IMPROVING STUDENTS' SPEAKING SKILLS BY

CONDUCTING SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS IN

GRADE 8 SMPN 14 BINTAN

THESIS

DIAH KHOTIMAH
180388203042

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITAS MARITIM RAJA ALI HAJI
TANJUNGPINANG
2022
IMPROVING STUDENTS' SPEAKING SKILLS BY
CONDUCTING SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS IN
GRADE 8 SMPN 14 BINTAN

Thesis

Submitted to Fulfil Procedure to get the Educational Degree

(S. Pd)

DIAH KHOTIMAH
180388203042

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITAS MARITIM RAJA ALI HAJI
TANJUNGPINANG
2022
ix
 MOTTO

Feeling tired is a human thing, because as long as you are alive, problems will
always come and get worse over time. So heal yourself, face it and never give
up.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Praise and thanks are rewarded to Allah SWT, who always blesses and gives

strength to the researcher and can complete this thesis entitled "IMPROVING

STUDENTS' SPEAKING SKILLS BY CONDUCTING SMALL GROUP

DISCUSSIONS IN GRADE 8 SMPN 14 BINTAN". This thesis was submitted to

the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education of Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji

as partial fulfillment of the requirement for an S-1 degree.

This thesis never existed without any support, encouragement, and guidance

from several dedicated people. The researcher would like to express gratitude to

many who had suggestions and help writing this thesis. The researcher conveys

appreciation and respect to all parties supporting this research. The gratitude goes

to:

1. Prof. Dr. Agung Dhamar Syakti, S.Pi, DEA. as the Rector of Universitas

Maritim Raja Ali Haji.

2. Assist. Prof. Satria Agust, S.S., M.Pd. as the Dean of Faculty of Teacher

Training and Education of Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji,

3. Assist. Prof. Dewi Nopita, M.Pd, head of the English Education Study Program

of Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji.

4. Assist. Prof. Elsa Ernawati Nainggolan, S.Pd., M.Pd., and the first advisor who

guided the researcher to finish this thesis and always gave solutions to revise

the thesis.

vii
5. Assist. Prof. Muhammad Candra, S.Pd., M.Ed. as a second advisor who guided

researche to finish this thesis and gave solutions.

6. To all my English Education Study Program lecturers, who always gave

researcher knowledge and guided researche during researche study.

7. My beloved parents always gave support, advice, and motivation to finish this

research.

8. For Faisal Akbar who always gives words of affirmation, quality time, giving

gifts, acts of service to researcher during colleges to writing a thesis which

takes a long time, it all means a lot to researcher.

9. To Nurasikin, Aini Kurnia, and Gery Agustian who always helped during

college, your help means a lot and makes researcher feel comfortable studying

when there are friends who support each other.

The researcher realizes that this thesis is not perfect, so suggestions and

advice will be welcomed to make every part better in the future.

Tanjungpinang, 21st July , 2022

The Researcher

viii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................. vii

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... xii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................ xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................................................... xiv

ABSTRAK ............................................................................................................ xv

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................ xvi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1

1.1 The Background of The Study ................................................................. 1

1.2 The Identification of the Problem ............................................................. 4

1.3 The Limitation of the Problem.................................................................. 4

1.4 The Research questions ............................................................................ 4

1.5 The Research Objectives .......................................................................... 4

1.6 The Significances of the Research ............................................................ 5

1.6.1 Theoretically ...................................................................................... 5

1.6.2 Practically .......................................................................................... 5

1.7 The Definition of Key terms ..................................................................... 6

CHAPTER II THE LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................... 7

2.1 Speaking Skill ........................................................................................... 7

2.2 Aspects of Speaking.................................................................................. 9

2.3 Small Group Discussion ......................................................................... 10

2.4 The Characteristics of Small Group Discussion ..................................... 11

2.5 Steps How to Conduct SGD (Small Group Discussion)......................... 13

ix
 2.6 Review of Related Findings .................................................................... 14

2.7 Conceptual Framework ........................................................................... 15

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................ 17

3.1 Research Design ..................................................................................... 17

3.2 Research Setting ..................................................................................... 19

3.2.1 Setting At Place .................................................................................... 19

3.2.2 Setting At Time ..................................................................................... 19

3.4 Research Procedure................................................................................. 20

3.5 Research Instrument ............................................................................... 22

3.6 Research Schedule .................................................................................. 23

3.7 The technique of Collecting Data ........................................................... 24

3.7.1 The Quantitative Data ...................................................................... 24

3.7.2 The Qualitative Data ........................................................................ 24

3.8 Technique of Analyzing Data ................................................................. 27

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ....................... 29

4.1 Data Description ..................................................................................... 29

4.1.1 The Quantitative Data ...................................................................... 29

4.1.2 The Qualitative Data ........................................................................ 31

4.2 Data Analysis .......................................................................................... 34

4.2.1 Quantitative Data ............................................................................. 34

4.2.2 Qualitative Data ...................................................................................... 42

4.3 Discussion ............................................................................................... 47

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS .................................. 50

5.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 50

5.2 Suggestions ............................................................................................. 51

x
REFERENCE ...................................................................................................... 53

APPENDICES...................................................................................................... 55

xi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Time Schedule ....................................................................................... 24

Table 3.2 English Language Speaking Skills Assessment ................................... .27
Table 4.1 The Quantitative Data............................................................................ 31
Table 4.2 Students' Pre-test Result ........................................................................ 35
Table 4.3 Students' Post-test I Result .................................................................... 36
Table 4.4 Students' Post-test II Result ................................................................... 39
Table 4.5 Students' Result Summary ..................................................................... 41
Table 4.6 Students' Score Improvement Percentage Summary ............................. 42

xii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 The Conceptual Framework of Tameness in Amajihono (2019) ......... 16

Figure 3.1 Spiral model of action research Kemmis & Mc. Taggart (2018) ......... 19
Figure 3.1 Kurt Lewin's Action Research Design in Batubara (2017) .................. 20

xiii
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Observation Checklist ........................................................................ 56

Appendix 2 Lesson Plan (Cycle I) ......................................................................... 57
Appendix 3 Lesson Plan (Cycle II) ....................................................................... 61
Appendix 4 Assessment Instrument ...................................................................... 65
Appendix 5 Interview Guidelines .......................................................................... 66
Appendix 6 Pre-test ............................................................................................... 68
Appendix 7 Post-test (Cycle I) .............................................................................. 69
Appendix 8 Pre-test ............................................................................................... 70
Appendix 9 Post-test (Cycle II) ............................................................................. 71
Appendix 10 Documentation .............................................................................. 72

xiv
 ABSTRAK

Khotimah, Diah. 2022. Improving Students' Speaking Skills By Conducting Small

Group Discussions In Grade 8 Smpn 14 Bintan. Skripsi. Tanjungpinang: Program
Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan,
Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji. Pembimbing I: Assist. Prof. Elsa Ernawati
Nainggolan, S.Pd., M.Pd. Pembimbing II: Assist. Prof. Muhammad Candra, S.Pd.,
M.Ed.

Kata Kunci: Diskusi Kelompok Kecil, Kemampuan Berbicara Siswa

Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendeskripsikan bagaimana Diskusi

Kelompok Kecil meningkatkan keterampilan berbicara bahasa Inggris siswa dan
untuk mengungkapkan apa persepsi siswa dengan menggunakan Diskusi Kelompok
Kecil untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berbicara mereka di kelas VIII SMPN 14
Bintan. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian tindakan
kelas (PTK). Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah seluruh siswa kelas VIII C SMPN
14 Bintan tahun pelajaran 2021/2022 yang terdiri dari 28 siswa.
Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui pre-test dan post-test. Berdasarkan
hasil penelitian, siswa lebih aktif dan berpartisipasi dalam proses belajar mengajar
berbicara. Pada tes pertama (pre-test), jumlah siswa yang memenuhi kriteria
ketuntasan minimal 75 adalah 1 dari 28 siswa (5%). Pada tes kedua (post test I),
siswa yang mendapat nilai di atas 75 atau memenuhi kriteria ketuntasan minimal
sebanyak 7 dari 28 siswa (25%). Pada tes ketiga (post test II) siswa yang memenuhi
kriteria ketuntasan minimal 75 sebanyak 16 dari 28 siswa (57,14%).
Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa ada beberapa peningkatan pada keterampilan
berbicara siswa secara kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Sebagai penutup, SGD bekerja
dengan sangat baik dan efisien dalam membantu siswa berbicara bahasa Inggris di
kelas delapan SMPN 14 Bintan.

xv
 ABSTRACT
Khotimah, Diah. 2022. Improving Students' Speaking Skills By Conducting Small
Group Discussions In Grade 8 Smpn 14 Bintan. Thesis. Tanjungpinang: English
Education Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Raja Ali
Haji Maritime University. Supervisor I: Assist. Prof. Elsa Ernawati Nainggolan,
S.Pd., M.Pd. Supervisor II: Assist. Prof. Muhammad Candra, S.Pd., M.Ed.

Keywords: Small Group Discussions, Students' Speaking Skill, Speaking skill.

This study aimed to describe how small group discussions improved

students' speaking skills in class VIII of SMPN 14 Bintan. The method used in this
research is classroom action research (CAR). The population in this study were all
class VIII C of SMPN 14 Bintan students in the 2021/2022 academic year,
consisting of 28 students.
The data was collected through pre-test and post-test. In the first test (pre-
test), the number of students who met the minimum completeness criteria of 75 was
1 out of 28 students (5%). In the second test (post-test I), students who scored above
75 or met the minimum completeness criteria were 7 out of 28 students (25%). In
the third test (post-test II), 16 of 28 students (57.14%) met the minimum
completeness criteria of 75.
The result shows that there are some improvements in the students' speaking
skills quantitatively and qualitatively. Moreover, students were more active and
participated in the teaching and learning process of speaking. To conclude, the SGD
worked excellently and efficiently in helping students speak English in the eighth
grade of SMPN 14 Bintan.

xvi
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Background of The Study

In this era of globalization, the English language is important to our lives. Not

only because it is the second most spoken language in the world but also because

almost every institution requires their workers to be able to speak and write English

properly as a benchmark. English is taught as a foreign language in Indonesia from

elementary school to higher education.

