty Allah Swt. for the blessing, mercy, guidance, and love during the study

and the completion this thesis. Second, peace and blessing be upon to the prophet

Muhammad SAW, his family, his companion, and his followers.

Further, the researcher gives the special and deepest gratitude to beloved

parents Timang and Kasman for their prayer, financial, motivation, and their love

sincerely and purely without time.

The researcher realized that in carrying out the research and writing this

thesis, many people have contributed their valuable suggestion, guidance,

assistance, and advice for the completion of this thesis. Therefore, she would like

to acknowledgment them:

1. Prof. Dr. H. Ambo Asse, M.Ag., the Rector of Muhammadiyah University of

Makassar.

2. Erwin Akib, M.Pd., Ph.D., the Dean of FKIP UNISMUH Makassar.

3. Ummi Khaerati Syam, S.Pd., M.Pd., the Head of English Education Department

of FKIP UNISMUH Makassar, who gave her valuable authorities and

suggestion in doing this thesis.

4. The greatest thanks are due to the first consultant Dr. Hj. Andi Tenri Ampa,

M.Hum., and Farisha Andi Baso, S.Pd., M.Pd., as the second consultant who

xi

have given their valuable time and patient to support assistance and guidance to

finish this thesis.

5. The greatest thanks to the lecturer and staff of FKIP UNISMUH Makassar,

especially the lectures of English Education Department who taught her for

many years.

6. Asri, S.Pd., M.Pd., the Headmaster of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar, the

teacher, Nunun Ulfa Arifin, S.Pd., M.Pd., who have given a chance and help to

conduct this research and the students of XI IPA as the sample of the research

which was participated in the process of collecting the data.

7. The greatest thanks to all of members of Jaguar Class as a class who have given

experiences in developing her character and specially to her closed friends that

was gave her support, care, help, and love starting from the first semester until

finish this thesis, her lovely Hariyati, Isnawati, Dian Agri Busman.

8. The greatest thanks to MAMMESA and EXIT as the organization which is a

place of researcher to develop potential especially in English.

9. Special thanks for Nur Hikma Amir S.Pd., Dzulfiani Hamsar, S.E., Najma

Arifin, S.Pd., Nurul Fitra, Asrifaini Rahma, S.Pd., Nurmila, S.Pd., Nur Aini

Syah, S.Ak., who always give me love and support until now.

10. The greatest thanks to her family in P2K especially her lovely Ryan, Indri Asti,

Ismi Rusadi, Khaerunnisa that always support her every time and everywhere.

11. The greatest thanks to her family who always give her support, motivation, and

suggestion in completing this thesis.

xii

12. The greatest thanks also to everybody that ask her ‘Apa Kabar Skripsi?’ here

you go! Finally, she finished it.

13. Finally, for everyone who have given valuable suggestion, guidance, assistance,

and advice to completion this thesis may Allah S.W.T. be with us now and ever

after.

Aamiin.

Billahi Fi Sabillil Haq Fastabiqul Khaerat

Makassar, September 2020

The Researcher

Nilam Cahya Kasman

xiii

LIST OF CONTENTS

Page

TITTLE PAGE .................................................................................................. i

APPROVAL SHEET ....................................................................................... ii

COUNSELLING SHEET ................................................................................ iii

SURAT PERNYATAAN ................................................................................. v

SURAT PERJANJIAN .................................................................................... vi

MOTTO ............................................................................................................ vii

ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... viii

ABSTRAK ........................................................................................................ ix

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ................................................................................. x

LIST OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... xiii

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... xvi

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................... xvii

LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................. xix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background ................................................................................... 1

B. Problem Statement ........................................................................ 4

C. Objective of the Research ............................................................. 4

D. Significance of the Research ......................................................... 4

E. Scope of the Research ................................................................... 5

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. The Concept of Participation Point System .................................. 6

xiv

1. Strength and Weakness of Participation Point System ............. 7

2. Implementation of Participation Point System ......................... 8

B. The Concept of Writing ................................................................ 10

1. Writing Process ......................................................................... 11

2. Component of Writing .............................................................. 13

3. Writing Genre............................................................................ 15

C. The Concept of Speaking .............................................................. 18

1. Element of Speaking ................................................................ 19

D. Conceptual Framework ................................................................. 23

E. Hypothesis .................................................................................... 24

CHAPTER III METHOD OF THE RESEARCH

A. Research Design ........................................................................... 26

B. Population and Sample ................................................................. 28

C. Research Variables and Indicators ................................................ 28

D. Research Instruments .................................................................... 29

E. Procedure of Collecting Data ........................................................ 30

F. Techniques of Data Analysis ........................................................ 30

CHAPTER IV FINDING AND DISCUSSION

A. Finding .......................................................................................... 36

B. Discussion ..................................................................................... 47

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion .................................................................................... 54

B. Suggestion ..................................................................................... 56

BIBLIOGHRAPHY ......................................................................................... 57

APPENDICES

CURRICULUM VITAE

xv

LIST OF TABLES

Tables

3.1 Research Design .......................................................................................... 26

3.2 Content Scoring ......................................................................... .................. 30

3.3 Organization Scoring ................................................................ ................. 31

3.4 Pronunciation Scoring ................................................................................. 32

3.5 Vocabulary Scoring .................................................................................... 33

3.6 Classifying the Students’ Score .............................. .................................... 33

4.1 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Content ......................................... 37

4.2 Frequency of the Students’ Score in Terms of Content .............................. 38

4.3 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Organization ................................. 38

4.4 Frequency of the Students’ Score in Terms of Organization ...................... 39

4.5 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Pronunciation ............................... 40

4.6 Frequency of the Students’ Score in Terms of Pronunciation .................... 41

4.7 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms Vocabulary ....................................... 42

4.8 Frequency of the Students’ Score in Terms of Vocabulary ........................ 43

4.9 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Content between Pre-Test

and Post-Test ............................................................................................... 44

4.10 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Organization between Pre-

Test and Post-Test ....................................................................................... 45

4.11 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Pronunciation between Pre-


xvi

4.12 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Vocabulary between Pre-


xvii

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................ 24

4.1 The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Content ............................... 37

4.2 The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Organization ...................... 39

4.3 The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Pronunciation ..................... 41

4.4 The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Vocabulary ......................... 43

xviii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A : Lesson Plans

Appendix B : Instruments

Appendix C : Data Analysis

Appendix D : Documentation

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

The curriculum is undoubtedly an inseparable part of education. It is a

network of varying activities involved in translating curriculum design into

classroom activities and changing people’s attitude to accept and participate in these

activities. In Indonesia, education curriculum has already undergone several

changes. One of the curriculums is the 2013 curriculum. Particularly in English

subject, the 2013 curriculum is bringing back the true goal. It is to develop the

ability of students to communicate in that language with communication skills that

include the ability to listen, speak, read, and write. It also makes the students learn

English by activities, real text, and using the language. So, the activities of listening,

speaking, reading and writing are integrated.

Furthermore, for a good communication, the communication skills are

essential. The basic skills are listening, speaking, reading and writing. These are

called the “language skills”. The four language skills are related to each other in

two ways. Harmer (2007: 265) states that language skills are divided into two types,

receptive skills and productive skills. Receptive skill is a term used for reading and

listening, skill where meaning is extracted from the discourse. Productive skill is

the term from speaking and writing, skill where students actually have to produce

language themselves. In this term, this research will focus on productive skills as it

is the most difficult than the others.

2

According to Sreena and Ilankumaran (2014), the learner who posses

efficient productive skills are able to produce something. They are also known as

active skills. Learners need to generate language to communicate their ideas either

in speech or text. As Misrha and Muralikrishna (2004) state that three things matter

in a speech; who says it, how he says it and what he says. The three things above,

the last matters the least. Speaking skill is apparent in the society in various styles

such as formal, informal, normal, strong, etc. These styles based on situation and it

is very important for speakers to strike the right thoughts. For example, learner have

already spent time practicing receptive skills within a shape of a poem, by listening

to it and reading it. They now move on to productive skills by speak it out or write

it down on their own words. Richards and Renandya (2002: 30) state that there is

no doubt that writing is the most difficult skill for the second language learners to

master. The difficulty lies not only in generating and organizing ideas, but also in

translating these ideas into readable texts.

Based on the observation result of the researcher at SMA Muhammadiyah

9 Makassar especially the eleventh grades students in academic year of 2018/2019,

it shown that the mean score of English skill of the students in terms of productive

skills must be more improved. It seemed that the students were rarely taught to write

in English. They just did the assignment and discussed the answer together. When

the students were asked to write, they were reluctant to write even a very simple

text, and the products of their writings were far from the expectation. Students were

expected to be able to write a good text with good content and coherence, but in

fact, they could not do it well. Students have any ideas to write. In other words, they

3

had blank minds when they were asked to write a text, for example narrative text.

This situation gave the effect for the students speaking skill. Most of them think

that speaking is difficult because they should adapt among the written form. The

students afraid to speak because they do not know how to pronounce the words.

In order to enable the students to express their ideas in writing and speaking,

the method that is used not only needs a teachers’ roles but also learners’ roles. It

means that more effort is required by the students and various interesting activities

are also required by the teacher. Therefore, teacher should use effective teaching

methods that encourage student to take a part activity in every activity. Another

case of applying certain method in classroom is that teachers usually emphasize

students’ participation in which it will be graded and will be the significant adding

score in English. However, the teacher usually notes the students’ participation

secretly in their note. To solve this problem, it is important to have a method that

make the point of participation become visible, so students can see clearly and then

evaluate their progress in every meeting. That is why the researcher considered to

apply Participation Point System (PPS) method to verify whether this method able

to improve students’ English skill especially in writing and speaking skill or not.

As Jeffrey (2003) states that Participation Point System (PPS) method is a

method of motivating classrooms participation, especially communicative

participation by giving something tangible (such as discs, marbles, poker chips, etc)

while activities are underway to represent their participation score. This method is

very motivated to make the students being active in teaching and learning process

by rewarding immediately with participation points.

4

Based on the case above, the researcher was interested in carrying out a

research entitled “The Effectiveness of Using Participation Point System (PPS)

Method in Teaching English at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA

Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar”.

B. Problem Statement

Based on the previous background above, the researcher formulates the

research questions as follows:

1. How is the students’ writing achievement through the use of Participation

Point System (PPS) Method?

2. How is the students’ speaking achievement through the use of Participation

Point System (PPS) Method?

C. Objective of the Research

Based on the problem statement above, the objectives of this research are to

find out:

1. The students’ speaking achievement through the use of Participation Point

System (PPS) Method.

2. The students’ writing achievement through the use of Participation Point

System (PPS) Method.

D. Significance of the Research

The result of the research is expected to be a useful information and a

reference for the English learners in general, for the English teacher at SMA

Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar in particular, and also it will be expected to giving a

new insight in teaching English to improve productive skills in English.

5

E. Scope of the Research

The scope of this research is limited on how far the students’ productive

skill in writing and speaking. This covers the students’ writing skill in terms of

content and organization. Meanwhile the students’ speaking skill cover two

components; pronunciation and vocabulary by using Participation Point System

(PPS) Method at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

6

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. The Concept of Participation Point System (PPS) Method

Participation Point System (PPS) is a teaching method developed by

Hadley (1997). The idea of the method is how to make students participation

become tangible so that students can evaluate their progress. Teachers usually

emphasize students’ participation in which it will be graded and will be the

significant adding score for English score. However, the teachers usually note the

students’ participation secretly in their notes. To solve this problem, it is important

to have a method that make the point of participation become visible, so students

can see clearly and then evaluate their progress in every meeting (Jumiati and

Asriana, 2013).

Participation Point System Method is a method of motivating classroom

participation, especially communicative participation by giving students something

tangible participation, by giving students something tangible (such as discs,

marbles, poker chips, etc.) while activities are underway to represent their

participation scores (Hadley, 2003). Anything can be used. PPS is motivational and

the best form of praise. It has been developed to motivate the passive students to be

active. In addition, by rewarding the students immediately with participation points

and making the participation points as important part of the grading process, and

the point is tangible it is the more students will become motivated (Jeffrey, 2003).