Argawati (2014) Emphasises that speaking is an activity that someone uses to

communicate with other people. It's everywhere and has become part of our

everyday activities. Mart (2012: p.91) defines oral language as speaking ability,

revealing or sharing ideas through language use. He interacts and uses vocabulary

to express his mind and feelings when someone tells them. He also shares

information with other people through communication.

Speaking language is one of the main objectives of language learning because

it conveys an idea to others clearly and correctly. According to Gani (2015),

speaking skills are the ability to verbally express opinions, thoughts, facts, and

feelings to others. This partly reflects whether someone has mastered the language.

In other words, he can communicate his ideas well to others.

1
 2

Therefore, speaking skills are one of the essential skills to learn. Many

students still have not mastered it, especially in speaking skills. Students are still

lacking in speaking. The researcher was observed

During the teaching and learning process in class VIII students of SMP 14 Bintan.

Some students said that speaking is the most challenging skill to master because it

requires four aspects of speaking in terms of vocabulary mastery, fluency,

comprehension, and pronunciation. Therefore, the researcher tried to research by

developing speaking skills using Small Group Discussion (SGD) in grade 8.

Some factors can cause the problem, such as motivation, interests,

intelligence, or learning material. However, the teaching strategy seems to be an

important reason why the issue of oral language remains. The researcher identified

several contingent factors relating to class strategies that affect student speaking

skills. First, students are bored and not active during teaching because of the same

technique. Second is the dominant teacher in the classroom (Teacher-Centered),

meaning students are less motivated in the learning process. Finally, students still

experience difficulties in some essential aspects of speaking, such as students

feeling less fluent in pronunciation, understanding, and student vocabulary abilities.

Another method that can be used to learn to speak is in group discussions.

SGD is a tecnique for learning to speak foreign languages. This can help students

improve their speaking skills. In small groups, students could use English with each

other and practice with their friends. Conversations with friends or group exercises
 3

increase mastery of vocabulary, understanding, fluency, and comprehension. In

addition, group learning also increases confidence and student leadership skills.

There are some studies there have investigated SGD. First, Fauzi (2017) on

exploring how to improve Students' Speaking Ability through Small-Group

discussions. It was found that small group discussions could effectively improve

students' speaking skills. It was done by actively involving the students in group

work discussions, giving them the freedom to expose themselves to learning

activities, making them feel more relaxed in learning, and providing them with more

opportunities to improve their speaking skills. Second, La'biran's (2017) study

showed that the SGD strategy effectively increases student activity and learning

outcomes in speaking subjects, especially in learning English. Students' post-test

proved higher than students' pre-test after involving SGD in teaching and learning

communication research.

The previous study above strengthens Orlich that Small group discussions can

improve students' speaking skills. Moreover, three reasons why we can use small

group discussions to improve speaking skills. The first discussion is used to

improve teacher-student and students' verbal interaction. Second, the discussion is

used to promote personal interaction and meaningful learning. Third, it is used to

help students adopt a more responsible attitude. Learning can be in the form of

content, skills, attitudes, processes, attitudes, and ways of independent learning.

And also, the reason the researcher used this SGD is to increase the students'

confidence in speaking English from small groups to self-confidence to a wider

scope.
 4

1.2 The Identification of the Problem

According to the background, several problems that can be identified are:

- Students have difficulty speaking due to a lack of vocabulary.

- Many students also do not comprehend speaking English

- Students feel less fluent in pronunciation and understanding of speaking.

- The participation and motivation of students in learning to speak are low.

1.3 The Limitation of the Problem

Problems related to the title are very broad. Therefore it is necessary to limit

the problem. Problem restrictions include:

1. The subjects of this study were class VIII semester 2. The researcher took

one class from 3 existing classes. The class is VIIIC. Class C consists of 11

males and 17 females with 28 students.

2. Researcher takes speaking skills in this study. This study uses small group

learning techniques.

3. Existing learning problems are limited to group study to improve student

achievement, especially speaking.

1.4 The Research questions

Based on the limitation of the problem, the research question could be

formulated as; "How can students' speaking skills be improved using small group

discussions in grade 8 SMP N 14 Bintan ?".

1.5 The Research Objectives

Regarding the research question, this study aims to describe how to improve

students' speaking skills by conducting small group discussions in grade 8 of SMPN

 5

14 Bintan. To achieve this goal, the researcher entered the classroom and

implemented the strategy in the teaching and learning process. This decision

facilitated collecting data from students as the main source.

1.6 The Significances of the Research

1.6.1 Theoretically
This research contributed to students, teachers, schools, and researchers. This

research provided benefits for the teacher as a reference for using the right tecnique

for students, namely speaking skills by conducting SGD. In addition, students can

use this research as a reference to use the right technique to learn English on their

own, and also for schools to develop the use of teaching and learning tecnique with

SGD so that students are interested in studying at SMPN 14 Bintan.

1.6.2 Practically
a.Student

The results of this study are expected to provide new experiences in learning

English, especially in speaking skills, by conducting SGD to be more creative and

enthusiastic so that they can be more motivated to develop their abilities and

students interested and enthusiastic in learning English;

b. English teacher

The results of this study are expected to provide an alternative tecnique for

attracting students' interest, especially in speaking skills using SGD. It is also

expected to motivate teachers to be more creative; so that students are more

enthusiastic about learning English in class;

 6

c. researcher

The results of this study can develop knowledge-related experiences in

research and teaching English language education;

d. School

The results of this study: 1) can improve the quality of learning, both process

and results; 2) With the completion of the research conducted by this researcher, it

can be used as input for the school regarding the use of the SGD tecnique so that

students interested in studying at SMPN 14 Bintan.

1.7 The Definition of Key terms

To avoid some keywords are defined as follows:

a. Small-Group Discussion

Small group discussion is a learning process by discussing in small groups.

Consists of 2-4 members to enable students to have problem-solving skills

encountered in teaching and learning.

b. Speaking

Speaking is one of the skills to communicate with other people through

language media. Speaking is a speech act in the form of sounds produced by the

speech apparatus accompanied by body movements and facial expressions.

 CHAPTER II

THE LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Speaking Skill

According to Darmadi (2015) defines speaking as a productive skill that can

be observed directly and empirically. These observations are always coloured by

the accuracy and effectiveness of the listening maker's ability, which interferes with

the reliability and validity of oral production tests.

According to Sidik (2013) argues that "it shows that oral interactions can be

characterized in terms of routines, which are conventional ways of presenting

information that can focus on information or interaction." According to Koşar

(2014), speaking is an interactive process of constructing meaning that produces

and receives information. From the statement above, it can be concluded that

speaking is one of the language skills that focuses on verbal interactions. This can

produce, send or receive information accurately and smoothly. The speaker must

pay attention to vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation.

When people speak, they think not only about using the right sounds or

patterns but also the choice of words to communicate with other persons so they

can convey the right meaning. According to Brown (2018) cites five stages of

speaking performance. They are imitative, intensive, responsive, interactive, and

extensive. The explanation about those categories is stated as follows:

7
 8

a. Imitative

The ability to simply imitate a word or phrase or possibly a sentence. In

this stage, the teacher focuses only on students' pronunciation than the

ability to understand or convey meaning.

b. Intensive

The production of short stretches of oral language is designed to

demonstrate competence in a narrow band of grammatical, phrasal, lexical,

or phonological relationships. The speaker is aware of semantic properties

to be able to respond, but interaction with an interlocutor or test

administrator is minimal as best.

c. Responsive

This performance includes interaction and test comprehension, but at the

somewhat limited level of a very short conversation, standard greetings,

small talk, simple requests, and comments.

d. Interactive

In this stage, the length and complexity of the conversation are more than

in the responsive stage, which sometimes includes multiple exchanges

and/or multiple participants.

e. Extensive

Extensive oral production includes speeches, oral presentations, and

storytelling. In this stage, the students should be able to produce their

language with their idea.

 9

The goals of our teaching influence the activities in the class. A teacher should

know that speaking is about using the right sounds and the choice of words so that

someone can communicate with others. The stage of students' performance also

becomes part of the consideration in designing English teaching activities.

2.2 Aspects of Speaking

Learning to speak is an important aspect of language. Mai (2015), there are

many factors affecting students" speaking as follows: (1) topical knowledge; (2)

motivation to speak; (3) teachers" feedback during speaking activities; (4)

confidence; (5) pressure to perform well and (6) time for preparation. Considering

the factors above, Indramawan (2013), speaking develops to acquire speaking

skills; students must have many aspects of speaking such as pronunciation,

structure, vocabulary, content, and fluency. Moreover, Rahman and Deviyanti

(2012: p.3) state that speaking must fulfill the following aspects they are fluency,

accuracy (grammar and pronunciation), and comprehension, while Brown (2004:

p.172-173) states that speaking skills must have four aspects they are vocabulary,

fluency, comprehension, pronunciation.

In this research, the researcher uses four aspects of speaking skills based on

Brown (2004): vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and pronunciation.

a. Vocabulary

One of the linguistic factors is that several words combine into language when

spoken. Vocabulary is important but not the first thing to consider if speaking

occurs very early. Vocabulary is the number of words that make up a language.
 10

b. Fluency

This shows that people can communicate well because it consists of cases and

fluent speech speed. Someone who can communicate fluently but he may be able

to use the language fluently. Someone can be said to be fluent if he can ask several

criteria or categories, namely, students can speak fluently and with good

pronunciation. Students have a lot of vocabulary, so they can pronounce it fluently

and know what to say next. They know the rules of the language (grammar). They

can spell words correctly in any situation, making communication easier to

understand, even if they don't use grammatical language.

c. Comprehension

The speaker and the listener must have a good understanding, so dialogue

requires the subject to react to the speech and initiate. However, in this study, the

researcher refers to it as completeness.

d. Pronunciation

Pronunciation is how we make language sound, how and where we apply

stress, and how we use intonation and intonation to express how we feel and what

we mean. Harmer (2017). So improvement is also important; students must have

good pronunciation to pronounce very clear words or speak, making it easier for

others to understand.

2.3 Small Group Discussion

Small group discussion does not seem like recitation in which the

conversation belongs to only the teacher and certain students. Still, small group
 11

discussion encourages and emphasizes students to interact with each other. Brown

(2000) states that a small group discussion is a group of students working

corporately to achieve certain goals. Moreover, Cohen & Lotan (2014) define that

students work together in a small group to participate in an assigned learning task.

From the explanation above, it can be concluded that small group discussion is the

technique that consists of two or more persons in a small group for exchange of

thought orally to achieve a result in teamwork. They can assume more responsibility

for their learning, develop social and leadership skills and become involved in an

alternative instructional approach. From the explanations of several researchers

above, it can be concluded that small group discussion is a learning activity

involving 2-4 members made into one group with a chairman, deputy, and members

that aim to complete a task. So, this technique is better used in the learning process.

2.4 The Characteristics of Small Group Discussion

Among some teachers, small group discussion has misconceptions about

implementing small group discussion. However, if the small group discussion is

utilized well, it can be one of the more effective techniques in 12 teaching speaking

that provides a real-life situation for students. Below is the description of the

characteristics of small group discussion:

1. Opportunities for the contribution

All of the group members have a chance to express their opinion. Even though

the student is clever, diligent, low, popular, unpopular, and shy, they have the same

right and proportion to contribute to discussing a given solution (Rahman, 2011).

 12

2. Goal and objective gained

The discussion flows with the purposeful goal, such as mastering the material

given. Members group are not allowed to gossip around as it is not the goal of the

discussion. In addition, the most important learning outcome is the process itself.

The process is more emphasized than the result as the learning outcome in the

discussion (Orlich, 2010).

3. Ideal group size

The number of group members should be ideal to have an effective

discussion. The best number of groups is around five. If it is less than five students,

there might be insufficient information. Meanwhile, having more than five students

in the group causes little opportunity to express ideas. Therefore five members in a

group will give greater involvement and participation, and the group will have

various opinions (Jhonson, 2010).

4. Room arrangement

The effective room arrangement for small group discussion is to make a

circle. This arrangement can make the group focus on their group and task without

being distracted by other groups and other activities in the room. (Orlich, 2010).

5. Choice of topics

The topic for discussion can be varied from the syllabus or determined based

on the students’ interest in the selected area. The important thing is that the topic

should raise students’ motivation and adjust the students’ ability to solve the

problem (Cohen, 2014).

 13

In conclusion, the teacher must prepare everything before conducting a small

group discussion. Therefore, small group discussion can be a successful technique

if it covers the characteristics of small group discussion.

2.5 Steps How to Conduct SGD (Small Group Discussion)

Several steps should be taken when conducting small group discussions.

Doing small groups in class has many steps:

First, It starts with small groups of 2-4 members per group who work well

together. Let students arrange their desks in small circles and proceed to plan and

make choices about their projects. It would be a good idea for students to choose a

chair and implement their ideas. The students have a variety of group work

experiences and help overcome some of the problems in working together that arise

again and again;

Second, The Researcher assigns some defined and achievable tasks that

provide initial reinforcement. If the group completes the work, students are more

satisfied with the group and with their participation in it;

Third, The Researcher works with each group in turn. This should be done

so that students know the concerns and feel comfortable knowing that the researcher

time is the students. Sit down with students and systematically explore the "state of

the project" with each group member. This activity can increase students'

motivation to learn;

Fourth, The Researcher also provided source materials of several types.

Researcher provided several types of material, from speaking of congratulations to

 14

adding insight to students in the information session to make it easier for all group

members to understand. Materials for making group report media must be equipped

with tools;

Fifth, Students were assigned and completed their work. The researcher

asked students in each group to report and discuss the results of the student's small

group discussion, presented results, and then developed suggestions for a short and

lively information-sharing session (Durriyah, 2017).

2.6 Review of Related Findings

There is numerous researcher that has relevant to research, especially in

speaking. Research conducted by Fauzi (2017) on Improving Students' Speaking

Ability through Small-Group Discussion. The subjects in this study were students

and English teachers. This research uses classroom action research. The results of

this study indicate that small group discussions can effectively improve students'

speaking skills and involve them in group work discussions actively as well, giving

them the freedom to expose themselves to learning activities, thus making students

feel more relaxed in learning and providing the students have more opportunities to

improve their speaking skills.

La'biran (2017) Research on Improving Speaking Ability Through Small

Groups Discussion For The Eighth Year Students Of Smpn 2 Saluputti In Tana

Toraja. The subjects in this study were English teachers and students. This type of

research uses classroom action research using pre-test and post-test experiments.

The results of this study indicate that the post-test value is higher than the pre-test
 15

value. The results of this study also show that the Small Group Discussion strategy

effectively increases student activity and learning outcomes in speaking subjects,

especially in learning English.

This research was conducted by Bohari (2019) regarding Improving Speaking

Skills Through Small Group Discussion At Eleventh Grade Students Of Sma Plus

Munirul Arifin Nw Praya. The subjects in this study were students and English

teachers. This type of research is classroom action research. The results of this study

indicate that teaching speaking using small group discussions is more effective than

teaching speaking without using small group discussions. In addition, small group

discussions can improve students' speaking skills in class XI SMA Plus Munirul

Arifin NW Praya students.

2.7 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of research is essential because the conceptual

framework facilitates the researcher to know the research process. Tameness in

Amajihono (2019) writes that the conceptual framework is a network or relationship

of assumptions, expectations, and beliefs which guide the research. Therefore, the

researcher gives the conceptual framework of this research as follows. The

researcher used the speaking technique to improve students' speaking and was

followed by the teaching technique using classroom action research (CAR).

The following is the process that the researcher did in class VIII SMP N 14

Bintan.
 16

Students’ difficulties in learning speaking

skill.

- Students have difficulty speaking due to a lack

of vocabulary.
- Many students also do not comprehend
speaking English
- Students feel less fluent in pronunciation and
understanding of speaking.
- The participation and motivation of students in
learning to speak are low.

Small Group Discussions

Classroom Action Research

Figure 2.1 The Conceptual Framework

 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

The type of research that the researcher uses is Classroom Action Research

(CAR). Classroom action research is research in the form of actions taken by

teachers in the classroom. This study aims to improve the quality of learning

practices that focus on the teaching and learning process in the classroom. In

addition, this action research was carried out considering the problems in learning

in or outside the classroom to improve the quality of the learning process or learning

achievement (Rifai, 2016). Classroom action research is a collaborative activity in

which practitioners work together to help each other design and conduct

investigations in their classrooms. According to Mills (2000), classroom action

research is reflective research carried out by teachers to improve the rational ability

of their actions and improve classroom learning practices' conditions.

In this Classroom Action Research (CAR), the researcher used the CAR

design from Kemmis (1990), who states that action research occurs through a

dynamic and complementary process that consists of four fundamental steps in a

spiralling process. They are as follows:

a. Planning

Develop a plan of critically informed action to improve what is already

happening. Here the researcher prepares everything that is needed in doing the

17
 18

research; for instance, the researcher prepares the lesson plans that be used in

teaching speaking class, the material that is used in implementing the Action, and

she also prepares the evaluation material after conducting the Action to measure

whether or not that the speaking proficiency improves.

b. Action

After planning the Action, the researcher carried out English learning

activities using the SGD tecniques. In this study, the researcher implemented

speaking skills using SGD. The researcher also gave pre-test, treatment, and post-

test to the students.

c. Observation

The researcher observes the effects of critically informed Action in the

context in which it occurs. Besides, the observer also fills the observation sheet

about the process of teaching and learning runs. By so doing, the researcher can

document and reflect upon the interactions and events.

d. Reflection

After doing the Action, the researcher continued to the step, namely

reflection. In this step, the researcher reflects on how the teaching and learning

process runs. The function of reflection is to know the Action's weaknesses and

strengths. The researcher evaluates the result of the test and also from the

Observation done by the researcher and the observer during the teaching and

learning process.
 19

Figure 3.1 spiral model of action research Kemmis & Mc. Taggart (2018).

3.2 Research Setting

3.2.1 Setting At Place

This research was conducted at SMP N 14 Bintan, located in Kukup Village,

Tambelan District, Bintan Regency. This vocational junior high school is the only

school in the Tambelan Islands. This research was conducted in the eighth grade of

SMP N 14 Bintan.

3.2.2 Setting At Time

3.3 Research Subject

The subject of this research is class VIII semester 2. The researcher took one

class from 3 existing classes. The class is VIIIC. Class C consists of males 11 and

females 17, with 28 students. This research aims to improve students' speaking

skills By using the SGD technique for class VIIIC students at SMP N 14 Bintan.
 20

3.4 Research Procedure

In this Classroom Action Research (CAR), the researcher used the CAR

design from Kurt Lewin's Action Research Design. Because Lewins was the first to

introduce action research. He illustrated action research as a denial of steps that

form a spiral so that it can be easily understood compared to other design models.

Kurt Lewin's research design's main concept consisted of four components:

planning, Action, Observation, and reflection. The relationship between the four

components is seen as a viable cycle described as follows:

Acting Observing

CYCLE I

Planning Reflecting

Acting Planning

CYCLE II

Observing Reflecting

Figure 3.2 Kurt Lewin's Action Research Design in Batubara (2017)

Classroom Action Research using Lewin's design consists of four stages;

planning, Action, Observation, and reflection in one cycle. If the first cycle has been

completed, but there are obstacles, or it does not work, it is necessary to proceed to

the second cycle with the same concept as the first cycle. Namely planning, Action,
 21

observation, and reflection. In addition, the researcher conducted a preliminary

study before entering the classroom action research cycle. It aims to obtain data

about teachers' and students' problems in teaching and learning activities that need

to be solved (Dewi, 2020). According to Mills (2003:26), initial information

gathering is taking time to reflect on your beliefs and understand the nature and

context of your general ideas.

a. Planning

In this step, the researcher makes a lesson plan for speaking skills on

Expression of Congratulations and Expression of Like and Dislikes. They are

learning material, media, time, schedule, and instruments for Observation.

b. Implementing

In which SGD tecniques are designed is lesson plan applied.

c. Observing

At the observing stage, the researcher approached each group, in turn, to

observe students' work activities during the teaching and learning process. While

applying SGD, the researcher also records important events during the teaching-

learning process. Therefore, the researcher can provide some input or suggestions.

d. Reflecting

After carrying out the learning process using SGD, the researcher recited the

events in the class as a reflection of Action. The researcher evaluated the process

and results of implementing SGD in teaching English. The data from each step

analyze, and the data is used to determine the next step in the following Action or
 22

cycle to achieve the previously set goals. The researcher must make further

planning (re-planning) to get good results.