7

Based on some definitions, researchers concluded that Participation Point

System is a method which can make students active in communicating in the

classroom because this method can motivate students to get a score. Whilst in

retrieval score teachers can motivate them by using praise. In this way students can

evaluate themselves and know their capabilities.

1. Strength and Weakness of Participation Point System (PPS) Method

Participation Point System (PPS) is undoubtedly motivated teaching

method. However, there are some strength and weakness of PPS Method.

According to Jeffrey (2003), the strengths of using PPS method are:

a. Very helpful for students in overcoming their passivity.

b. Its tangibility.

c. Make classes easier to teach.

d. It is easier to help the students understand certain things.

e. It cuts down on unnecessary teacher talking time and giving more time

for the students to talk.

There is one weakness of PPS Method, it takes a lot of energy to move

around the classroom distributing points.

According to Harris (2014: 2) PPS has transformed his class from

passive participants to active and engaged learners. The contrast of the

students before and after the system has taught, it made all students, even

high achievers can useful from external motivation.

8

2. The Implementation of Participation Point System (PPS)

According to (Jeffrey, 2003) Participation Point System (PPS) is

a very simple yet, very effective method of motivating students to overcome

their passivity. He stated that there are many ways of practically applying

the PPS. The teachers can decide what they want to use and what score they

want to assign. He said that different color can also represent different

scores.

Jeffrey (2003) implemented the PPS method in his class by using

glass discs. Each glass disc is worth one point, and each marble is worth

three points. In his class, the discs are given to the students for fulfilling

what would possibly be considered standard for speaking English and

answering questions, while the marbles are given for attempting more

challenging issues. When the response is short and one-worded, they usually

receive one point. If they elaborate in any way, add some “depth”, or attempt

to answer more difficult questions, then they receive more points. Even if

the student has a wrong answer, that student will keep the participation

points because points are given mainly for making an effort to communicate

in the classroom, and not primarily for the correct answer.

Jeffrey also used gold discs that were worth six points for

remarkable and outstanding participation. One point was given to each

student who was on time emphasize the importance of punctuality. He found

that punctuality definitely improved when students were rewarded with one

9

point in this way for being on time. Before using this method, there were

always a number of late students, coming into the class after the lesson had

started, which was disruptive.

In the first section, the teacher walks around the classroom to

check each students’ homework and gives one point to each student who has

done his/her homework. Additionally, students who volunteer to answer a

question while their homework is being checked get one additional point or

more if they elaborate the answer. Homework checking only takes around

five minutes. Before the class ends, each student’s participation score is

counted by collecting all discs and marbles.

According to Bess and Bess (2002) PPS works like this: during the

lesson planning, the teacher thinks about planned student behaviors such as

speaking in pairs, working in groups, etc. Next, the teacher assigns each task

with a number of participation points based on the task. What students are

expected to do is clearly spelled out, either written on the white board or

written out in a handout. Students complete each activity in the classroom.

In fact, teaching English using Participation Point System can be

used in many kinds of ways. Below are the fundamental steps to implement

PPS in a classroom as outlined by Raine (2014):

a. Desirable behaviors (asking for opinion, asking questions, volunteering

for classroom activities, etc.) are assigned a participation score;

10

b. Students who participate in desirable actions are rewarded with a

physical representation of the points value (coins, beads, or tokens);

c. At the end of each class, the total participation points received by each

learner is counted;

d. Special prizes are awarded at the end of each semester for the students

who collect the most points.

B. The Concept of Writing

Writing process is the stage goes through in order to produce something in

its final written form (Harmer, 2004, p.4). To deliver from that explain of course

we used to practice of express what idea in our mind in the form of list, letter,

essay, reports, or novel.

The written language is simply the graphic representation of spoken

language, and that written performance is much like oral performance, the only

difference lying in graphic instead of auditory signals (Brown, 2001, p.335). In

addition, when write something, it usually expects somebody to read it. It is easy

for the reader to understand what the writers have written. However, it might be

difficult for other people to understand. The writing process is the stage goes

through in order to produce something in its final written form. The writer not

only needs to know the process of writing, but also need to apply these processes

to the works. It will help the writer to organize idea logically.

Writing skill is complex and difficult to learn. Requiring mastery is not

only grammatical patterns but also the rule of writing such as high degree of

organization in the development of ideas and information and also choosing the

11

appropriate vocabularies and sentence structure to create a style which is

appropriate to subject matter (Jim A.P in Hong-qin, 2014).

Writing is one of the four language skills, which is taught in the school.

Writing is an important skill, to be developed from the beginning of language

instruction (Larsen and Anderson, 2013). On the other hand, writing is powerful

way not only to describe but also to examine, to reflect on, and to understand our

thoughts, feelings, ideas, action and experiences (Yagelski, 2015).

Additionally, writing is a written productive language skill. The purpose

of writing skill is to share information from spoken language into written

language. It needs a great thinking to produce writing which begin from getting

main idea, planning, and revising procedure. To reach the whole, it requires the

specific skill which not all the people could develop it (Ramadhani, 2013).

Based on to the statement above, it can conclude that writing is a complex

process. Writing is the activity to create pieces of written work, communicative

act, and a way of sharing observation, information, thoughts, or ideas with

ourselves or others into language that linked together in certain ways.

1. Writing process

According to Harmer in Ramadhani (2013), the writing process divided

into four stages: planning, drafting, editing, and final draft. All the stages of

writing process are explained below:

12

a. Planning. It is the first stage of writing process when the writers plan,

try, and decide what they are going to say before starting to write. It

might involve making detailed notes. There are three issues; purpose,

audience, and content structure that must be considered in planning to

write. The purpose of writing will influence the type of the text to

produce, the language use, and the information. Secondly, the audience

will influence the shape of the writing (how it is laid out, how the

paragraph structured), and the choice of language such as formal and

informal tone. Thirdly, the content structure of the piece that is, how

best to sequence the facts, ideas, or arguments which are decided to

include.

b. Drafting. It is the first version of a piece of writing. A number of drafts

might be produced on the way to the final version, as the writing process

proceeds into editing.

c. Editing (reflecting and revising). It is the writing process to make the

change of draft which is ambiguous or confusing by using general

meaning and overall structure such as individual words and

grammatical accuracy. Reflecting and revising are often helped by other

readers who comment and make suggestions. The reaction of readers to

a piece of writing will help the author to make appropriate revisions.

d. Final draft. It is the last stage of the writing process when the written

text is ready to send to its intended audience.

13

2. Component of Writing

In writing process, the writer can be said successful if their writing

contains some aspects of writing. According to Jacob, et al (1981:90), there are

five aspects of writing, they are:

a. Content

The content of writing should be clear to readers so that the readers

can understand the message conveyed and gain information from it (Weigle,

2009). In order to have a good content of writing, its content should be well

unified and completed. The term usually knows as unity and completeness,

which become one of characteristic of good writing. The content to

relevance, originality, logic, clarity, etc. The content itself must be clear for

the readers so they can get the information from it.

b. Organization

Organization refers to the overall structure pieces of writing. The

aim of organizing material in writing involve coherence, the order of

importance, general to specific, specific to general, chronological order and

spatial order of the pattern (Weigle, 2009).

Organization concern with the way how the writer arranges and

organizes their idea and their messages in writing from which consist of

some partial order (A.R. Coulthardas cited in Hirsyam, 2016). In writing,

the writer should know about what kinds of paragraph that they want to write

and what topic that they want to tell to the readers. It must be supported by

cohesion.

14

c. Vocabulary

Vocabulary is one of very important component where the selection

of words should be suitable with the content. It means that the writer can

express their meaning or ideas exactly rather than blurs it. Thus, the reader

is easy to understand the content of the writing.

d. Language Use

Language use in writing description and other form of writing

involved correct usage and points of grammar (Cole, et al as cited in

Hirsyam,2016). However, considering that there are many points of

grammar, the writer would like to quote a little literature about tenses,

verbs, nouns and agreement. Specific nouns and strong verbs used

modifier or adjectives, adverbs, and participle in the writing. A modifier

may also be a phrase. A single, well-chosen modifier is often more

effective than several used together. If it is difficult to describe a subject

with overused or worm-out modifier, find more interesting synonyms in

the dictionary.

e. Mechanic

Essay writing is mechanically good if the writers demonstrate the

mastery of conventions, good spelling, punctuation, capitalization,

paragraphing, and also handwriting. Mechanics are the convention of print

that do not exist in oral language just in written language. Therefore, we

should be careful in writing because it will be permanent.

15

3. Writing genre

There are many kinds of genre in writing. They are descriptive,

narrative, anecdote, spoof, recount, report, analytical exposition, hortatory

exposition, explanation, review, discussion, procedure, news item.

Genre is a term for grouping texts together, representing how writers

typically use language to respond to recurring situations (Hyland, 2004, p.4).

Knowledge of genres (understanding how different purposes are commonly

expressed within a discourse community) is only one of the many ‘knowledge’

of ‘competences’ that a reader brings to the task of reading, and which a writer

assumes the reader will know (Harmer, 2004, p.17). In addition, genre

approach to writing students study texts in the genre they are going to be

writing before they embark on their own writing (Harmer, 2000, p.258).

According to Hyland (2004, p.29), there are some example of genres;

a. Recount: to reconstruct past experiences by retelling events in

original sequence.

b. Procedure: to show how something is done.

c. Narrative: to entertain and instruct via reflection on experience.

d. Description: to give an account of imagined of factual events.

In addition, a writer’s style is a reflection of his or her personality,

unique voice, and way of approaching the audience and readers (Meer,

2016). However, every piece of writers write is for a specific purpose—for

example, writers may want to explain how something works or persuade

16

people to agree with their point of view. While there are as many writer's

styles as there are writers, there are only four general purposes that lead

someone to write a piece, and these are known as the four styles, or types,

of writing. Knowing all four different types and their usages is important for

any writer. Here are the categories and their definitions:

1. Expository

Expository writing explains or informs. It talks about a subject

without giving opinions. Expository writing explains or informs. It talks

about a subject without giving opinions. Expository writing's main

purpose is to explain. It is a subject-oriented writing style, in which

authors focus on telling you about a given topic or subject without

voicing their personal opinions.

These types of essays or articles furnish you with relevant facts and

figures but do not include their opinions. This is one of the most common

types of writing. You always see it in textbooks and how-to articles. The

author just tells you about a given subject, such as how to do something.

2. Descriptive

Descriptive writing focuses on communicating the details of a

character, event, or place. Descriptive writing focuses on communicating

the details of a character, event, or place. Descriptive writing's main

purpose is to describe. It is a style of writing that focuses on describing a

character, an event, or a place in great detail. It can be poetic when the

author takes the time to be very specific in his or her descriptions.

17

Key point of descriptive text: it is often poetic in nature, describes

places, people, events, situation, or location in highly-detailed manner.

3. Persuasive

Persuasive writing tries to bring other people around to your point

of view. Persuasive writing tries to bring other people around to your

point of view. Persuasive writing's main purpose is to convince. Unlike

expository writing, persuasive writing contains the opinions and biases of

the author. To convince others to agree with the author's point of view,

persuasive writing contains justifications and reasons. It is often used in

letters of complaint, advertisements or commercials, affiliate marketing

pitches, cover letters, and newspaper opinion and editorial pieces.

4. Narrative

The narrative text explains events from the writer’s life. It retells

the previous event or experience. It begins with the opening, then

followed by the events and the last is ended by resolution where the

problems in the story are solved. The purpose of narrative text is to

entertain the reader.

According to Anderson (2003), narrative text consisted of some

generic structure. They are orientation, complication, climax, resolution,

and re-orientation. The first is orientation. This stage describes the main

characters and some minor characters. It is commonly indicated action

located and when it is taking place. The second is complication. It means

that problem happens in the story. It involves the main characters. The

18

third is climax. It describes how narrator tells the character in the story

to face the conflict. It involves their feeling and what they do. Next is

resolution. It contains how the character solve the problem in

complication stage. This implication may be resolved for better or worse,

but it is rarely left completely unresolved. The last is coda. It contains the

writers’ message whether moral message or advise for the reader. It is an

optional stage that means in narrative text, it can use or not.

C. The Concept of Speaking

Speaking is the verbal use of language to communicate with other

(Fulcher, 2003, p.79). Speaking in interactive and according to accomplish

pragmatic goals through interactive discourse with other speaker of language.

(Hughes, 2007).

Speaking is the productive aural/oral skills. It consists of producing

systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning. Teaching speaking is sometimes

considered a simple process. Commercial language schools around the world hire

people with no training to teach conversation. Although, speaking is totally natural,

speaking in language other than our own is anything but simple (Nunan, 2003).

The process of speaking, when a person speaks, we assume that the

following takes place. Though some motivation the person decided to speak, and

some content is bought other under attention. Through association of this content

with expression in the language, sentences are constructed with words, intonation,

phonemes, etc.

19

Speaking is making oneself understood. At a more defined level, speaking

requires the correct and idiomatic use of the target language. From the above

definition, the writer can conclude that speaking is expressing ideas, opinions, or

feelings to others by using words or sounds of articulation in order to inform, to

persuade, and to entertain that can be learnt by using teaching learning

methodologies.

According to Ubberyas cited in Lutfi (2014), some characteristics when the

speaking activity can be said have been successful. They are follows:

a. Leaners talk a lot. Learners should get as much as possible chance to speak.

But, unfortunately, it is most usually time is taken up with teachers talk or

pauses.

b. Participation is event. All students should get some chance to speak and give

contributions; classroom discussion in not dominated by a minority of

talkative participants.

c. Motivation is high. Learners are full of desire to speak, because they are

interested in the topic and have something new to say about it.

d. Language is of an acceptable level. Leaners express themselves in utterances

that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other, and of acceptable

level of language accuracy.

1. Elements of Speaking

a. Accuracy

According to Srivasta (2014), accuracy refers to the ability of

the learner to produce grammatically correct sentences. The learner should

20

not only know correct grammatical rules of the language but also able to

speak and write accurately. Accuracy is a manner of people in using

appropriate word and the pattern of sentences (Marchelas cited in

Lutfi,2014). In this case, accuracy divided into three elements, namely

vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar.

1) Vocabulary

The essential elements to learn before practice speaking is

vocabulary. We are difficult to speak without mastering vocabulary.

Students sometimes get difficulties in memorizing all vocabularies

that they have known it caused by lack of practicing and use them.

That is why the student need to practice more to keep in their mind.

Vocabulary is all the words that person knows or uses (Hornby,

2010).

2) Pronunciation

Pronunciation is the way for students to produce the utterance

words clearly when they are speaking (Kline as cited in Primarora,

2015). English pronunciation does not amount to mastery of list of

sounds or isolated words. Instead, it amounts to learning and

practicing the specifically English way of making a speaker’s

thoughts easy to follow (Gilbertas cited in Primarora, 2015).

When a teacher teaches English, they need to be sure that the

students can be understood when they speak. They need to be able

21

to say what they want to say. This means that students’ pronunciation

should be at least adequate for that purpose.

According to Hornby (2000) pronunciation is way in which

a language or a particular word or sounds is spoken. On their own

the sound of language may will be meaningless some of preambles

that speaker of English as foreign language because they have

difficulty with individual sound. Stress is a feature of word not only

when the words construct phonemically minimal pair partner, but

also giving shape to a word as spoken. Then intonation is clearly

important item and component user of language recognize what

meaning it has and can change the meaning of word they through

using it in different ways, when we taught English language,

student’s need it use rhythms and stress correctly if they are to be

understood.

3) Grammar

Grammar refers to the set of rules that allow us to combine

words in our language into larges units (Greenbaum & Nelsonas

cited in Primarora, 2015). Grammar it is needed for students to

arrange a correct sentence in conversation (Heatonas cited in

Cemink, 2012).

According to Dalleas cited in Herly (2015) grammar whose

subject matter is the organization of word in to variables

communication, often representing many layers of structure, such as

22

phrase sentences and complete utterance. The grammar of a

language is the description of the ways in which words can change

their forms and can be combined into sentences in that language.

Students need grammar in order to communicate underlying

proposition compactly and efficiently (Harmer as cited in Primarora,

2015).

b. Fluency

Fluency refers to how well a learner communicate meaning rather

than now many mistakes that they make in grammar, vocabulary, and

pronunciation. Fluency is often compared with accuracy, which is

concerned with the type, amount, and seriousness of mistake made.

Therefore, fluency is highly complex ration relate mainly to smoothness

continuity in discourse, it includes a consideration of how sentences

pattern very in word order to omit element of structure and also certain

aspect of the prosily of discourse.

Fluency refers to a level of proficiency in communication. It is

the ability to produce written and spoken sentences with ease, efficiency,

without pauses or a breakdown of communication (Srivastava, 2014,

p.55). Generally, language teachers have to deal with heterogeneous

students having different language background and language skills,

different world views, age levels, experiences and point of view. Some

students are accurate in speaking and writing but hesitate to speak in

public. On the other hand, few students are fluent but not accurate. Every

23

student wants to be accurate as well as fluent in speaking and writing.

But there are many variables and kinds of learner and differences in

classroom that makes teaching sometimes very challenging and

interesting.

Fluency refers to the smoothness of flow which sounds, syllables,

words, and phrases are joined together when speaking. In the classroom,

the students often speak English with pause, they often say “ums” or “a”.

They not fluent speak English in classroom. Apart from cognitive and

linguistics factors, learners’ speaking competence is influenced by

affective factors. Both anxiety and self-restriction have an impact on

learners’ oral proficiency.

c. Comprehension

Comprehension is discussed by both speakers because

comprehension can make people getting the information they want.

Comprehension is defined as the ability to understand something by a

reasonable comprehension of the subject or as the knowledge of what a

situation is really like.

D. Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework underlying of this research was presented in the

following diagram:

24

Figure 2.1 Conceptual Framework

The three variables above; input, process, and output are briefly classified as

follows:

1. Input: refers to Participation Points System (PPS) Method which consists of

writing and speaking materials. A teaching media which is hoped to be a good

device in teaching and learning English.

2. Process: refers to the implementation of the input variable in the classroom

activities both teaching and learning through Participation Points System

(PPS) Method.

3. Output: refers to the students’ writing skill focuses on content and

organization meanwhile speaking skill focuses on pronunciation and

vocabulary.

E. Hypothesis

The hypothesis of this research is formulated as follows:

a. Null Hypothesis (Hₒ): The use of Participation Points System (PPS) Method

is not effective for students’ English skill where focused on productive skills

at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

Input

Writing and

Speaking

Material

Process

Using

Partipation

Point System

Method

Output

The Students’

Improvement in

Writing and

Speaking Skill

25

b. Alternative Hypothesis (H¹): The use of Participation Points System (PPS)

Method is effective for students’ English skill where focused on productive

skills at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar

26

CHAPTER III

METHOD OF THE RESEARCH

A. Research Design

The design of this research was a pre-experimental research method with one

group pre-test and post-test design. The treatment was conducted after the pre-test

and before post-test. The design of the experiment would be presented as follow:

Table 3.1 Research Design

(Arikunto, 2006)

Where:

O1 = Pre-test

X = Treatment

O2 = Post-test

In this research, the researcher had tried to figure out the effectiveness of

using participation point system in teaching English especially in writing and

speaking at the eleventh grades students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar. The

effectiveness had been known after finding out the significant difference between

the students’ achievement in learning process before and after using the

participation point system as in this case it refers to pre-test and post-test score.

Pre-test Treatment Post-test

O1 X O2

27

1. Pre-Test

Before doing treatment, the researcher gave the students test related to

the writing and speaking test to find out their knowledge. The pre-test was

given in the next step on the procedure of collecting data. The pre-test took one

meeting.

2. Treatment

After giving the pre-test, the researcher corrected out the treatment to

the students by using Participation Point System Method. This treatment was

conducted six meetings and took 90 minutes for each meeting. The procedures

of the treatment were as follows:

a. The researcher used sticky notes to give the students’ participation score.

Each sticky notes had variant colors, they are red, green, and yellow. Each

color had different score where red was worth three points, green was worth

two points, and yellow was worth one point.

b. The researcher divided the students into five groups. Each group consisted

of 4 students.

c. The researcher explained about the material and gave some questions related

to the topic.

d. The researcher gave opportunity for the students to ask questions about

things that they did not understand about the material.

e. The researcher gave some instructions about what the student did.

f. The researcher gave picture series about narrative text.

g. The researcher asked the students to write narrative text in several

paragraphs.

28

h. The researcher asked the students to tell their work for 2-3 minutes in front

of the class.

i. The researcher gave conclusion about the material and then closed the class.

3. Post-Test

The researcher gave post-test to the students after treatment. The post-

test was similar with pre-test where both of pre-test and post-test have the same

question in order to found out whether or not Participation Point System

improve the students skill in teaching English.

B. Population and Sample

1. Population

The population of this research was the eleventh grades students of SMA

Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar in academic year of 2018/2019. There was one

class. It was XI IPA. The total number of populations were 20 students.

2. Sample

The sample is part of the number and characteristics of the population.

The sample is partially or the representative will be studied (Sugiyono, 2018).

The researcher used total sampling technique which was the sample was

selected from all of the population. It mean all of the students was taken as

sample. The researcher took 20 students from one class (IPA) at the eleventh

grades students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

C. Research Variables and Indicators

There were two variables in this research, namely independent variable and

dependent variable. Independent variable was the variable which influenced the

29

object, while dependent variable was the variable which influenced by the object.

They are:

1. Variables

a. Independent variable of the research was the Participation Point

System Method.

b. Dependent variable of the research was the students’ productive

skills (writing and speaking skills).

2. Indicators

The indicator of this research was focused on productive skills of the

students in learning English.

a. The students’ writing skill focused on content and organization.

b. The students’ speaking skill focused on pronunciation and

vocabulary.

D. Research Instrument

The research instrument of this research was test. The test consisted of two

kinds, they are writing test and speaking test. Writing test was one which involves

writing rather than doing something practical or giving spoken answers where the

researcher asked the students to write narrative text. Meanwhile speaking test was

the questions that need verbally answers where the students spoke up in front of the

class. used writing-test and speaking-test as the instrument. However, the researher

only focused on content and organization in writing skill and focused on

pronunciation and vocabulary in speaking skill.

30

E. Procedure of Data Collection

The procedure of collecting data used the following steps:

1. Writing Test

In the writing test, the researcher gave the students work sheet. They

asked to write narrative text based on the topic into several paragraphs.

2. Speaking Test

The speaking test had a relationship with the writing test. The students

wrote narrative text in the work sheet. After that, the researcher gave the

students 2-3 minutes to speak English based on the topic. The researcher used

recorder as supporting instument to measure the students’ speaking skill.

F. Technique of Data Analysis

The techniques of data analysis were used as follows:

1. Scoring the students’ correct answer of the pre-test and post-test by using

this formula:

𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑟

𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑠𝑋 100

(Shofa as cited in Wahdania, 2016)

2. Rating Scale for Writing

a. Scoring of Content

Table 3.2 Content Scoring

Score Criteria

6 Knowledgeable, substantive, through development of thesis,

relevant to assigned topic.

31

5 Some knowledge of subject, adequate range, limited development

of thesis, mostly relevant to the topic, but lacks detail.

4 Some knowledge of the subject, a small portion relevant to the

topic, the development of the thesis is lacking.

3 Limited knowledge of subject, little substance, inadequate

development of topic

2 Does not show knowledge of subject, non-substantive, not

pertinent, or not enough to evaluate.

1 All knowledge were errors.

(Glencoe,2000)

b. Scoring of Organization

Table 3.3 Organization Scoring

Score Criteria

6 The ideas are-well organized in spatial order, correction spatial

order concise, the ideas are cohesion, the ideas are coherent.

5 The ideas are adequate organized, the organization is adequate

concise, the ideas are adequate cohesion, the ideas are adequate

coherence, the ideas are relevant to outline.

4 The ideas are generally organized, the organization is quite

concise, few ideas are a break out cohesion, the ideas are

generally coherent, the ideas are mostly relevant.