3.5 Research Instrument

The researcher used a speaking test instrument to obtain data. To collect data,

the researcher gave two tests to the students, namely pre-test and post-test. The pre-

test measures the students' previous knowledge and speaking achievement before

entering the trial circle. The post-test aims to determine the data that needs to be

evaluated after the results. The form of the speaking test is to express student

performance. Students discussed in groups and presented their ideas. Then, the

researcher achieved vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, and pronunciation. The

researcher gave 10-15 minutes for groups of students to present ideas in front of the

class. In giving achievement, the researcher used the category of oral proficiency

assessment from Brown (2004: 172-173). The assessment consists of five items:

vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, and pronunciation. Achievements are

reported in the 1-5 range. To conduct an oral test, the researcher gave instructions

to students about the steps to be taken in the test, such as (1) Asking students to

choose one topic from several that had been provided; (2) Giving them about 20-25

minutes to prepare for their dialogue on the topic; (3) Ask students to present their

dialogues for about 10-15 minutes; (5) Gave each presenter achievement. The

assessment rubric used to measure the students' speaking test consists of four

aspects or elements (1) Vocabulary, (2) Comprehension, (3) Fluency, and (4)

Pronunciation.
3.6 Research Schedule

TIME

NO ACTIVITIES March April Mei June July

Week

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1 Research preparation
2 Seminar proposal
3 Cycle I
4 Cycle II
5 Data analysis
6 Final research report

Table 3.1 Time Schedule

23
 24

3.7 The technique of Collecting Data

3.7.1 The Quantitative Data

The researcher used the test to collect the data by asking them to give a report

orally, either in an individual or group test, based on the topic. The time was given

twenty-five minutes. In scoring the data of the speaking test, the researcher used the

category that evaluates for criteria. Each criterion is going to be scored 25 points.

Every aspect of speaking is going to be arranged from 0-25. So, for all requirements,

students got 100 points. The scoring of this research was based on oral proficiency

scoring categories proposed by Brown (2015). The research is successful if the

students significantly improve their vocabulary, pronunciation, comprehension, and

fluency. The test scoring categories for speaking can be seen as follows:

3.7.2 The Qualitative Data

a. Observation

The Observation was done by the researcher using an observation checklist

to get information about the students' speaking ability, involvement, and

understanding of the given materials in class during teaching and learning.

b. Test

According to Linn and Gronlund in Sudaryono (2013) test is an instrument of

a systematic procedure for measuring a sample of behaviour by posing a set of

questions uniformly. Because a test is a form of assessment, the test also answers

the questions of how well the individuals perform in comparison with others or

contrast with a domain of performance task.

 25

Speaking tests were done at each meeting to get the data. The researcher is

going to conduct a pre-test and post-test. A pre-test was used to get the data

before using SGD. Post-test was done to get the data after using SGD.

c. Documentation

The researcher needs documentation to know about the teaching and learning

process situation. Documentations involve taking photographs and audiotape

recording to monitor and evaluate the actions. Meanwhile, quantitative data was

obtained through pre-test and post-test to measure the improvement of students'

speaking skills.

d. Field Notes

Field notes are used to note the activities in class during the teaching-learning.

The field note draft can be seen as follows:

Field Notes
Date ………………..
Subjects ………………..
Participants ………………..
Length of Observation ………………..
Summary

Table 3.2 English Language Speaking Skills Assessment

 26

No. Category Aspect Range Score

1. Vocabulary
a. inadequate Very limited vocabulary makes 1-6
comprehension quite difficult
b. decent Frequent uses of wrong speech limited to 7-12
simple vocabulary
c. good Sometimes uses inappropriate terms about 13-18
language because of inadequate vocabulary
d. excellent Barely has trouble 19-25
2. Pronunciation
a. inadequate Hard to understand because of sound, accent, 1-6
pitch, difficulty, and incomprehensible
b. decent The error in basic pronunciation 7-12
c. good Few noticeable errors 13-18
d. excellent Understandable 19-25
3. Comprehension
a. inadequate Understands only slow, very simple speech on 1-6
common social and touristic topics, requires
constant repetition and rephrasing
b. decent Understands careful, somewhat simplified 7-12
speech when engaged in a dialogue, but many
require considerable repetition or rephrasing
c. good Understands quite well normal educated 13-18
speech when engaged in a dialogue, but
requires occasional repetition or rephrasing
d. excellent Understands everything in normal educated 19-25
conversation except for very colloquial or
low-frequency items, or exceptionally rapid
or slurred speech
4. Fluency
a. inadequate Speed of speech below normal, Long pause, 1-6
utterance left unfinished
b. decent Some have obvious but manage to rephrase 7-12
and continue
c. good Speech is generally natural 13-18
d. excellent Understandable 19-25
Total Score

Adapted from: Brown (2015)

 27

3.8 Technique of Analyzing Data

After collecting the data, the next step of this study was to analyze the data.

This study applied quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative data was used

to analyze the score of students, while the qualitative data did use to describe the

situation during the teaching process. By applying this data, the researcher used two

ways of analyzing the data, they are:

a. Descriptive qualitative technique

A descriptive qualitative technique was used to know the student's behavior

during the teaching-learning process. This technique describes the detailed note

about the lesson situation inside the classroom.

b. Statistical technique
First, the researcher searched the mean of each post-test from every cycle by

applying the following formula:

∑X
𝜒=
N

Where:

Χ : Mean of the student's score

ΣX : Total score

𝑁 : Total number of students

To categorize the member of master's students, the researcher used the

following formula:

𝑅
𝑃= × 100%
𝑇
 28

Where:

P : Percentage of students who get the point of 69

R : Number of students who get points up to 69 above

T : Total of students who do the test

Then, the researcher analyzed whether or not there might have students'

improvement scores on speaking skills from pre-test and post-test scores in cycle

one and cycle 2 using the following formula:

𝑦1 − 𝑦
𝑃= × 100%
𝑦

Where:

P : Percentage of students' improvement

y : Pre-test result

y1 : Post-test I

𝑦2 − 𝑦
𝑃= × 100%
𝑦

Where:

P : Percentage of students' improvement

y : Pre-test result

y2 : Post-test II
 29

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Data Description

The data of this study are quantitative and qualitative. The quantitative data

were taken from the mean of student's scores on some tests. The qualitative data

were taken from an interview with teacher and students of SMPN 14 Bintan,

observation sheet, and documentation. This research was conducted in eight-grade

classes with 28 students. This research was accomplished in two cycles. Each cycle

consisted of four action research steps (planning, Action, Observation, and

reflection). The first cycle, including the pre-test, was conducted in one meeting,

and the second cycle was conducted in one meeting. In each cycle's last meeting,

the students took the test as the post-test consisted of post-test I for the cycle I and

post-test II for cycle II.

4.1.1 The Quantitative Data

Quantitative data were taken from the results of tests in class which were

carried out in two cycles and two meetings. The tests given to students are in the

form of pre-test, post-test cycle I, and cycle II. In this study, the researcher used

two cycles. In the first cycle, the value obtained by the students was not what the

researcher wanted, far from enough. Therefore, researcher need a second cycle to

ensure that this tecnique successfully improves students' speaking skills. In cycle I,

the researcher found unsatisfactory results; Although students are enthusiastic about

learning, the results are still low. Therefore, the researcher used cycle II to achieve

29
 30

the specified value. In cycle II, the researcher changed the topic of learning from

Expression of Congratulations to Expression of Like and Dislikes; changing

different topics in these two cycles was useful for measuring students' abilities

without repeating the same material. The results of student scores from the speaking

test can be seen in the following table.

Table 4.1 The Quantitative Data results of student scores from the speaking test

Initial Score of Pre- Score of Post-test Score of Post-test

No
Name Test I (cycle I) II (cycle II)
1 AS 60 62 62
2 A 59 62 65
3 A 55 68 70
4 AKN 58 72 75
5 DP 61 65 70
6 DA 52 65 75
7 DA 40 63 70
8 EP 58 70 70
9 FRK 70 75 75
10 GE 54 68 70
11 HG 60 76 80
12 HK 58 72 75
13 K 50 63 70
14 LA 54 68 75
15 MNH 55 70 75
16 MRP 56 70 75
17 NS 70 72 80
18 NNR 60 77 85
19 NRA 63 79 85
20 NRH 60 70 72
21 RAM 62 77 86
22 RR 65 65 80
23 RKP 70 72 75
24 RNM 50 55 60
25 SES 75 75 80
26 SA 70 75 80
27 TS 60 62 65
28 XZ 50 55 60
Total 1.662 1.923 2.060
Average 59,35 68,67 73,57
 31

The value that must be achieved by students is >69. The table above shows

the pre-test scores of only 5 students who succeeded, with an average score of

59.35. Then in post-test I (cycle I), only 15 students succeeded with an average

score of 68.67. In post-test II (cycle II), some students in grade 8C experienced an

increase. Namely, 23 students succeeded with an average score of 73.57. It turned

out that half the students from 8C managed to reach the specified KKM. Thus the

researcher can conclude that this method is successful in improving students'

speaking skills using the SGD tecnique.

KKM = >69
Noted : The number in bold reaches a value >69

4.1.2 The Qualitative Data

a. Observation

The researcher uses observation to see the activities of students and

researcher during the teaching and learning process. Observations focused on the

teaching-learning process applied by SGD, students' activities and behavior,

students' speaking ability in English lessons, and interactions between researcher

and students. Based on the checklist observations, students were more enthusiastic

about learning, as seen from their cheerful faces and enthusiastic about asking the

researcher if there were difficult words in the learning process using SGD.
 32

b. Documentation

The researcher used a smartphone to collect data. The smartphone was

utilized to take photos and record the student's performance in the teaching and

learning process.

c. Interview

Interviews were conducted twice. The first interview was conducted in the

first cycle when students did the pre-test, and the second was conducted at the end

of the second cycle. The resource persons are English teachers and students. At the

first meeting, they received an interview about their problem with speaking. At the

second meeting, they were interviewed about their responses or comments about

the application of the SGD in their teaching and learning process.

Interview transcript
Teacher
Researcher :Do you think this SGD is interesting?
Teacher :Yes, of course, very interesting. See the resulting increase.
Researcher :Can this SGD solve the problems we discussed earlier?
 33

Teacher :Of course, this strategy makes their interest in learning high. Reduce
shyness to appear.
Researcher :Would you like to use this strategy in the future?
Teacher : Why not, I will use this method later.
Students
Researcher :Did you find any difficulties while we were learning to speak
English?
Students :Yes miss, but not really because there is a dictionary.
Researcher :Is this learning model interesting?
Students :Interesting
Researcher :Do you prefer to study in groups or individually?
Students :In groups, Not confident if individually.

In the interview transcript above, it can be concluded that both teacher and

students like this tecnique. The students can be seen in their enthusiastic responses

after learning to use this technique, and the results the speaking test scores have

been achieved satisfactory results. At the same time, the English teachers is

interested in this SGD technique and wants to use it someday.

d. Field notes

During the research process, the researcher wrote field notes. The researcher

describes thoughts and feelings about the teaching-learning process in field notes.

The researcher recorded everything that happened during the teaching and learning

process.
 34

Table 4.2 Field Notes

Field Notes
Date 21st May, 2022
Subjects Students
Participants 28 students
Length of Observation Two weeks
Summary
The researcher started the research on 12-21 May 2022 at SMP N 14 Bintan. The
researcher took a sample of class 8C from the three existing classes. In this study,
the researcher used speaking skills in giving tests. Using two cycles and two
meetings in each cycle consists of pre-test and post-test. In the first cycle, the
students experienced an increase in scores from pre-test to post-test. But, in cycle
one, the researcher found the class was not conducive. Some students were afraid
to practice conversation in front of the class; some students were not serious
about learning, and the value obtained had not reached the target desired by the
researcher, so cycle two was carried out in the second week the researcher was at
the school. In cycle two, students experienced a significant increase; they were
active in learning, diligently asked questions, their enthusiasm for learning
increased and their scores. This research was certainly successful by the
researcher using the SGD technique.

4.2 Data Analysis

4.2.1 Quantitative Data

The researcher gave a test at the end of each cycle. Students' has been found

that the means of scores increase from pre-test until post-test. The following are the

results of the pre-test speaking in the first cycle of the first meeting.

Table 4.3 Students’ Pre-test Result On The Topic Expression of Congratulation

No Initial Name Score of Pre-Test Successful Criteria (>69)
1 AS 60 Unsuccessful
2 A 59 Unsuccessful
3 A 55 Unsuccessful
4 AKN 58 Unsuccessful
5 DP 61 Unsuccessful
6 DA 52 Unsuccessful
7 DA 40 Unsuccessful
 35

8 EP 58 Unsuccessful
9 FRK 70 Successful
10 GE 54 Unsuccessful
11 HG 60 Unsuccessful
12 HK 58 Unsuccessful
13 K 50 Unsuccessful
14 LA 54 Unsuccessful
15 MNH 55 Unsuccessful
16 MRP 56 Unsuccessful
17 NS 70 Successful
18 NNR 60 Unsuccessful
19 NRA 63 Unsuccessful
20 NRH 60 Unsuccessful
21 RAM 62 Unsuccessful
22 RR 65 Unsuccessful
23 RKP 70 Successful
24 RNM 50 Unsuccessful
25 SES 75 Successful
26 SA 70 Successful
27 TS 60 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 50 Unsuccessful
Total 1.662
Average 59,35

Based on the table above, the total student score is 1,662, and the number

of students who took the test was 28 students. Then the average student score was:

∑X
𝜒=
N

1.662
𝑋=
28

𝑋 = 59,35

Based on the above calculations, the students speaking skill in the English

lesson was still deficient. The average value was 59,35. To categorize the member

of master's students, the researcher applies the following formula:

 36

R
𝑃= × 100%
T

5
𝑃= × 100%
28

𝑃 = 17,85%

Based on the above calculations, only 17,85% (5 students) of all eighth-grade

students who took the test passed the competency. In contrast, the remaining

82,14% (23 students) failed the meeting the minimum competency criteria.

Students could conclude that their skill in speaking English was still deficient.

After implementing SGD in the classroom, the students were given a post-

test I to find out the cycle I result. The following are the results of the students' post-

test speaking in cycle I in the second meeting.

Table 4.4 Students’ Post-test I Result On The Topic Expression Of Like and
Dislikes

No Initial Name Score of Post-test I Successful criteria (>69)

1 AS 62 Unsuccessful
2 A 62 Unsuccessful
3 A 68 Unsuccessful
4 AKN 72 Unsuccessful
5 DP 65 Successful
6 DA 65 Unsuccessful
7 DA 63 Unsuccessful
8 EP 70 Successful
9 FRK 75 Successful
10 GE 68 Unsuccessful
11 HG 76 Successful
12 HK 72 Successful
13 K 63 Unsuccessful
14 LA 68 Unsuccessful
15 MNH 70 Successful
16 MRP 70 Successful
 37

17 NS 72 Successful
18 NNR 77 Successful
19 NRA 79 Successful
20 NRH 70 Successful
21 RAM 77 Successful
22 RR 65 Unsuccessful
23 RKP 72 Successful
24 RNM 55 Unsuccessful
25 SES 75 Successful
26 SA 75 Successful
27 TS 62 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 55 Unsuccessful
Total 1.923
Average 68,67

Based on the table above, the total student score is 1,923, and the number of

students who took the test was 28 students. Then the average student score was:

∑X
𝜒=
N
1.923
𝑋=
28
𝑋 = 68,67

Based on the above analysis, the students' speaking skills in English lessons

got increasing. The average value was 68,67. To categorize the member of master's

students, the researcher applies the following formula:

R
𝑃= × 100%
T
15
𝑃= × 100%
28
𝑃 = 53,57%

Based on the above calculations, 53,57% (15 students) of all eighth-grade

students who took the test passed the competency. Meanwhile, the remaining

46,42% (13 students) failed to meet the minimum competency criteria. The
 38

calculation could be concluded that the post-test of the cycle I was categorized as

unsuccessful.

According to the students' speaking skill result in cycle 1, there was an

increase in students' mean scores from the students' speaking skills in the

preliminary study (pre-test) to the students' speaking skills in the first cycle (post-

test I). The pre-test means score from the mean class 59,35 increased to 68,67, or 5

students who passed the score above the minimum mastery criterion increased to

15 students. It means that there was a 35,72 % of mean score improvement. The

improvement percentage is derived from the formula:

𝑦1 − 𝑦
𝑃= × 100%
𝑦
68,67 − 59,35
𝑃= × 100%
59,35
9,32
𝑃= × 100%
59,35
𝑃 = 15,70 %

Students' speaking skill in English lesson on the topic "Expression of

Congratulation" was classified as unsuccessful, so cycle II is needed to increase

students' higher scores. Furthermore, the results of the post-test speaking for cycle

II are as follows:

Table 4.5 Students' Post-test II Result On The Topic Expression Like and Dislikes

No Initial Name A score of Post-test II Successful criteria (>69)

1 AS 62 Unsuccessful
2 A 65 Unsuccessful
3 A 70 Successful
4 AKN 75 Successful
5 DP 70 Successful
6 DA 75 Successful
 39

7 DA 70 Successful
8 EP 70 Successful
9 FRK 75 Successful
10 GE 70 Successful
11 HG 80 Successful
12 HK 75 Successful
13 K 70 Successful
14 LA 75 Successful
15 MNH 75 Successful
16 MRP 75 Successful
17 NS 80 Successful
18 NNR 85 Successful
19 NRA 85 Successful
20 NRH 72 Successful
21 RAM 86 Successful
22 RR 80 Successful
23 RKP 75 Successful
24 RNM 60 Unsuccessful
25 SES 80 Successful
26 SA 80 Successful
27 TS 65 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 60 Unsuccessful
Total 2.060
Average 73,57

According to the table above, the students' speaking skill in the English lesson

was increased on the topic "Expression of Like and Dislike" through SGD. The

standard of maximum criteria was accomplished with a total score of students was

2.060 divided by the number of students who did the test was 28 students, so the

students' average was:

∑X
𝜒=
N
2.060
𝑋=
28
𝑋 = 73,57
 40

Based on the above analysis, the students' speaking skills in English lessons

had increased. The average value was 73,57. To categorize the member of master's

students, the researcher applies the following formula:

R
𝑃= × 100%
T
23
𝑃= × 100%
28
𝑃 = 82,14%

Based on the above calculations, 82,14% (23 students) of all eighth-grade

students who took the test passed the competency. Meanwhile, the remaining

17,86% (5 students) failed to meet the minimum competency criteria. It could be

concluded that the post-test of cycle II was categorized as a success because the

students' skills in speaking increased.

The calculation formula for the improvement percentage is as follows:

𝑦2 − 𝑦
𝑃= × 100%
𝑦
73,57 − 59,35
𝑃= × 100%
59,35
14,22
𝑃= × 100%
59,35
𝑃 = 23,95 %

According to the students' speaking skill result in cycle 2, there was an

increase in students' mean scores from the students' speaking skills in the

preliminary study (pre-test) to the students' speaking skills in the second cycle

(post-test II). The pre-test means score from the mean class 59,35 increased to 73,57

or 23 students who passed the score above the minimum mastery criterion increased

to 13 students. It means that there was a 23,95 % of mean score improvement. The
 41

following are the results of the students' speaking pre-test to post-test I and II and a

summary of the percentage increase in student scores:

Table 4.6 Students' Result Summary

Pre-test Post-test I Post-test II
Initial
No Successful Successful Successful
Name Score Score Score
criteria (>69) criteria (>69) criteria (>69)
1 AS 60 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful
2 A 59 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful
3 A 55 Unsuccessful 68 Unsuccessful 70 Successful
4 AKN 58 Unsuccessful 72 Unsuccessful 75 Successful
5 DP 61 Unsuccessful 65 Successful 70 Successful
6 DA 52 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful 75 Successful
7 DA 40 Unsuccessful 63 Unsuccessful 70 Successful
8 EP 58 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 70 Successful
9 FRK 70 Successful 75 Successful 75 Successful
10 GE 54 Unsuccessful 68 Unsuccessful 70 Successful
11 HG 60 Unsuccessful 76 Successful 80 Successful
12 HK 58 Unsuccessful 72 Unsuccessful 75 Successful
13 K 50 Unsuccessful 63 Unsuccessful 70 Successful
14 LA 54 Unsuccessful 68 Unsuccessful 75 Successful
15 MNH 55 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 75 Successful
16 MRP 56 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 75 Successful
17 NS 70 Successful 72 Successful 80 Successful
18 NNR 60 Unsuccessful 77 Successful 85 Successful
19 NRA 63 Unsuccessful 79 Successful 85 Successful
20 NRH 60 Unsuccessful 70 Successful 72 Successful
21 RAM 62 Unsuccessful 77 Successful 86 Successful
22 RR 65 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful 80 Successful
23 RKP 70 Unsuccessful 72 Successful 75 Successful
24 RNM 50 Unsuccessful 55 Unsuccessful 60 Unsuccessful
25 SES 75 Successful 75 Successful 80 Successful
26 SA 70 Successful 75 Successful 80 Successful
27 TS 60 Unsuccessful 62 Unsuccessful 65 Unsuccessful
28 XZ 50 Unsuccessful 55 Unsuccessful 60 Unsuccessful
Total 1.662 1.923 2.060
Average 59,35 68,67 73,57