3 The ideas are almost loosely organized, the organization is not

concise, the ideas are inadequate cohesion, the ideas are

inadequate coherent.

2 The organization are loosely organized, the organization is not

concise in spatial order, the ideas are confused and

disconnected.

1 All knowledge are errors.

(Glencoe, 2000)

32

3. Rating scale for speaking

1. Scoring of Pronunciation

Table 3.4 Pronunciation Scoring

Score Criteria

6 Pronunciation is only very slightly influenced by the mother

tongue. Two or three grammatical and lexical errors.

5 Pronunciation is lightly influenced by the mother tongue. A few

minor grammatical and lexical errors but most utterances are

correct.

4 Pronunciation is still moderately influenced by the mother

tongue but no serious phonological errors. A few grammatical

and lexical errors but only one or two major errors causing

confusion.

3 Pronunciation is influenced by the mother tongue but only a few

serious phonological errors. Several grammatical and lexical

errors, some of which cause confusion.

2 Pronunciation is seriously influenced by the mother tongue with

the errors causing a breakdown. Many “basic” grammatical and

lexical errors.

1 Serious pronunciation errors as well as many “basic”

grammatical and lexical errors. No evidence of having mastered

any of the language skills and areas practice in the course.

(Heaton, 1989)

33

a. Scoring of Vocabulary

Table 3.5 Vocabulary Scoring

Score Criteria

6 Speak without too great an effort with a fairly wide range of

expression. Searchers for words occasionally but only one or two

unnatural pauses.

5 Has to make an effort at time to search for words. Nevertheless,

smooth delivery on the whole and only a few unnatural..

4 Although he has to make an effort and search for words, there

too many unnatural pauses. Fairly smooth delivery mostly.

Occasionally fragmentary but succeeds in coveying the general

meaning. Fair range of expression.

3 Has to make an effort for much of time. Often has to search for

the desired meaning. Rather halting delivery and fragmentary.

Range of expression often limited.

2 Long pauses while he searched for the desired meaning.

Frequently and halting delivery. Almost gives up making the

effort at times limited range of expression.

1 Full of long and unnatural pauses. Very halting and fragmentary

delivery. At time gives up making the effort. Very limited range

of expression.

(Heaton, 1989)

4. Classifying the students’ score into the following criteria:

No Score Classification

34

1 90-100 Excellent

2 80-89 Very Good

3 70-79 Good

4 60-69 Fairly Good

5 50-59 Fair

6 X<50 Poor

(Depdiknas as cited in Susanti, 2018)

5. To know the students’ percentage improvement, the researcher used

formula as follows:

P = X2−X1

X1× 100%

P = Percentage

X2 = Post-test mean score

X1 = Pre-test mean score

6. Statistic (SPSS)

The research data were gathered from the students’ test and analyzed

by using IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Science) 2.4 software

program in order to know the improvement of students’ writing and speaking

skill by calculating the mean score, median, mode and standard deviation.

7. Hypothesis Testing

The researcher has applied visual dictionary in students’ vocabulary

mastery including pretest, treatment and post-test. The pre-test score and post-

35

test score have significant difference after done hypothetical test. The results

of data have been representative in below:

While the criteria acceptance or rejection of t-test as follows:

H1 is accepted if sig < a = 0.05

H0 is accepted if sig > a = 0.05

36

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter answered of problem statements in the previous chapter and

consisted of findings and discussion. Findings showed description of result from

the data that had collected through writing and speaking test in pre-test and post-

test. It was described in graphic or chart or table form. Then, discussion was

explanation of findings but it still showed result of the data. In this discussion, the

researcher used their own word to explain it.

A. Finding

The findings of the research present the result of the research in using

Participation Point System Method which was consists of five parts. These are the

improvement of students’ writing skill in terms of content, the improvement of

students’ writing skill in terms of organization, the improvement of students’

speaking skill in terms of pronunciation, the improvement of students’ speaking

skill in terms of vocabulary, and hypothesis testing. In the further interpretation of

the data analysis are given below:

1. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of Content

The students’ content competence in writing is determined through the

pre-test and post-test mean score. The pre-test mean score showed the students’

score before giving the treatment. Meanwhile, the students’ post-test mean score

was showed after giving the treatment. It can be seen in the following table:

37

Table 4.1 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Content

Indicator Students’ Score Improvement (%)

Pre-test Post-test

Content 48.30 78.25 62.00 %

Table 4.1 shows that the students’ mean score in terms of content has an

improvement in post-test than pre-test. It is proved by seeing the table which the

students’ mean score is 48.30 in pre-test to be 78.25 in post-test. The

improvement percentage of students’ score in terms of content after giving the

treatment by using Participation Point System (PPS) Method is 62.00%. The

improvement of the students’ writing skill in terms of content could be described

as follows chart:

Figure 4.1: The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Content

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

48.3

78.25

Improvement

pre-test

post-test

38

Table 4.2 Frequency of the Students’ Score in Terms of Content

No Classification Score Pre-Test Post-Test

F % F %

1 Excellent 90-100 - - 2 10

2 Very Good 80-89 - - 10 50

3 Good 70-79 - - - -

4 Fairly Good 60-69 4 20 8 40

5 Fairly 50-59 10 50 - -

6 Poor X<50 6 30 - -

Total 20 100 20 100

Table 4.2 shows the students’ score frequency in terms of content. In pre-

test, it can be seen that there are 4 students (20%) got fairly good, 10 students

(50%) got fair and 6 students (30%) got poor. Then, the students showed the

improvement in post-test than pre-test which is 2 students (10%) got excellent,

10 students (50%) got very good and 8 students (40%) got fairly good.

2. The Improvement of the Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of

Organization

The students’ organization competence in writing is determined through

the pre-test and post-test mean score. The pre-test mean score showed the

students’ score before giving the treatment meanwhile the students’ post-test

mean score was showed after giving the treatment. The data description can be

seen in the following table:

Table 4.3 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Organization


Pre-test Post test

Organization 45.80 78.25 70.85%

39

Table 4.3 shows that the students’ mean score in terms of organization has

an improvement in post-test than pre-test. It is proved by seeing the table which

the students’ mean score was 45.80 in pre-test to be 78.25 in post-test. The

improvement percentage of students’ score in terms of organization after using

Participation Point System (PPS) Method is 70.85%. The improvement of the

students’ writing skill in terms of organization could be described as follows

chart:

Figure 4.2: The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Organization

Table 4.4 Frequency of Students’ Score in Terms of Organization


F % F %

1 Excellent 90-100 - - 1 5

2 Very Good 80-89 - - 12 60

3 Good 70-79 - - - -

4 Fairly Good 60-69 3 15 7 35

5 Fairly 50-59 10 50 - -

6 Poor X<50 7 35 - -

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

45.8

78.25

Improvement

pre-test

post-test

40

Total 20 100 20 100

Table 4.4 shows the students’ score frequency in terms of organization.

In pre-test, it can be seen that there are 3 students (15%) got fairly good, 10

students (50%) got fairly and 7 students (35%) got poor. Then, the students

show the improvement in post-test than pre-test which are 1 student (5%) got

excellent, 12 students (60%) got very good and 7 students (35%) got fairly

good.

3. The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Terms of

Pronunciation

The students’ pronunciation competence in speaking is determined

through the pre-test and post-test mean score. The pre-test mean score showed

the students’ score before giving the treatment. Meanwhile, the students’ post-

test mean score was showed after giving the treatment. It can be seen in the

following table:

Table 4.5 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Pronunciation


Pre-test Post test

Pronunciation 43.30 67.55 56.00%

Table 4.5 shows that the students’ mean score in terms of pronunciation

has an improvement in post-test than pre-test. It is proved by seeing the table

which the students’ mean score was 43.30 in pre-test to be 67.55 in post-test.

The improvement percentage of students’ score in terms of pronunciation after

41

using Participation Point System (PPS) Method is 56.00%. The improvement of

the students’ speaking skill in terms of pronunciation could be described as

follows chart:

Figure 4.3: The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Pronunciation

Table 4.6 Frequency of Students’ Score in Terms of Pronunciation


F % F %

1 Excellent 90-100 - - 1 5

2 Very Good 80-89 - - 5 25

3 Good 70-79 - - - -

4 Fairly Good 60-69 4 20 8 40

5 Fairly 50-59 6 30 6 30

6 Poor X<50 10 50 - -

Total 20 100 20 100

Table 4.6 shows the students’ score frequency in terms of pronunciation.

In pre-test, it can be seen that there are 4 students (20%) got fairly good, 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

43.3

67.55

Improvement

pre-test

post-test

42

students (30%) got fairly and 10 students (50%) got poor. Then, the students

show the improvement in post-test than pre-test which are 1 student (5%) got

excellent, 5 students (25%) got very good, 8 students (40%) got fairly good and

6 students (30%) got fairly.

4. The Improvement of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Terms of

Vocabulary

The students’ vocabulary competence in speaking is determined through

the pre-test and post-test mean score. The pre-test mean score showed the

students’ score before giving the treatment. Meanwhile, the students’ post- test

mean score was showed after giving the treatment. It can be seen in the

following table:

Table 4.7 The Students’ Mean Score in Terms of Vocabulary


Pre-test Post test

Pronunciation 42.45 62.50 47.23%

Table 4.7 shows that the students’ mean score in terms of pronunciation

has an improvement in post-test than pre-test. It is proved by seeing the table

which the students’ mean score was 42.45 in pre-test to be 62.50 in post-test.

The improvement percentage of students’ score in terms of pronunciation after

using Participation Point System (PPS) Method is 47.23%. The improvement of

the students’ speaking skill in terms of vocabulary could be described as follows

chart:

43

Figure 4.4: The Improvement of the Students in Terms of Vocabulary

Table 4.8 Frequency of Students’ Score in Terms of Vocabulary


F % F %

1 Excellent 90-100 - - 1 5

2 Very Good 80-89 - - 4 20

3 Good 70-79 - - - -

4 Fairly Good 60-69 3 15 6 20

5 Fairly 50-59 7 35 7 35

6 Poor X<50 10 50 2 10

Total 20 100 20 100

Table 4.8 shows the students’ score frequency in terms of vocabulary. In

pre-test, it can be seen that there are 3 students (15%) got fairly good, 7 students

(35%) got fairly and 10 students (50%) got poor. Then, the students show the

improvement in post-test than pre-test which are 1 student (5%) got excellent,

4 students (20%) got very good, 6 students (30%) got fairly good, 7 students

(35%) got fairly, and 2 students (10%) got poor.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

42.45

62.5

Improvement

pre-test

post-test

44

5. Hypothesis Testing

The hypothesis is the most important of the research. Hypothesis is used

to know whether there is significant difference between pre-test and post test

result. It determines whether Participation Point System (PPS) Method is

effective or not in teaching English especially in writing and speaking skill.

The hypothesis is tested by using T-test analysis. The researcher used t-test

(test of significance) to know and to compare the significant difference between

the students’ score in pre-test and post-test. The researcher used t-test analysis

on the level of significance (α) = 0.05 with the degree of freedom (df = N – 1

= 20-1 = 19). Therefore, the hypotheses are as follows:

H1 is accepted if sig < α = 0.05

H0 is accepted if sig > α = 0.05

1. The Significance of the Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of Content and

Organization

a) Content

The result of the data calculation was calculated using SPSS. The

students’ result score in terms of content shown in the following table:

Table 4.9 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Content

between Pre-test and Post-test

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

T Df Sig. (2-

tailed) Mean

Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

45

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -29.80000 1.96326 1.96362 -33.90990 -25.69010 -15.176 19 .000

Based on the table 4.9, it can be seen that the Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.000 < α

0.05. The alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted whereas null hypothesis

(H0) was rejected. It can be concluded that there was significant difference

between the result of the student writing skill in terms content after using

Participation Point System (PPS) Method.

b) Organization


students’ result score in terms of organization shown in the following table:

Table 4.10 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Organization

between Pre-test and Post-test

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

t Df Sig. (2-

tailed) Mean

Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -32.30000 12.78198 2.85814 -38.28215 -26.31785 -11.301 19 .000

Based on the table 4.10, it can be seen that the Sig. (2-tailed) is 0.000 <

α 0.05. The alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted whereas null hypothesis

(H0) was rejected. It can be concluded that there was significant difference

46

between the result of the writing skill in terms of organization after using

Participation Point System (PPS) Method.