The following is a summary of the percentage improvement in student

scores from pre-test to post-test speaking cycle II :
 42

Table 4.7 Students' Score Improvement Percentage Summary

Test Students’ Score > 69 Percentage
Pre-test 5 17,85%
Post-test I 13 53,57%
Post-test II 23 82,14%

From the above result, only 17,85% (5 students) scored>69. In the post-test

in cycle I, 53,57% (13 students) got a score >69. It means that there was an

increasing 35,72%. In post-test II, 82,14% (23 students) got a score >69. The

increase was about 28,57%, and the total increase in students' scores from pre-test

until post-test II was 64,29%. To conclude, the SGD worked excellently and

efficiently in helping students speak English in the eighth grade of SMPN 14

Bintan. SGD successfully applied and was able to increase students' skills in

speaking.

4.2.2 Qualitative Data

Cycle I

a. Planning

In the first step of Cycle I, a series of plans were carried out. The researcher

designed a lesson plan based on a predetermined topic: "Expression of

Congratulations. The activity schedule is for 12th May 2022. The time allocation

for the meeting is 120 minutes (2x60 minutes). The researcher also prepared a

post-test to collect data to determine if there was an increase in some students'

scores from pre-test to post-test I.

 43

b. Acting

At the first meeting of the first cycle, the class started with the students'

enthusiasm to look at the researcher, assuming that there was a new teacher.

Class conditions are noisy but conducive; they are eager to learn but difficult to

understand the lesson. The researcher acts as a teacher in the class based on the

previous lesson plans so that students don't get tensed and feel pressured. The

researcher tries to dilute the class situation by occasionally joking. The

researcher also explained to the students the intention to do research. First, the

researcher opened the class by greeting, taking the students' attendance, and

getting to know each student. Explaining speaking, then giving a pre-test to make

random conversations in pairs and then showing them in front of the class. Next,

the researcher asked the students to do the dialogue in front of the class. After

they performed, the researcher gave feedback to the students on their

performance. Then give a brief explanation about SGD to students.

At the second meeting, the researcher opened the class by greeting and

attending to the students while getting to know each student. At the first meeting,

they were explained about SGD; at the second meeting, the researcher gave a

post-test to students to make it into four members per group, and the researcher

gave time for each group to make a conversation about Expression of

Congratulations. Per person must have at least four utterances. The researcher

saw student work by approaching from one group to another. Each group

practiced and memorized the dialogue. When ready, each group presented the

results of the conversation that had been made.

 44

c. Observing

In this Observation, the researcher recorded every Action, comment, and

certain behaviour of students. In this phase, the student's behaviour and

responses during the teaching-learning process were recorded using

documentation, namely photos and field notes. There were many things which

had been observed as follows:

1) The researcher observed the students' activities and participation during

the teaching-learning process.

2) The researcher took notes on students' participation in the activity and on

the language used during the learning activity

3) Many students were still confused about the best way to learn to speak

English.

4) Many students were not active in the class, and some were still noisy.

d. Reflecting

After implementing the SGD, the researcher discussed the process of Cycle I

and the result of post-test I with the teacher. Based on the post-test I result, only

15 students, or 53,57% of students, passed the minimum mastery criterion. The

researcher and teacher were impressed because their efforts to improve students'

speaking skills had increased compared to pre-test I, but still, many students got

insufficient marks. So, to increase the number of students who can exceed the

minimum completeness criteria, the researcher and teacher try to modify the

Action. Action modifications are carried out in the next lesson plan cycle II.
 45

Cycle II

a. Planning

In the previous cycle, some students improved their speaking skills. However,

many students still have difficulties learning to speak, as evidenced by their post-

test I scores, which only seven students completed. The lesson plan used in the

previous cycle underwent several modifications. Researcher modify from

different materials, namely "Expression of Congratulations" to "Expression of

Like and Dislike." This material difference avoids repetition of material so that

students do not learn the same thing to get the specified value. To support

students' enthusiasm for learning, researcher prepared prizes for students who

had high learning enthusiasm and were eager to perform. This cycle is expected

to improve the speaking ability of all eighth-grade students of SMPN 14 Bintan.

In addition, the researcher prepared post-test II and interviewed students to

collect data. This cycle was carried out in two meetings on 19th May 2022. The

time allocation for this meeting was 120 minutes (2x60 minutes).

b. Acting

After this cycle was conducted, the result was expected to be better than the

first. The researcher tried their best to teach the students and motivate them to

increase their speaking ability using SGD. The procedure of this strategy was

the same as the first cycle. The actions were:

1) At first, the researcher started by questioning and answering the topic in the

previous meeting. The researcher also tried highlighting some aspects that

have not been done yet in the first cycle.

 46

2) Meanwhile, some students asked for some rewards to get if they could speak

better than they did in the last session.

3) The researcher promised to give them rewards if they got a good mark which

is good to motivate them to speak English.

c. Observing

At this stage, the Observation was done to find out the students' activities

during the teaching-learning process; they are:

1) The researcher found that the students were more active and serious than in

the previous cycle.

2) Most of them became more confident after being told that making mistakes

was common in the learning process.

3) They were also highly motivated to perform in front of the class first.

4) The researcher saw they did not have any problem doing their test.

d. Reflecting

After implementing actions in Cycle II, the students' participation in

responding to the teacher improved to be more active. Also, the students'

speaking ability has been improved. Moreover, the teaching-learning process

could be considered very well. Firstly, the student's pronunciation was improved,

and they rarely mispronounced the words. Secondly, the students had better

vocabulary mastery by exercising and memorizing dialogues. They became

more confident in speaking activities.

 47

4.3 Discussion

The students' low speaking ability was the problem with the English teaching-

learning process speaking in the eighth grade of SMPN 14 Bintan. Because of the

lack of speaking practice done in the learning process. The students also had a

problem related to self-confidence when speaking in English. They felt nervous, so

they could not speak fluently. Hence, the actions to overcome the problems were

needed to improve the students' speaking ability.

The SGD was one of the strategies the teacher could use in teaching English

to improve the students' speaking ability. The researcher research indicated that the

SGD was effective in the classroom. The SGD helped the students to understand

the subject easily because they could hear and pronounce it actively. Supported by

the opinion of Harmer ( 2001), research regarding small group discussion as an

effective teaching strategy in language activities shows that there are some class

assignments where pair work is insufficient and may not be effective. Thus,

organizing them in groups where students can write group stories or role-play

would be better. Small group activities help students create a more interactional

environment. At the end of the session, reflection was done to discuss what students

had learned and the difficulties they found in the teaching-learning process. The

researcher also gave the students some feedback related to the students'

performance in front of the class.

In the first cycle, the students were given new vocabulary and expressions

related to the "Expression of Congratulations" topic. The students were excited to

discuss the meaning and pronunciation with the teacher, their friends, and the
 48

researcher. However, when it came to speaking practices, the students indicated

they did not want to speak English. They refused to go in front of the class because

they were afraid to make mistakes, and their friends would make fun of them. Some

students even wrote sentences of the dialogue in their hands. Nevertheless, most of

the students did not manage to surpass the minimum mastery criterion in this cycle.

In the second cycle, the researcher gave the topic of "Like and Dislike

Expressions." The researcher changes a different topic from cycle I because, with

the same topic, it will be called repetition while the researcher aims to improve

students' abilities. Therefore this modification is needed to determine whether there

is an increase in students. Although the topic differed from the first cycle, students

still had the same activities as the previous cycle. This cycle aims for them to

practice more. Students work in pairs and groups in making dialogues. They

became more serious and enthusiastic because they had practiced before. Neither

of them wrote sentences in their books or papers. They are also more confident

when doing the post-test and rarely make mistakes in pronunciation.

Based on the students' Interviews about their perception of using the SGD of

English Lesson to improve their speaking ability, they felt that SGD was very

interactive for them. They could pronounce many new vocabularies without fear of

being laughed at by other friends. Before the implementation, they felt insecure

about their speaking ability. Nevertheless, after the second cycle, all students

confidently told the researcher they could speak English fluently.

So, the researcher concluded that the research result showed that

implementing the SGD could improve the students' speaking ability. The
 49

quantitative data could be seen by proving the students' scores got better in the post-

test I than in the pre-test, and the post-test II got better than the post-test I. The

qualitative data showed that the students were confident and motivated to speak

English without fear of making mistakes. They could arrange sentences better than

before.
 50

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

The research was conducted to improve the students' speaking ability through

SGD. As stated in the discussion in the previous chapter, the researcher can

conclude that the SGD successfully improves the students' speaking skills.

Summarise could be as follows:

a. SGD activities can improve students' speaking English ability, which can see

from their scores and responses to CAR's teaching activities. It can conclude

that students like SGD. Their participation in classroom conversations,

discussions, class performances, pronunciation, fluency, and confidence in

spoken English testify to these.

b. In the SGD, the students were more active and participated in the speaking

teaching-learning. For that reason, the SGD can be used as an alternative

strategy for teachers' speaking teaching, improving and maintaining speaking

English ability. In the first test (pre-test), the number of students who passed

the minimum mastery criterion of >69 was 5 out of 28 (17,85%). In the second

test (post-test I), students who scored above >69 or passed the minimum

mastery criterion were 15 out of 28 students (53,57%). In the third test (post-

test II), the students who passed the minimum mastery criterion of >69 were

23 out of 28 students (82,14%).