2. The Significance of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Terms of

Pronunciation and Vocabulary

a) Pronunciation


students’ result score in terms of pronunciation shown in the following table:

Table 4.11 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Pronunciation

between Pre-test and Post test

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

T Df

Sig.

(2-

tailed) Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -24.15000 12.67104 2.83333 -38.28215 -30.08023 -18.21977 19 .000


α 0.05. It means that the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted whereas null

hypothesis (H0) was rejected. It can be concluded that there was significant

difference between the result of the student speaking skill in terms of

pronunciation after using Participation Point System (PPS) Method.

b) Vocabulary


students’ result score in terms of pronunciation shown in the following table:

47

Table 4. 12 The Significance of Students’ Score in Terms of Vocabulary

between Pre-test and Post test

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

T Df

Sig.

(2-

tailed) Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -20.50000 11.64146 2.60311 -25.49837 -14.60163 -7.702 19 .000


α 0.05. It means that the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted whereas null

hypothesis (H0) was rejected. It can be concluded that there was significant

difference between the results of the students’ speaking skill in terms of

vocabulary after using Participation Point System (PPS) Method.

B. Discussion

In this part, the discussion dealing with the interpretation of findings

derived from the result of the students’ increase in writing skill in terms of

content and organization meanwhile speaking skill in terms of pronunciation

and vocabulary. In findings, the data showed that the increase of students’ in

writing and speaking skill were significant after analysing t-test and t-table

value. The application of Participation Point System (PPS) Method in

teaching English at the eleventh grade students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9

Makassar can improve the students’ achievement and their ability to

understand the material in pre-test and post-test inside the learning process

48

where the KKM in SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar especially for English

subject was 75.

1. The Achievement of the Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of

Content

One of the important things in writing is the content. A content in

writing have to relevant with the topic. As Weigle (2009) state that the

content of writing should be clear to reader so that the reader can

understand the message coveyed and gain information from it. Result of

the data analysis through the writing test showed that the students’ writing

skill in terms of content has increased. It was indicated by the students’

score in pre-test and post-test.

The mean score of the students in pre-test was 48.30. In terms of

content in pre-test, the students were still confused to write a text because

they has limited knowledge and little substance in their writing. In pre-test

there were 6 (30%) out of students classified into poor score, 10 (50%) out

of them classified into fair score, 4 (20%) out of students classified into

fairly good score, and none of them classified into good, very good and

excellent score. While the mean score of the students in post-test, it was

78.25. It has increased and higher than pre-test. The students can write the

content with the relevant topic. In post-test there were 2 (10%) out of

students classified into low score, 5 (25%) out of them classified into fairly

good score, 1 (5%) out of them classified into excellent score, none of them

classified into very good and excellent score.

In the treatment at the first meeting the researcher actually found

49

that there were most of students got problem in writing because the most

of them still confused to make paragraph. The second until the last

meeting, they tried to read and understand the content of the text and they

also pay attention to the explanation that given by the researcher to them

at the end of meeting.

Based on the result of the t-test, the researcher found that there was

significant difference between the result of the pre-test and post-test. It

means that there was significant difference of the pre-test before and after

teaching and learning processed by using Participation Point System. Thus,

by using Participation Point System (PPS) Method could be improved

students’ writing skill in terms of content.

2. The Achievement of the Students’ Writing Skill in Terms of

Organization

In addition, organization in writing skill. It is one of writing

aspects that help the readers easy to get the point in our writing. Every text

has their organization or usually called generic structure. Narrative text

itself consist of orientation, complication, resolution, and re-orientation.

As A.R Coulthard as cited in Hirsyam (2016) state that

organization concern with the way how the writer arranges and organizes

their idea and their messages in writing from which consisted of some partial

order. The result of the data analysis through the written test shows that the

students’ writing skill in terms of organization has increased. It was

indicated by the students’ score in pre-test and post-test.

50

The means score of the students in pre-test was 45.80. The students

looked confused and disconnected in their writing. Students’ writing does

not completely told in the orientation of the story such as they did not show

the complete setting in the story like character, place, and situation. Besides

that, in terms of complication, they were not totally narrated. In pre-test,

there were 7 (35%) out of students classified into poor score, 10 (50%) out

of them classified into fairly, 3 (15%) out of them classified into fairly good,

none of them classified into good, very good and excellent score.

Meanwhile, the mean score of the students in post-test was 78.25.

It has increased and higher than pre-test. After the implementation of

treatment in six meetings, the students organize their writing. They had

shown clear orientation and had used signal words which indicate sequence.

In post-test, there were 7 (35%) out of students classified into fairly good

score, 12 (60%) out of them classified into fairly, 1 (5%) out of them

classified into excellent score.

From the discussion above, the researcher could be conclude that

using Participation Point System (PPS) Method was one of good methods

that could improve the students’ writing skill in terms of content and

organization at the eleventh grades Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9

Makassar.

3. The Achievement of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Terms of

Pronunciation

Pronunciation is one of aspects in speaking. As in Primarora (2015)

state that pronunciation is the way for students to produce the utterance

51

words clearly when they speak. The result of the data analysis through the

speaking test shows that the students’ speaking skill in terms of

pronunciation has increased. It was indicated by the students’ score in pre-

test and post-test. The mean score of the students in pre-test was 43.30. The

students’ score was lack because they only speak English but they did not

pay attention with the correct pronunciation. They still influenced by the

mother tongue. In pre-test, there were 10 (50%) out of students classified

into poor score, 6 (30%) out of them classified into fairly score, 4 (20%) out

of them classified into fairly good score, none of them classified into good,

very good and excellent score.

Meanwhile the mean score of the students in post-test was 67.55. It

has increased and higher than pre-test. The students can speak effectively

and they can use correct pronunciation. As Andi Tenri, et al (2013) state that

correct pronunciation of individual sounds and words make the listeners be

able to hear and distinguish the words we are saying. In post-test, there were

6 (30%) out of students classified into fairly score, 8 (40%) out of them

classified into fairly score good score, 5 (25%) out of them classified into

very good score, and 1 (5%) out of them classified into excellent score.



means that there was significant difference before and after teaching and

learning process by using Participation Point System (PPS) Method.

52

4. The Achievement of the Students’ Speaking Skill in Terms of

Vocabulary

Vocabulary is one of important aspects in speaking. Large

vocabulary should be improved in order that the words might be used

appropriately. As Andi Tenri, et al. (2013) state that one cannot

communicate effectively or express their ideas in both oral and written

forms if they do not have sufficient vocabulary; without vocabulary nothing

can be conveyed. The result of the data analysis through the speaking test

shows that the students’ speaking skill in terms of vocabulary has increased.

It was indicated by the students’ score in pre-test and post-test.

The mean score of the students in pre-test was 42.45. The students’

score was lack because their vocabulary was very limited so it was hard to

understand by listener. In pre-test, there were 10 (50%) out of students

classified into poor score, 7 (35%) out of them classified into fairly score, 3

(15%) out of them classified into fairly good score, none of them classified

into good, very good and excellent score.

Meanwhile the mean score of the students in post-test was 62.50. It

has increased and higher than pre-test. The students had limited vocabulary

but the meaning could be understood by the listener. As Rahman (2012)

state that speaking is an oral communication involving two elements namely

the speaker who gives the messages and the listener who receives the

message. In post-test, there were 2 (10%) out of students classified into poor

score, 7 (35%) out of them classified into fairly score, 6 (30%) out of them

53

classified into fairly good score, 4 (20%) out of them classified into very

good score, and 1 (5%) out of them classified into excellent score.



means that there was significant difference before and after teaching and

learning process by using Participation Point System (PPS) Method. It

concluded that the result of the research was suitable with the theory of

Jeffrey (2003) states that Participation Points System (PPS) is a very simple

yet, very effective method of motivating students to overcome their

passivity. In addition, Hadley (1997) states that PPS is a method of

motivating classroom participation, especially communicative participation

by giving students something tangible participation, by giving students

something tangible (such as discs, marbles, poker chips, etc.)

From those results, it can be concluded that Participation Point

System (PPS) Method is effective to be used in teaching English at the

Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

54

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Based on the description in the previous chapter, the researcher puts forward

conclusion and suggestion as follows:

A. Conclusion

Based on the findings and discussion in the previous chapter, the researcher

concludes this research as follows:

1. The use of Participation Point System Method was effective to improve

students’ writing skill in terms of content. It was proved by the Sig. (2-tailed)

(0.000) that was lower than α = 0.05. It also proved by the students’ mean

score before giving treatment was 48.30 (pre-test) to be 78.25 (post-test) after

giving treatment with 62.00% improvement. It indicated that the students’

content score between pre-test and post-test was significantly different. Thus,

it can be concluded that there was a significant effect of using Participation

Point System Method in improving students’ writing skill at the eleventh

grades students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.


students’ writing skill in terms of organization. It was proved by the Sig. (2-

tailed) (0.000) which was lower than α = 0.05. It also proved by the students’

mean score before giving treatment was 45.80 (pre-test) to be 78.25 (post-

test) after giving treatment with 70.85% improvement. It indicated that the

students’ organization score between pre-test and post-test was significantly

55

different. Thus, it can be concluded that there was a significant effect of using

Participation Point System Method in improving students’ writing skill at the

eleventh grades students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.


students’ speaking skill in terms of pronunciation. It was proved by the Sig.

(2-tailed) (0.000) which was lower than α = 0.05. It also proved by the

students’ mean score before giving treatment was 43.30 (pre-test) to be 67.55

(post-test) after giving treatment with 56.00% improvement. It indicated that

the students’ pronunciation score between pre-test and post-test was

significantly different. Thus, it can be concluded that there was a significant

effect of using Participation Point System Method in improving students’

speaking skill at the eleventh grades students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9

Makassar.


students’ speaking skill in terms of vocabulary. It was proved by the Sig. (2-

tailed) (0.000) which was lower than α = 0.05. It also proved by the students’

mean score before giving treatment was 42.45 (pre-test) to be 62.50. (post-

test) after giving treatment with 47.23% improvement. It indicated that the

students’ vocabulary score between pre-test and post-test was significantly

different. Thus, it can be concluded that there was a significant effect of using

Participation Point System Method in improving students’ speaking skill at

the eleventh grades students of SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar.

56

B. Suggestion

The researcher presents some suggestion as follows:

1. The teacher should more creative to enrich their teaching in the classroom. It

is suggested to the English teachers at the eleventh grade of SMA

Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar use Participation Point System Method as

alternative way that can be used in teaching English because it is effective to

improve the student skill especially writing and speaking skill.

2. The students should be pay attention while the teacher explain about the

material and ask the teacher their difficulties on learning if there is something

misunderstand.

3. For the next researcher who has similar research with this research, I

suggested to conduct more perfect research with different framework and

contexts that could enrich knowledge by giving contribution to develop

English teaching and learning process.

57

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, M. & Kathryn. (2003). Text Type in English 2. Melbourne: Macmillan

Education Australia.

Ampa, A. T., Muhammad, B. D. & Andi, A. A. (2013). The Development of

Contextual Learning Materials for the English Speaking Skills. International

Journal of Education and Researh. 1(1),3.

Arikunto, S. (2006). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Edisi Revisi

IV. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta.

Bess, M., & Bess, D. A. (2002). A Participation Points System Good for Every Task

in JALT 2002 Conference Proceedings.

Brown, H. D. (1980). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Englewood

CLIFFS. New Jersey. Particehall Inc.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles an Interactive Approach to Language

Pedagogy: Second Edition. New Jersey: Cambridge University Press.

Bygate, M. (1998). “Theoretical Perspectives on Speaking”. Annual Review of

Applied Linguistics. 18(1), p: 20-42.

Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Cemink. (2012). The Components of Speaking Ability. Thesis. Education Faculty:

State University of Yogyakarta.

Cornbleet, S. and Carter, R. (2001). The Language of Speech and Writing. London:

Routledge.

Creswell J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and

Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research: Fourth Edition. Boston:

Pearson Education.

Fulcher, G. (2003). Testing Language Second Language Speaking. Sydney:

Longman. p.79

Gay, L. R. (1981). Education al Research: Competencies for Analysis and

Application. Colombus: Clurles Publishing Company.

Gay, L. R. Mills, Geoffrey, Airasian, Peter. (2006). Educational Research:

Competencies for Analysis and Application (8th Ed). United State.

58

Hadley, G. (1997). Encouraging Oral Communication in the EFL Classroom. Paper

Presented at Niigata University General Education and Language Research

Group. Niigata City: Japan.

Hadley, G. (2003). Action Research in Action. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional

Language Centre.

Harmer, J. (2007). How to Teach Writing. New York: Longman.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching: Fourth Edition.

Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Heaton, J. B. (1990). Classroom Testing: Longman Keys to Language Teaching.

New York: Longman.

Herlis. (2011). Improving the Reading Comprehension of the Second Grade

Students of SMP 11 Makassar through Discovery Learning Method. Thesis.

Fakultas Bahasa dan Sastra. Universitas Negeri Makassar.

Herly. (2015). Using Role Reversal Question Strategy to Develop Students’

Speaking Ability. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Bahasa dan Seni. Universitas Negeri

Yogyakarta.

Hirai, Debra L. Cook, and Friends. (2010). Academic Language Literacy Strategies

for Adelescents A “How to” Manual for Educators. New York: Routledge

Companion.

Hirsyam, I. (2016). Using Synergetic Teaching Strategy to Improve the Students

Writing Ability. A Thesis. Makassar: Universitas Negeri Makassar.

Zhang, H. (2014). Academic Writing Instruction for EFL Under Graduation: an

Intelextuality Approach. International Journal of English and Education.

Hornby. (1974). Oxford Advanced Learner Dictionary of Current English, London:

Oxford University Press.

Hornby, A. S. (2000). Oxford Advanced Learner Dictionary of Current English.

London: Oxford University Press.

Hornby. (2005). The Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. London:

Oxford University Press.

Hughes, R. (2002). Teaching and Researching Speaking. Warlow: Longman.

Hughes, D. (2007). Public Speaking. Jakarta: Gramedia Widiasarana. p.57.

59

Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. Michigan: The University

of Michigan Press.

Jacobs, H. J. et al. (1981). Testing ESL Cmposition: A Practical Approach Newbury

House Rowley Massachusett. Accessed on Monday, April 2019 from

(http://Faculty.ksu.edu.sa/yourself/Reseerch%20Papers/writing%20Evalua

tion.pdf.)

Jeffrey. (2003). Participation Point System (PPS) Method to Encourage Classroom

Communication: The Internet TESL Journals Vol. IX. No.8, August 2003.

Jumiati, A. A & Asriana, A. S. (2013). Improving the Students’ Speaking Ability

Through Participation Point System (PPS) Method. Expose Journal

(Online). Vol.2, No.2. Makassar: Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar.

Johnson, Keith and Morrow, Keith. (1981). Communication in the Class-room,

England: Longman Group Limited.

Larsen, F. D. & Anderson, M. (2013). Techniques and Principles in Language

Teaching: The 3rd Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Layman. (1972). Technique in Testing. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lutfi, A. M. (2014). The use of peer technique to improve students’ performance

and activeness in speaking ability at third year students in a class of MTS

Muhammadiyah Tallo. Makassar: Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar.

Marcel. (1978). English speaking elements. Last update June, 15th 2008. Available

on http//eng.gsu.edu/mos.dos/ghtml.

Martinis, Yamin. (2007). Kiat Membelajarkan Siswa. Yogyakarta: Gaung Persada

Press.

Maybin, J. & Joan. S. (2010). The Rutledge companion to English Language

Studies. New York: The Rout Ledge Companion.

Meer, H. (2016). Four Different Types of Writing Styles: Expository, Descriptive,

Persuasive, and Narrative.

Miller, L. (2001). “A Speaking Lesson. How to Make the Course Book More

Interesting”. MET. V.10, n.2, P.25-29.

Mishra, S & Muralikrishna, C. (2004). Communication Skills for Engineers. Delhi:

Pearson Education Pvt. Ltd.

Nunan, David. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw-

Hill Companies, Inc., p.48.

60

Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle &

Heinle Publishers.

Primarora, A. (2015). The Components of Speaking Skill. Yogyakarta: Pustaka

Wordpress.

Rahman. (2012). Improving the Students’ Speaking Ability Through Engage, Study,

and Active (ESA) Method. Makassar: Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar.

Raine, P. (2014). The Use of Participation Point System to Encourage more

Proactive Learner Participation in Japanese University English Classes.

Retrieved on February 20, 2019, http://www.i-repository.net/contents/asia-

u/11300140.pdf.

Ramadani, S. A. (2013). Improving Students’ Writing Ability in Writing Descriptive

Text Through Field Trip at SMAN 1 Godean. A Thesis. Yogyakarta:

Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

Richards, J. C. (2001). Approach and Method of Language Teaching. New York.

Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C. and Renandya, W. A. (Eds). (2002). Methodology in Language

Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching Listening and Speaking; From Theory to Practice.

New York. Cambridge University Press.

Sasmedi, D. (2006) Language testing and Evaluation. Makassar. LPMP.

Silberman, Mel. (2009). Active Learning 101: Strategi Pembelajaran Aktif.

Yogyakarta: Pustaka Insan Madani.

Sugiyono. (2018). Metode Penelitian Kombinasi. Bandung: Penerbit Alfabeta.

Sreena, M & Ilankumaran, M. (2018). Types of Communication Skills and the Ways

and Means to Enhance Them. International Journal of English Language

and Literature in Humanities (IJELLH) with IF 5.7. Vol.6. No.4, p.492-498.

Srivasta, D. S. (2014). Accuracy and fluently in English classroom. Vol.1.

Weige. (2009). Assessing Writing:Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Yagelski, R. P. (2015). The Essential Writing Ten Core Concepts. Stamford:

Cengage Learning.

http://www.i-repository.net/contents/asia-u/11300140.pdf

http://www.i-repository.net/contents/asia-u/11300140.pdf

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN

(RPP)

Sekolah : SMA Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar

Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

Kelas / Semester : XI / 2 (Dua)

Materi Pokok : Teks Naratif

Alokasi Waktu : 6 pertemuan

A. Kompetensi Inti

KI 1 : Menghargai dan menghayati ajaran agama yang dianutnya.

KI 2 : Menghargai dan menghayati perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggung jawab,

peduli (toleransi, gotong royong), santun, percaya diri, responsif dan pro-

aktif dan menunjukkan sikap sebagai bagian dari solusi atas berbagai

permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial

dan alam serta dalam menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa dalam

pergaulan dunia.

KI 3 : Memahami, menerapkan, menganalisis pengetahuan faktual, konseptual,

prosedural berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang ilmu pengetahuan,

teknologi, seni, budaya, dan humaniora dengan wawasan

kemanusiaan, kebangsaan, kenegaraan, dan peradaban terkait penyebab

fenomena dan kejadian, serta menerapkan pengetahuan prosedural pada

bidang kajian yang spesifik sesuai dengan bakat dan minatnya untuk

memecahkan masalah.

KI 4 : Mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak

terkait dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara

mandiri, dan mampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan.

B. Kompetensi Dasar dan Indikator:

Kompetensi Dasar Indikator

3.5 Membedakan fungsi sosial,

struktur teks, dan unsur

kebahasaan beberapa teks

naratif dengan memberi dan

meminta informasi terkait

cerita pendek, sesuai dengan

konteks penggunaannya

3.5.1 Mengidentifikasi fungsi sosial,

struktur teks dan unsur

kebahasaan yang digunakan

dalam teks tersebut.

4.5. Menangkap makna secara

kontekstual terkait dengan

fungsi sosial, struktur teks,

dan unsur kebahasaan teks

naratif terkait cerita pendek

4.5.1 Menceritakan kembali teks

naratif yang telah disimak

secara tertulis dengan

menggunakan bahasa yang

sederhana

C. Tujuan Pembelajaran

Sikap:

1. Selama dan setelah proses pembelajaran, peserta didik dapat mensyukuri

kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa pengantar

komunikasi internasional yang diwujudkan dalam semangat belajar.

2. Selama dan setelah proses pembelajaran, peserta didik mampu meneladani sikap

dan tindakan peduli, percaya diri, disiplin, dan cinta damai yang ditunjukkan oleh

tokoh dalam teks naratif.

3. Selama dan setelah proses pembelajaran, peserta didik mampu menunjukkan

perilaku jujur dan bertanggungjawab dalam mengerjakan tugas-tugas dalam

pembelajaran teks naratif.

Pengetahuan:

4. Peserta didik dengan membaca teks naratif dan diskusi mampu menjelaskan

struktur teks naratif sederhana (orientation, complication, resolution dan coda).

5. Peserta didik dengan membaca teks naratif dan diskusi mampu menjelaskan

unsur kebahasaan teks naratif sederhana.

Keterampilan:

6. Peserta didik mampu menganalisis gagasan utama, makna kata, dan menggali

informasi tentang teks naratif lisan dan tulis.

7. Peserta didik mampu menafsirkan gagasan utama dan makna kata dalam teks

naratif lisan dan tulis.

8. Peserta didik mampu menyimpulkan dan menyajikan pesan moral (moral value)

dalam teks naratif lisan dan tulis.

9. Peserta didik mampu menceritakan kembali dengan bahasa mereka sendiri teks

naratif lisan dan tulis.

D. Materi Pembelajaran

1) Fungsi sosial

Memperoleh hiburan, menghibur dan mengajarkan nilai-nilai luhur,

meneladani nilai-nilai moral, dsb.

2) Struktur teks

• Pendahuluan (orientasi). Bagian ini memperkenalkan tokoh, tempat,

waktu, dan terjadinya cerita.

• Masalah yang terdapat di dalam cerita (komplikasi)

• Resolusi. Bagian ini menceritakan bagaimana masalah itu terselesaikan.

• Ulasan atau komentar umum (reorientasi), opsional.

3) Unsur kebahasaan

• Menggunakan simple past tense, past continous dan lainnya yang

relevan

• Menggunakan keterangan waktu

• Menggunakan kata benda dan frasa kata benda

• Menggunakan kata hubung waktu

• Kosa kata: terkait karakter, watak, dan setting dalam cerita pendek

• Penggunaan nominal singular dan plural secara tepat \Ucapan, tekanan

kata, intonasi, ejaan dan tanda baca, dan tulisan tangan

4) Topik

Cerita-cerita pendek yang memberikan keteladanan dan yang dapat

menumbuhkan perilaku yang termuat dalam KI.

E. Metode Pembelajaran

1. Pendekatan : Scientific

2. Model Pembelajaran : Participation Point System

3. Teknik Pembelajaran : Picture Series

F. Media, Alat, dan Sumber Pembelajaran

1. Media : Gambar tentang teks naratif “Timun Mas”

2. Alat : Sticky notes

3. Sumber Pembelajaran:

• Buku teks yang relevan

• Gambar-gambar yang relevan

G. Langah-Langkah Kegiatan Pembelajaran

1. Pertemuan Pertama

No Tahap Kegiatan Belajar Alokasi

Waktu

1 Pendahuluan ➢ Guru mengucapkan salam dan bertegur

sapa dengan peserta didik

➢ Guru mempersilahkan peserta didik untuk

berdo’a

➢ Guru mengecek absensi peserta didik

➢ Guru memotivasi peserta didik untuk

fokus kepada materi yang akan

disampaikan

10 menit

➢ Guru menjelaskan pengetahuan umum

tentang teks naratif kepada peserta didik

guna memberikan background knowledge

agar peserta didik lebih mudah mencerna

teks yang diberikan

2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati

➢ Guru memberi penjelasan mengenai

materi teks naratif “Timun Mas” kepada

peserta didik

➢ Guru memperlihatkan gambar berseri

tentang teks naratif “Timun Mas”.