50
 51

5.2 Suggestions

Based on the conclusions above, The researcher can make some suggestions

to the English teacher, the students, and the other researchers. The suggestions

describe as follows:

a. For the English teachers

The SGD can be a good strategy for improving the students' speaking ability.

The English teachers should explain clearly and instruct their students using

SGD. It is important to control the students by providing interesting activities

to make the students pay attention to the teaching process. The English

teachers also need to enrich themselves with the knowledge of developing

interesting media to encourage their students to speak up, lest they rely too

much on textbooks. These actions improved the quality of English teaching-

learning, especially the students' speaking ability.

b. For students

Through the SGD, students are used to practicing spoken English. The

researcher suggested they should participate in the activity to improve their

English-speaking skills. Before conducting a conversation or dialogue, some

activities, such as exercises and other tasks, should be carried out following

the activity to improve their verbal skills.

c. For the other researchers

This research describes how the SGD can improve students' speaking ability.

For other researchers interested in researching the same field, the researcher
 52

suggests they carefully examine the activities used. This study may be one of

the references before researching the student's speaking ability.

Finally, the researcher realized that this study still has shortcomings and

errors. Therefore, the researcher hopes to accept constructive suggestions to

improve the research.

 REFERENCE

Bohari, L. (2019). Improving Speaking Skills Through Small Group Discussion At

Eleventh Grade Students Of Sma Plus Munirul Arifin Nw Praya. Journal of
Languages and Language Teaching, Vol. 7 No.1.
Brown, G. &. (2015). Effective Teaching in Higher Education (reprint). . USA:
Routledge.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. (2nd Ed). New York: Pearson Education.
Brown, H. D. (2004). Teaching by Principles: Language Assessment. . New York:
Pearson Education.
Brown, H. D. (2018). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices
3rd Edition. . USA: Pearson Education ESL.
Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, E. G. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous
classroom (3rd ed). New York: Teachers College Press.
Darmadi, H. (2015). Assessing Procedure Text Through Simulation To The Tenth
Grade Students Of SMK Al-Madani Pontianak. An Article For Tefl
Assessment.
DEWI, N. A. (2020). Improving Students’ Writing on Descriptive Paragraphs
through Instagram Personal Photography. MUHAMMADIYAH
UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR.
Durriyah, R. (2017). The Effectiveness Of Using Small Group Discussion On
Students’ Reading Comprehension Of Recount Text. Syarif Hidayatullah
State Islamic University Jakarta.
Fauzi, I. (2017). Improving Students’ Speaking Ability through SmallGroup
Discussion. Journal of ELT Research.
Florez, C. M. ( 1999). Improving Adult English Language Learners’ Speaking
Skills.
Flutcher, G. (2003). Testing Second Language Speaking. . Great Britain: Pearson
Education Longman.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed). London:
Longman.
Jhonson, A. P. (2010). Making Connections in Elementary and Middle School
Social Studies. USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

53
 54

Kemmis, S. M. (1990). The Action Research Planner. Australia: Deakin University.

Kidsvatter, R. (1996). Dynamics of effective teaching. London: Longman
Published Ltd.
Koşar, G. &. (2014). Strategies-based instruction: A means of improving adult EFL
learners’ speaking skills. International Journal of Language Academy, 2(3),
12–26.
La’biran, R. (2017). Improving Speaking Ability Through Small Group Discussion
for the Eight-Year Students of SMPN 2 SALUPUTTI in Tana Toraja.
Universitas Kristen Indonesia Toraja Volume 04 Number 01.
Mills, G. E. (2000). Action Research: A Guide for Teacher Researcher. . New York:
Prentice-Hall.
Nuranalisa. (2020). Improving Students’ Speaking Skill Through Animation Movie
At Second Grade Of Smpn 5 Mandai. Muhammadiyah University Of
Makassar.
Orlich, D. C. (2010). Teaching Strategies: A Guide to Effective Instruction (9th ed).
Rahman, F. e. (2011). Impact of Discussion Method on Students Performance. .
International Journal of Business and Social Science. (2)7, 88-89. .
Rifai. (2016). Classroom Action Research In Christian Class. Sukoharjo:
BornWin's.
Rukajat, A. (2018). Penelitian tindakan kelas . Yogyakarta : Deepublish.
Sidik, A. S. (2013). Improving Students’ Speaking Ability Through Practice
Rehearsal Pair of The Tenth Grade of Man Malang 1. Language-Edu, 2(4),
682–688.
Sudaryono. (2013). Pengembangan Instrumen Penelitian Pendidikan. Yogyakarta:
Graha Ilmu.
 55

APPENDICES
 56

Appendix 1
OBSERVATION CHECKLIST
Students : SMPN 14 Bintan
Class : VIII
Subject : English

NO OBSERVATION ITEM YES NO

1. The students are ready to learn the material √
2. The teacher explains the material √
3. The teacher provides opportunities for students to express an √
opinion and ask questions related to the lesson
4. The students provide opinions and questions √
5. The teacher checks the students' understanding √
6. The teacher gives a test to the students √
7. The students use dictionaries √
8. The teacher goes around the class during the learning process to see √
students' activities and provide help when needed

The Teacher The Researcher

(Ivan Tri Jambri) (Diah Khotimah)

 57

Appendix 2
Surat balasan dari SMP N 14 Bintan :
 58

Appendix 3
LESSON PLAN
Skill : Speaking
Text Types : Expression of Congratulations
Class : VIII
Time Allotment : 2 x 60 minutes
A. KOMPETENSI INTI
1. Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya
2. Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggung jawab, peduli (gotong royong,
kerjasama, toleran, damai), santun, responsif,dan pro-aktif sebagai bagian dari
solusi atas berbagai permasalahan dalam berinteraksi secara efektif dengan
lingkungan sosial dan alam serta menempatkan diri sebagai cerminan bangsa
dalampergaulan dunia.
3. memahami, menerapkan, menganalisis pengetahuan faktual, konseptual,
procedural 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.
4. mengolah, menalar, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret dan ranah abstrak terkait
dengan pengembangan dari yang dipelajarinya di sekolah secara mandiri, dan m
ampu menggunakan metoda sesuai kaidah keilmuan

B. KOMPETENSI DASAR DAN INDIKATOR PENCAPAIAN

KOMPETENSI
Kompetensi Dasar (KD) Indicator Pencapaian Kompetensi
(IPK)
3.2 Menerapkan fungsi sosial, struktur 3.2.1 Mengidentifikasi ungkapan
teks, dan unsur kebahasaan teks memberi ucapan selamat dan
interaksi interpersonal lisan dan tulis responnya.
yang melibatkan tindakan memberikan 3.2.2 Menerapkan ungkapan memberi
ucapan selamat dan memuji bersayap ucapan selamat dan responnya.
(extended), serta menanggapinya,
sesuai dengan konteks penggunaanya.

4.2 Menyusun teks interaksi 4.2.1 Menyusun kalimat tentang

interpersonal lisan dan tulis sederhana ungkapan memberi ucapan selamat.
yang melibatkan tindakan memberikan
ucapan selamat dan memuji bersayap
 59

(extended), dan menanggapinya

dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial,
struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan
yang benar dan sesuai konteks.

C. TUJUAN PEMBELAJARAN
Setelah mengikuti proses pembelajaran, peserta didik diharapkan dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi ungkapan memberi ucapan selamat dan responnya.
2. Menerapkan ungkapan memberi ucapan selamat dan responnya.
3. Menyusun kalimat tentang ungkapan memberi ucapan selamat.
D. MATERI PEMBELAJARAN
1. Materi Pembelajaran Reguler
a. fungsi sosial
Merespon percakapan (asking and giving congratulate)
b. Struktur teks
- Memulai
- Menanggapi
E. MEDIA PEMBELAJARAN
1. Media
- Worksheet
- Handout
- Power point
2. Alat/Bahan
- Papan tulis
- Spidol
- LCD, infocus
F. Learning objectives:
At the end of the lesson, students are expected to be able to: Use expressions
of congratulations to someone in terms of vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and
pronunciation.
Cycle I: Expression of Congratulations
 60

G. Teaching techniques:
Small Groups Discussions (SGD)
H. Teaching and learning activities
Meetings Teacher's Activities Students' Activities
1 1. The Researcher greeted the 1. Responding
students, followed by a prayer
reading led by the class leader;
2. The Researcher then checked the 2. Responding
students' attendance;
3. The Researcher introduced the 3. Paying attention
learning materials, namely
Expressing Congratulations on the
use of speaking skills;
4. The Researcher gave a pre-test to 4. Possible answers
the students. The exercises are as
follows: 1. Make a short conversation
about Congratulations, including the
responses! (make it with your
partner.)
5. Researcher provided the same 5. Pay attention
material, but it is done in the form of
SGD for about 2-4 members;
6. Researcher first explained what 6. Responding and
SGD is and how to do it; making a groups
7. The Researcher explained in each 7. Trying to make a
group how to make a conversational dialogue
dialogue Expressing conversation
Congratulations, including the
responses;
8. The Researcher opened a 8. After completing the
discussion session for students to ask test, Congratulation
about learning difficulties. Expression. perform
the dialogue in front
of the class
9. Doing the
9. The Researcher surrounded each evaluation.
pair to confirm and check the work of
each pair of students. 10. Doing the
10. Finally, before the researcher evaluation.
closes the class, the researcher gives
time to discuss or ask questions about
learning.
 61

2 1. The Researcher greeted the 1. Responding

students, followed by a prayer
reading led by the class leader;
2. The Researcher then checked the 2. Responding
students' attendance;
3. The Researcher reviewed the 3. Pay attention
previous meeting and explained that
the second meeting had a test (post-
test) using the group formed at the
first meeting. The exercise is as
follows: Make a conversation about
Expression of Congratulations,
including the responses! Five
utterances per person? (make in SGD
about 2-4 members in groups.);
4. The Researcher asked students to 4. Per groups, choose
choose the type of Expressing of the types of
Congratulations and make a dialogue expression. Then
based on the type chosen; the make conversations
researcher went around to check the based on the types
group work; chosen.

5. The Researcher assessed the group 5. Presentation in front

that appears of the class.
6. Finally, the researcher opened a 6. Doing the
discussion session before closing the evaluation.
lesson.