➢ Peserta didik memperhatikan gambar

berseri beserta penjelasannya.

➢ Peserta didik mencermati fungsi struktur

teks dan struktur yang digunakan dalam

teks naratif “Timun Mas”

➢ Peserta didik menirukan pengucapan guru

mengenai tahapan-tahapan menceritakan

kembali teks naratif “Timun Mas”

Mempertanyakan

➢ Dengan bimbingan guru, peserta didik

diberi kesempatan untuk

mempertanyakan materi pembelajaran

mengenai teks naratif “Timun Mas”

Memahami

➢ Peserta didik menulis dan

mempraktekkan story telling di depan

kelas

➢ Peserta didik memahami isi dari cerita

yang diceritakan

70 menit

➢ Peserta didik menjawab pertanyaan yang

diberikan oleh guru sesuai dengan gambar

berseri tersebut.

Mengeksplorasi

➢ Guru membagikan gambar kepada setiap

individu.

➢ Peserta didik mempersiapkan cerita yang

akan diceritakan

Mengkomunikasikan

➢ Peserta didik dipilih secara acak oleh guru

untiuk menceritakan gambar yang telah

diberikan.

➢ Peserta didik menjelaskan fungsi sosial,

struktur, dan menyimpulkan nilai moral

yang terdapat pada teks naratif “Timun

Mas”.

3 Penutup ➢ Peserta didik memperoleh umpan balik

(feedback) dan penguatan dari guru dan

teman.

➢ Peserta didik menyempurnakan kembali

struktur teks naratif “Timun Mas”

berdasarkan umpan balik (feedback) dari

guru dan teman.

➢ Guru menanyakan kesulitan yang dialami

peserta didik dalam memaparkan tahapan

yang dilakukan di depan kelas.

➢ Guru dan peserta didik menyimpulkan

kegiatan pembelajaran yang telah

dipelajari.

➢ Mengucapkan salam.

10 menit

2. Pertemuan Kedua


Waktu



➢ Guru mempersilahkan peserta didik

untuk berdo’a




disampaikan


tentang teks naratif kepada peserta

didik guna memberikan background

knowledge agar peserta didik lebih

mudah mencerna teks yang diberikan

10 menit



materi teks naratif “Cinderella” kepada

peserta didik


tentang teks naratif “Cinderella”.



➢ Guru memberikan contoh kepada siswa

cara membuat teks deskriptif

berdasarkan gambar berseri yang

diperlihatkan

70 menit

➢ Peserta didik mencermati fungsi

struktur teks dan struktur yang

digunakan dalam teks naratif

“Cinderella”

➢ Peserta didik mencari pesan yang

terkandung dalam teks naratif

“Cinderella”

➢ Peserta didik menirukan pengucapan

guru mengenai tahapan-tahapan

menceritakan kembali teks naratif

“Cinderella”

Mempertanyakan




mengenai teks naratif “Cinderella”

Memahami

➢ Peserta didik mempraktekkan story

telling di depan kelas


yang diceritakan

➢ Peserta didik menjawab pertanyaan

yang diberikan oleh guru sesuai dengan

gambar berseri tersebut.

Mengeksplorasi

➢ Guru membagikan gambar kepada

setiap individu.

➢ Peserta didik mempersiapkan cerita

yang akan diceritakan

Mengkomunikasikan

➢ Peserta didik dipilih secara acak oleh

guru untiuk menceritakan gambar yang

telah diberikan.

➢ Peserta didik menjelaskan fungsi

sosial, struktur, dan menyimpulkan

nilai moral yang terdapat pada teks

naratif “Cinderella”.



teman.

➢ Peserta didik menyempurnakan

kembali struktur teks naratif

“Cinderella” berdasarkan umpan balik

(feedback) dari guru dan teman.

➢ Guru menanyakan kesulitan yang

dialami peserta didik dalam

memaparkan tahapan yang dilakukan di

depan kelas.



dipelajari.


10 menit

3. Pertemuan Ketiga


Waktu



10 menit


untuk berdo’a




disampaikan








materi teks naratif “The Golden Slug”

kepada peserta didik


tentang teks naratif “The Golden Slug”.





digunakan dalam teks naratif “The

Golden Slug”.


terkandung dalam teks naratif “The

Golden Slug”




“The Golden Slug”

70 menit

Mempertanyakan




mengenai teks naratif “The Golden

Slug”

Memahami




yang diceritakan




Mengeksplorasi


setiap individu.



Mengkomunikasikan



telah diberikan.




naratif “The Golden Slug”.



teman.


kembali struktur teks naratif “The

Golden Slug” berdasarkan umpan balik





depan kelas.



dipelajari.


10 menit

4. Pertemuan Keempat


Waktu




untuk berdo’a




disampaikan




10 menit





materi teks naratif “Loro Jonggrang”



tentang teks naratif “Loro Jonggrang”.





digunakan dalam teks naratif “Loro

Jonggrang”


terkandung dalam teks naratif “Loro

Jonggrang”




“Loro Jonggrang”

Mempertanyakan




mengenai teks naratif “Loro

Jonggrang”

Memahami

70 menit




yang diceritakan




Mengeksplorasi


setiap individu.



Mengkomunikasikan



telah diberikan.




naratif “Loro Jonggrang”.



teman.


kembali struktur teks naratif “Loro

Jonggrang” berdasarkan umpan balik




10 menit


depan kelas.



dipelajari.


5. Pertemuan Kelima


Waktu




untuk berdo’a




disampaikan






10 menit

2 Kegiatan Inti Mengamati 70 menit


materi teks naratif “Ali Baba” kepada

peserta didik


tentang teks naratif “Ali Baba”.





digunakan dalam teks naratif “Ali

Baba”


terkandung dalam teks naratif “Ali

Baba”



menceritakan kembali teks naratif “Ali

Baba”

Mempertanyakan




mengenai teks naratif “Ali Baba”

Memahami




yang diceritakan




Mengeksplorasi


setiap individu.



Mengkomunikasikan



telah diberikan.




naratif “Ali Baba”.



teman.


kembali struktur teks naratif “Ali

Baba” berdasarkan umpan balik





depan kelas.

10 menit



dipelajari.


6. Pertemuan Keenam


Waktu




untuk berdo’a




disampaikan






10 menit



materi teks naratif “Snow White”



tentang teks naratif “Snow White”.



70 menit



digunakan dalam teks naratif “Snow

White”


terkandung dalam teks naratif “Snow

White”




“Snow White”

Mempertanyakan




mengenai teks naratif “Snow White”

Memahami




yang diceritakan




Mengeksplorasi


setiap individu.



Mengkomunikasikan



telah diberikan.




naratif “Snow White”.



teman.


kembali struktur teks naratif “Snow

White” berdasarkan umpan balik





depan kelas.



dipelajari.


10 menit

H. Penilaian

1. Sikap Sosial

1. Jenis/Teknik Penilaian : penilaian diri

2. Bentuk Instrumen Penilaian Diri : lembar penilaian diri

Penilaian Sikap Sosial

No Pernyataan Ya Tidak

3. Pedoman Penskoran

Keterangan: Skor = 1 (Ya) Skor = 0 (Tidak)

SB = jika skor 11 - 12

B = jika skor 9 - 10

C = jika skor 6 – 8

2. Pengetahuan

1. Jenis/Teknik Penilaian : Tes lisan dan tes tulis

2. Pedoman Penilaian

Content : 1-6

Organization : 1-6

Pronunciation : 1-6

Vocabulary : 1-6

NA =𝑆𝑘𝑜𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑒ℎ

𝑆𝑘𝑜𝑟 𝑀𝑎𝑘𝑠𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑙 X 100

1 Mengerjakan dengan mandiri atau sesuai perintah guru

2 Mengerjakan tugas tidak mencontek

3 Datang tepat waktu di kelas

4 Berpakaian rapi sesuai ketentuan

5 Mentaati aturan guru saat pembelajaran berlangsung

6 Berbicara, berbahasa lisan dan tulis dengan baik

7 Mengumpulkan tugas tepat waktu

8 Mengejakan tugas yang diberikan guru dengan baik

9 Tidak menyalahkan teman lain dalam bekerja

10 Meminta maaf atas kesalahan yang dilakukan

APPENDIX B

INSTRUMENTS

PRE-TEST

Name : ...............................

Nis : ...............................

Date : ...............................

Write down a narrative text with the theme ‘Malin Kundang’! (Minimal 3

paragraphs)

Good luck!

POST-TEST

Name : ...............................

Nis : ...............................

Date : ...............................

Write down a narrative text with the theme ‘‘Sangkuriang’’! Complete your

narrative text with rules below:

1. Use generic structure (orientation, complication, resolution and coda)!

2. Use content and organization exactly!

Orientation (character & setting), min 1 paragraph

………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………….

Complication (conflict), min 2 paragraph

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

Resolution (solution of the problems), min 1 paragraph

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

Coda (lessons from the story/optional), min 1 paragraph

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………

Good luck!

APPENDIX C

DATA ANALYSIS

A. THE STUDENTS’ SCORE OF PRE-TEST IN WRITING SKILL



No Respondents Content Organization

1 ANDI WAHIDA 3 2

2 ANDI ZAKIR MUZAKKIR 2 3

3 ANGRAYANI 2 3

4 BAIQ WIRANDANINGRAT 3 2

5 CINDY AQILA SAFIRA 4 2

6 GALANG 4 2

7 HAJRAH 3 3

8 MUH. ALI SYAFE’I KISMAN 2 1

9 MUH. ILHAM PERMANA MAJID 3 4

10 MUH. RANDI 3 3

11 MUH. FADIL FAUZAN 4 4

12 MUHAMMAD KHAIRUN 2 4

13 MUHAMMAD FADLY SUDRAJAT 3 3

14 NURUL ANA 3 3

15 RADEN UMAR N 2 3

16 RAHMADANI 3 2

17 SALSABILA APRILIA 3 3

18 SAMPARA 4 4

19 TEGUH RAHUL FERDYAN 3 3

20 YUDHI PRATAMA 2 4

B. THE STUDENTS’ SCORE OF PRE-TEST IN SPEAKING SKILL



No Respondents Pronunciation Vocabulary

1 ANDI WAHIDA 2 2


3 ANGRAYANI 1 3



6 GALANG 4 4

7 HAJRAH 3 2



10 MUH. RANDI 3 3




14 NURUL ANA 2 3

15 RADEN UMAR N 2 3

16 RAHMADANI 3 4


18 SAMPARA 4 2



C. THE STUDENTS’ SCORE OF POST-TEST IN WRITING SKILL



No Respondents Content Organization

1 ANDI WAHIDA 5 4


3 ANGRAYANI 4 5



6 GALANG 6 5

7 HAJRAH 4 4



10 MUH. RANDI 5 4




14 NURUL ANA 5 5

15 RADEN UMAR N 4 5

16 RAHMADANI 5 6


18 SAMPARA 6 5



D. THE STUDENTS’ SCORE OF POST-TEST IN SPEAKING SKILL



No Respondents Pronunciation Vocabulary

1 ANDI WAHIDA 3 3


3 ANGRAYANI 4 4



6 GALANG 6 5

7 HAJRAH 4 4



10 MUH. RANDI 4 3




14 NURUL ANA 3 4

15 RADEN UMAR N 4 5

16 RAHMADANI 4 6


18 SAMPARA 5 3



E. THE STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL IN PRE-TEST AND POST-

TEST

1. Pre-Test

No Students Content Organization

1 S-1 50 33

2 S-2 33 33

3 S-3 33 50

4 S-4 50 50

5 S-5 67 33

6 S-6 67 33

7 S-7 50 33

8 S-8 33 33

9 S-9 50 50

10 S-10 50 17

11 S-11 67 67

12 S-12 33 50

13 S-13 50 67

14 S-14 50 67

15 S-15 33 50

16 S-16 50 50

17 S-17 50 50

18 S-18 67 33

19 S-19 50 50

20 S-20 33 67

Total ∑ 𝒙 = 966 ∑ 𝒙 = 916

Mean Score (X) 48.30 45.80

Note: The result of pre-test score of every student can be shown by us/ing the

following formula:



1. Content


6𝑋 100

2. Organization


6𝑋 100

2. Post-Test

No Students Content Organization

1 S-1 83 67

2 S-2 67 83

3 S-3 67 83

4 S-4 83 83

5 S-5 83 67

6 S-6 100 83

7 S-7 67 67

8 S-8 83 83

9 S-9 66 67

10 S-10 83 67

11 S-11 83 83

12 S-12 67 83

13 S-13 67 67

14 S-14 83 83

15 S-15 67 83

16 S-16 83 100

17 S-17 83 83

18 S-18 100 83

19 S-19 83 67

20 S-20 67 83

Total ∑ 𝒙 = 1565 ∑ 𝒙 = 1565

Mean Score (X) 78.25 78.25

Note: The result of pre-test score of every student can be shown by using the

following formula:



1. Content


6𝑋 100

2. Organization


6𝑋 100

F. THE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING SKILL IN PRE-TEST AND POST-

TEST

1. Pre-Test

No Students Pronunciation Vocabulary

1 S-1 33 33

2 S-2 33 17

3 S-3 17 50

4 S-4 50 50

5 S-5 33 33

6 S-6 67 67

7 S-7 50 33

8 S-8 17 17

9 S-9 67 33

10 S-10 50 50

11 S-11 50 33

12 S-12 33 33

13 S-13 67 67

14 S-14 33 50

15 S-15 33 50

16 S-16 50 67

17 S-17 33 50

18 S-18 67 33

19 S-19 50 33

20 S-20 33 50

Total ∑ 𝒙 = 866 ∑ 𝒙 =849

Mean Score (X) 43.30 42.45


following formula:



1. Pronunciation


6𝑋 100

2. Vocabulary


6𝑋 100

2. Post-Test

No Students Pronunciation Vocabulary

1 S-1 50 50

2 S-2 67 33

3 S-3 67 67

4 S-4 50 83

5 S-5 83 50

6 S-6 100 83

7 S-7 67 67

8 S-8 50 50

9 S-9 83 50

10 S-10 67 50

11 S-11 67 67

12 S-12 50 67

13 S-13 83 83

14 S-14 50 67

15 S-15 67 83

16 S-16 67 100

17 S-17 67 67

18 S-18 83 50

19 S-19 83 33

20 S-20 50 50

Total ∑ 𝒙 = 1351 ∑ 𝒙 = 1.250

Mean Score (X) 67.55 62.50


following formula:



1. Pronunciation


6𝑋 100

2. Vocabulary


6𝑋 100

G. THE STUDENTS’ CLASSIFICATIONS OF WRITING AND

SPEAKING SKILL IN PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST

1. Content

No Respondents Pre-test Classifications Post-test Classifications

1 S-1 50 Fair 83 Very Good

2 S-2 33 Poor 67 Fairly Good



5 S-5 67 Fairly Good 83 Very Good

6 S-6 67 Fairly Good 100 Excellent

7 S-7 50 Fair 67 Fairly Good

8 S-8 33 Poor 83 Very Good













2. Organization














13 S-13 67 Fairly Good 67 Fairly Good



16 S-16 50 Fair 100 Excellent





3. Pronunciation


1 S-1 33 Poor 50 Fair



4 S-4 50 Fair 50 Fair








12 S-12 33 Poor 50 Fair


14 S-14 33 Poor 50 Fair






20 S-20 33 Poor 50 Fair

4. Vocabulary



2 S-2 17 Poor 33 Poor








10 S-10 50 Fair 50 Fair

11 S-11 33 poor 67 Fairly Good

12 S-12 33 poor 67 Fairly Good






18 S-18 33 Poor 50 Fair

19 S-19 33 poor 33 Poor

20 S-20 50 Fair 50 Fair

H. THE STUDENTS’ MEAN SCORE OF PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST

IN WRITING AND SPEAKING SKILL

1. Mean score of pre-test and post-test in terms of content

a. Pre-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=966

20

= 48.30

b. Post-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=1565

20

= 78.25

2. Mean score of pre-test and post-test in terms of organization

a. Pre-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=916

20

= 45.80

b. Post-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=1565

20

= 78.25

3. Mean score of pre-test and post-test in terms of pronunciation

a. Pre-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=866

20

= 43.30

b. Post-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=1351

20

= 67.55

4. Mean score of pre-test and post-test in terms of vocabulary

a. Pre-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=849

20

= 42.45

b. Post-test

𝑋 =∑ 𝑥

N

=1.250

20

= 62.50

I. FREQUENCIES VARIABLES OF PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST IN

WRITING AND SEPEAKING SKILL

1. Content

Statistics

PreTest PostTest

N Valid 20 20

Missing 0 0

Mean 48.3000 78.2500

Std. Error of Mean 2.65855 2.49726

Median 50.0000 83.0000

Mode 50.00 83.00

Std. Deviation 11.88940 11.16809

Variance 141.358 124.726

Range 33.00 34.00

Minimum 33.00 67.00

Maximum 67.00 100.00

Sum 962.00 1558.00

PreTest

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

33.00 6 30.0 30.0 30.0

50.00 10 50.0 50.0 80.0

67.00 4 20.0 20.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

PostTest


Valid

67.00 8 40.0 40.0 40.0

83.00 10 50.0 50.0 90.0

100.00 2 10.0 10.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

Histogram

2. Organization

Statistics

PreTest PostTest

N Valid 20 20

Missing 0 0

Mean 45.8000 78.2500


Median 50.0000 83.0000

Mode 50.00 83.00

Std. Deviation 13.12049 9.71109

Variance 172.147 94.305

Range 50.00 34.00

Minimum 17.00 67.00

Maximum 67.00 100.00

Sum 912.00 1558.00

PreTest


Valid

17.00 1 5.0 5.0 5.0

33.00 6 30.0 30.0 35.0

50.00 10 50.0 50.0 85.0

67.00 3 15.0 15.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

PostTest


Valid

67.00 7 35.0 35.0 35.0

83.00 12 60.0 60.0 95.0

100.00 1 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

Histogram

3. Pronunciation

Statistics

PreTest PostTest

N Valid 20 20

Missing 0 0

Mean 43.3000 67.5500


Median 41.5000 66.0000

Mode 33.00 66.00

Std. Deviation 15.67432 14.70866

Variance 245.684 216.345

Range 50.00 50.00

Minimum 17.00 50.00

Maximum 67.00 100.00

Sum 860.00 1343.00

PreTest


Valid

17.00 2 10.0 10.0 10.0

33.00 8 40.0 40.0 50.0

50.00 6 30.0 30.0 80.0

67.00 4 20.0 20.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

PostTest


Valid

50.00 6 30.0 30.0 30.0

67.00 8 40.0 40.0 70.0

83.00 5 25.0 25.0 95.0

100.00 1 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

Histogram

4. Vocabulary

Statistics

PreTest PostTest

N Valid 20 20

Missing 0 0

Mean 42.4500 62.5000


Median 41.5000 66.0000

Mode 33.00 67.00

Std. Deviation 14.89781 17.83403

Variance 245.684 216.345

Range 50.00 50.00

Minimum 17.00 67.00

Maximum 67.00 100.00

Sum 860.00 1343.00

PreTest


Valid

17.00 2 10.0 10.0 10.0

33.00 8 40.0 40.0 50.0

50.00 7 35.0 30.0 80.0

67.00 3 15.0 20.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

PostTest


Valid

33 2 10.0 10.0 10.0

50 7 35.0 35.0 45.0

67 6 30.0 30.0 75.0

83 4 20.0 20.0 95.0

100 1 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 20 100.0 100.0

J. HYPOTHESIS TESTING IN WRITING AND SPEAKING SKILL

1. Content

Paired Samples Statistics

Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pair 1 PreTest 48.1000 20 11.88940 2.65855

PostTest 77.9000 20 11.16809 2.49726

Paired Samples Correlations

N Correlation Sig.

Pair 1 PreTest & PostTest 20 .712 .000

Paired Differences

T Df Sig. (2-

tailed) Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

95% Confidence Interval

of the Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -29.80000 1.96326 1.96362 -33.90990 -25.69010 -15.176 19 .000

2. Organization



Pair 1

PreTest 45.6000 20 13.12049 2.93383

PostTest 77.9000 20 9.71109 2.17147


N Correlation Sig.


Paired Differences

T Df Sig. (2-

tailed) Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean


of the Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -32.30000 12.78198 2.85814 -38.28215 -26.31785 -11.301 19 .000

3. Pronunciation



Pair 1 PreTest 43.0000 20 15.67432 3.50488

PostTest 67.1500 20 14.70866 3.28896


N Correlation Sig.


Paired Differences

t Df Sig. (2-

tailed) Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean


of the Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -24.15000 12.67104 2.83333 -38.28215 -30.08023 -18.21977 19 .000

4. Vocabulary



Pair 1

PreTest 42.4500 20 14.89781 3.33125

PostTest 62.5000 20 17.83403 3.98781


N Correlation Sig.


Paired Differences

t Df Sig. (2-

tailed) Mean Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean


of the Difference

Lower Upper

Pair

1

pretest –

posttst -20.50000 11.64146 2.60311 -25.49837 -14.60163 -7.702 19 .000

K. DISTRIBUTION OF T-TABLE

(Level of Significance) (Two-Tailed test)

0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01

1 3.078 6.314 12.706 31.821 63.657 636.619

2 1.886 2.920 4.303 6.965 9.923 31.598

3 1.638 2.353 3.182 4.541 5.841 12.941

4 1.533 2.132 2.776 3.747 4.604 8.610

5 1.476 2.015 2.571 3.365 4.032 6.859

6 1.440 1.943 2.447 3.143 3.707 5.959

7 1.415 1.895 2.365 2.998 3.499 5.405

8 1.397 1.860 2.306 2.896 3.355 5.041

9 1.383 1.833 2.262 2.821 3.250 4.781

10 1.372 1.812 2.228 2.764 3.169 4.587

11 1.363 1.796 2.201 2.718 3.106 4.437

12 1.356 1.782 2.179 2.681 3.055 4.318

13 1.350 1.771 2.160 2.650 3.012 4.221

14 1.345 1.761 2.145 2.624 2.977 4.140

15 1.341 1.753 2.131 2.602 2.947 4.073

16 1.337 1.746 2.120 2.583 2.921 4.015

17 1.333 1.740 2.110 2.567 2.898 3.965

18 1.330 1.734 2.101 2.552 2.878 3.922

19 1.328 1.729 2.093 2.539 2.861 3.883

20 1.325 1.725 2.086 2.528 2.845 3.850

21 1.323 1.721 2.080 2.518 2.831 3.819

22 1.321 1.717 2.074 2.508 2.819 3.792

23 1.319 1.714 2069 2.500 2.807 3.767

24 1.318 1.711 2.064 2.492 2.797 3.745

25 1.316 1.708 2.060 2.485 2.787 3.725

26 1.315 1.706 2.056 2.479 2.779 3.707

27 1.314 1.703 2.052 4.473 2.771 3.690

28 1.313 1.701 2.048 2.467 2.763 3.674

29 1.311 1.699 2.045 2.462 2.756 3.659

30 1.310 1.697 2.042 2.457 2.750 3.646

40 1. 303 1.684 2.021 2.423 2.704 3.551

APPENDIX D

DOCUMENTATION

CURRICULUM VITAE

NILAM CAHYA KASMAN, was born on September 26th 1996

in Bunggawai. She is the five childs from six siblings. Her father

is Kasman and her mother is Timang. In 2004 she started her

elementary school at SDN 33 Sossok and graduated in 2008.

Then, she continued her study at SMPN 1 Anggeraja and graduated in 2011. After

that, she continued her study at SMAN 1 Anggeraja and graduated in 2014. At the

next year, she was accepted as English Department student in Faculty of Teacher

Training and Education, Makassar Muhammadiyah University. At the end of her

study, she could finish her thesis in 2020 entitle The Effectiveness of Using

Participation Point System (PPS) Method at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA

Muhammadiyah 9 Makassar (A Pre-Experimental Research Study).

the effectiveness of using participation point system …

Documents