I. Teknik Penilaian
1. Teknik Penilaian:
a. Penilaian Sikap : Observasi/Pengamatan
b. Penilaian Pengetahuan : Tes Berbicara
c. Penilaian Keterampilan : Unjuk kerja/Praktik
2. Bentuk Penilaian:
a. Observasi : Jurnal guru
b. Unjuk Kerja : Berbicara di depan kelas
 62

Appendix 4
LESSON PLAN
Skill : Speaking
Text Types : Expression of Like and Dislike
Class : VIII
Time Allotment : 2 x 60 minutes
A. TUJUAN PEMBELAJARAN
1. Secara bersama-sama siswa dapat mengidentifikasi ungkapa yang
menyatakan suka dan tidak suka.
2. Secara berpasangan maupun berkelompok siswa dapat mengungkapkan
dan merespon pernyataan suka dan tidak suka.
3. Siswa secara berpasangan membuat teks percakapan lisan sederhana
mengenai ungkapan yang menyatakan suka dan tidak suka.

B. KOMPETENSI DASAR dan INDIKATOR

KOMPETENSI DASAR INDIKATOR
3.4 Mengidentifikasi fungsi sosial, 3.4.1 Menjawab pertanyaan
struktur teks, dan unsur seputar like and dislike
kebahasaan teks interaksi 3.4.2 Mengemukakan ekspresi like
transaksional lisan dan tulis yang and dislike
melibatkan tindakan memberi dan 3.4.3 Membuat percakapan tentang
meminta informasi terkait nama like and dislike
dan jumlah binatang, benda, dan
bangunan public yang dekat
dengan kehidupan peserta didik
sehari-hari, sesuai dengan konteks
pengunaaanya.

C. TUJUAN PEMBELAJARAN
Setelah mengikuti proses pembelajaran, peserta didik diharapkan dapat:
1. Mengidentifikasi ungkapan memberi ucapan suka dan tidak suka dan
responnya.
2. Menerapkan ungkapan memberi ucapan suka dan tidak suka dan responnya.
3. Menyusun kalimat tentang ungkapan memberi ucapan suka dan tidak suka.
D. MATERI PEMBELAJARAN
1. Materi Pembelajaran Reguler
a. fungsi sosial
Merespon percakapan (asking and giving like and dislike)
 63

c. Struktur teks
- Memulai
- Menanggapi
E. MEDIA PEMBELAJARAN
1. Media
- Worksheet
- Handout
- Power point
2. Alat/Bahan
- Papan tulis
- Spidol
- LCD, infocus
F. Learning objectives:
At the end of the lesson, students are expected to be able to: Use the
Expression Like and Dislike to someone in vocabulary, fluency, comprehension,
and pronunciation.
Cycle II: Expression of Like and Dislike
G. Teaching techniques:
Small Groups Discussions (SGD)
H. Teaching and learning activities
Meetings Teacher's Activities Students' Activities
1 1. The Researcher greeted the 1. Responding
students, followed by a prayer
reading led by the class leader;
2. The Researcher then checked the 2. Responding
students' attendance;
3. The Researcher introduces the 3. Paying attention
learning materials, namely
Expression of Like and Dislike on
the use of speaking skills;
4. The Researcher gave a pre-test to 4. Possible answers
the students. The exercises are as
follows: 1. Make a short
conversation about Like and Dislike,
including the responses! (make it
with your partner.)
 64

5. Researcher provided the same 5. Pay attention

material, but it is done in the form of
SGD for about 2-4 members;
6. Researcher first explained what 6. Responding and
SGD is and how to do it; making a groups
7. The Researcher explained in each 7. Trying to make a
group how to make a conversational dialogue
dialogue Expression of Like and conversation
Dislike;
8. The Researcher opened a 8. After completing the
discussion session for students to ask test, Congratulation
about learning difficulties. Expression. perform
the dialogue in front
of the class

9. The Researcher surrounded each 9. Doing the

pair to confirm and check the work of evaluation.
each pair of students.
10. Finally, before the researcher 10. Doing the
closed the class, the researcher gave evaluation.
time to discuss or ask questions about
learning.

2 1. The Researcher greeted the 1. Responding

students, followed by a prayer
reading led by the class leader;
2. The Researcher then checked the 2. Responding
students' attendance;
3. The Researcher reviewed the 3. Pay attention
previous meeting and explained that
the second meeting had a test (post-
test) used the group formed at the
first meeting. The exercise is as
follows: Make a conversation about
the Expression of Like and Dislike,
including the responses!
, 5 uttarances per person ? (make in
SGD about 2-4 members in groups.);
4. The Researcher asked students to 4. Per groups, choose
choose the type of Expression of the types of
Like and Dislike expression. Then
and make a dialogue based on the make conversations
type chosen. The researcher went
around to check the group work;
 65

5. The Researcher assessed the group 5. Based on the types

that appeared chosen.
6. Finally, the researcher opened a 6. Presentation in front
discussion session before closing the of the class.
lesson. Doing the
evaluation.

I. Teknik Penilaian
i. Teknik Penilaian:
a. Penilaian Sikap : Observasi/Pengamatan
b. Penilaian Pengetahuan : Tes Berbicara
c. Penilaian Keterampilan : Unjuk kerja/Praktik
ii. Bentuk Penilaian:
a. Observasi : Jurnal guru
b. Unjuk Kerja : Berbicara di depan kelas
 66

Appendix 5 ASSESMENT INSTRUMENT

No. Category Aspect Range Score

1. Vocabulary
a. inadequate Very limited vocabulary makes 1-6
comprehension quite difficult
b. decent Frequent uses of wrong speech limited to 7-12
simple vocabulary
c. good Sometimes uses inappropriate terms about 13-18
language because of inadequate
vocabulary
d. excellent Barely has trouble 19-25
2. Pronunciation
a. inadequate Hard to understand because of sound, 1-6
accent, pitch, difficulty, and
incomprehensible
b. decent The error in basic pronunciation 7-12
c. good Few noticeable errors 13-18
d. excellent Understandable 19-25
3. Comprehension
a.inadequate Understands only slow, very simple 1-6
speech on common social and touristic
topics, requires constant repetition and
rephrasing
b.decent Understands careful, somewhat simplified 7-12
speech when engaged in a dialogue, but
many require considerable repetition or
rephrasing
c.good Understands quite well normal educated 13-18
speech when engaged in a dialogue, but
requires occasional repetition or
rephrasing
d.excellent Understands everything in normal 19-25
educated conversation except for very
colloquial or low-frequency items, or
exceptionally rapid or slurred speech
4. Fluency
a.inadequate Speed of speech below normal, Long 1-6
pause, utterance left unfinished
b.decent Some have obvious but manage to 7-12
rephrase and continue
c.good Speech is generally natural 13-18
d.excellent Understandable 19-25
Total Score
Adapted from: Brown (2015)
 67

Appendix 6
INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

Before Implementation
Teacher
Researcher :How long have you been teaching English at this school?
Teacher :I have been teaching here since 2007.

Researcher :What do you think about the students of this class? Are they actively
participating?

Teacher :For class C, there are indeed some students who stand out in English
lessons. Others are also active but more noisy than active in their
studies.
Researcher :How do you control your students in class?
Teacher :Certainly, there must be firmness and patience in guiding students.

Researcher :Do you think they like English? Is their interest in learning English
great?

Teacher :You must also know how the children are here. Only a few of them
are interested in learning English. But grateful because they are still
willing to try to practice and learn.
Researcher :Do they have difficulty speaking English?

Teacher :Some are already a little proficient, but most have difficulty due to
a lack of practice on their own.
Researcher :How do you teach them to speak English?

Teacher :Get them used to talking about small things, for example, asking
how they are, good morning, and so on. Increase vocabulary when
entering English lessons.

Students
Researcher :Do you like English?
Students :Some students answered yes, and some did not.
Researcher :Do you often practice speaking with your English teacher?
Students :Often with sir Ivan
 68

Researcher :Did you find any difficulties when speaking English?

Students : It's hard to pronounce words in English. I don't know the meaning
of Indonesian because it's embarrassing to speak English.

After Implementation
Teacher
Researcher :Do you think this SGD is interesting?
Teacher :Yes, of course, very interesting. See the resulting increase.
Researcher :Can this SGD solve the problems we discussed earlier?

Teacher :Of course, this strategy makes their interest in learning high. Reduce
shyness to appear.
Researcher :Would you like to use this strategy in the future?
Teacher :Why not, I will use this method later.

Students
Researcher :Did you find any difficulties while we were learning to speak
English?
Students :Yes miss, but not really because there is a dictionary.
Researcher :Is this learning model interesting?
Students :Interesting
Researcher :Do you prefer to study in groups or individually?
Students :In groups, Not confident if individually.
 69

Appendix 7
PRE-TEST
Name :
Class :

With your partner, make dialogues based on the situations below. Use expression

of Congratulations, including the responses. Then, practice the dialogues.

 70

Appendix 8
POST-TEST
(Cycle I)
Name :
Class :

With your group, make dialogues based on the situations below. Use expression

of Congratulations, including the responses. Then, practice the dialogue

 71

Appendix 9
POST-TEST
(Cycle II)
Name :
Class :

With your group, make dialogues based on the situations below. Use expressions

of Like and Dislike, including the responses. Then, practice the dialogues.
 72

Appendix 10
DOCUMENTATION

1. Documentation : Students form SGD

2. Documentation: One of the groups tries to present the results of the

group's work.
 73

3. Documentation : When students do the test. The researcher approached

each group and checked the students' work

4. Documentation: Class conditions at the time of the lesson.

 74

5. Documentation: After closing, the researcher and students took a photo

together
 75

CURRICULUM VITAE

Diah khotimah was born and raised on the island of

Tambelan, Bintan Regency on August 27, 2000. Her father's

name is Ruba'i and her mother's name is Nuryani. Diah is the

fourth of four children, the first child is a girl named Rusyani,

the second child is a boy named Seli, the third child is a boy

and named Mulyadi. Diah is an alumnus of SD OO5 Tambelan in 2012. Then she

ended her junior high school at SMPN 14 Bintan in 2015. And completed her high

school education at SMAN 1 Tambelan in 2018. After that in mid 2018 she

continued her higher education at the University Maritim Raja Ali Haji by majoring

in English Education and completing his higher education in 2022.